User talk:Imroy/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Not my Site?

Hi Imroy,

That is not my site. For my business class I did a report on the link between marketing, pop culture and photography and decided to add to wikipedia using the popculture topic...

That is NOT my site, nor is it the site of anyone I know...

Go into any photo store in the USA and ask what a purist is. Bourgeosis and Nouveau Riche are terms in connection with the upper middle class.

Please check the pages PR. When I was doing my report, it had a PR of 7

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagerank

Hey

dont know what you have agaisnt my artical i started Night photography tips but i wrote everything there.--Picturetokyo 05:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikia links on Perl

Please see User_talk:Ermeyers#Wikia_links_on_Perl for a response to your comment. HighInBC 15:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Trent Reznor

Thanks for the "correction", but there has been no reliable evidence to prove that the track in question actually contain vocals from Trent. Please research.

renaming instances of "Thermal Design Power"

Please look at the discussions on german Wikipedia. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Thermal_Design_Power#Thermal_Design_Point There was a hint on this a long long time on the discussion-page of thermal design point. but nobody did anything. till today. i did something. 134.30.5.94 13:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

The individual language wikis are quite separate from one another. You can't expect everyone (or even very many people) to be polyglots and monitor talk pages across several languages. You should have said something more definitive on the talk page, instead of relying on a "hint" left by someone else. And perhaps noone responded because they didn't think it was important. I don't know what to think. You just seemed to come out of nowhere renaming links, and your edit summaries (with exclaimation points!) looked like a newbie making lots of changes without understanding how Wikipedia works. Perhaps you should seek consensus before continuing. --Imroy 14:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

My intention was to do something and not to wait and wait. The hint on the discussion-page of Thermal Design Point was there since at least a few months. And nothing happened. I hope that now, that I have changed something, other people will notice this. The English Wikipedia is a real big chaos. It intends to have as much articles as possible. But not quality. Thats really poor. 134.30.5.94 14:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

"Americanised" spelling?

You wrote, in your summary: "rv Samuel Webster's Americanised spelling changes - Article is about an English person". What do you mean? Did you read my edit summary? Seems like an unnecessarily hostile change. Please explain, thanks. --Samuel Webster 13:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I've responded to this first part on your talk page.

P.S. Please see En-GB-oed#Spelling. Thanks. --Samuel Webster 13:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I direct you to American and British English spelling differences#-ise / -ize:

But the OED has been waging a losing battle. The -ise form is used by the British government and is more prevalent in common usage within the UK today; the ratio between -ise and -ize stands at 3:2 in the British National Corpus, according to Pam Peters (2004, -ize/-ise). In Australia and New Zealand -ise spellings are strongly preferred; the Australian Macquarie Dictionary, among other sources, gives the -ise spelling first, many people in New Zealand and Australia believe -ize to be an "Americanism" and -ise to be British, and are even taught in school of the former being the case.

I don't know why you're holding up the OED as some sort of standard for British or CommonWealth spelling. While highly influental, it is still written by a private organisation.

P.P.S. "Agenda"? You write: "As a native english speaker I do sometimes clean up text that appears to be written by someone having difficulty with the language. That includes teenagers and americans, as well as non-native speakers" (italics added). And: "This user dislikes American 'English'". What is the purpose of that sort of hatefulness? --Samuel Webster 13:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am anti-American in many ways, which is a large part of my opposition to various Americanisms. It's nothing personal, I don't really have anything against Americans. I just resent feeling smothered under this blanket of cultural imperialism from the U.S. But those statements are meant in jest. You know, humour. Where's the hate? Imroy 14:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

If I publicly say Australians are the inbred descendents of prisoners, too cowardly to remove the Union Jack from their flag, and say "just kidding" when someone points out it's hateful, would you take me seriously?

About American cultural imperialism, um... reflect on the British Empire's deeds, and ask yourself whether your seeming lack of concern for British imperialism might make it difficult for any serious person to take your concerns about American "cultural imperialism" seriously. Sigh. Adios, and I hope y'all have a revolution someday. (Do you really need a queen?) --Samuel Webster 14:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, Sammy, Sammy. Take a look at yourself before chucking abuse at other people. Seriously mate, chill out. NJW494 18:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

It's now a two-way street, my little friend. But that's not how it began. In any event, I wasn't being insulting in the same way at all, I'm sure you'll agree. --Samuel Webster 19:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't agree. You seem to like pursuing your own little vendettas. Perhaps by simply being polite and not reverting stuff for the wrong reasons you'd be received better. For the record, some of your OED reverts were justified, however your recent such reverts were not. Cut out the arrogance and we'll get along just fine Mr German. Actually, since you say that you're German, perhaps that would explain your brusque, confrontational English. Maybe arrogance wasn't actually intended?NJW494 20:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Not vendettas, not little. I've made a couple of mistakes, so have you. Not so complicated. "Confrontational English?" I don't see it, but it might be the result of my not growing up with English (though I've been speaking it as my primary language for years). Perhaps we'll get along. That would be good. By the way, I think there are too many issues at play at once here. By "abuse" I thought you were referring to my reply to the Aussie's insults against Americans. That was not a two-way street! That was someone casting aspersions on hundreds of millions of people. I did nothing of the sort. --Samuel Webster 21:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

We've both made mistakes (some early OED edits on my part, some suspect reversions on your part). Lets just get along, I won't change as many "ize" suffixes (though I'll still change some when I change American English into English). You on the other hand should not be so judgemental.

As for Imroy's comments; He was using humour, albeit a type of humour that Americans aren't very good at getting (especially German-Americans I guess). Please take time to consider the actions of other people. NJW494 21:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hard to see how it's humor. Even harder to see how insulting me then making kissy-kissy is a winning strategy. If you want to be friends, act that way. (I'm German, not German-American.) --Samuel Webster 21:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, so you're not American then, just a German, okay. In that case, why not play around with the spelling on German Wikipedia instead? You should also know that Brits/Aussies/Kiwis have a rather more subtle sense of humour than you would be used to. Apologies if I have caused any offence. NJW494 09:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

You're the one playing around with spelling. I'm trying to clean up after you! --Samuel Webster 14:52, 8 August 2006 (UTC) PS For others, NJW494's post above originally ended with "Please take time to consider the actions of other people. Cheers..........friend." That's part of what I was referring to with "kissy kissy".

120 Aspect ratios

Imroy wrote: I'm not sure I agree with your changes to the 120 film article. I originally formatted the aspect ratios the way I did to keep them in the same order as the numbers in the frame size name and the nominal frame size e.g 6x17 => 56x168 => 1:3. I also don't like the decimal approximations. How are they easier to understand than simple and exact fractions? Also, 6x7 should be 1.25:1 just like 6x4.5. --Imroy 06:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Imroy, Thanks for commenting on my edits to the article 120 film. As you asked, I will explain the changes I made. First, the decimal numbers make comparisons easier than fractions. For example, 1.25:1 is clearly between 1.2:1 and 1.33:1, but 5:4 is not "clearly" between 6:5 and 4:3 (it becomes clear when one does the conversion to decimal). Please bear in mind that while you and I might be able to convert between fractions and decimals, readers of Wikipedia are not necessarily able to do arithmetic mentally.

Regarding approximations, note that while the some of the decimals I gave are inexact approximations to the fractions, the fractions themselves are not exact; they are nominal. Actual machined values may differ from item to item and model to model. Moreover, frames of film can even overlap, resulting in the usable pieces of film having dimensions quite different from specifications. Regardless of the cause, the difference between 4/3 and 1.33 (to take one example) is a third (a quarter 07:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)) of a percent; this has little practical consequence on film or print.

Next, agreement between the order of the aspect ratio and the order of the sizes is worthwhile in one mathematical sense but not in the photographic sense. The photo is near-square or very oblong independent of the orientation. The numbers don't make it clear that 2:3 (or about 0.67) is the same print as 3:2 (or 1.5). It's useful to give a measure that puts both on an equal footing. That's why I divided long by short. (The reverse would work as well.)

In any case, please feel free to revert the changes I made. Or, if you like, you can make multiple columns, one for exact fractions and one for decimal approximations. And even separate columns for vertical orientation and for horizontal.

Fg2 07:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Subversion

I added a link to a commercial subversion hosting site which you have deleted without discussion. Before posting the information I thoroughly researched the rules on this and found that it was within the Wikopedia codes of conduct (Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not). If you look at the section "Wikopedia is not a soap box" you will see that "External links to commerical organisations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with this topic".

The presence of online subversion services is not only relevant but useful to those researching the subject of subversion version control providing the user the facilityto experience the subject matter in a practical way. I will replace my changes but this time label them as a major change. I respectfully request that you do not immediately remove them according to your interpretation to the guidelines but put them out to the wider userbase to decide. Mbbeaton 12:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted the link in question. That Wikipedia should not be used for advertising is not just an "interpretation", but a widespread consensus among editors. Wmahan. 16:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

AGF

I was fairly sure there was nothing below what I typed, and I *surely* didn't delete a comment intentionally. It was either a mistake or a glitch. So apologies, but keep in mind I have no motivation to censor you. - BalthCat 04:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Something went wrong. There were six hours between my comment and yours. Surely you didn't take that long to compose you comment? It looks like you edited the older revision (the one the anon. made) to add your comment. Perhaps you clicked on the wrong link in the history or diff display? --Imroy 05:02, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I wasn't paying attention even when I checked to see what I did wrong, I thought there was only 12 minutes between our comments. It's possible I grabbed a diff from a watchlist that had been open and didn't click to load the discussion before I edited. A likely explanation. I may carelessly missed the red warning :/ Anyway, all is well now... ... maybe... (ciao.) - BalthCat 05:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Baileys external links

Hi Imroy, I'm new to Wikipedia and trying to understand how the whole process of editing pages works. From what I understand of Wikipedia policies, external links can be added that are related to the page topic. The official Baileys site is linked at the bottom of the page, as is a link to a site called Jago's, which appears to sell brands of liquor. TheBar.com website is a webpage created by Diageo, the owners of the Baileys brand, and provides recipes and information about the Baileys brand. This is useful information.

I'd appreciate it if you could help me understand how the link to TheBar.com is different from the link to the official Baileys site. Perhaps I can repost the link but word the description differently. I would like to understand the best way to post the website to avoid finding myself in the category of wikispam. Thanks Jack The Bartender 11 October 2006

Sorry, I didn't know that thebar.com was associated with Baileys, or Smirnoff either. I wasn't aware of this Diageo company/group. Wow, they own a lot don't they? I've reinstated the links to TheBar.com on those two articles, with a description that makes the relationship clear. I apologise for accusing you of link spamming. I run into linkspam very often and have become rather fervent about removing it from Wikipedia. Your links really looked like genuine linkspam, although I was surprised you'd only added it to two articles. Spammers usually add their links to lots of articles, making them easy to spot. But I overlooked that disparity. You should be more careful about adding links to articles - make sure the description of the link doesn't sound like promotional material. That's what tripped me off. --Imroy 18:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

TR

hey thanks for fixing that... I wonder what happened. When I edited the artcle I never went below the inbox. I wonder if it has to do with Firefox? Anyway thanks again, it obviously wasn't intentional.Naufana : ^talk 21:48, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. LittleOldMe 13:31, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Links to OneCall.com

Hi Imroy,

Yes, I did setup several links to OneCall.com. I didn't think of the idea but actually noticed that several of our competitors are doing this currently on Wikipedia and thought I should do the same in order to keep up with their SEO advantage for doing so. If you do not want me on Wikipedia then please also clean up the external links from my competitors. You can find examples of competitors on all the pages that I put a link on. The biggest violator is Vanns.com.

Until those other external links are removed I will continue to attempt to put external links on manufacturer pages in order to keep a competitive equality.

P.S. Yes I am new to Wiki . . . so if there is a better way to accomplish my goals please let me know. I don't me harm I simply need equality.

Thanks,

B. David Payne Business Development OneCall.com http://www.onecall.com

Did it ever occur to you to remove your competitor's links yourself? Instead, you're only making the problem worse! Thank you for making contact, but if you re-add your link to articles, it will be considered vandalism and you will be blocked. The actions you propose are simple unacceptable for anyone on Wikipedia. --Imroy 19:24, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Kodachrome

I had considered writing it the way your two changes are, but didn't really like the idea of a black 's' trailing the blue word. I thought is was more aesthetic to have it all in blue, and the redirect and alias don't really have any major processing cost. I didn't realize the software was smart enough to pickup on a trailing 's'. Thanks. Luxomni 15:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Single-lens reflex camera

Thanks for catching my reversion on Single-lens reflex camera where I let the extra link creep back in. Hu 18:21, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Message left for 69.129.190.34

You left the following message on the talk page for anonymous user 69.129.190.34: [1]. I'm not going to remove it, but you might want to think about doing so. I already left a note about adding external links regarding the set of edits you were commenting on, as part of my welcome message. Leaving two might be overkill, especially for a total three potential good faith edits. —INTRIGUEBLUE (talk|contribs) 00:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Alright, done. I have to remember to not bite the newbies. --Imroy 01:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. —INTRIGUEBLUE (talk|contribs) 05:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Happyzapper

Hey nice job deleting my article, wanted to see how fast wiki fixes itself. (pertty damn fast) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happyzapper (talk • contribs)

Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. --Imroy 11:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Dweddell

Hi Imroy,

I made a mistake. I should not have put a speedy deletion template on the user page.

Apologies

Fg2 12:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Imroy wrote: Hi, I'm just wondering why you placed a speed deletion template on User:Dweddell after I'd moved the article into the User namespace? --Imroy 11:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Sean Harnett

Hi. I notice that you posted on this talk page. Talk:Sean Harnett I'm wondering if you can help me. This page is CLEARLY self-promoition. And I repeatedly added deletion tags and he repeatedly removed them. Are you an admin or do you know any admins that you can point this out to? Thank you so much! Avraham 10:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

No I am not an admin. You might post a complaint to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, maybe get the user blocked from editing entirely. And if you're lucky an admin will also take a look at the article and delete it immediately. Otherwise, just sit on the article history page or their contributions page and try to revert their changes as soon as possible. --Imroy 10:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Your vandalism count

I noticed that a vandal decremented your vandalism count. Instead of simply reverting it, you should increase it by 3. I caught the same user a few minutes ago and they just did it again (as noted above in this post). -Will Pittenger 04:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I incremented the count but the same little shit is just changing open proxies on a regular basis and no admin blocked him after almost 2 hours. I'll just wait for him to finish before counting up all of the incidents of vandalism. --Imroy 04:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I think who ever it is is on a public system (like a computer lab or public library) or dialup. Either way, his or her IP address is changing every time. With the public system, they are probably switching computers. -Will Pittenger 06:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

The IP addresses are too different. One was in Hong Kong, another in Boston University. They're obviously open proxies. The person could be anywhere in the world. --Imroy 06:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Even so, with them floating around like that, we can't block him. You might have to ask that your page be semi-protected. Will (Talk - contribs) 07:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Well he/she seems to have stopped for now. If they come back I'll certainly consider it. --Imroy 08:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Myf's love for Kenny Rogers

Hey. Myf's love for Kenny Rogers is long-standing and oft talked about on Spicks and Specks. What is so wrong in putting it on her page?