From TheBestLinks.com
Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need any questions answered about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149
Hiya modemac, I'd quite forgotten about Thor in Marvel. Actually comic-book Thor/Norse mythos this is probably an article in its own right. user:sjc
I used to be a hardcore comic book geek way back during the 1980s (sob, I feel so old), but I never did read much of Thor's series. The one paragraph added to your article is about all I know of him. user:Modemac
'k. If you come across anyone that feels like collaborating on this front, send 'em my way, I can help out on the hardcore Norse stuff. rgds user:sjc
Well, there are lots of fanboys (heh) on the Usenet newsgroup rec.arts.comics.marvel.universe...I can always post a message there saying that you want some input re: the comic book series. user:Modemac
Please refrain from making unneeded changes...
Why did you move "Disneyland Paris" to "Euro Disney" ?
I see no need for that and you made two mistakes in th move:
- all formatting and links of my original "Disneyland Paris" article has been lost;
- don't forget to update links. There were three Wikipedia pages that linked to "Disneyland Paris". Did you find and update them ?
I am now restoring the older situation. If you are unhappy with that you can leave a message on my talk page.
FvdP 13:24 Aug 26, 2002 (PDT)
--
Sorry, it seems I walked on your feet. If you really want the move, please do it, I will no longer interfere.
BTW, to copy pages and preserve their formatting, I suggest you do this:
- edit the page
- copy the text in the edit form
- edit the new page
- paste the copied text in the edit form
To see the ingoing links you need to correct, click on "What links here" at the bottom of a page.
FvdP 13:34 Aug 26, 2002 (PDT)
--
Ok, thanks for your apologies, perhaps I have been a little bit more upset than necessary. I, too, vaguely remembered that "Euro Disney" was indeed the official name; the reason I expanded "Disneyland Paris" instead was just that there were already two links pointing there. But, after some search I just made, it looks like "Disneyland (Resort) Paris" is indeed the official name of the resort, and "Euro Disney" the name of the company who operates it. I'm putting this information on Talk:Disneyland Paris -- FvdP 12:59 Aug 28, 2002 (PDT)
When it opened, it was Euro Disney, but the Disney company didn't realize that to Europeans, Euro meant "that currency we're all going to have in a couple years" -- therefore, the name sounded too much like, "Fork-Over-Your-Money Disney". But I wouldn't put this story in the Disneyland Paris listing, as I no longer have sources for it. Oh, and HIYA MODEMAC, you silly SubG. -- Ridetheory Feb 1 2003
- Umm...hello? -- Modemac
Something seems to have gone weird when you tried to make an article about "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World". Do you need help fixing this? Vicki Rosenzweig
It certainly seems like I need help! Evidently the Wikipedia software isn't recognizing multiple uses of the <nowick> tag, and this may be causing a malfunction.
- no, the problem is that you can't use < no wiki > inside [ [ -- those are part of wiki syntax. -- Tarquin
<nowiki> tags are used to prevent something from acting in the usual way. For instance, if you wanted to show how to link rather than having it link, you would type e.g. "You can link a term by putting brackets around it like so: [[iron]]." This will render the last part an example rather than a link (click the edit link below or it won't make sense to you). And welcome to wikipedia, btw. Thanks for your edits on Spider-Man. :-) --KQ 17:25 Aug 27, 2002 (PDT)
Re: inspiration to write: I'm glad I can cause that occasionally. :-) Now if someone could inspire me to want to read--I've got to return to the books. :-/ Cheers, --KQ
You mentioned the load on the server. I've been modifying entries like everyone else and despite the articles being added (about one article every 1-5 seconds) I have not noticed a change in responsiveness due to the addition of articles. I've added 3,000 articles on counties and there was lag during much of that time, but not due to the addition of articles. I've heard rumor that the foreign Wiki's cause lag for some reason. The new PHP software is supposed to be good enough to handle the load. However, I've stopped for now to see if you have any more thoughts. -- Ram-Man
I can see the image. Lir 11:36 Nov 10, 2002 (UTC)
Hmm. Well, I'll take your word for it. -- Modemac
I think your titles are wrong for the articles The Fellowship of the Ring (movie) and The Two Towers (movie). You have moved articles away from their most precise definition. Please explain your reasons for this move in the discussion in Talk:The Fellowship of the Ring (movie)
Talk:The Two Towers (movie). Proposed actions or reversions may be implemented in a day or so if you do not give some reason for changes made. I suspect that there will be a few others who will take a more aggressive line than me, as one of these entrys was also shifted from under me when I made a minor edit! kiwiinapanic 05:52 Jan 25, 2003 (UTC)
Hi there, I just had a look at your web site and just thought I'd encourage you to contribute your writings about the Scientology reform movements (freezone, etc.) to wikipedia.
Okay, now we have an entry for Free Zone (Scientology). I'm trying to be NPOV here, though with this subject it can be difficult. -- Modemac
Hey, just wanted to say if you tag the "This is a minor edit" checkbox when you revert an article, it doesn't show up in the recent changes list, so therefore this brat won't pick it back up so quick. Ducker 13:02 Feb 8, 2003 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Armenian Genocide. Thanks. --Kaihsu 13:56 May 3, 2003 (UTC)
Hi! I wonder if I could draw your attention to the Narconon page. You've done well in the past at contributing facts discovered by Scientology critics into Scientology-related Wikipedia articles whilst adhering to NPOV -- I wonder if you could help out with this one? There's another contributor (User:Desertphile) who has made some informative contributions but seems to be saying (in the talk page) he doesn't think some things can be put in neutrally. Help? --FOo 20:45 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- Thank you for the kind words; I'll see what I can do. --Modemac 11:42 11 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Please excuse the query, but I'm stumped on a project that I think Modemac may be vastly better suited than I. The entry for Scientology doesn't have a fair game entry (though perhaps it once did). My imagination isn't up to the task of defining what Scientology Inc. means by "fair game" nor up to providing a NPOV regarding examples. Could it even be possible? I suppose the entry would have to say "It is alledged that...." and "Some observers say that...."
With even the most passive voice, can one list the drowning of Duke in Judge Swaringer's swimming pool neutrally? I could do it in parody (not that it's all that funny). I write poetry and travel pieces for magazines well, but I'm not up to the task of explaining "fair game" except at its most basic. Naturally, the entry doesn't need examples of "fair game," but examples would be a good idea. Anyone up to the task? (I've got a boat to deliver!) Desertphile 05:52 13 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Didn't the Sea Org go sailing around, aiming to spread Scientology overseas? This is what I have read around...this wrong? Dysprosia 11:35, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I'd have to do more extensive research to be sure, but I do know that they were founded by "Commodore" LRH. They're the strong-arms who enforce the laws within Scientology, and they're widely believed to be the real powers behind the organization. I think Miscavige, who heads RTC, is also the head of the Sea Org; but I can't verify this, so I didn't put it into the article. --Modemac 13:36, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I think you misunderstood my comment of Talk:Wiping. The article is not so much about wiping tape, as tape or film of old shows being lost or destroyed or wiped. Mintguy 13:32, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
- I'll plead my innocence on this one, based upon the article's opening statement: "Wiping or junking is an economic move by TV companies in which old videotapes and kinescopes are wiped (deleted) and reused or are destroyed." This emplies that the major emphasis is on the physical destruction of old videotapes. I'm not sure what a better title for that article would be, though. --Modemac 13:41, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Hi, Modemac -- I'm rather doubtful that I've caught your attention at all with my edits to articles in the Scientology section, but I hope if you have, you've noticed that I'm quite capable of accepting edits from people who do not believe as I do (pro-Scientology posters, for instance) and that I try to aim for NPOV even when the POV is the POV I myself believe. I mention this because there is an edit war on the article "Catholicism" that really needs someone to step in, and I really hope that you can help.
The problem is ClarityMS07, who is now operating one of the AOL IPs he used to post under as a sockpuppet, and may also have MattWilkes as a sockpuppet. ClarityMS07 has a laundry list of "widespread opinions", by which he means a combination of opinions and conspiracy theories, about the Roman Catholic Church. He is insistent that because there is a "connection" between Catholicism, the belief system, and the Roman Catholic Church, the religious entity, that the article about the belief system is not "complete" and not "relevant to anything in particular" without his accusations about the RCC.
While still posting under an AOL IP, he vandalized the Talk page of the article, erasing some paragraphs on the weakness of his article altogether, and rewriting my words and those of Samuel J. Howard to praise him and insult me. He is now pretending that that vandalism was done by someone else, who just coincidentally shares that IP and the obsessive focus on the Catholicism article (he does not realize, it seems, how much external and internal evidence shows this to be a feeble lie.) He has refused to address criticisms of his contributions and retaliates with personal attacks and ad hominem fallacies. And now that he has sockpuppets, he seems to think it is legitimate to do three reverts a day per sockpuppet. Can you please help? -- Antaeus Feldspar 03:22, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-- Antaeus Feldspar 03:22, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Votes for Deletion
- http://ps.wikipedia.org/wiki.cgi?Report
As I'm not intimately familiar with Wikisource (and I don't have admin priveleges [yet, I hope]), I need to ask for help from the admins in properly moving the page, and the image if necessary, over to Wikisource so that we can use it as a resource there. Once the image and/or page are moved, then the page can be properly deleted here on Wikipedia. --Modemac 12:35, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
- It isn't possible to move pages between wikis unfortunately, so you will have to use the cut and paste method. As you are the only author of the page so far, there is no GFDL issue and you can simply recreate the page on Wikisource. An interwiki redirect could be set up to point to the current page to Wikisource, or better still, you could create a short article on what the source is about and just link to Wikisource. Angela 13:37, Sep 14, 2003 (UTC)
Just in case you were wondering why your sidebar looks so cluttered now: I just made you a sysop. -- Tim Starling 08:24, Sep 17, 2003 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. --Modemac 11:09, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Hi, congrats on your adminship and thanks for deleting those silly lists. Don't forget to delete pages that redirect to the page you are deleting too. You should normally delete the talk page as well, unless the discussion is worth keeping, in which case you should link it to Archived delete debates. Angela 12:39, Sep 21, 2003 (UTC)
- I don't think I have the right to edit someone else's text on their own talk page, which is where the majority of those links came from. We'll just have to keep an eye on this. --Modemac 12:46, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)
No, I don't mean user talk pages! I mean a page that is just a redirect (not a link) to the page you deleted. For example this page (http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Undelete&target=List_of_famous_black_people×tamp=20030915084453) was a redirect to the page that you deleted. Once you deleted the List of black people, the redirect at List of famous black people is broken, so that page needs to be deleted too. And the talk page I meant was Special:Undelete/Talk:List_of_white_people. I've deleted them all now. Angela 13:20, Sep 21, 2003 (UTC)
Nice job on the List of Wikipedia articles based upon websites page. I'm glad you wasted no time in enacting on a small idea I had. -- Mattworld 21:32, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
- Not a problem; it seemed like a sensible idea. You can do the same thing, too! Look at the option to Move this page on the left frame. --Modemac
- I know, you'll see I did that with the talk page. I just wanted to make sure there was some sort of other opinion on the subject before I did that. -- Mattworld 21:44, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
You're very welcome! Rickyrab 14:21, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)
How come you deleted Cimeran? It had only been on VfD one day. Angela 17:47, Oct 14, 2003 (UTC)
Sorry if I jumped the gun on that one; it seemed that a clear consensus existed for deleting the entry, even though it had only been up there for a brief period of time. There was nothing controversial about the entry, and it had no support -- it was clearly just an post meant to boost someone's ego. --Modemac 23:57, 14 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- Yes I realise that, but the decision as to whether consensus has been reached is only supposed to be made after the seven days. Otherwise people complain they didn't get a chance to vote (and I'm sure some people must read the deletion logs looking for things to complain about!). Angela 00:10, Oct 15, 2003 (UTC)
Applauding move of bloatware to Software bloat. (I wrote most of the article) Williamv1138 14:39, Oct 16, 2003 (UTC)
Deleted page
22:09, 2 Dec 2003 Modemac deleted "Transiaxartesia" (7 days on VFD page)
What was the problem with the page? I don't remember even seeing a votes for deletion boilerplate on the page even though it was on my watchlist. I was really happy when that small ammount of info appeared in a link from Khwarezmia. I had no-where else to store it for future ref when I found it and thought it was safe on Wiki. Is there any way to reclaim the info again? I can only remember a few words.
- The problem was that this was a nonsense word that didn't exist in any dictionary or any Web site other than Wikipedia. A Google search for "Transiaxartesia" shows nothing at all other than the Wikipedia entry and the sites that copy Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of existing, current information; it is not a repository for fictional words. --Modemac 10:12, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- As far as I remember the article was about the land beyond the Jaxartes in the ancient world, maybe the name was wrong but I remember the info seemed very accurate and evocative at the time. Anyway I take it you mean that the info is irretreivable?
Thank you! You are a scholar and a gentleman/gentlewoman (?). I can't take one more fight today, and Plautus seems to have several fights in him/her. Your aid is more than appreciated. Jwrosenzweig 21:02, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi, could you please update the listings on Wikipedia:Protected_page when you protect or unprotect a page? It gets a little confusing. Thanks, silsor 18:15, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
Do you think Twins really needed moving? See Pixies for a similar case. Also, isn't the usual Twins (band) if it must be disambiged? Reagards -- sannse (talk) 16:59, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'm going to move it back for now - the move broke an awful lot of links. perhaps we could discuss it if you disagree strongly. Regards -- sannse (talk) 18:44, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Oh dear goodness me, you actually read that much of Mission Earth? I salute your dedication to human knowledge at the cost of valuable SAN points ... - David Gerard 13:17, Mar 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Yes, I read all ten books -- and the damn things stuck in my head, similar to what you see when you pass by a vehicle accident. --Modemac 13:24, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I must confess my original 'plot summary' in that entry was based on the blurbs. - David Gerard 13:29, Mar 8, 2004 (UTC)
Happy Elron Day! ;-) -- ChrisO 12:19, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I hope the new Mediawiki:Scientology series header is a nice present to Wikipedia to celebrate this day. :) --Modemac 12:26, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
No prob. Glad to help--Samuel J. Howard 01:17, 1 May 2004 (UTC)
You posted:
You have been busy adding links to your Web site over a dozen articles. Kindly cease doing so. The intent of Wikipedia is to provide content and relevant links, not to blatantly promote your own Web site. --Modemac 23:10, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Firstly let me apologise for vandalising your page, but only with a message that expressed my displeasure at your reversal of all my contributions that I had spent a long time submitting.
Really you should not have been so high-handed and should have expressed your view-point in a more reasonable manner (in accordance with wiki protocol).
I believe that my site has photographs, content and informational web-links directly relevant to each page that I contributed to.
My site is a labour of love, not for profit, and not selling anything (other than a link to a posters and memorabilia site that is not run by me).
My links were directly to the page relevant for the particular musician or artist (not global).
I am not advertising my site in the manner you suggest, but providing complementary information that is not in conflict with wiki-pedia. I note that IMDb (The Internet Movie Database) has many such links and very useful they are too. You have not removed them (and I hope you never do otherwise Wiki-pedia will be the poorer.
I notice your user page link adverises the Church of Scientology etc. ! - each to his own but I suggest my links are far less contentious
I have also made contributions on other topics (Nepal, Philippines, Ferdinand Marcos, Theatres, Sir Charles Hawtrey, Poet Laureate, Elizabet bowes-Lyon, Arthur Lloyd - a famous music hall performer) are the few that come to mind.
Please note that I will be under User:Olive in future.
Finally some of the contributions under that IP are not by me, are subjects I know nothing about nor have I ever visited the pages.
In future I will be Olive so talk to me first.
Mediawiki:Scientology still needed?
Do we still need this article series box? It's large and clunky, and I've added everything in it (I think) to Category:Scientology. It was useful before the category, but now I think it's just unsightly - David Gerard 17:36, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- If nothing else, it gives links to key areas of the Scientology discussion - including Xenu - in every important Scientology-related article. If you decide it's unnecessary, I won't contest it. --Modemac 21:42, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
It's currently being tempered in the fires of Hell on WP:FAC. There are some questions as to the synopsis. It's this close to getting through, I think - David Gerard 13:56, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I removed:
- The Thin Blue Line by Errol Morris inspired the judicial appeal of a man who had been wrongfully imprisoned for murder for eleven years, leading to his acquittal -- a moral victory that earned this film a place in film history.
from List of movies that have been considered the greatest ever. It is not because I don't think it is a great documentary. If you check the talk page, you'll find that there was a history of people including all sorts of movies. A consensus was reached to only add movies if they include citations as to why they are on the list. The criteria are, Critical acclaim, Box Office, Popular acclaim, or Academy Awards. If you can document that The Thin Blue Line meets one of the criteria for being "the greatest", you are welcome to put it back in the list. Add a verifiable citation. --Samuel Wantman 21:47, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
General Hospital
I'm removing your bit about the Venus Butterfly from the General Hospital article. You're confusing it with L.A. Law. The Venus Butterfly bit happened on L.A. Law. Mike H 00:07, Jul 24, 2004 (UTC)
Dobbshead?
I noticed you added an image of the Dobbshead to J. R. Bob Dobbs way back when, then removed it a few days later. I saw that the image caption said "used with permission", but did you decide that copyright/trademark issues required its removal? I think an article on Dobbs really should have a Dobbshead. However, I'm sure a slack-filled SubGenius such as yourself knows best :)
Gwimpey 17:39, Aug 3, 2004 (UTC)
- I put the Dobbshead in "Bob's" article way back when, then took it out because I thought it would be better to put his graven image in the entry for the Church of the SubGenius itself. But you're right, there should be a picture of "Bob" in an article about "Bob." So now there's a link to that picture in both the entries for "Bob" and the Church. --Modemac 21:00, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the help
Thanks for the assistant correcting the Hayduke and George Washington Hayduke entries -- and for cleaning up the Scientology entries. Eventually I'll have to read the instructions. }:-}
- Umm...as far as I can tell, the Hayduke articles were edited by User:Infrogmation. --Modemac 10:54, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Steamboat Willie
I noticed your recent comment on Steamboat Willie being the first Mickey Mouse short released in theathres. If by these you mean multiple theatres you are correct. But Plane Crazy was earlier released in a single theater, owned by a friend of Walt Disney. The one which was produced but not released before Steamboat Willie was The Gallopin' Gaucho. User: Dimadick
Related links
Top visited
0 of
0 links
[no links posted yet]
>> place link >>
Discussion
Last posted
0 of
0 messages
[no messages posted yet]
>> post message >>
Watch
You can
add this article to your own "watchlist" and receive e-mail notification about all changes in this page.
