User talk:Fragglet

Welcome!

Hello, Fragglet, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If 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. Again, welcome!

(That's the default newcomer welcome banner ;-) -- Fredrik | talk 23:28, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Fredrik, before you start asking for help on your new mega-cool-and-whatnot writeup, make sure you have something to show first (text, a stub, etc.). Keep in mind we've already seen thousands of upcoming writeups that actually never got done.Fragglet 12:31, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

On the Moon

I noticed that you have been changing the spelling of the plural of Octopus from Octopi to Octopuses. Are you sure about this? I'm pretty sure the plural word for Octopus is Octopi. Thanks, CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 23:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sorry it took me a while to reply. I got about 80,000 messages while I was offline and must have just missed yours. Ok, i'll leave your spelling alone, although according to the Wiktionary article, both spellings are endorsed by a few different dictionaries. Any idea which dictionary is used on Wikipedia? CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 01:58, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rift stuff

Hi - I just reversed your move of rift. It seems that you left about 100 articles linking to a disambig page, and as virtually all were geological articles it seemed easiest to create rift (disambiguation) and restore rift to its geological usage. Cheers, Vsmith 00:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFID legislation

I pulled that info (and continue to collect info) from a number of sources. It's been a while since I first entered it so I don't really remember from where exactly I gleaned it. Grika 17:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attack

Sorry but that person said that I replaced a picture of a non-US aircraft carrier on a page about supercarriers when the U.S. is the only country with supercarriers.

What's happening on Doom Wikipedia?

Hi, I'm Afullo, I got banned, probably for a wide range ban, from Doom Wikipedia:

Questo nome utente o indirizzo IP sono stati bloccati da Splarka. La motivazione del blocco è la seguente: :Vandalism Se lo si desidera, è possibile contattare Splarka o un altro amministratore per discutere del blocco.

Si noti che la funzione 'Scrivi all'utente' non è attiva se non è stato registrato un indirizzo e-mail valido nelle proprie preferenze.

Si prega di specificare l'indirizzo IP coinvolto ("ip address, if you need it i'll send it to you in private") o il numero del blocco (ID #198) in qualsiasi richiesta di chiarimenti.

Could you kindly do something about that? I didn't spam, and surely i didn't make vandalism.

I'm not registered here (on English Wikipedia), in case try to contact me on Doom Wikipedia or Italian Wikipedia. Thank you in advance.

Slovio AfD, take 2

Hi there,

You may want to know, that i re-nominated Slovio for deletion. --Amir E. Aharoni 13:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References on Quantum Mind

Ey Up Fragglet,

(Yorkshire alternative to Hi)

That looks like a mamoth edit to Quantum Mind. Although I'm still a bit of a newbie, may I suggest that you could do your edits in smaller chunks. It would make it easier to see what you have done.

The introduction to Quantum Mind doesn't seem right to me. Roger Penrose, for example, has written three books which refer to Quantum Mind, Stapp put MU.PDF out some while ago. And the Quantum Consciousness conferences organised by Hammerof and Chalmers were very popular (though possibly, some suggest, went a bit downhill). It can't be correct to say that proponents haven't put their hypothesese out for peer review.

Best regards, Davy p (talk) 23:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see that you fixed the references; and it must have taken quite a bit of work. It was rather difficult, on my browser at least, to scan though and see what you had changed. Myself I'd probably have made a number of mistakes. Sorry if I didn't make this clear.

My mention of the introduction (above) was because you seem to have been trying to get the article into better shape. Davy p (talk) 21:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I still didn't make myself clear. a) Great work in fixing the references; this has improved the article. b) As you have been through it with a toothcomb fixing the references, what do you think about the introduction? Davy p (talk) 00:20, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Davros

Hi Fragglet; sorry, we cannot have links to YouTube videos if they breach BBC copyright, which this would appear to do. Also, your conclusion from that video is original research and aso not allowed. If you have a reliable source for this, it can go into the article. Thanks. --Rodhull andemu 13:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK. We have to be careful about copyright. OR is less important, but the idea sounds interesting. If necessary, we can wait until the episode is broadcast, then there's no problem. Cheers. --Rodhull andemu 13:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. You may be right, I've just watched it. I suppose the link might be OK, but we still need to let readers draw their own conclusions from it. --Rodhull andemu 13:56, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 07:46, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tense changes in Amstrad CPC

Hello Fragglet. Recently, you edited the whole Amstrad CPC article to change all the predicates into the past tense. While I get your intention, this is actually not correct. Things that have been produced do not cease to exist just because production has stopped. Accordingly, when referring to things that still exist (and Amstrad CPC computers certainly do still exist), the present or present perfect simple is to be used. (You wouldn't describe an out-of-print book in your hand starting with "this book was ...", would you?) I just didn't want to quietly undo your changes since you obviously put some work into that. Takimata (talk) 12:10, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let's keep a discussion on one talk page instead of spreading it out over our respective talk pages, shall we? Quoting you from my talk page:

"While I see your point, I would appreciate it if you could be more selective in what you revert from my changes, as not all fixes are of that type. fraggle (talk) 13:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)"[reply]

I admit that I didn't check each and every one of your changes. From what I gathered, you changed all predicates into the past tense, I am sorry if my bulk revert changed other unrelated fixes. Takimata (talk) 15:40, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm also not sure that I agree with your reasoning. See comparable sections from other articles, eg. Zx_spectrum#Sinclair_Research_models, Apple_ii#Models, Commodore_64#The_C64_family, IBM_PC#Models - the purpose of the section is to describe the various models in terms of the history of the product line and how the details of the design changed from one model to the next. Using the past tense does not imply that the machine has ceased to exist. fraggle (talk) 13:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)"[reply]

This wasn't willy-nilly, I actually took some time researching the issue (in the Amstrad CPC article history you'll find tense edits by me): The use of tenses occasionally comes up in talk pages, and when it does, the consensus seems to be that simple past is to be used when acts have been concluded, and thus is not to be used to describe items unless their existence has been concluded. Unfortunately, while it regulates all sorts of grammatical details, the Wikipedia Manual of Style is sorely lacking a section about use of tense. And existing articles are a poor precedent, you can find any number of articles supporting either reasoning.

I am, however, actually inclined to bring this up before a "higher authority", perhaps even the keepers of the Manual of Style. Not because I am bent on fighting you over this issue (I am not, and I will happily stand corrected). But I feel it should be decided in general for Wikipedia. What do you think? Takimata (talk) 15:40, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the record: [[1]] is one of the few occasions a question quite similar to ours has been brought up and answered. No guideline came out of it, tho. Takimata (talk) 17:27, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Plural of Cannon

is cannon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.212.13 (talk) 13:30, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Innocence of Muslims image

Thank you for your good faith contribution of the screen cap from the film. Unfortunately it cannot be used on Wikipedia at this time as it is a clear violation of copyright. Thank you and happy editing!--Amadscientist (talk) 02:12, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dooh! You are correct. I confused your contribution from the editor just before you. My apologies! I think I am getting tired.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:57, 15 September 2012 (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) 13:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Fragglet. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Fragglet. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Fragglet. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doomworld

Now that you retargeted the redirect, why don't you change the other links please? I can't do that via mobile. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]