User talk:Elipongo/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Elipongo. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

Hi Elipongo; you're right, this is getting heated, but I have tried to step back. This is why I did in fact stop at two reverts. I admit to being frustrated by user:Noroton, but as far as I can tell, this has been a problem on the article for a while, and this editor has not been terribly willing to cooperate. But thanks for the cool head. I hope that this will all have simmered down by tomorrow. Cmprince 04:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, but it brings back pleasent memories of my father (of blessed memory, he died three years ago this week). He had this incredible ability to argue with me when I was in complete agreement with him. I think Noroton is justifiably sensitive on this subject because some people said some unpleasent things about it and he obviously put some good work into it. A short break should give everyone time to think a bit. Cheers! —Elipongo (Talk contribs)

How do you use sandbox {{helpme}} Hpsander456 19:10, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I plan to use it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpsander456 (talk • contribs) 01:21, 16 July 2007

You're welcome! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 18:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

thanx for asnwering my question. I was testing how to upload and download fotos, and ended up doing it on the user page instead of the sandbox!

--Ixyuxx 03:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Happy to help. Happy editing! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 18:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Did you say you were wanting to talk about Swirlex and Zapsteel? Swirlex 16:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Not lately, you all seem to have been behaving. Cheers! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 18:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

M. Eliongo, there seems to be a troll on the loose. Please check one newbie editor's completely erroneous edits on major movie stars. It won't take you long to trace the aforementioned editor down. I see you've had to revert a number of the submissions made by this editor. Can you refer this issue to an admin? Bzuk 05:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC).

Hi Bzuk! He stopped adding erroneous information once warned. The only thing he's done since that wouldn't fall completely in line with the guidelines is that he's removed maintenance templates from the article he created. I plan to try to guide him gently in regards to the maintenance templates. Unless he starts to vandalize again, and fails to stop after repeated warnings up to and past a final warning, I don't think intervention will be required— nor do I think that an admin would take action given the current circumstances. I know it's annoying to see that someone messed with a bunch of articles, but since he stopped when he was told to, no more action need or should be taken. Thanks for writing and be assured that I will be keeping an eye out! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 05:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey! I found you via your paramedic userbox and thought you might be able to help me out here. --|EPO| ^da: 21:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay. Hope my comment helped some. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 23:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

1. We do not say "the God", but "God".

2. We do say "the Devil" rather than "Devil" without the definite article.

3. But we do not say "the Satan," but "Satan" without an article.

4. We have a plurality of gods, devils, but only one Satan?

5. The is a usage of "Antichrist" as a proper noun as in "Antichrist will come."

5.1 It's like "Christ," meaning "Jesus" (there can be no other Christ).

So I think you were mistaken in Velikoe v malom in placing the definite article "the" in "the Antichrist."

I am --70.23.239.248 14:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC), a.k.a. Ludvikus

---

Here's another argument: Should one speak of

1. "the 2nd coming of Christ? Or of

2. "the 2nd coming of the Christ?

Yours truly, Ludvikus --70.23.239.248 15:00, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

---

Check this out: [1]

It shows (Google search) 2,130,000 uses of "Antichrist" without any article.

Yours truly, Ludvikus --70.23.239.248 15:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello again Ludvikus and thanks for your note. I think the confusion here revolves around what constitutes a title and therefore a common noun and what constitutes a name and therefore a proper noun. I'll address your points in order:

1. The word "G-d" is one of those interesting words in English that can be either a common or a proper noun depending on the context. When one is writing about the singular deity of the Abrahamic religions or other monotheistic religions, then the word is considered to be equivalent to the name of the deity and is capitalized and doesn't take an a article. However, when referring to a member of a polytheistic pantheon then the word is considered to be a title or an attribute and as such is a common noun and may take either a definite or an indefinite article depending on context. For example, "Thor is the god of thunder in Norse mythology. Many other polytheistic pantheons had a god of thunder as well. One such was Zeus, god of thunder to the ancient Greeks." As you may note, I was easily able to use the common noun form with both a definite and an indefinite article, but was only able to leave off an article by awkwardly directly associating it with the proper noun it's referencing.
2. Per the Devil article, the word derives from the Greek diabolos, which means "slanderer" or "accuser". It is a title and not a name and as such accepts an article.
3. While the original formation, Ha-Satan (the accuser), takes an article even in Hebrew; the Abrahamic faiths other than Judaism have assigned Satan as the proper name of a fallen angel or demon. As such it is a proper noun and does not take an article.
4. Yes, there is only one Satan, just as there is only one Gabriel.
5. According to the Antichrist article the term appears in the Christian Bible once in plural form and 4 times in the singular. Since the plural usage obviously doesn't refer to a specific individual and also since the word has never been applied to any specific individual it is a title and is therefore a common noun and takes an article.
6. The word Christ is itself a title derived from the Greek word Χριστός (Christós), which literally means "The Anointed One.", a direct translation of the Hebrew word מָשִׁיחַ. The phrase, "The Christ" is a valid, if slightly archaic, formation in English. Christ has assumed proper noun status in English by common usage by people who seem to think that it is the surname of Jesus.
7. You need to look at the actual results from your Google search rather than just looking at the numbers. Many of the listings refer to a black metal album or to people who selected the word as their username on a multiplicity of forums and websites. If you search for the word using both the definite and the indefinite articles, you get back numbers in the same ballpark without nearly as many false hits. Also, just because a lot of people are doing something incorrectly doesn't make it right.

I hope I have addressed your concerns adequately. Thanks again for writing. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 07:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

We have added the following to our wikipedia directory as per suggestions from a number of other users.

http://www.personalityphotos.com/wikipedia/license.html

we still need to resolve how this will be tagged to images in dispute and who would do that. Obvioulsy because of a conflict of interest we cannot do so.

I apologize in the dleay of the reply, but we were involved in a number of other projects which consumed our time.

PersonalityPhotos 05:46, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

This sounds like a very thorough permission, I'm hoping that the consensus will favor this solution. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 21:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Thedjatclubrock :) ^(T/C) 02:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you my friend. A good and sweet new year to you and may we all be inscribed for good in the book of life. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 05:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

New York City Meetup Next: Saturday November 3rd, Brooklyn Museum area Last: 8/12/2007 This box: view • talk • edit

The agenda for the next meetup includes the formation of a Wikimedia New York City local chapter. Hope to see you there!--Pharos 20:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a great idea, but I don't think I can get down after Shabbos. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 20:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Interested in meeting-up with a bunch of your wiki-friends? Please take a quick look at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 3 and give your input about the next meetup. Thank you.
This automated notice was delivered to you because you are on the Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite. BrownBot 01:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Will do, thanks!—Elipongo (Talk contribs) 19:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! Blohme (talk) 06:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. You seem to be keeping it cool and reasonable while others are getting grumpy, if you can keep that up, you'll do just fine here! It's the same philosophy I use while on my bike when people get P.O.ed and honk, flip me off, or curse at me- I just wave (with all my fingers!) and smile like it was my best friend saying. Cheers! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 07:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Why thank you very much! My best wishes that your holidays be blessed and peaceful. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 23:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Eep! I'm so glad you saw that one. It slipped under my radar! I'm heading off for almost a week, but will be trying to log in periodically during that period to respond. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 04:02, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem, you shouldn't have to do all the work. Enjoy your break! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 04:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

We need to get a preliminary head-count for the AMNH tour happening before the meet-up. If you think you would like to go, please sign up at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC#AMHN tour sign-up. Thanks! ScienceApologist (talk) 02:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Nice. I like the way the images are laid out in the article now. - Denimadept (talk) 20:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm not sure why the images are covering up the numbers in the references section though. I should probably ask around at WP:VPT. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 20:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome! GalaxyGuy (talk) 22:51, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. Happy editing! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 00:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome box on my talk page Elias! I have just started taking a greater interest in editing/Wiki markup, and so it is much appreciated.

MAP91 (talk) 18:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

You're quite welcome! Be well.—Elipongo (Talk contribs) 00:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Elias, thanks for your contribution and informing me of some of the rules. Please be patient with me I am new at editing and I will try to be much more careful in the future. --Robertptolemy (talk) 01:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. It does take most people a little while to get their bearings and get used to how things are done here. Happy editing! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 17:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Will do. Happy New Year!

Thank you very much! May 2008 bring you nothing but good fortune and blessings. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 17:16, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all your work on the article (and the DYK nom). I can add facts but I have to admit I'm close to my personal comfort limit for avoiding conflict of interest...this is the sort of article that could easily run away into a flamewar. --Stlemur (talk) 18:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad to do some gnoming on the article. So far people have generally been civil, I think that'll continue. Cheers! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 19:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I suspect no one else will bother to thank you for all the time and consideration you've given to this topic so I thought I would take a moment to say thanks for bending over backwards to help this new editor. You've gone much further than most people would, on behalf of a topic which is unlikely to be sufficiently notable for Wikipedia. And I also suspect that the editor in question may not appreciate the amount of consideration you've provided; when this article is deleted, as it probably will be, he will act like a bitten newbie... but as I will testify, the situation will be quite the opposite, not a single tooth-mark will be found <grin>. It seems axiomatic that the newbies who require the most assistance are the ones who appreciate it the least, so I wanted to let you know that someone had noticed your efforts. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		For your willingness to help a new user in a difficult and time-consuming situation, with little potential for any appreciation at all, I am delighted to award you this barnstar. Thank you for trying to keep a new editor contributing! Accounting4Taste:talk 16:20, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Why thank you so very much! I'm at a loss for words, so I'm just going to say thank you again as I copy this shiny sparkly to my user page. Happy new year! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 16:51, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Just expanded the history of Middletown, Connecticut. . .inline refs, too, including one I found on the city of Middletown website. All very NPOV but inclusive of the actual history with an eye toward balance. It will be interesting to see if the town employee responsible for editing the article and talk page for the state IP will let it stand. Hope you'll keep an eye on it so that the article doesn't become simply an extension of the town website. I've done good work with good intent; now I'm bowing out. --Pgagnon999 (talk) 17:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice job; well written and well referenced. Happy new year! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 17:10, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, it happened again. . .the IP user for the town of Middletown deleted the entire section. User doesn't seem interested in using talk page. Any suggestions? I haven't bothered to revert, as it's obvious where that will go. ..but as it stands, the article is little more than an extension of the will of one individual working for the town of Middletown. Hardly seems encyclopedic or netral. --Pgagnon999 (talk) 00:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I was busy and missed the whole thing. Looks like you and the others have things well in control, though. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 05:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Awards Rolecall

To check whether all of our members are still interested, we have blanked the members list, if you still wish to take part please add your name back on the list. Please wait until the 4th January to re-add your name.

// F9T 19:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I dd mean that, thanks for the note, only problem is is I SUBST: ed all the templates, so I can't change it without having another 500 edits. // F9T 20:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

On 4 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Republic of Lakotah, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 16:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm charged with making the reservations for us, so let's make it official. We'll do this via voting and everyone including anonymous voters, sockpuppets, and canvassed supporters is enfranchised. Voting irregularities and election fraud are encouraged as that would be really amusing in this instance. Please vote for whichever restaurant you would like to eat at given the information provided above and your own personal prejudices at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC#Let's make it official. The prevailing restaurant will be called first for the reservation. If a reservation cannot be obtained at the winning restaurant, the runner-up restaurant will be called thus making this entire process pointless. Voting ends 24 hours after this timestamp (because I said so). ScienceApologist (talk) 17:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Novices often ask the same questions, but they never know. So: hereby a short one on editing rules for new Wikipedia contributors like me. I noticed all rules, help etc.. is Web based, like in software. But complicated software programs also contain documentation of another kind.

Now you've got to switch by page anytime you need a certain item (how to link, make italics, bold....etc). Why is there no printable short version somewhere? PDF would be nice, but a not too recent Word version is also OK to me. Donvr (talk) 10:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Donvr. It sounds like the Reference card or the Cheatsheet might be what you're looking for. If you want to print any page, do the following: On the left side of each page, in the group of links that are labeled "toolbox" (they're under the search line), you should find one that says "printable version". Click on that and you'll be navigated to a version of the page that's more suitable for printing. Hope that helps out, if not ask again and I'll see if I can do better! Happy editing! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 15:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Exactly what I needed, thanks. Any welcome to new people would benefit from this tip. I myself aim at maximum effort for contributing on IT, Telecom and audio recording/HiFi and minimum on editing details. PS Because of a WIKI-system crash, this response needed repeating Donvr (talk) 19:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Your input is very much appreciated. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:40, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing, glad to help- and figured I should since I did start the discussion with him half a year ago. You'd see me more over there except that you're so fast replying that by the time I notice there's even a new post, there's nothing for me to add! Thank you for all of YOUR work there and everywhere else too. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 23:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You're very kind. :) I tend to pay close attention to the Drawing Board; I got into the habit when I first inherited it from User:John Broughton and found that nobody else was then responding. I have since then developed a couple of templates of my own for use there which make it pretty easy to respond, though of course there's always new situations cropping up.

From the moment that user declared that if I "have problems understanding" him then I am "a bigot!!!" I had a feeling I was in for bumpy times. That's when I discovered his history with you and the lovely e-mail he sent to the deleting admin (who admittedly may have given him some provocation). It didn't occur to me that he might think he needed my approval for his article, not after you'd gone to the trouble to explain the drawing board to him in the past! I hope that your input is sufficient to move him along to greener pastures. I'm all set to ignore further PAs (do you ever wikilink off wiki? Is that a bad sign?), but I'd really rather I didn't have to. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:04, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I wasn't sure that he had read my other on-wiki response to him; it was in response to an email he had sent me. If I'm not mistaken, we now have a guideline discouraging replying to emails on-wiki, and perhaps this is a good example of why. Hopefully I have made it clear to him that he's barking up the wrong tree by trying to argue at the Drawing board, but I'll be happy to field any more of his remarks should he remain uncivil.

While I haven't tried to use wiki markup in other applications, I have been guilty of confusing the Wiki shortcut keys with those of GMail- also when I spot an error on a website/news-site/book, I have a strong urge to look for an edit button! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 22:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

In regard to "Sorry to jump in at your page, Billy":

It's fine. I don't mind it. It makes sense to me to jump in wherever the discussion is being had :) — TheBilly^(Talk) 06:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest and your concern about the film and page Transcendent Man. We too are interested in editing in a responsible and mature manner. That is why I would like to bring to your attention a point you made regarding the film and the page. Our film is listed as FUTURE CLASS and was created EXACTLY to criteria from Wikipedia on scheduled films. There are over 197 future films written by producers of the film. There can not be a conflict of interest, since there is no one else to know and therefore to add to the page, since no one has seen the film.

I know from your biography, that you are a thouhtful and considerate participant here at Wikipedia and we hope to follow in your footsteps in how we edit.

Thank you for your conisderation, help and patience. Fjnainoa (talk) 02:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

How does that need to be disambiguated? It does not even point to a disambiguation page. The way I read it, he was a chef's apprentice somewhere in Northern Italy. So the page it points to is completely fine. If I'm misunderstanding something, please tell me. MrKIA11 (talk) 20:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out my error. I'm not sure why I got that stub confused with a dab page- lack of sleep maybe? Anyways, I've reverted myself. Thanks again for letting me know about my glitch! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 00:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Elipongo, Sorry about the can-we-link-it site being down - I was interstate for a week and whilst I was away the switch it was on decided to reset itself, and for some weird reason didn't come back up properly. I have reset it now, and the site seems to be accessible and working now. Sorry for the outage! -- All the best, Nickj (t) 06:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied to on sender's talk page.—Elipongo (Talk contribs) 00:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for noticing my humble (hoped to go unnoticed...) contributions. The sheer magnitude of the english Wikipedia scares the *** out of me, yet I'll try to do my best not to *** up. See you around.

Arimis (talk) 21:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

You're quite welcome! I wouldn't worry too much about messing anything up since pretty much anything can be fixed with a couple of keystrokes. If you're ever in need of help with anything, feel free to ask. Shavua tov! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 00:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

New York City Meetup Next: Sunday March 16th, Columbia University area Last: 1/13/2008 This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, and have salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).

Well also make preparations for our exciting Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, a free content photography contest for Columbia University students planned for Friday March 28 (about 2 weeks after our meeting).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

You're also invited to subscribe to the public Wikimedia New York City mailing list, which is a great way to receive timely updates.
This has been an automated delivery because you were on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 02:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I can do you one better: User:Elipongo/SmileyAward. east.718 at 05:02, December 23, 2007

Thanks. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 20:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

There has been a mailing list created for Wikipedians in the New York metropolitan area (list: Wikimedia NYC). Please consider joining it! Cbrown1023 talk 21:01, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for the invitation! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 18:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)