Archives
May 06 June 06 September 06 March 07 May 07 June 07 December 07 2008 2009

If you want to report issues with adding births and deaths to the date pages, please READ THIS PAGE first.

Please Click here to add a new comment to this page.

Contents 1 Wanted to know why Joseph Brant Arseneau's page is deleted 2 PseudoBot deletes redlinks? 3 no links introduction 4 Rent a car syria 5 Which vs that 6 IPA pronunciation symbols for Latin names 7 Bot not bot 8 WP:BITE 9 Why was Edward Cullen deleted from the births of June 20? 10 Why R Deleting Everything On Birthdays And Things Just Because U Don't Know Who They R???

[edit] Wanted to know why Joseph Brant Arseneau's page is deleted

We worked for Brant at IBM and he did develop the Renewable Energy Derivative and continues to do "note worthy" work in this area. Please explain further, so as the team can work this out. A lot of people find this useful!

[edit] PseudoBot deletes redlinks?

Hi, I see that PseudoBot apparently deleted a redlink. I posted a question about this to Wikipedia_talk:Bot_policy#PseudoBot_deletes_redlinks.3F, as IMHO it is a question of general bot policy and operation, rather than specific to PseudoBot.
Would appreciate any response that you care to make there. Thanks. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 16:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Thx for your response at Wikipedia_talk:Bot_policy#PseudoBot_deletes_redlinks.3F. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 14:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem; thanks for keeping an eye on the bot :) Pseudomonas_(talk) 14:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] no links introduction

This is just the sort of thing we are looking at at the moment could form the basis of Wikipedia_talk:Help_Project/Overview#Simplified_ruleset_refactoring for example, JoeSmack has created a simple navbox - which is looking more useful as it develops ( we are currently working on a nice simple intro to talk pages for it). Please do come check by... Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 20:30, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

You left me some questions] about WP:WebCite, and I have moved the discussion to Wikipedia talk:Using WebCite. I hope I was able to give you some useful info. --Blargh29 (talk) 04:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Rent a car syria

Sorry, I didn't mean to nom over your nom (nom nom if you will), my connections just real slow this morning Cathardic (talk) 15:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll take it as you seconding my opinion :) Nom Nom Nom. Pseudomonas_(talk) 15:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Which vs that

While Fowler called attention to the which/that issue, he didn't invent the difference between the two, but reported it along with all the other grammatical elements he collected and documented. He did mention that some good writers of his time (the 1920's) ignored the distinction. Judging by what I've read by learned people of that era and earlier, the rule wasn't followed as much as it is in modern writing.

The Chicago Manual of Style (the Bible for most non-journalistic writers in the U.S.)—and all other guides I know of that discuss the issue—recommend using which/that for non-restrictive/restrictive. Unlike some truly red-herring rules (like 'don't end a sentenced with a preposition') the distinction between which and that serves a purpose in that it helps avoid ambiguous constructs, especially by writers who forget commas. Consider:

• "The hat which Sue bought in town was red."
  

Is the writer trying to say:

• "The hat, which Sue bought in town, was red." (non-restrictive)
  

or

• "The hat that Sue bought in town was red." (restrictive)
  

Consider also, that even if the which/that rule is not as valid as some other English grammar rules, I'm not making a sentence worse by appropriately changing 'which' to 'that.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.0.181.93 (talk) 01:08, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I guess it's harmless - and I'm delighted for you to go around making text read more smoothly in general - something that Wikipedia sorely needs - but please don't go shoving [sic] into quotes and please don't go implying that editors ignoring this "rule" are somehow wrong. I'm well aware that Fowler & al. thought it'd be a useful way of disambiguating (although making sure that the commas are there as necessary would really be a much better way of going about it; the text is only ambiguous if you assume that the author can't handle a comma), but really it never caught on apart from with the sort of authorities that think that splitting infinitives is a terrible solecism (though I guess that one is dying out, and thank goodness - we don't need any more acts of random prescriptivism). Pseudomonas_(talk) 11:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

See also: [1] Pseudomonas_(talk) 11:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I only disagree with the "...never caught on.." statement. If you conducted a pole of professional writers—journalists, technical writers (my day job), and other serious writers—I feel confident the vast majority would respect the which/that difference. I'm less confident this would be true among academics who write as an adjunct to their profession. I've noticed that many Wikipedia articles on technical subjects by obviously smart and learned people are constructed of verbose, convoluted prose, with a surprising number of punctuation and grammar errors. On reflection, however, I do agree that inserting "[sic]" in quotations is overkill. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.0.190.101 (talk) 22:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] IPA pronunciation symbols for Latin names

Not sure if I'm doing this right; I'm pretty new to editing and talk pages are pretty confusing to me. I'm in the U.S., as it happens. But based on my understanding of the IPA conventions, /ʌ/ seems to be the sound of the letter "u" in the nominative ending "-us". It should sound like the "u" in "bus", not like "oo" in "book", which is what /ʊ/ seems to be for. The praenomen Publius, by contrast, should have both sounds, /ʊ/ for the first "u" and /ʌ/ for the second. I'm sure you could pronounce Latin words with the ending /ʊs/, but that would sound like a strange accent to me. Perhaps it's a variation in how Latin is taught. Or it could simply be a very indistinct sound. In any case, I'm sure that /ʊ/ (with a strikethrough) must be the wrong symbol, since that seems to be a sound midway between /ʊ/ and /juː/. I would prefer to revert to /ʌs/, but I'll wait until I hear back from you first. Thanks for your interest in my work—I've been wanting to do this for years! P Aculeius (talk) 01:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

After further consideration, I note that the range of sounds represented by /ʌ/ in Received Pronunciation has become much more restricted over the last half-century, and because this is the accent with which you identified, I believe that this may contribute to your preference for /ʊ/ and /ʊ/. In my opinion, /ʊ/ as described in the table of IPA symbols for English is an acceptable alternative for pronouncing Latin words, and in particular, certain praenomina, such as Aulus, in which the sound of the second vowel is affected by the preceding letters. However, I do not feel that it should be the preferred pronunciation, at least for those whose first language is English. For the sake of both simplicity and consistency, I would like to use /ʌ/ for these entries, bearing in mind that pronunciation guides (for those words that require them) are really only a suggestion in the first place. P Aculeius (talk) 12:55, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I think probably the version that would have least controversy is /ə/. Pseudomonas_(talk) 13:12, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bot not bot

Are you (as User:Pseudobot) a bot or not? I ask because your edits show up on my watchlist even when I selected "hide bot edits". Abductive (reasoning) 17:19, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

PseudoBot is a bot, but runs without the bot flag; this is standard for "anti-vandalism" bots. Pseudomonas_(talk) 18:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah. Abductive (reasoning) 04:22, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I was caught out by it - when the bot got started it had a bot flag by mistake, which then got removed when someone who knew the system noticed. Pseudomonas_(talk) 12:18, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] WP:BITE

Hey dude, don't bite the newbies! ;) Drmies (talk) 01:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Why was Edward Cullen deleted from the births of June 20?

This is something common that most people might look at since Twilight is huge right now, and I linked the name to the page and did everything the correct way. Please help-. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.122.182 (talk) 02:40, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

a) When the bot reverted you there was no link to any page. The second time it was another user that removed it.

b) The practice is only to put real people with Wikipedia articles on the births and deaths. Fictional characters don't go on there; you are not to blame for not knowing this in advance. Pseudomonas_(talk) 16:07, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Why R Deleting Everything On Birthdays And Things Just Because U Don't Know Who They R???

Dear Weird Robot, I think u should stop deleting things on pages and live with them as every other 7 billion humans know who they r. Infact, U R very rude, looking at your discussion page. On most of ur complaints u either don't even read them or ignore them like they rn't even there. I'd like u to stop deleting things that us humans like and treat Wikipedia the way it should be treated, with respect of everyone using it. From a person u should not know as u r a weird and terrible robot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.70.217 (talk) 23:59, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

The person that these 7 billion people know being a nine-year-old who wants to be a footballer, right? See the bit where it says Please do not add yourself, non-notable people, fictional characters, or people without Wikipedia articles to this list? Pseudomonas_(talk) 12:02, 18 December 2009 (UTC)