User talk:ObfuscatePenguin

Welcome!

Hello, ObfuscatePenguin, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Hope you carry on enjoying your time on Wikipedia. Even if you only speak as much Welsh as I do, you would still be welcomed to join the team at WP:WALES! Bencherlite ^Talk 11:10, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Irina Mikitenko translation

Hey, thanks. German isn't my first language, so if I can translate with only a few mistakes, I consider that acceptable.--Danaman5 18:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

And I've replied more on my talk page. Just wanted to drop you a note to let you know I replied. Thanks again! ^Ariel♥Gold 06:21, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adage (fr)

the discussion is now opened for adage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Adage and ,even if i am new ,we are equals wikicitizens. The rules explained previously by you , apply to yourself also . I am guessing you are not a french or spanish speaker; so perhaps you cannot understand the feeling when someone is willing for the "extinction" of one of your beloved words. please bring good arguements in the discussion page for adage (english) ; if possible not the "clicking two time is too much". Even if the (fr) Adage page is in the "Homonymie" catégory , and this page needs to be done by a good writer (not me) , it is more important to preserve the language and the words then misleading and hide this word for the world (no reference is found in (fr) proverbe page for Adage) .

damaging a language is quick and i am just working to preserve it the best i can ,here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Adage

before clicking undo please come to the talk page . thank you for your comprehension. --Otij 08:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied at your talk page. ObfuscatePenguin 09:08, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hello ,
first adage(fr) is not an homonymie/disambiguation of adage(eng)
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catégorie:Homonymie
they share the same sens in both language***.
Adage(fr) is also a term taken afterward in danse and lawers profesion.
so it is good to have it in the homonymie/disambiguation category.

the wiktionary explanation is short but true
that adage(fr) =Proverbe, sentence populaire.
( ~maxim or proverb)

i am no writer , and it is complicated for me to
sort out everything:
***the proverbe is inspirated by dictons , locutions populaires and is then declinated into adage ,
aphorisme , maxime , sentence .

if Adage(eng) links to Proverb(eng)
then proverb(eng) do not link to Adage(eng).
This is where my conclusions*** are different from the authors
of the two previous(eng) definitions;without going to the
opposite direction.

The best way should be to leave it as it is
adage(eng) go to adage(fr)
the person will then click
where apropriated.
synonymous :proverbe
definition :wiktionary
or homonymie --Otij 16:21, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I have replied at your talk page. ObfuscatePenguin 18:54, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hello,
thank you for the change
and pointing me out to Homonymie ;
perhaps you didn't read well what i writen here previously.Anyway it doesn't mater.

i will then link the spanish page to
Adage_(expression)

good input:
"Language interwiki
A link to a page in another language's Wikipedia that covers the same concept. Remember, Wikipedia is an
encyclopaedia, not a dictionary; its purpose is to explain concepts, not to define words. This is why many of the
interwikis are not literal translations: because the purpose is to link to a translation of the idea, not a
translation of the article title."
do you think adage(fr) is a word or a concept nor both.
if i follow your idea both adage(fr-eng) should have been put in wiktionary...

--Otij 04:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly still have a lot to learn, but I'm glad you have at least seen the light on this issue. ObfuscatePenguin 07:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

did there was a pride lose on the process?
at least you helped me protect my precious language (thank you).
ah... protocols they make things go slowish... --Otij 14:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

U7 (Berlin U-Bahn)

Hello Marc, I saw you proofreading my translation on the U4 (Berlin U-Bahn) page. Thanks very much for that. Now I translated parts of U7 (Berlin U-Bahn) from .de and I'm searching for someone who is able to correct my grammar and word choice mistakes. This is no request to do that, I only thought you would like to know as you are in the Category:Proofreaders de-en and maybe have fun in doing such things. Really no problem if you don't want to. I also added this concern here. Cheers --Oxymoron⁸³ 21:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need to thank me for the U4 proofreading: I (and Wikipedia as a whole) should thank you for improving the article with some valuable content.

I decided to take you up on your offer with U7 and, having now completed that, I can say that your translation was fine—the changes I made are better described as copy edits for English prose rather than translation corrections—so, if you ever want me to check over another translation, let me know. ObfuscatePenguin 06:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it is a pleasure to work with you. I hope the efforts you spent on copy editing weren't higher than those a fresh translation would have needed ;) --Oxymoron⁸³ 10:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

League of Copyeditors roll call

Greetings from the League of Copyeditors. Your name is listed on our members page, but we are unsure how many of the people listed there are still active contributors to the League's activities. If you are still interested in participating in the work of the League, please follow the instructions at the members page to add your name to the active members list. Once you have done that, you might want to familiarise yourself with the new requests system, which has replaced the old /proofreading subpage. As the old system is now deprecated, the main efforts of the League should be to clear the substantial backlog which still exists there.
The League's services are in as high demand as ever, as evinced by the increasing backlog on our requests pages, both old and new. While FA and GA reviewers regularly praise the League's contributions to reviewed articles, we remain perennially understaffed. Fulfilling requests to polish the prose of Wikipedia's highest-profile articles is a way that editors can make a very noticeable difference to the appearance of the encyclopedia. On behalf of the League, if you do consider yourself to have left, I hope you will consider rejoining; if you consider yourself inactive, I hope you will consider returning to respond to just one request per week, or as many as you can manage. Merry Christmas and happy editing, The League of Copyeditors.

Melon‑Bot (STOP!) 18:34, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar?

Please stop replacing outside of with outside. There's nothing wrong with it. It's standard in American English, and "established in British English, and used across a range of prose styles for the general reader ... [it] is idiomatic for the writer, and probably helps the rhythm of the statement" (Pam Peters, "The Cambridge Guide to English Usage," p. 401). Don't impose your personal preferences on others. Thank you. Jack^(Lumber) 21:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a matter of "personal preference", so much as what I have been taught to be correct, and the texts that I have read—both American and British— which have variously described the addition of of to prepositions such as outside, off, etc. as non-standard, colloquial, redundant, or simply wrong. I am, therefore, grateful for your reference, which I can use to update my understanding of modern usage. However, I would assert that: simple outside probably still has a greater acceptance in all dialects of English than the "idiomatic" construction does, especially in more formal, published works, such as encyclopaedias; and, as such, is the more appropriate choice for Wikipedia. That said, if, in future, I make the change elsewhere, I will instead describe it as a copy edit. ObfuscatePenguin (talk) 01:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My original post was actually a little out of line. I sounded like the archetypal pain-in-the-ass holier-than-thou Mr. Know-it-all. I apologize.

Anyway, sometimes outside of sounds a little bit better; sometimes, plain outside is just fine. The following examples are from the British National Corpus [1]:

based on discoveries that go beyond, or arise outside of, ordinary experience. Here, "outside of" helps the rhythm of the statement.

the 26-mm lamps have limitations, outside of the problems of colour rendering. Plain "outside" wouldn't make sense here.

economic growth outside of London. This one really comes down to personal preference.

Off of is a little different. In British English, it's still beyond the pale, usually associated with nonstandard speech. On my side of the pond, off of is pretty common in speech and can be found in ordinary writing, though not in the most formal styles. The rule of thumb I follow is: If the article is about an American [British, Canadian, etc.] topic, let the Americans [British, Canadians, etc.] take care of it. (Indeed, you will find that many articles written mainly by people from India, Hong Kong, etc. have a distinct flavor, particularly with respect to word choice and prosody rather than grammar.) If the topic is region-free, then let's try to find alternatives shared by as many speakers as possible. For example: It is different from what it used to be. (region-free). Not: ~~It is different to what it used to be~~ (British sounding), nor ~~It is different than it used to be~~. (American sounding). (Four centuries ago, however, these three construction were all possible in England.) Jack^(Lumber) 18:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello ObfuscatePenguin! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 16 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

José de Guimarães - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of José de Guimarães

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on José de Guimarães requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 18:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

Your addition to Vidya Bharati has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. You replaced the text of an article with a bunch of stuff from the organization's website--http://www.vidyabharati.org/main.asp. Drmies (talk) 21:17, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]