Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gatoclass (talk | contribs) at 07:31, 7 May 2006 (→[]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

==Welcome== Hello Tamfang and welcome to Misplaced Pages! I'm glad you've chosen to join us. This is a great project with lots of dedicated people, which might seem intimidating at times, but don't let anything discourage you. Be bold!, explore, and contribute. If you want to learn more,

Misplaced Pages:Bootcamp teaches you the basics quickly,
Misplaced Pages:Tutorial is more in-depth, and
Misplaced Pages:Topical index is exhaustive.

The following links might also come in handy:
Glossary
FAQ
Help
Manual of Style
Five Pillars of Misplaced Pages

Float around for awhile until you find something that tickles your fancy. One easy way to do this is to hit the random page button in the navigation bar to the left. There are also many great committees and groups that focus on particular jobs. My personal favorite stomping grounds are Misplaced Pages:Translation into English and Misplaced Pages:Cleanup for sloppy articles. Finally, the Wikimedia Foundation has several other wiki projects that you might enjoy.

There are a few crucial points to keep in mind when editing. Be civil with users, strive to maintain a neutral point of view, verify your information, and show good etiquette like signing your comments with four tildes like this: ~~~~ If you have any more questions, always feel free to ask me anything on my talk page or ask the true experts at Misplaced Pages:Help desk. Again, welcome! -- Draeco 05:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC) Make sure to use the edit summary field when editing articles, and to mark minor edits accordingly. This helps other users easily identify your changes. Thanks! Mrtea (talk) 22:14, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Vampire (Buffy)

Welcome to Misplaced Pages!

Kudos. It's a good starting article. I moved it to Vampire (Buffyverse) to be in keeping with some other articles that we (see below) have been maintaining, but of course you weren't expected to realize that. I'm going to work on it some in the coming days, but it's got all the essentials. Thanks a lot for that.

You might want to consider signing on to the efforts at WikiProject Buffy. Stop on by and see what we're about. :) - Che Nuevara: 18:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

White Willow as in Chosen? nope, just the search term I tend to used when working on plant databases. --Salix alba (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hey! Thank you VERY MUCH for the major improvement on my webpage. I know it was a small thing but it made that table (and the whole page) look much much better. I will try to duplicate it on the other table there. Please feel free to edit more!  :-) Lawyer2b 01:35, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Heraldry generally

Re heraldic bucket shops - good point. I would like the referral to go straight to definition 4 but havent worked out how. It was definition 1 out of 3 but I removed it to 4 and inserted No 1. Yes, I have in mind to write articles about how arms pass (to women, etc) incl England & Scotland & exceptions to each, coparceny, bogus arms & fake titles and bad heraldry. Kittybrewster 23:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Added Hamilton house and amended Scottish country dance

A benevolent wish to drag numerous people from ignorance to enlightenment without it really hurting much. Kittybrewster 03:50, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Usurping arms

It's only fair to indicate in the edit summary when you propose an article for deletion. (And maybe a merge would be more appropriate?)

I'd also like to suggest that you notify the creator of the article when you prod an article. Prod is for uncontroversial deletions only, so it's particularly important that we not side-step controversy by keeping things on the d/l. There's a template available at {{PRODWarning}}. NickelShoe 00:51, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Plurality of Baronets

Two people in a room, both called Sir John Moore, are collectively the two Sir John Moores present in the room. The word Sir is never pluralised. Kittybrewster 23:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't object much to the change, but this absolute claim is rubbish. —Tamfang 00:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Why do you think so? Do you have any authority to say it is rubbish? Are you not an American? Kittybrewster 12:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

What is your authority to say what is never said?

Would you say "Lord Mars" rather than "Lords Mar"?

I find "Sirs John Moore" more logical than "Sir John Moores". "Sir John" is short for "a knight (sieur) named John", and "two Sirs John" is short for "two knights named John". (I also prefer "Johns Moore" to "John Moores", because a surname is more like an adjective, because there can be two Johns in one family but not one John in two families, and to avoid the ambiguous appearance of a surname that happens to be plural in form as many are.)

One says "Sirs" when addressing more than one, and I heard once that when two knighted actors (Olivier and Richardson, I think) were in the same production the rest of the cast referred to them as "the two sirs"; so much for "never". —Tamfang 16:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I should have said what is never correctly said. "The two sirs" is a solecism and was probably used in the knowledge that it was horribly wrong. The word Lord is a noun, in contrast to a titular prefix. "two Sir Johns" is the correct abbreviation for two knights named John. It seems equally bizarre to pluralise John and Moore but it is the surname rather than the christian name that gets pluralised. Possibly because that is what one would do if they were both Mr - the Mr Moores rather than the Misters Moore or the Mr Johns.Kittybrewster 11:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I think I've seen "Messrs Moore" far more often than "Mr Moores".

"two Sir John Moores" strikes me as most likely to mean two of something named after a Sir John.

—Tamfang 16:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes. "Messrs Moore" is certainly fine. But "Sirs John" I am afraid is not. I think the usual phrase would be "This is the first time I have found myself in the presence of three knights" rather than "three Sirs" - and of course the chances are against their all being called Sir John. Kittybrewster 00:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

John Brooke-Little

Anton...with your interest in heraldry, I thought you might like to join in the peer review of John Brooke-Little's article. Your input would be greatly appreciated. Keep up the great work.--Evadb 15:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

You'll turn my head with such flattery! As it happens, the officers of arms are an area about which I know little. —Tamfang 17:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh well...it was worth a shot. I've been reading your contributions to rec.heraldry for years and you seem to know much about heraldry. I thought I'd try. You're welcome to add check for spelling errors. :) --Evadb 21:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Dashes

See Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (dashes)

"The hyphen, or more accurately the hyphen-minus (-), is the shortest dash-like character visually. Traditionally, this was used only for hyphenating words, creating line breaks, or as the minus sign."

and

"The en dash (–) is slightly longer than the hyphen and figure dash and about half the width of an em dash. It indicates duration, such as when you could substitute the word "to" (as in a range of dates). An en dash placed between numbers or in compounds does not have spaces around it: for example Paris–Brussels timetable, Ages 7–77. Some writers, however, prefer to place a space on either side in complex ranges: January 1, 2003 – December 31, 2004. The en dash can also be used as a hyphen in compound adjectives in which one part consists of two words or a hyphenated word: for example, pre–World War II period . . ."

The Manual of Style does list several styles, saying to be tolerant of what other editors have used. It doesn't mention using hyphen as n–dashes, which is what I think you're advocating, but I don't want to get in an ongoing disagreement over it. I'll leave any changes to your discretion. Dvd Avins 00:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

What do you make of the Paris–Brussels timetable example? Dvd Avins 02:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

That's a range (though not a range of numbers). I'd be less willing to accept a dash in Champaign-Urbana (the double town where I grew up) or Mary-Anne or Spencer-Churchill. —Tamfang 02:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Do you see "well-placed" as something other than a hyphenated word? —Tamfang 02:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Heraldry

Thanks for catching the vandal who removed the section. Eternal vigilance pays. --EncycloPetey 06:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Grass and mass

Just curious do you pronounce "ass" in "grass" and "mass" the same way? --Philip Baird Shearer 13:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I pronounce the ass in grass as in arse and the ass in mass as in ass, so I do not see why a French accent mark on a word to tell anyone how to pronounce a word in English when words like Cirencester do not have any such indicators. --Philip Baird Shearer 19:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

How can common English pronunciation of English words be miss pronunciation? That words are not spelt as they are pronounced in English makes it a punny language, but we could follow this down a Mousehole, (or into a pub), so I guess we will have to agree to differ.--Philip Baird Shearer 21:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Quebec English

Thanks for cleaning up those links! Thanks also for updating the version in my sandbox! CJ Withers 20:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Dominick Browne, 4th Baron Oranmore and Browne

Thanks for adding the bullet indents, for some reason when I tried to do that it gave me two bullets not a doubt indent distance. There's not much else to wikify now do you think we can remove the cleanup tag?Alci12 16:43, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

"cite" v "allege"

Hi Tamfang, regarding the criticisms of capitalism section, I take your point that some criticisms such as a tendency toward oligarchy and imperialism are contentious. But others listed there, such as inequality, unemployment and economic instability pretty obviously are not merely "alleged" problems. To put it another way, neither "cite" nor "allege" can suffice to adequately address all the phenomena listed.

Therefore I have altered the sentence structure somewhat toward what I think is a more neutral expression all around. Regards, Gatoclass 07:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)