User talk:JHunterJ/Archive 1

I will reply here unless you ask me to reply somewhere else.

Autobiographical articles

You may want to check out Wikipedia's guidelines on autobiography. Generally, this is frowned upon. Now that it's there, you might as well leave it, but I suggest editing the article further only if another editor introduces an inacuracy. Good luck, and happy editing! -Harmil 00:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit at New York Euphoria

What was your source for the player numbers you added? Greetings Weapon X (de) 16:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo, Weapon X (de)! I got the player numbers from the players directly in e-mail, from online images, or by the process of elimination. I might be able to provide more precision from another computer, if it would help. Auf wiederchatten! User:JHunterJ 17:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's satisfies me. Just wanted to get sure... :)

So you are in contact with some of the players... that's cool!

Maybe you can also help sorting out the numbers of LA Temptation for LB III, also one player entry is too much (maybe Jerilee Villanueva and Jerilee Woodford are one and the same person ???).

Weapon X (de) 13:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects?

JA: Maybe I just don't get what it's about yet, but as far as I can tell I seem to be getting exactly contradictory advice from different people on this issue. Jon Awbrey 20:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blade Runner and Soldier

Why remove the "Followed By: Soldier" datum from Blade Runner? JHunterJ 15:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Soldier is not a follow up movie to Blade Runner. —Asatruer 15:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a sequel, but it is a following, unofficial sidequel, according to the article. So it does follow BR. <shrug>. —JHunterJ 16:04, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Miyamoto Musashi

Hi JHunterJ, Please note that both dates given for Miyamoto Musashi are death dates. May 19 (or as I wrote the 19th day of the fifth month) is his death date by the traditional calendar and June 13 is his death date according to the ~~Julian~~ Gregorian calendar. His year and date of birth are unknown. So I ask you to revert to the version as I entered it. As I noted in the edit summary, the information came from the Japanese Wikipedia, which you can check for confirmation. Thanks Fg2 15:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Please note that his date of death is known. It is a single date, not a range of dates. Thus, the "c." (the abbreviation of circa, meaning "about") is inappropriate for his date of death. The date of death according to the ~~Julian~~ Gregorian calendar is June 13. This is the very same day as the nineteenth day of the fifth month of that year. It is not a different day, nor does it indicate a range of dates. In contrast, his year and date of birth are unknown. He was born in or near the year 1584. The function of the "c." is to indicate that he was born in or near the year 1584. The "c." must precede the approximate date. That is why I wrote "Born c. 1584 – died on 19th day of 5th month (June 13 in Western calendar), 1645." Again, the information comes from the Japanese Wikipedia. If you have more reliable information, I'd be happy to hear about it. Fg2 16:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(JHJ)

There's a 60-year span of possible death dates? I undid my mistaken fix of marking one of the possible death dates as a birth date, but I still left out the longer written-out dates. WP:MOSDATE indicates that the Gregorian (or Julian, or both) should be used, so perhaps the May 19th date should be removed as well, to be kept in the body only, or they should be indicated simply as Japanese calendar" and "Julian (or Gregorian) calendar". So perhaps it could be died [[May 19]] ''<small>([[Julian calendar]]: [[June 13]])</small>'', [[1584]] or [[1645]]) -- or [[Gregorian calendar]] if that's the one the June 13 comes from. The dates in the intro should be kept as terse as possible, I think. -- JHunterJ 16:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Fg2)

No, the date and year of death are well known. The 1584 figure is not a possible year of death; it's a possible year of birth. As I wrote, "Born c. 1584 – died on 19th day of 5th month (June 13 in Western calendar), 1645" Fg2 16:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think we're there. I was completely backward about Julian calendar -- should have said Gregorian. The Japanese calendar is different from both. I've switched the dates in your format and think we've now got it right! Please check and let me know if there's a problem... it's entirely possible that I've gotten it wrong again! I've crossed out my Julians above and put Gregorians in. Sorry for confusing you on that point! Fg2 16:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page indent style

Off topic follow up to the discussion on the Blade Runner discussion page. You are correct that the talk style guide does say that other forms of indentation are just as acceptable. I find that for ease of readability on a long discussion, the suggested fixed indent method is far preferable to that of the threaded indent system. Example. I find the second threaded option, and how the indent on the left just gets wider and wider, more difficult to read, especially if it went much longer than that.
In the end product, it is more up to the personal taste of the individuals involved than anything else, so is mostly irrelevant.
—Asatruer 19:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Fixup

Thanks for the fixup on the Internet Movie Database article... the links were not removed deliberately. I guess I'll have to avoid editing Unicode-laden articles. :-( AlexDW 16:56, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed it was a software problem, no worries. Check out Wikipedia:Enabling East Asian characters if you think you might need to work with Unicode later. -- JHunterJ 17:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noncontemporaneously

Yeah, I know, I know. It's still an awesome word though. ;) ~CS 21:57, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kill Doctor Lucky

Liked your work there. Nice one. Not sure about changing "whereas" to "where"... it's not brilliant English and it's ambiguous because that part of the article discusses geographical locations! If you don't like "whereas" (do you perceive it as archaic?) one of us could find another to make the point? --Dweller 13:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like "whereas" because it seems wrong (not archaic) to my inner monologue because of the double conjunction. Wiktionary says:

whereas: 1. but in contrast; while on the contrary 2. it being the case that

and I don't think "but whereas A does B, X does Y" flows. If "where" loses clarity because other parts use geography, maybe "but Cluedo begins... whereas [or "while"] KDL ends....". Probably should be broken into two sentences:

Both games are set in a sprawling mansion full of colorfully named rooms and a variety of dangerous weapons and deal with the murder of the mansion's owner. Cluedo begins after the murder has been committed, and players compete to solve it, but Kill Doctor Lucky ends when the murder is committed, and players compete to commit it.

to get rid of some of the conjunctions anyway. -- JHunterJ 13:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Much better! <grins> --Dweller 13:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Angelina Jolie

Why remove the external link to Angelina Jolie's tattoos? I find it to be an interesting website that colourfully illustrates her tattoos (a topic of much discussion on the Angelina Jolie page).