User talk:Nknight

Greetings and all that, since I'm the first to write on your talk page. With regards to the album moving, I'm moving them to the correct title according to the standards of the language. What is written on the cover may not be what the title is officially designated as, so it's probably very difficult to know exactly how the title should be punctuated. Some of the ones I'm moving are probably wrong, but these can be moved when this is confirmed and until then, I think it is better that other contributors can reliably guess what the correct title is for easy linkage. I won't revert any that you move back, unless I'm sure it's wrong. Tokerboy

Particularly with regards to Bridge over Troubled Water, I agree it looks better with a capital O, and I didn't like moving it--I'm just trying to be consistent, and it is a preposition. See Wikipedia:Wikiproject Albums. Tokerboy

It's not something I'm terribly worried about, I just wanted to make sure that the subject was brought up. I'm fully in agreement regarding the standards of English calling for lowercase prepositions in titles, and I probably wouldn't have even bothered to say anything except seeing "Bridge over Troubled Water" was somewhat jarring :). nknight 10:48 Jan 2, 2003 (UTC)

Hi, you cast a vote in the TEMP5 debate. The Temp5 proposal was voted down by 61.3% to 38.6%. We seem to be going around in circles on the whole issue of the main page. A new vote is now taking place to clarify what exactly we want, namely

Do we actually want to have a new page?
If so when (immediately, after a pause, timed to the press release, etc)?
What do people want on the front page and what do they want excluded?

As of now, the whole issue seems surrounded by complete confusion. This way, finally and definitively, we will know what we want and when we want it. So do please express your opinions. The vote is on the same page as the previous votes. FearÉIREANN 20:31, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)

classifier in prog lang article names[edit]

I sincerely apologize if I have caused you any difficulty. I have indeed read the language naming policy page, but found its contents do not reflect the vast majority of the existing prog lang articles, most of which were created with the 'programming language' classifier. Sure enough, the real names do not include the programming language phrase: the phrase is a classifier (I don't see it as a disambiguator, there are other mechanisms for doing that). Furthermore, the policy page actually suggests creating something like 'LanguaName programming language' and redirect this to the 'LanguageName' article... what's the point for doing that? The other way around does make sense. In fact, the classifier should not end up being 'programming language' but '(programming language)' so that the wiki shortcuts would apply (perhaps the right administrator might attempt that change later). Besides trying to put some order into what was the mess in 'Category:Programming Languages'(it used to include not only prog langs, but also prog langs lists, programming terms, among other things) I have also created the FL, FP, Function-level, ZPL, among other, content articles. Finally, I don't think it speaks well of Wikipedia's level of quality if there is such inconsistency on a page as there was in the prog langs category page: some languages were labeled 'LanguageName programming language' and redirected from 'LanguageName', others did the exact opposite (in fact,Tcl, Modula-2, Modula-3, and Objective-C still go the other way)... that's more like a mess to me. But if you detail how the changes have affected you, I will see how to fix it. Thanks for your comment. Wish you a good day.danakil

Article Licensing[edit]

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Abuse by Stirling Newbury[edit]

Nknight, I am at a loss as to how to deal with Stirling Newberry vis-a-vis The Age of Enlightenment. He totally refuses to bring forth any sources to back up his position; in fact he doesn't even try to explain his position. He just keeps making abusive comments and vandalizing the article by removing whole chunks of it. He then ends up by making a series of changes indicating that he wishes to take ownership of this entire article. I think we need to initiate a formal Request for Comment, soon. RK 18:56, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

Disrupting Wikipedia vote[edit]

You voted once for the policy at Wikipedia:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Despite a 75% support that vote was rejected by the minority. A new vote has been called with a two week limit at Wikipedia talk:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Please take a moment to participate. Thanks. - Tεx τ urε 17:12, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Richie Sambora[edit]

Hi I think you created the Richie Sambora page. Well I have improved it and added by concert pictures from Ireland but do you have any further bio details because he is a massive star and the info is very brief?. James Janderson 12:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake[edit]

It'd been a while since I noticed that page pop up on my watchlist and reacted too quickly thinking the problem had been undue coverage instead of whitewashing. Sorry about that. --Onorem ♠Dil 19:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]