Jump to content

User talk:Calton

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wahkeenah (talk | contribs) at 19:45, 11 August 2005 (→August 16). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 14:40, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC) and Pedant 17:01, 2004 Nov 13 (UTC)

Archives:

In another fit of housecleaning, I've moved a bunch of stuff to archives (I hate having to scroll down a long distance):

New Stuff

I didn't

A troll (already banned a number of times) have been changing dates on European topics from dd/mm/yy to mm/dd/yy in articles I edit. (He is a user who has been stalking me and some others in a campaign of harrassment. He only edits articles I write!) I simply reverted his edits. Any errors that were there weren't, AFAIK, my doing. They were in the version that was reverted to. BTW I am all in favour of the links and endorsed them the moment the idea was first mooted. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 17:00, 19 July 2005 (UTC) [reply]

Everyking drinking game

Hi Calton. I know that Everyking's attitude is not the sweetest or most diplomatic on the Administrator's Noticeboard. I also admit that I got a bit of a guilty laugh out of your 'Drink!' comments the first couple of times. Nevertheless, he is generally a good, productive editor and contributor to the wiki. Rather than derisive remarks, could you make an effort to limit yourself to constructive criticism? Lead by example, if you will. I still hang on to a faint hope that his ability to speak civilly on WP:AN can be rehabilitated. Thanks, TenOfAllTrades(talk) 11:40, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stop screwing around with dates

Stop screwing around with dates. It has been Wikipedia policy for well over a year to use the appropriate form of dates for an article, ie, the preferred American format mm/dd/yy for articles on American topics, and the international preferred standard of dd/mm/yy for not US, or specifically European topics, following the example of how Wikipedia uses American English for American article topics and international English for European topics. The preferences are set up to covert all wikified dates to the format chosen by a user, but not all users know how to do it. If you persist in adding in American dating to non-American topics they will simply be reverted on sight and will your edits of dates will reported as vandalism. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 03:18, 23 July 2005 (UTC) [reply]

Jtdirl, you might not want to come down so hard on Calton here. The Manual of Style specifies
"It is generally preferable to use the format used by local English speakers at the location of the event." (emphasis added)
For the sake of consistency and clarity for users who have not set date preferences, it is a good idea for dates to remain consistent within any given article. In the interest of avoiding conflict (and really silly edit wars) it is often preferable to retain the same date format used by the original author (similar to the way we handle American/British English issues). In the article George VI of the United Kingdom, I note that the early versions of the article contain dates of the form December 14 (not 14 December). Heck, Jtdirl, you even made several edits to the article over the course of the last two or three years that left the dates in the 'wrong' format. It's only been in the last few days that you've been edit warring over the date format...why now, and why is it so important?
Incidentally, could you be more careful about how you're entering the dates? By leaving the trailing space inside the wikilink ([[14 December ]], instead of the correct [[14 December]]), the date format customization for users who have set their preferences doesn't work. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 04:10, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The policy as has been implemented since the original vote has been to use the format relevant to the location — so all US topics should have US spelling and dating; UK and European topics should have British English spelling and dating, and those in between should remain in the format chosen by their original author. British monarchs by definition should have the British/international dating system; most do in any case. Any that don't have, as is normal in series of articles, are being converted to following the one convention (just as any US presidents written in British English and British dating are being converted to use the style normal for local English speakers in the US.

BTW I did not leave the trailing space inside the wikilink. From what I have been able to work out, another user did so. When the Americanised dates were being returned to the required British dates for British articles they were inadvertently returned to a form that had that error. But because my preferences are set the error was not showing up. I've corrected the error and left a message with person I think made the original mistake pointing out that problem leaving such a space causes.

re why the sudden interest? A sockpuppet for a banned user in the last few days targeted a lot of royal articles and deliberately put American dating, spelling, etc into British articles. I and others ended up repeatedly having to impose indefinite bans on the asshole (he is notorious!), sometimes imposing bans on different sockpuppets of his in the space of an hour. His action drew the attention of a couple of users to the fact that not every article in the series actually following the same dating and spelling. Some had either been originally written in American-English and American dates or had been Americanised over the months. As is the norm, all the parts of the series are being checked to make sure they all confirm to the one format. (Some US topics are also being checked, and where they are in BE or using British dating, they are being converted over to what is the type of english and dating used by local English speakers, in those cases AE and American dating. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 04:38, 23 July 2005 (UTC) [reply]

I did not deliberately set out to ensure the date preferences would not work, contrary to your assertion. If you had checked out your facts, you would see that it was [[1]] that an anonymous user made the edit that mucked up the preferences. By a fluke he happened to have been followed onto the page as editor by a sockpuppet of a banned user who had been targeting that and other pages. Like the others who had to deal with that idiot as well as blocking him I had to revert his changes. I hit the revert button.

That is what happened. So keep your paranoid dillusions to yourself in future. And BTW you have twice accused me of deliberately adding in the space after the month to stop the wikilink working. If you had bothered to do 2 minutes checking before making wild allegations you would have seen that it was not true. Next time get off your butt and actually check the facts first before making stupid allegations. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 05:21, 23 July 2005 (UTC) [reply]

Clearly your ability to misunderstand and misrepresent knows no limits. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 06:06, 23 July 2005 (UTC) [reply]

WTF?

I have no idea why you left this on my talk page?

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been removed. Please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for any other tests you want to do, since testing in articles will be removed quickly. Please see the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Calton | Talk 02:50, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

What's it all about? SeanMack 12:40, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Bygones. SeanMack 13:49, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AIDS conspiracy theories

Since you cared to revert AIDS conspiracy theories, I expect to see your replies to my comments on the talk page. Strange that you enter this while not having made a single comment on the talk page, so I would really like you to discuss on the talk page since you apparently advocate doing so. Cburnett 02:55, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Ah, so you have no intention of participating...just reverting? Cburnett 03:09, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

RfA for Germen

Please be aware that, in light of the RfC against Germen, I have raised an request for arbitration for him. Axon (talk|contribs) 10:13, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Global View of Neurofeedback

Hi Calton

Your reversions to the neurofeedback article seem a little overzealous. I for one, am no scientologist. Neurofeedback is used in many ways. Your labeling of my postings as propaganda for scientology may even betray your bias as a feedback cultist. Also, the insistence on the purely technical perspectives of neurofeedback researchers and promoters will lead to a view that is far too narrow for wikipedia. Your opinion about this matter is welcome on the discussion section. Otherwise, you are a long way from consensus. Regards D.Right 13:11, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Province of the Carolanas

Hi, I noticed that you participated in the VfD for John Lilburne Research Institute. I am nominating another article created by the same user: Province of the Carolanas, which is another massive hoax/vanity/original research article. --JW1805 19:00, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting Sam Spade on sight

You may have been sure you were right. But you were in fact wrong :-( [2] whoops! Everything is a learning experience. Assume good faith and all that. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 00:15, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Atheists of Silicon Valley sockpuppets

Nice work flagging all those sockpuppet votes on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Atheists of Silicon Valley. I would have done that myself when I posted the comment, but was busy at the time. Have you dealt with these people before? - ulayiti (talk) 01:56, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • I went through the history of the page, from the first vote to the last, and moved all of the anonymous votes together under a subheader, noting them individually. Took a bit of time. and lost some of your specific comments relating to their sock/meatpuppet activities in the process, however - sorry. Still, it should appear to be a bit more manageable now. It's just craziness with all the puppet"masters" on this VFD, and the related on on The God Who Wasn't There. --Blu Aardvark | (talk) | (contribs) 07:40, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh. Um, sorry. I didn't mean for my comments in the GWWT VfD to be taken as an attack on you; my apologies. I'm polishing up the movie's article a bit more - I think it manages notability and is salvageable; have a look now - and totally agree with you on the AofSV article. Again, my apologies. DS 12:54, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Care to show some consensus again

[3] *sigh* SchmuckyTheCat 21:05, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnam War

Thanks for your assistance at that page. Stevertigo is determined to get his way with that article and as you noticed has broken many rules to that end. An Rfc has been started, if you care to contribute. Also keep an eye out on the Vietnam War page as well. Thanks again. --TJive 03:02, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Hello, i've noticed that you've removed my links to freesites on the Dune (computer game). Although i disagree with what you are going to say (i already know that... q;-) ), but please check out Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Beta_m_and_his_freenet_spamming. Waiting to read what you actually have to say. Beta_M talk, |contrib (Ë-Mail)

August 16

If nothing else, this exposes other sites that blatantly rip off wikipedia. Check out the August 16th births on this site before they update it. Both of those bogus birthdates are on it: [4] Wahkeenah 13:05, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Hillary Duff's new album is a major event. For some, anyway. Like her mother, maybe. Wahkeenah 19:45, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Calton&oldid=20797247"