User talk:Tokek/Archive 1

Thank you for your change on Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange/51-XX Geometry. I had that page machine generated, and some encoding issues caused the typos you fixed. And now, the standard

Welcome!

Hello, Tokek/Archive 1, 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!

Oleg Alexandrov 01:15, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Planetmath project

Hey, its me again. Thank you for your comparing PlanetMath articles with what we have here. I would like to ask you just a small favor. When you put a comment about how the articles compare, could you please sign it with 4 tildas? In this way we will know who made that comparision, and most importantly, when it was made. This because more comparisons might be done in the future, when both the Wikipedia and the PlanetMath articles will evolve. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov 02:48, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Encoding issues

Thanks for the correction of my WP:PMEX edit. I analysed "ErdÃ¶s" and found out that it is a UTF-8 byte sequence of "Erdös" interpreted as an ISO-8859-1 byte sequence. Are you interested in fixing the mojibakes?--Tokek 11:50, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It would be nice. But to do that, I think one needs to go thru each page and do a search and replace. I think I (we) will do that as we gradually work our way towards copying things from PlanetMath to here. So I expect things will get fixed but in time. Oleg Alexandrov 15:49, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Re:Talk:Round Table (band)

It is not currently standard procedure to move closed vfd debates to talk pages, but this debate was moved almost a year ago when it was very much standard procedure to do so. - SimonP 21:18, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

You can move it, but there a hundreds of pages just like it. The reason the system was changed was not because people were unhappy with it, but rather because the changes to the VfD format made moving the page impractical. If it were possible we would go back to moving the arguments to the talk pages rather than simply linking them. - SimonP 21:48, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

I Need your help on 'Move Tsushima Islands' Issue

Hi! You appear to be an QUALIFIED interested disinterested bystander... I'm just making the rounds to everyone that has made their mark on Tsushima Islands which lead me to Fg2, (thence to Kigo, then YOU! Congrats! Booby Prize, but I badly need some responisble People to help me mediate therein that are familiar with things Japanese... Sorry, but I infer that's still YOU!) in the last month trying to mediate this flaming revert war — I can use your help — Bring lots O water! (Better yet Beer) Frank

This is the message I've been dropping on anyone on the Talk or Article pages since 13 May, I'd appreciate it if you can familarize yourself on the small article and stand-by to jump in on Tuesday with some cogent watersprays from a logical firehose! Thanks for the trouble -- the issue is trivial, (Is proper name plural or singular, Forsooth!) save there seem to be at least two teens in a war going well over three hundred edits in this one month sampling interval, over 70 edits in the past three days.

I would appreciate a rational explaination (after you read my Comments in the subject dispute Talk:Tsushima Islands), of the arguement or arguments you consider vital and germane to the discusion and vote. Frankly, MOST all of you are being silly over nothing of particular importance, since both names can be redirected into the one used. I have left a comment concerning my contribution to the article, which contribution — seems to have triggered the current edit and revision wars. For that I apologize, but see the Comments on the vote. I am also taking the liberty of putting the vote section AFTER the Comments about same.
Still, I have just spent over four hours of valuable spare time, and would welcome your thoughts after you read and understand the distinction I put forth between a governments termonology as a governing body and a geographical reference like an archepelego, which it certainly is.
More to the point, I'd like to see your defense regarding your favorite POV of what I had to say viz a viz the mergest attitude of the senior editors and administrators that frequent the Wikipedia:VfD discussions. To my recollection, I don't recollect any of you hotheads in this dispute ever spending anytime thereon, possibly excepting Mel Etitis, but rarely even then.
In any event, I'm neutral here, and have asked that the article be kept EDIT FREE for the next three days by placing The Inuse template into it — I'd copyedited over two and half hours before I suspended that effort the other night because this shameful fued was going on — proper English grammer does depend, unfortunately, on whether one uses the plural or the singular. I saved that on my hard drive, but I don't need to wade through yet another 70 edits to finish the job. As it is, this matter will probably double the time it takes for such a simple job.
If you are local to Japan, some history of the canals or Sea-channel is certainly germane to the ongoing discussion, moreover, any cogent arguement you condsider being particularly telling needs to be clearly repeated in the current on going comments if you want them counted on in the vote.
I will make sure this message goes to each contributor to the article the past month, so you are not being singled out. Now is the time to take a deep breath, for rational concise summaries, not all the arguing that is so wearisome in 66 printed pages - half a novelette, I'd guess! It's certainly a lot to ask your fellow editors to wade through on a minor issue.
I will also personally be making sure that at least a dozen other Administrators I'm acquainted with take a look at the debate after the time below. I will in fact ask for twenty commitments, so be clear and respectful of our time!!!
Thankyou for your time, attention, and good professional behaviour. I'll check the Talk state again no sooner than Monday around Noon (UTC), And ask the uninvolved others to do the same. PLEASE BE CONCISE. 24.61.229.179 03:03, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

24.61.229.179 03:03, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well that's my heads up, and appeal -- Hope you can help. I really don't have a dog in this fight! If you can alert a few others qualified on matters Japanese, by all means, please do so!

Tsushima (Island(s))

Concerning this issue, I would greatly appreciate if you could discuss with me personally on this controversial issue to which you propose a move, and if you wish, my objections are found at Talk:Tsushima Islands Also, I would be happy if you are willing to counter-state your views. Your co-operation will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Mr Tan 05:06, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Anime/ manga magazines

The category "anime and manga magazines" is a merge of two categories, "anime magazines" and "manga magazines." I thought that the two weren't different enough to deserve different categories, that there weren't enough articles in either category to warrant a split, and that many anime/ manga 'zines included both subjects, so they should all be in one category. I asked a fellow Wikipedian, Premeditated Chaos, what she thought I should do, and she told me just to merge them. I'm sorry if I did something wrong, but you can always change it back, right? ^^;Purplefeltangel 9 July 2005 00:49 (UTC)

I have no idea what an anime magazine is. I think it's just a magazine that talks about anime. I just thought the categories were superfluous. You do what you want to do with those categories. ♥purplefeltangel 02:02, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Akuma (mythology)

Hi. I'm not sure about this as I only split off the text from the main akuma page. I assumed its not actually from a manga or anime, but is part of traditional japanese mythology. You can see in the main akuma page that it is also used in japanese to mean demon and other things, so I would assume it is an old term. Sorry can't help any further. - Master Of Ninja 4 July 2005 06:05 (UTC)

Hi again. The actual text is from the original akuma page, which was moved to the Akuma (Street Fighter character) - see here [1]. From the street fighter article you can see in the history of the page that the akuma section was moved on the 20th August. I'm not sure where the information is from, but i do assume that it really is japanese mythology. The only way to tell would be to get someone to research it in Japan. If you need any more help just post to my page. - Master Of Ninja 4 July 2005 19:58 (UTC)

Thanks for your review

Hi and many thanks for adding that detail to the VFD/Chinese raping chair page. I'm well impressed :-)

- Veledan 5 July 2005 20:33 (UTC)

Kuril Islands dispute

Please consider removing your voting section. It would be preferable to acknowledge the consensus against Northern Territories (I see it's what you want, but this happens sometimes); and start a new discussion below on the three Kuril island variants. Or why not leave well enough alone? Septentrionalis 17:52, 31 July 2005 (UTC) Good luck, in any case. Septentrionalis 21:47, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Northwest Territory

I think it's better for people to land on a page and know immediately what their retreat options are, rather than having to forge ahead to another page to figure out where they might want to go. Thanks. jengod 18:39, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Bifauxnen

Hi, and thanks very much! That's an amazingly solid-looking article, but I suppose I need to vote Delete all the same, after your sorry Google list. Note that the Hentai Dictionary is also Wikipedia dependent, btw—check out the definition page you get when you click through hits 11 or 12 to the Bifauxnen article. Just to make sure, though, I'm holding off voting till the family member who actually knows about anime wakes up. I'm only a sham myself. :-) Thanks again. Bishonen | talk 08:16, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

iTunes external link

I noticed that you recently edited the iTunes article and I was hoping you might be able to offer an objective opinion here. As you can see, there is controversy concerning the issue. However, I was hoping the external article might be considered on its merits, not on suspicions of my motivations. Again, your comment/vote would be appreciated. Thanks. Uriah923 15:23, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Curry bread

I know you've put a stub tag on the article, but could you add one more bit of detail just for my own personal satisfaction, since you obviously are familiar with curry bread? What kind of curry? This curry bread stuff sounds excellent (mmm.. curry sandwiches), but is it just curry powder baked into the bread, a layer of curry paste, or a complete vegetable, meat or seafood curry? Tonywalton | Talk 20:56, 19 September 2005 (UTC) (with mouth watering)[reply]

Mikan

As far as I know, mikan isn't a Japanese word for citrus, although "mikan rui" is the general classification for citrus plants. I looked at the dictionary quoted and neither the Japanese to English nor the Japanese to Japanese entries supports your assertion. --DannyWilde 13:18, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is, definition 1:

みかん 1 【▼蜜▼柑】

(1)ウンシュウミカン・ナツミカン・ダイダイ・オレンジ・ザボンなどの柑橘類の総称。
(2)特にウンシュウミカンをいい、古くはキシュウミカンをいった。［季］秋。

Unfortunately, I will have to go offline since I have to go.--Tokek 13:23, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I read it, but that doesn't say it is a Japanese word for citrus. Japanese people use "mikan" where English speakers might say "oranges". I don't understand you. How many Japanese people would say a lemon (which is a citrus) was a kind of "mikan"? I think none. --DannyWilde 13:54, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the Japanese Wikipedia, "柑橘類" redirects to "カンキツ," and the English article for it is "Citrus." Also, the English-to-Japanese and Japanese-toEnglish dictionaries at dictionary.goo.ne.jp point out that these terms are equivalent. You say you don't understand, but I don't understand which part is not evident. --Tokek 11:02, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think Japanese people call a lemon, or even a yuzu, a "mikan"? If you think so then please provide evidence. --DannyWilde 12:10, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

By above definition the word can be used to mean citrus in general, including lemons. I will not "provide evidence" to validate a dictionary, I will assume a dictionary to be valid. The polite thing to do instead of removing another's contribution you are unsure of is to ask first, or at least have something, like facts, to back up your own claim. Otherwise just trust what dictionaries say. Constantly, people who were familiar with only one definition of a word are surprised to find that said word has more than one usage.--Tokek 10:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

South Sakhalin dispute

The entire content was self-evident from the title, which is one of the speedy deletion criteria. It does need a proper article, though - if you're interested to write it, be my guest. Ambi 10:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kumi Koda

Thank you very much for taking the time to check out the validity of the links in the article about Kumi Koda! -- chsf 17:00 2006/01/30 (CET)

RE: Soul Society

No need, an alternate name in a Bleach-related article is put down to avoid confusion, and it's enough that one group (official or fan) calls it with that name. For example, in the article on zanpakutō we cite 'final release', 'bankai' and 'ban release' even though it's not officially called anything other than bankai. There are over 600 results on Google for "Spirit World" and Bleach ([2]); I only reviewed the first page but the results seem to be relevant. -- Y Ynhockey || Talk Y 12:18, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you so intent on removing 'spirit world' from the article? I think it's pretty clear that in the context of Bleach, Spirit World would equal Soul Society, as it says in the article. The purpose of the alternate naming in articles such as that one, as I said before, is to avoid confusion and ambiguity, therefore many non-official and less popular names can be included. Spirit World wouldn't actually be a replacement to Soul Society as a name, but it's what Soul Society is - a spirit world. Perhaps if I worded it differently you'd not want to remove it (see changes). -- Y Ynhockey || Talk Y 23:00, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

XCP list

Maybe the EFF's list already addresses your concern about companies. Wikipedia still has a problem that I've already mentioned about verifiability. Just for the record, I didn't create the AFD request out of any pro- or anti- DRM/Sony stance, but simply from a quality control perspective.—Tokek 05:39, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! It's been a number of days, but felt courtesy required a reply. I was not deeply invested in the topic, but merely voicing an opinion. My point regarding commercial websites was simply that once information is no longer commercial, it will be removed. It was not intended to apply to Sony alone. Regarding verifiability, any wikipeda article has that problem. ;)

Thank you for your work keeping Wikipeda of highest quality! Zen611 20:26, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flip4Mac WMV

I was wondering why you moved the Flip4Mac WMV article to Windows Media Components for QuickTime. The stated reason was that Microsoft and Telestream call it that, but looking at Telestream's website I see four occurrences of it being called "Flip4Mac WMV" but only one of it being called Windows Media Components for QuickTime... and the context of that make it clear it is a description of what the product does rather than the name of the product. --Steven Fisher 22:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of gairaigo and wasei-eigo terms

Hello Tokek, You removed "Chakki" from List of gairaigo and wasei-eigo terms with the edit summary "remove non-gairaigo". Can you elaborate on that? I believe the word belongs in the article. Fg2 21:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vodcast/Vlog Discussion

Totek can you please first read the discussion page at the Vodcast article before you change anything in the article. A Vodcast is a Video Podcast and not a Video Blog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.84.246.198 (talk • contribs)

Tokek at google vodcasting gets 2.000.000 hits (with only 80.000 in Dutch) and vlogging gets only 800.000 hits worldwide, so I don't know what your problem is, just quit promoting Vlogging in the Vodcast article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.84.246.198 (talk • contribs)

I've now added actual google counts at Talk:Vodcast. —Tokek 07:08, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tokek, Just read the dsicussion page there is everything clearly explaned, it seems you just want it only your way. As you can see in the discussion page the majority is against a merge which you requested a few months before, and now you are still crying like a child that you just want it your way.

The conclusion is: Merge request removed, it's obvious that VLOG and VODcast are totally different applications and different technology as well"

There is a big difference between a vodcast and a vlog. Therefore both Wikipedia entries should not be merged. A Vlog is a personal bulleting like a blog, but then with video. Mostly a html site, sometimes with rss. A vodcast is a TV-channel with on-demand video titles, built by pro-users or broadcasters, mostly an rss but not a website. To keep the distinction, vlog and vodcast should keep their own pages. (cross posted this to vlog talk) — "--213.84.246.198 09:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)"[reply]

Could you tone down with the name calling that you've been conducting lately? It doesn't add value to the discussion. —Tokek 17:10, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WordNet on Wiktionary

In Talk:WordNet, you ask whether WordNet could be used on Wiktionary. Please do not do this, as WordNet definitions are notoriously inaccurate, as several "synonyms" together with a single definition so that in most cases all but one of the definitions are accurate. Base definitions on credible dictionaries like the OED or Webster. - Centrx 04:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, although I was wondering about it more from the copyright / licensing side. —Tokek 02:35, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]