User talk:Somercet

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Somercet.

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello [[User:<user>|]], welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for all your [[Special:Contributions/<user>|contributions]]. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

—Noldoaran (Talk) 04:01, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)

Hi there, I was wondering what the benefit was in changing redirect links so that they point directly to the main article, if the redirects work totally fine and are in no danger of being changed to redirect elsewhere. I've noticed others doing it as well, and I've never been able to figure out why it is time worth spent. Thanks! Postdlf 12:32, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It saves a lot on effort spent writing articles if one knows to what one should link. For instance, I've kept an eye on Valerie Solanus simply because that is a misspelling of her name. Thus, removing redirects helps us look like we can spell. Also, consider a redirect page like USS Enterprise. If you know this link should go to the nuclear carrier, change it. It also helps people writing new articles because they can see the right names for things: thus, the Independence Day holiday is often nicknamed the Fourth of July, not the other way around. Somercet 13:15, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

Valerie Solanas

Thanks for putting some positive attention toward Valerie Solanas. Its much needed! An An 23:36, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

May I choke and die before I direct "positive" attention to someone who shot and nearly crippled a great artist and saloniste. Or shall I define NPOV for you? Somercet 06:56, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

There's no need to be rude about it. An An 12:00, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's not rude. You don't want to see rude. I feel bad for Valerie Solanas, but I felt far worse for Andy Warhol. Somercet 18:02, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of Valerie Solanas, did you ever hear back from womynkind.org? If you didn't get a chance to email them, let me know and I will follow up. Thanks, Nihila 01:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OCaml

I noticed that a recent edit of yours at the OCaml article removed all diacritics from the article, breaking some links and people's names. Has perhaps something gone wrong with the software you use to edit? --TuukkaH 21:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Starting only earlier today, I used ELinks and Vim, as one metawiki recommended: I know Vim's support for UTF-8 is solid, so I can only guess that ELinks malfunctioned. Sorry for the mess, I have reverted and re-entered my change using Firefox. Somercet 01:46, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a guess, but perhaps ELinks for some reason assumes it can only send ASCII to Vim, or vice versa? Anyway, thanks for cleaning up the redirect at OCaml. Happy wiki-ing! --TuukkaH 11:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hyphenated compound adjectives

Hi. What was your rationale for de-hyphenating "open-source" in KDbg, Xxgdb, and ups (debugger)? As far as I can tell, there is presently no policy-level Wikipedia guidance on the hyphenation of compound adjectives in general, and "open-source" in particular. FWIW, Open Source Initiative suggests hyphenation. "Open source" may be unambiguous to typical Wikipedia contributors, but it seems to me that it hasn't quite made it into the standard English lexicon (at least it's not in M-W's dictionary).

I was fixing REDIRECTS and took out the hyphens while I was working on the other. I come across the hyphenated "open-source" or "closed-source" far more rarely than you, I suspect. Since both are correct, you can change them back, if you like.

Also, "ups" seems to get capitalized as if it were a common noun [1]. —Fleminra 01:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it doesn't. Check the sourceforge link at the bottom of the page.

Wait a min... *rereads Fleminra*, I mean, yes it does. Somercet 01:53, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user has been on Wikipedia for 20 years, 11 months and 2 days.

Image copyright problem with File:True Adventures of 2 girls 1995.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:True Adventures of 2 girls 1995.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 12:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Specter refs

Hi- quick note about the ref style: the "work" field automatically italicizes its entry, so is the correct field to use for the names of newspapers and magazines, but not for websites like CNN which should use "publisher". thanks Tvoz/talk 09:09, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That should have said - at least that's the way I've been told to do it in numerous FACs. At this hour it's amazing I can even put two sentences together. Tvoz/talk 09:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Nixon CRP alumni

Category:Nixon CRP alumni, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:14, 22 October 2011 (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) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Somercet. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Somercet. 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, Somercet. 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, Somercet. 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]