User talk:Aziraphale/Archive 3

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Category

There are many Categories with only one or two members. Could you merge them in new or old categories, but in packages of several articles?

--User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 11:51, 25 July 2007 (EDT)

Hi Joaquin. :) I plan to do exactly that. However, my plan is to tackle re-categorization after I first clear out the un-categorized list. It's an equally valid method to categorize "thoroughly" the first time through, but my brain likes it better when I do a first, "rough" sort to get every article into a category, and then go back and tidy the categories. Make sense? Aziraphale 11:59, 25 July 2007 (EDT) <-gives correct change...
Sounds great! --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 12:43, 25 July 2007 (EDT)
  • You might want to check this out: [[1]] I would like your thoughts as well, particularly in regard to the categories and wanted page list, via IM or email, at first, until we build some direction. Perhaps I can even compel you, BrianCo, LTC and Mr. Rayment into a productive chat session! :p --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 16:17, 25 July 2007 (EDT)

I don't remember where you responded! Perhaps tomorrow we can chat? You know where...you hate it! --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 01:52, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

FYI, I removed category cats from the Erwin Schroedinger article. User:PheasantHunter/FullSig 01:53, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
  • Well, he had something to do with something about cats! --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 01:54, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
I recognized this as a potentially controversial edit, so I notified the original contributor. Feel free to revert me. User:PheasantHunter/FullSig 02:02, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
  • If you recognize that, then don't do it. :p --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 05:23, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
fwiw, I don't mind the edit. I have a short list (I think it is/was two items) of things I did for my own amusement that I needed to take out later. "cats" on Scroedinger was one... I think I have "category:unusual ways to open windows" on defenestration. Nothing rude or uncouth, I just get a little silly every once in awhile, and figured it might give the reader a chuckle. But no, no harm in removing it, I would have eventually myself. Aziraphale 10:23, 26 July 2007 (EDT) <-how about category - underwear for jockey?

Email!

--Sysop-TK /MyTalk 13:45, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

belatedly responded to your last one, sorry about that. Typing isn't my favorite thing at the moment, I seem to have sprained/broken a finger. :p Aziraphale 14:38, 27 July 2007 (EDT) <-typity-type typity-type...
 :p In any case, I have responded... Aziraphale 17:26, 27 July 2007 (EDT) <-speechless

categories revisited

*I think we need a page for working on the category reorganization, and I made it here: User:TK/SandboxCat-- TK

Thanks for the input! Too bad my watch list is so long, and I didn't see your posts, lol! Geo and I will begin this evening, I guess...I will direct him to your suggestions, and we can email back and forth, I guess. --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 16:05, 31 July 2007 (EDT)

The only thing I'd appreciate you letting me know is if there is something you DON'T want me to do, like condensing the orphan categories (that's what I call the cats with one or two members in my head). It doesn't require a sysop, so I was going to plug away at those when I was done cat'ing the articles (whenever that is). Aziraphale 16:26, 31 July 2007 (EDT) <-meow...
  • We would appreciate a greater coordination on this than the assignments you have been doing, which has been great. However, the point of this review will be elmination of categories, and re-alignment. So, I would hold off making new ones for right now, so as not to make double work. --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 21:32, 31 July 2007 (EDT)
okie-doke! Aziraphale 23:43, 31 July 2007 (EDT) <-easy...

Categories

I always get a kick out of your categorizing, and you'd make a fine sysop candidate at 17,000 edits. But when categorizing, keep in mind that the point of a category is to help people who are reading one article find additional information about a broader topic. So it isn't absolutely necessary to create a randomly obscure category for a lonely article, considering that no other articles would be in that category.

Just thought I'd get that off my chest.

Auf wiedersehen! --Ħøĵímαζĥŏήğθαλκ 01:58, 31 July 2007 (EDT)

Hi Hojimachong, :)
I agree with you almost entirely, and I'm not sure which article(s) you had in mind. There are a couple that I freely admit I did to amuse myself, with a little note to myself that I have to clean it up (I think I have defenestration under "category:non-standard methods of opening windows" or something like that). When I do a few hundred in a row, sometimes I got a little punchy. ;)
In other cases, if I have a future re-organization in mind I might use a category that I suspect will be used in a few weeks, although it does mean I've got a temporary orphan.
In still other cases, I make a mistake. :p
Anyway, thanks for the heads up, and let me let you in on a secret about me - I do not feel particularly proprietary about these things, so feel free to a)correct my errors, and/or b)let me know what you feel should be different so I can go and fix it. :D I'm not entirely egoless, but I'm not particularly invested in this project, it's more of a hobby.
Take care, Aziraphale 10:29, 31 July 2007 (EDT) <-oompla loompa at heart...

News Archive pages

I don't think we will be saving the old news stories from the front page. They are, after all, merely headlines, and links to stories which are already searchable via any news search engine. This is part of the categorization we need coordinated, okay? --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 01:52, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

*shrug* Suits me. Crocoite is a sysop so I figured he was doing approved work, I was just asking him not to make more work for us. If he's not creating those articles then obviously they won't need categories. :D As it was, since it wasn't a new category I thought it fell under my "jurisdiction" to categorize and move on. Sorry for the mixup! Aziraphale 01:56, 2 August 2007 (EDT) so close...

Congratulations

Well done! Bohdan 02:21, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

Thanks. :D I didn't do all of them, BrianCo in particular did a big chunk, and others chipped in. But... yeah, thanks. :) Aziraphale 02:24, 2 August 2007 (EDT) <-all categorized out...
I hope this isn't the end of Aziraphle? I couldn't go on without the funny comments... Bohdan 02:25, 2 August 2007 (EDT)
Nah, although now that the grown-ups are getting involved (rightfully so, but still...) it won't be quite the same. Aziraphale 02:29, 2 August 2007 (EDT) <-adult, but not grown-up...
You need to write on your userpage "official categorizer" or something. Bohdan 00:26, 4 August 2007 (EDT)
HA! If there's one thing I know about CP by now, it's not to get uppity. heheheheh Aziraphale 00:29, 4 August 2007 (EDT) <-you just wanted a new saying, didn't you? :P
  • Heck, if that was so, someone would have blocked you by now! Oh...wait. Never mind! --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 00:32, 4 August 2007 (EDT)
ttttthhhhppt. I don't think of myself as uppity. I'm just not particularly ...er.. downity? Aziraphale 00:37, 4 August 2007 (EDT) <-kind of middlety...
What if I get you a userbox that says "This User enjoys categorization"? Bohdan 00:39, 4 August 2007 (EDT)
Meh. I mean, yeah, thanks, that's very kind. But I don't ever really look at my own user page. Besides, I really only do the things I enjoy, so I get enough already. :) Aziraphale 00:42, 4 August 2007 (EDT) <-ain't workin'...
  • Who knows enought about wiki formatting to put a list of those d___ categories on my sandbox page? So we can edit them, and put comments next to them, etc.... --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 00:58, 4 August 2007 (EDT)
Since I don't even know what you mean by "d___" categories, clearly I'm not knowledgeable enough. hehehehe Aziraphale 01:22, 4 August 2007 (EDT) <-!!!!

More Categories

Hi Aziraphale,

We've noticed that certain categories are "colliding". For instance there is a science fiction category under books and the same category under movies. Could you split any categories like these that you see under books or movies that could have duel purpose? We were thinking maybe something like fiction (books) or fiction (movies). TK had me write you after a late night IM discussion. Thanks. ;-) Learn together 02:49, 14 August 2007 (EDT)

I'm not sure that I follow, although once I do I'll happily comply. Wouldn't it make sense to have cat:science fiction, and then a sci-fi movie would be cat:movies and cat:science fiction? Or is the concern that cat:movies will be too unwieldy? Aziraphale 10:25, 14 August 2007 (EDT)
The problem is more than one pipe is leading to the same source. So under cat:movies you have cat:science fiction, but under cat:books you also have cat:science fiction. So you're going along checking under movies and going to the sub category, science fiction, and suddenly you've got movies and books showing up. That's what we're trying to avoid. ;-) Learn together 12:34, 14 August 2007 (EDT)
Huh. Ok, so there should be cat:science fiction (books) and cat:science fiction (movies), correct? Aziraphale 12:44, 14 August 2007 (EDT)
Yes. Please use whatever naming conventions you're comfortable with, but we do need to split them. Thanks! Learn together 13:28, 14 August 2007 (EDT)
Ok. Last question (I hope TK warned you, I talk these things to death):is this a higher priority than the US/UK/U.S./U.K. thing? That's kinda where I was in the mood to go first... Aziraphale 16:17, 14 August 2007 (EDT) <-back to thingies!
I'd say go where your mood is, you last longer that way. ;-) Learn together 16:56, 14 August 2007 (EDT)
Oh good, you were briefed. ;) Aziraphale 18:45, 14 August 2007 (EDT) <-endless supply of tildes...
  • Extensively. The UK/US deal is the highest of priorities, as is whatever you decide to work on. --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 19:49, 14 August 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for letting me know....

Well ok, it'd be nice if it did; I sort of figure it has a few more days to it, which is fine. He'll eventually get back to political stuff, and I almost always brush off political differences; those are a part of life. Aziraphale 02:45, 20 August 2007 (EDT)

Archiving? To where?

I cannot find what you archived! --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 18:44, 20 August 2007 (EDT)

Hmmm... *goes and looks*
Oopsie. :p My bad, and for this I sincerely apologize. I assumed (yes, I know what happens when I assume) that the Talk:Main_Page/Archives page automatically updated... which it clearly doesn't. :( Whoops.
In any case, you can find the archived stuff at Talk:Main_Page/archive20 which is the correct name for the page - the link just needs to be added to the Archives page. Seriously, I'm sorry about that, it's my mistake. :/ Aziraphale 18:54, 20 August 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Main_Page

Where did the content go? It's not in the archive. Also, it is afaik common to archive only the first half of the topics, not the entire page. Order 19:18, 20 August 2007 (EDT)

1. Yeah, that was my bad, see the conversation above. It exists, I just thought the archive index auto-populated and, well, I was wrong.

2. Okie-doke, noted. Thanks. :) Aziraphale 23:16, 20 August 2007 (EDT)

Would you mind to move the last few item back from the archive to the talk page. I figure that these discussions weren't finished yet. Order 00:39, 21 August 2007 (EDT)


Which, of course, means I probably shouldn't have been all eager to archive the page. :p I didn't realize that there was an issue that required an admin, but that's why we have admins, right? I've learned my lesson. Aziraphale 10:20, 21 August 2007 (EDT) <-sittin' in the corner with the dunce cap on...
  • No, no lesson at all! I am happy someone did it, because I had work to do...and I had already fixed the deal by adding the link to the archive and locked it up. So......since you're not a sysop, you couldn't have moved anything back since it was locked. Besides, more talk chat would undoubtedly had Order in more hot water with Ed Poor. --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 06:06, 22 August 2007 (EDT)
hheheheh, TK, I appreciate the support, but I don't mean "lesson learned" in a sulky way, just that I was reminded that me assuming that there's no problem with me doing something, rather than making SURE that there's no problem first, would be a smart way to go around here. Isn't that the very thing you've asked me to do. :D I'm slow, but not completely stopped. Aziraphale 10:35, 22 August 2007 (EDT) <-a body in motion...

United Kingdom Towns and Cities

Thanks for message - will do. Pachyderm 05:40, 23 August 2007 (EDT)

Awesome, thanks. :) Aziraphale 10:21, 23 August 2007 (EDT)

TK

Nobody was in trouble, why do you make those troublesome posts? --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 01:01, 24 August 2007 (EDT)

What are you talking about? Aziraphale 10:12, 24 August 2007 (EDT)

Hi

I have a lot of respect for you Aziraphale, you tend not to be in favour of the constant ridiculing that goes on on the front page. I also like your philosophy on your userpage - how can a child truly find Christ if he hasn't discovered Buddha, and Muhammad or even Joseph Smith and learnt that not all religions are competing with one another, but are comrades in search of a better life and faith? Johnjoe 07:51, 28 August 2007 (EDT)

Wow, thanks. :) What a treat to log in and be greeted with positive vibes like this.
I'm essentially against ridiculing people for their beliefs, although I guess there are extremes that even I find ridiculous. I think, at the risk of being a moral relativist, that nearly all people believe that they've come to their beliefs for good reasons. I don't have any problem with disagreements, but demonizing the other side ... ugh, whatever. I'll talk forever if I get going.
Good luck fighting the good fight - for all that you may respect my beliefs, I have a HUGE amount of respect for people like you that actively defend religious tolerance and understanding. To be (brutally?) honest, I have to admit that I just don't have the passion for it, for whatever reason. Aziraphale 10:52, 28 August 2007 (EDT) <-day has been brightened...

I agree that it isn`t right to ridicule people for they`re beliefs but just a tip watch out I`ve alredy gotten blocked twice and am on parole and part of that i wasn`t directly dealing with sysops--MrRandom 17:40, 28 August 2007 (EDT)<mind if I use this<WATCH OUT

Thanks for the tip. :) I avoid what I consider to be incendiary talk; if my style of discussion ever becomes ban-able, I'll know that it's time to move on. A warning slap on my snout is usually enough, although I do tend to want a reason. Unlike some of the more bicker-y types, I don't debate the reason, I just want to know what it is. :D
In any case, congratulations on your un-banning. Aziraphale 20:54, 28 August 2007 (EDT) <-borrow away!

Jedi

How come that article is categorized as "Religion"? ATang 10:12, 30 August 2007 (EDT)

Because there are people on this planet who do, in fact, treat it as one. Maybe not many, but they're out there. (Forgive me, but I'll direct you here for more information.) :) That said, I'm not that strongly invested in this categorization, so if there's a better one (or another one that you'd like to add) feel free.
I went ahead and added cat:science fiction, if that helps any, but I don't think that cat:religion is inappropriate. Aziraphale 10:42, 30 August 2007 (EDT) <-use the Force...
Haha! The Force is telling me though, that it's a practical joke. I'm familiar with the whole census thing, but I highly doubt a lot of people actually do all the stuff the Jedi do in the movies - namely, meditation, Force exercises, etc. Sure, people dress up and stuff during big events, but then all the other Sci Fi stuff can be thought of as religion then (being Klingon?) Plus, it's not classified, nor recognized, as a religion by any country. Do as you will, but I think this might be an insult to religions... >_< ATang 11:18, 30 August 2007 (EDT)
*shrug* I'm not one for judging. Let's say that 1% of people in England who self-identified as Jedi have actually decided to incorporate the principles of Jedi-ism into their lives as guiding principles. That's 3,900 people. Technically, anybody who believes something different than me is "wrong," so what do I care exactly how wrong they are? Aziraphale 11:23, 30 August 2007 (EDT) * - I hope you recognize how firmly my tongue is planted in my cheek at this moment...

"Ed" Category

I'm trying to figure out what the "Ed" category is supposed to be, as it's not self-evident from the name. Could you please explain?

Sure. Ed Poor writes a lot of articles. Some of them are categorize-able, but some of them stump me for one reason or another. I'm putting those articles of his that defy my categorization in cat:Ed. Make sense? :) Aziraphale 17:08, 30 August 2007 (EDT) <-Not naming his feline 'Edward'...

Categories

You've done nice work on categories. For example, this change. [2] --Ed Poor Talk 14:54, 31 August 2007 (EDT)

Thanks, Ed, I appreciate it. And thanks for taking care of the "Ed" category. ;) I was going to point it out to you when it started to get a little full. I totally get that, with CP's focus being different from other wikis, articles like the ones you write are appropriate, but I don't always know what to do with them. :D Aziraphale 15:04, 31 August 2007 (EDT) <-probably stating the obvious...

Larry Craig

Whoa, remind me to never get on your bad side. >_< ATang 16:00, 31 August 2007 (EDT)

It's a pretty small side, but it's there. I'm not proud of it, but I recognize that when my anger is riled I don't let it go easily. In my defense, I don't think I exaggerate or use poor logic... of course, I would say that, wouldn't I? heheheheheh
Ok, I wasn't going to ask, but I can't help myself - since you mention it, what was your impression? Did I stay reasonable, or did I become purely belligerent, etc...? I know what I think, but outside advice is always appreciated. Aziraphale 16:16, 31 August 2007 (EDT) <-mostly over it now...
Well, I think your points are clearer than Rob's, but I'm obviously biased because of my own viewpoint. I'm a little confused with the whole Clinton thing, and by his usage of "hypocrisy" and "homophobia", but that might just be my terrible comprehension. I don't think you've turned belligerent, but your arguments are getting pointed (as expected in any heated debate).
Granted though, Rob is defending against 3 users, and it's difficult to reply to all of us when rebuttals are coming in as fast as he could reply! (not to mention the replies tend to stem out on three different branches). ATang 16:34, 31 August 2007 (EDT)
Ok, good. I worry about being rude, but sometimes getting hot under the collar clouds my judgment. Thanks for sharing your perspective. :)
The "Clinton thing," in my opinion, is a pure canard. I don't know if he does it on purpose or just relies on "oh yeah, well, Clinton!" for everything. Facing somebody who isn't in love with Clinton, he seems stuck.
Anyway, good luck if you're continuing on with him! I'm not looking at that new page that was created; it won't change anything here, but I disagree with it in principle. :p Aziraphale 16:39, 31 August 2007 (EDT) <-phooey...

I put an additional note on the "mediation" page since my last comment

I put an additional note on the "mediation" page since my last comment as I discovered something that was not fully talked about on the atheism talk page. I hope it provides useful assistance to you. Conservative 17:44, 7 September 2007 (EDT)

Arbitration Posted

I found your efforts above and beyond the call, Aziraphale! And was very favorably impressed with your effort and conclusions. --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 17:58, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

Thanks. :D Aziraphale 18:11, 10 September 2007 (EDT) <-sits up for his treat... (Georgia Bulldog, don'tcha know...)

thanks

greatly appreciate your time and energy, friend! Ga bulldog!? I went to law school there -- sic em! Ungtss 20:55, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I saw "Athens, GA" on your user page, I knew that was either Georgia or the Naval Supply School. Good law school from what my friends tell me. Demosthenian? I wasn't, but a gf was.

DISCLAIMER: Alumni partisanship had nothing to do with anything, people. :p Aziraphale 22:37, 10 September 2007 (EDT) <- Stoopid Gamecocks...

heh heh -- not quite cool enough to be demosthenian ... But i did develop an addiction to hot corner and jittery joe's ... Ungtss 23:05, 10 September 2007 (EDT)
Cool enough? They were pretty stuck on themselves. Interesting group, though, I gotta hand it to any crowd of college students who debate for FUN; not even a competition. Aziraphale 23:21, 10 September 2007 (EDT) <-she was a you-know-what, though...
cool enough in their judgment anyway :). What does aziraphale mean btw? Ungtss 23:34, 10 September 2007 (EDT)
  • beam!* Somebody finally asked... :) It's a character from one of my favorite books, "Good Omens" by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett. Both great authors in their own right, but when they got together, woof! Anyway, to get specific: Aziraphale is an angel. The two central characters are an angel and a demon who, as in some cold-war-set spy novels, become grudging friends since they see each other more than they've seen home in thousands of years. Then the Apocalypse begins, and hilarity ensues. I highly recommend it if you read humorous fiction. Aziraphale 23:43, 10 September 2007 (EDT) <-I DON'T CARE WHAT ANYBODY SAYS, I DIDN'T LAY A HAND ON HIM...
glad to oblige :). Will have to check it out ... Hate how my job makes reading a chore ... Ungtss 23:47, 10 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Silly! We read all the relevant material, provided to us by another Sysop, before you were allowed to edit category one!  :p Sorry, I should have mentioned that......;-) --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 23:53, 10 September 2007 (EDT)
You mean that Aziraphale isn't your real name? I'm so disappointed. Bohdan 00:07, 11 September 2007 (EDT)
TK, I don't mind if somebody(s) knew without asking, but I like talking about good books. It's also a "cool person" filter. When somebody says to me "hey, Aziraphale! Good name!" then I know I at least share taste in books with that person.
Bohdan, sorry, I've been dishonest with you. I'm also.. I... *sniff*... I don't like tacos like I said I did. :p Aziraphale 00:09, 11 September 2007 (EDT) Or did I...?
Its as if I don't know who you are anymore. Bohdan 00:16, 11 September 2007 (EDT)
HA! Nice. :D Aziraphale 00:20, 11 September 2007 (EDT)

If it wasn't for categories

no one would talk to you. J/K!
If you could do me a favor though, either mark your cats as minor (or change your prefs, My Preferences, editing, click mark all edits MINOR by default) that'd be SWELL. I'm going to do the same for my und(eadending) work.Samwell 13:25, 11 September 2007 (EDT)

Um, sure. What's that do? Aziraphale 13:26, 11 September 2007 (EDT) <-yes, I'm that clueless...
While logged in: Go up to the top, (where your username is), click on "My preferences", click on the "editing" tab, click the radio box that says, "Mark all edits minor by default", click the Save button below, return to normal duties. Samwell <--That is all
No, sorry, I already did it. I'm curious why I did it. :) It seems like minor and regular edits both show up in recent changes, so I don't know what difference it makes. Aziraphale 13:50, 11 September 2007 (EDT)
Retrieved from "http://conservapedia.com/User_talk:Aziraphale/Archive_3"
Personal tools