User talk:Scottandrewhutchins

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Scottandrewhutchins! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! -- Kukini 03:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects
Getting your info out there
Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Policy Library

Getting Help
New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions
Getting along
Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution
Getting technical
Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Edit Summary Request

I have noted that you often edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! -- Kukini 03:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Orobas.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Orobas.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Michael Patrick Hearn

Hi SAW: edited your article on MPH, for point of view, but added a verify tag because your article lacks sources. Cheers. V. Joe 00:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Homeric Question

Please stop characterizing my edits as vandalism. You're free to disagree with my edits, but they are not done in bad faith. --Akhilleus (talk) 16:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signatures on articles

Template:Nosig --Gnewf 01:23, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Orobas.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Orobas.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BrownCow  (how now?) 18:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Nyman

Hello. I have been working on the Opera Project, which includes The opera corpus, a list of important opera composers and their major works. Discovering that all Wikipedia references to Nyman's "Man Who..." opera pointed to the page for Sachs's book, where the opera is mentioned briefly but not described in any way, I decided that the opera deserves a page of its own, as do all the operas in the Corpus, and as has been done for lots of operas based on books, plays, poems, etc. You will see that there are currently a lot of red-linked operas in the Corpus. Some of us are working our way through these, creating stubs and/or articles. In preparation for a "Man Who... (opera)" article, I have relinked all WP links to the book that ought to have been linked to the opera, and made other concomitant changes. I hope this explanation will help you to see why I am not very happy with your reversion of my amendment to the Nyman article. --GuillaumeTell 16:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Timon / Alcibiades' reconciliation

Hello! Nice to see your edits on Timon of Athens. However, I hope you will consider leaving in the phrase about Alciabiades' reconciliation with Athens. It explains what the bit about the glove is about; otherwise the article is just cryptic. Also, the contrast between Alcibiades' reconciliation, when he was far more wronged than Timon ever was, and Timon's rather nutty bitterness, is instructive ... and perhaps the point of this rather odd play. rewinn 04:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya! The box labels are the easy part. In my user page (or that of anyone you want to copy from) just edit the page, then copy the stuff between {{Boxboxtop|Info}} and {{Boxboxbottom}} and delete the stuff you don't want. Then add to your collection any individual boxes you like; they're normally something like {User Kleptobox}} . There's an official way to make more ub's but you can create your own on the fly with this formula: {{userbox|#AABBAA|#DDEEDD|[[Image:MagrittePipe.jpg|42px]]|Ceci n'est pas une [[WP:UBX | User Box]].}} It's good silly fun! Some user boxes of the official sort will add stuff to your watchlist. Enjoy! rewinn 04:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the glove and reconciliation: when the Senators fail to get Timon to come back to Athens to help deal with Alciabiades (he offers them his last tree with which to hang themselves) they are reduced to haggling with A: " All have not offended: For those that were, it is not square to take On those that are, Revenge ... With those that haue offended, like a Shepheard, Approach the Fold, and cull th' infected forth, But kill not altogether"

With these words, they are asking him for a sign that he will wreak revenge only on those who did him wrong -- suggesting his glove as a sign (I don't know why).

Alcibiades does offer his glove as a sign of (relative) peace; his revenge is not on Athens but on a few individuals who the Senators shall choose themselves (!):

"Then there's my Glove, Defend and open your uncharged Ports, Those Enemies of Timons, and mine owne Whom you your selves shall set out for reproofe, Fall and no more"

.... and pledges that his army will obey Athens' laws (although I don't see whether this includes the objects of his revenge):

"and to attone your feares With my more Noble meaning, not a man Shall passe his quarter, or offend the streame Of Regular Justice in your Citties bounds, But shall be remedied to your publique Lawes At heaviest answer."

This text leads me to think that the bit with the glove is not throwing down the gauntlet, as we think of it, as a sign of challenge, but somehow a sign of accepting the terms of reconciliation. At the end of the play, as in history, Alcibiades returns from Sparta to Athens (...although he later must flee after more shenanigans, but this isn't really an history.) rewinn 04:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mildred Harris

Mildred Harris indeed played Dorothy Gale in 1914's The Patchwork Girl of Oz. ExRat 20:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scottandrewhutchins, Thanks for taking the time to write to me about Harris' Oz connection to the Dorothy Gale character. I am rather confused about the whole thing however - I have not seen The Patchwork Girl of Oz, but when researching the article I created for Harris, I did look at a variety of reputable sites that list Harris as making a brief cameo in the film as Dorothy. Most prominently are The New York Times movie section [1], which states:

"Mildred Harris, later the wife of Charlie Chaplin, appears briefly as Dorothy, while future comedy star Harold Lloyd can be briefly spotted as an extra."

Also, the AFI Silent Film Catalog [2] lists Harris as playing the role of Dorothy.

Although, I did then find this - Scott Hutchins' Oz Filmography [3] (is this you?) which states that Harris didn't appear in the film, neither did the character of Dorothy Gale.

I apologize for my lack of knowledge on the film and Harris' role (or lack of) in the cast. I guess it's probable that Harris' involvement has simply become "Hollywood lore". Thanks for the clarification. ExRat 18:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Emmet Fox

Your comment about Emment Fox's death is not supported by a citation. Please provide a credible source for your assertion that Fox was murdered and the nature of his assailant, and I will not revert your posting again. Until then, I have set it back to eliminate your unsupported allegation. David Traver 21:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC). Often rumors come from people in positions of authority. I suspect it should be possible to find a printed biography of Fox that would answer the question for you and provide a basis for reliably expanding the article. David Traver 13:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Land of Oz

Is there a Wikipedia article for the Land of Oz theme park in the North Carolina mountains? If not, why not make one? Isn't it defunct now? Badagnani 05:13, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I first became aware of the park via the Alan Lomax documentary film about Appalachian music and culture, which features elderly locals complaining about all the pristine land the park was ruining. I guess they got the last laugh in a way, but the land still isn't the way it used to be. Badagnani 17:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Political Compass Userbox

How do yo make it display anything but complete neutrality? Scottandrewhutchins 18:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Scottandrewhutchins[reply]

It's fixed. If you go to User:Disavian/Userboxes or User:Disavian/Userboxes/Political, you'll see the examples there with the listing. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 06:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bot Complaint

You just made the following statement: I don't appreciate having my userboxes altered. That is vandalism. Scottandrewhutchins 18:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)Scottandrewhutchins[reply]

It's not vandalism. There was nothing malicious or deceptive in my changes. I userfied your boxes to comply with WP:GUS. Basically, it kept you from having your userboxes deleted. If you revert my changes, you'll find that the userbox has either been replaced or deleted. WP:GUS, coincidentally, is the solution by Jimbo Wales, the founder and director of wikipedia. Please respond on my talk page. αChimp ^laudare 19:44, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signing stuff

I'm not sure what happened, but some signatures of yours look all weird. Do you sign AFD and HD comments with four tildes? - Mgm|^(talk) 23:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's it. The four tildes already add your username, so you don't have to write it behind the tildes again. - Mgm|^(talk) 05:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Worm Quartet

I saw that you've done some work on the Dr. Demento article. I thought you may be a better authority than I to speak on the Worm Quartet AfD. PT ^(s-s-s-s) 21:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Message copied from the Opera Project

Thank you and welcome to the Opera Project - the most dynamic arts project on WP!

I see you have added Winnie Böwe and Hilary Summers to the 'Can you help?' section. I wonder why you think these two merit articles and listing alongside some very famous artists? - Kleinzach 12:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. We encourage people to write about little-known singers if they think they are notable or becoming notable, but the 'Can you helps?' section is really for major artists who for some reason or other still don't have articles, so if you don't mind I think we should delete these two names and leave the articles to you. Is that OK? - Kleinzach 13:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:EvaGreenNudeTheDreamers.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:EvaGreenNudeTheDreamers.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oz project

hey there! it seems you've been contributing a lot to the Oz project and that most people who used to contribute are either taking breaks from it or lost interest. Just wanted to say hi and let you know i've joined the project to work on the literary accuracy in plot summaries and character descriptions and to also hlp with some of the horrible navigation were stuck with right now. you seem to have the filmography side covered, so maybe it would be a good idea for you to categorize us appropriately within those wikiprojects as well, ttyl! Zappernapper 22:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit in the Charun article

On 3 June 2006, you add this to Charun: "Similar to Charon, he is the Estruscan equivalent, at least in terms of function, and was superceded by him when the Trojans came to Italy."

Specify source. Charun is merely a Greek loan. Trojans never came to Italy; the "Tyrrhenoi" did (aka "Etruscans", not Trojans). (See Herodotus, Histories I.94 for the direct source.) Different peoples with different names. Are you confused? --Glengordon01 09:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The details may be more inspired by the Aeneid than by history, but Charon is a Greek loan, while Charun is a substantially different figure of similar function that was replaced with the Gree Charon subsequent to Greek influence. The description and vehavior of Charun seem to me different enough to warrant a separate entry, even if my historical facts are wrong. Scottandrewhutchins

Yes, I understand, but where in the Aeneid? Quote? If you can't justify your claim with a source, give up. --Glengordon01 05:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say Charun was mentioned in the Aeneid. I meant the Aeneid says that the Roman figures come to Italy via the Trojans. I don't have access to the source of the claims about horses or the bashing of souls with a hammer, but I believed they are derived from one of two books by Jeff Rovin, either The Fantasy Encyclopedia or The Encyclopedia of Monsters. Please see Wikipedia definitions of vandalism before you accuse me of it again. Scottandrewhutchins 15:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Fantasy Encyclopedia and The Encyclopedia of Monsters?? This proves you have low reading standards. If you can't separate "proven fact" from "fantasy" or "science" from "science fiction", you have no business editing. I suggest you follow the link on Wiki vandalism and actually *read* what it says instead of daydreaming about monsters:

There are four generally acknowledged types of vandalism: deletion of legitimate information, insertion of nonsense or irrelevant content, addition of unwanted commercial links (spam), and policy violations specific to that wiki.

Yours would be vandalism because of insertion of nonsense. Charun bonking the deceased with a hammer is a clear example of nonsense. Grow up and read labrys if you're truly interested in facts about Charun's "hammer". --Glengordon01 15:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not insertion of nonsense. It is derived from a published book. You can disagree if you so choose, but it is not correct to classify it as vanadalism. Scottandrewhutchins 18:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have one undocumented claim that Charun wielded a labrys rather than a hammer. I'm so impressed. Rovin said that Charun carries either a hammer or an axe depending on the source. Scottandrewhutchins 18:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hardly care whether you're impressed. Stating that the hammer is a labrys or labrys derivative is based on historical facts. Hardly outlandish. Claiming that Charun clubs people with a religious symbol based on the word of a sci-fi writer however proves you're a lunatic and a vandal. "Sourced" doesn't mean "based on just any cockamamey book". --Glengordon01 18:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and as for a source. Take a hard lookey at something from Robert S. P. Beekes The Origin of the Etruscans, my neophyte friend:

The double axe. On a smaller issue Versnel concludes (p. 299): ‘When this bipennis [‘double axe’], property of ‘Zeus Bakchos’, carried as symbol of sacred power by Lydian kings, is encountered again as the symbol of the royal authority of the Etruscan kings, particularly of the supreme king of the federation of cities, this may be considered an important indication of the Asia Minor origin of the entire underlying ideology, and of the ceremony of investiture in which the bipennis played a part.’

These conclusions are of primary importance, as they concern a deeprooted complex of religious views that cannot have been taken over from elsewhere. (p.31-32)

Note he's quoting Versnel who says the same damn thing that I'm trying to get through to you. You could have googled that yourself if you weren't so lazy and prone to fantasy books. And in case you're wondering, Beekes is an important scholar particularly of Indo-European linguistics, not a sci-fi writer. So crawl back to the hole you came from, buddy, or learn how to research for yourself. --Glengordon01 19:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The quote says nothing about Charun, and you're resorting to personal attacks, which is another violation of Wikipedia policy. Scottandrewhutchins 22:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read this book? http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0838750613/sr=8-1/qid=1155422077/ref=sr_1_1/102-3030524-8738536?ie=UTF8 Scottandrewhutchins 22:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can't you understand what "academic source" means? Nobody knows who Ronnie H. Terpeling is. Is he a recognized scholar? Never heard of him. Robert S. P. Beekes on the other is a famous linguist and that article that you refuse to read is expounding upon the labrys symbolism, identical to that in the Charun imagery. Can't understand? Too bad. Them's facts.

Claiming that "Charun smashes people's souls with a hammer" is as lunatic as saying "Jesus smashes people's souls with his cross in heaven". If you find that insulting, I equally find your twisted understanding of ancient religions insulting. End of discussion. Goodbye, goodbye, goodbye. Please, get lost. --Glengordon01 23:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VANDALISM. CONSTANT VANDALISM. Stop editing in your narrow POV into Charun. Your sources are science fiction. Stop it! --Glengordon01 20:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved a comment you left on a userpage

Hi, Scottandrewhutchins - I just wanted to let you know that I moved a comment you left on Glengordon01's userpage to his talk page. He's more likely to see it there (since he'll get a notification of a new message), and it's more in line with wikietiquette. Thanks! - Tapir Terrific 18:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your message: No problem! It's an easy mistake to make. Also, I noticed you put some of my userboxes on your page - cool! Do you want them to say "this tapir," though, or "this user"? It's easy to change, and I'd be happy to give you a hand. - Tapir Terrific 18:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your other message: Yeah, that's what always happens to me when I go to the zoo - most people think they're anteaters (and one baby who was just learning to talk thought they were ducks). Anyway, I'll create some userboxes for you that say "user" instead of "tapir." - Tapir Terrific 18:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've got new and improved userboxes now. - Tapir Terrific 18:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]