User:Mkill/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Mkill/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:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
• If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Ragib 02:00, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Hello Mkill,

Thanks for adding the ukiyoe to the article on Oki Islands. However, the information in the image page is either wrong, or else it's correct in French (I don't know which); the title of the print reads "Hōki Province." So I moved it to Hoki Province, where it is a nice illustration.

Best regards,

Fg2 10:44, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

I knew you couldn't trust the French :) -- Mkill 01:15, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for working on the Hotlist! But I have a concern. Are you checking the blue links before removing them? There are times when blue links should not be deleted. For instance, there may be cases where the Encyclopedia Britannica has an article about a 17th century chemist, but our article is about a soccer player with the same name. If you check the links, you can leave that blue link with a note that says our article is not about the more important figure. See what I mean? – Quadell ^(talk) 13:06, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

I checked, and from what I have found wikipedia is much more thorough and much more correct when it comes to lemmata and disambiguation. Individual articles of the commercial encyclopedias might be better researched, but when it comes to mass of material and completeness, wikipedia is first. -- Mkill 16:36, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

I see you are editing some of these, and have expertise. WP is having an effort to digest the prolific contributions of a team (two anyway) Latin Americans, with obviously wide and deep background in the pre-war stuff. It comes in as filtered through Spanish, and once cleaned-up is typically expanded again. Python swallowing a pig, really. I log all this at User:Charles Matthews/Imperial Japan. Despite obvious problems, I dislike the hostility sometimes shown to the contributor(s); that is no way to run a wiki. Therefore I do what I can on this. Charles Matthews 11:25, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Mkill,

Please be polite in your edit summaries. For example, "Who made the stupid suggestion to merge preposition and adposition? Why do you think these are different words? Maybe because they are not the same?" really isn't an appropriate edit summary. A better summary might be "Removing 'merge' tag until Talk-page shows more supporters for the suggestion to merge," together with a (polite) response to Karmosin's original comment on the talk-page.

(See Wikipedia:WikiLove.)

Incidentally, no one has claimed that the words "preposition" and "adposition" mean the same thing; rather, Karmosin said that since the two kinds of adpositions (pre- and post-) differ only in placement, he doesn't think it's useful to have a separate article for each of the three concepts. If you disagree, you should consider replying (politely) on the talk-page.

Thanks!

Ruakh 20:57, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

The problem is that people have the tendency to drop those "Merge me, merge me" bars in all kinds of articles but only a small margin of these is useful at all. Either it's obvious, that two articles have the same topic, like "German-French relations" and "French-German relations", than you can just merge them and be done. Or they are not about the same topic, most of the time one article has a special focus and the other one is more general. Then you can just leave them alone. In any case, there is no need for those ugly bars. -- Mkill 21:03, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

That's not an excuse to be uncivil, of course. In any case, there are many synonyms in English, so without a more specific justification, your comment in the edit summary doesn't hold much water, anyway. I agree, though, about merge notices being used too frequently. In particular, it is far too common for people to put a merge notice up and not even have the courtesy to put their reasoning on the talk page. :( —HorsePunchKid→龜 21:09, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Preposition, Postposition and Adposition are not synonymous. Well, no two words are ever exactly synonymous, but we're not discussing linguistics here. And besides, my doctrine is de:Wikipedia:Sei grausam. Have a nice day. -- Mkill 21:24, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Please read my comment again. I did not say they were synonyms; I said that your argument (from the edit summary) is fallacious because synonyms exist. A better justification (as you have rightly supplied now!) was all that was needed. Sorry for the confusion. —HorsePunchKid→龜 21:53, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry for making a rather redundant post about behavior, Mkill. I was just in somewhat of a rush and I just didn't bother to scroll down and read this thread.

Mkill, I'm a very devout wikilinguist, and I am often very pro-merging, but I do not do it simply because I feel like it or because some terms look similar. I'm not a professional linguist and I've only started studying at the university level, but I've studied many languages and I have quite a passion for linguistics in general. I wouldn't make this kind of suggestion if I didn't think it useful for readers in general.

Peter ^Isotalo 15:51, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Please stop moving articles from the article space into your user space.

If you have problems with the article contents, edit them in place (or discuss at the talk page first). If you think they should be deleted, nominate them at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. However, moving them into your article space is not really acceptable (there are many other contributors). I will now move these articles back to their original locations. -- Curps 22:46, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, I don't really care. But you should read what you add to the Wikipedia article space there first. -- Mkill 22:56, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm not adding them, I'm reverting improper moves. There are any number of articles on Wikipedia with contents that could use improvement, and there are any number of remedies: editing them or nominating them for deletion via the standard Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. However, "kidnapping" articles really not an acceptable option. -- Curps 23:04, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm not kidnapping them. There is still a redirect. As an Admin, you should care more about nationalist crap on Wikipedia. If this guy was a Brazilian Nazi and not a Peruvian Imperial Japan nationalist, he would have been banned a month ago. Get some sense. -- Mkill 23:07, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Just do things the right way next time, it's not that hard. -- Curps 02:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC)