User talk:Dforest

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am on semi-wikibreak while travelling. --Dforest 04:48, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Welcome 2 Aluminium & Google 2.1 General spelling in the 'Aluminium' article 3 Daikon 4 flavor profile 5 Tofu 6 Flatbread 7 Three disc kagami mochi 8 What on earth are you thinking about? 9 RfM... 10 Brain Teasers: 11 Pocky sticks 12 Hardest Questions In The World Section: 13 Oh no! 14 Emergency department 15 negi 16 Kagami mochi 17 Emergency department 18 Voting? 19 Just so you know... 20 HQITWS 21 Yoko Ono 22 Gruyère (cheese) False Cognate 23 Cask Ale etc 24 RateBeer 25 Ohsawa 26 DYK 27 "Spelt" 28 Abraham on List of people known as father or mother of something 29 Ya, red == good 30 ESL etc. 31 Partially true editorial comment 32 Image uploaded by User:Tommyllew 33 mantra 34 Syllabic n 35 Invitation to Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan 36 Beer cats 37 Revert 38 Draught beer 39 HQITW is back! 40 Essential Oils 41 HQITWS is back! 42 Poll 43 Election day

[edit] Welcome

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

[edit] Aluminium & Google

Hi - I've copied the relevant section from Google test:

Idiosyncratic usage. The English language often has multiple terms for a single concept, particularly given regional dialects. A series of searches for different forms of a name reveals some approximation of their relative popularity. For a quick comparison of relative usage try googlefight, e.g. comparing deoxyribose nucleic acid and deoxyribonucleic acid. Note that there are cases where this googletest can be overruled, such as when an international standard has been set, as in the case of aluminium.

Please note the last sentence. Also note that I'm a chemistry teacher in the US and use and prefer aluminum, but this is an international encyclopedia and IUPAC rules here in chemical articles. Thanks, Vsmith 03:31, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I understand your argument, but I believe that passage refers primarily to Wikipedia naming conventions. I do not contest that the article should remain at "aluminium". I just think it is relevant to show popular usage as well, at least in a footnote. Yes, an international standard has been set--by scientists, not by linguists. I don't think it is fair for scientists to claim complete ownership over chemical articles. The article name is one thing, but popular usage is worthy of a footnote, is it not? In my opinion, a good reference work shows popular usage as well as what is considered the "standard". If anything, I think the mention of the google test above makes it more relevant to footnote in the article. Also note that I am an American EFL teacher teaching high school abroad. I find it contentious when people use International English as a euphemism for Commonwealth English. Both British and American-derived English are learned and spoken in various countries. Dforest 04:15, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

The spelling section notes the usage at the top and then the spelling history. A Google search simply shows that the web is largely written by Americans, that's why it is rather irrelevant as well as redundant in the section. Vsmith 04:35, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

As Wikipedia is primarily a web-based reference, it is indeed relevant if the majority of web users prefer one form over the other. I am not the only one who thinks it is relevant, it's been contested before and that should be mentioned. If it's worthy of note at the top of the Google test page, it's worthy of a footnote in the article. Please realize I am not contesting the correctness of "aluminium", I agree that it is the consensus standard here. But to contrast that with a measure of common usage is a worthwhile point. Dforest 05:52, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

The users who come to the article are interested in relevant information, not in internal Wikipedia processes (which the note reverals). Pavel Vozenilek 01:40, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] General spelling in the 'Aluminium' article

Articles should be consistent in the use of spelling. The title of the article uses the British English spelling and so British English should be used throughout the article. Please do not revert this again. BTW your comments about the Googletest are not useful or helpful. Google exists in the rarified world of the American dominated Internet. This is an international encyclopaedia. In the words of Jimbo Wales. The Wikipedia is not an Internet encyclopedia. It is an encyclopedia that happens to be on the Internet. In the future, editions of the encyclopaedia will be distributed to the poor in places where cheap acces to the Internet is not possible. Good day. Jooler 10:06, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

The title of the article was chosen because it is the IUPAC preferred spelling. It does not mean the article is written in British English, and according to the guidelines you shouldn't change the spelling willy-nilly or without due cause.

Regarding the Google test comment, which you call "not useful or helpful", I respectfully disagree. Of course Google is biased toward popular usage. The article is biased toward the IUPAC spelling, because it is a chemical article. It is worthy to note that that spelling does not appear to reflect popular usage. It is a linguistic curiosity that may not be interesting to you, but it may well be useful for others. Let's try to compromise. Dforest 16:00, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

What you term 'popular usage' is no such thing. It is common American usage, and because considerably more than half of the English language web pages on the Internet are of American origin, the web pages cached by Google reflect this usage. It does not reflect the usage in the rest of the world was is much more poorly represented on the Internet than it is in print etc. The reason for using British spelling is not relevant, what is relevant is that consistent spelling should be used throughout. Please do not revert again. Good day. Jooler 21:56, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

By popular, I mean 'preferred by a majority'. If it is true that 'considerably more than half of the English language web pages on the Internet are of American origin', it does not negate that 'Aluminum' is the popular usage on the Internet, which if you read the comment, was the point I was trying to illustrate. What you term 'British spelling' is misleading. 'Aluminium' was chosen because it is the IUPAC spelling. Cheers, Dforest 01:21, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Again what you say "preferred by the majority" - you mean by the American majority of the systemically biased Internet and just because something is "popular" on the Internet (like the mispelling "medevil" or the word "pr0n") means nothing with regards to how things should be described in an Encyclopaedia that has a life outside of the rarefied Geek filled, pornography obsessed, Amerco-centric Internet. What I term British spelling is what it is. The fact that it is used by the IUPAC is the reason for the choice of spelling for the article, but again it is Wikipedia policy that spellings should be consistent. Jooler 08:21, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

That is certainly not what I mean by "preferred by a majority". If it is the case that that majority (of citings of 'aluminum' on Google vs 'aluminium') is predominately American, so be it. I am not defending it as right or wrong. Regarding popularity, let me re-emphasize that I never suggested the article should change its spelling to "aluminum". The word, "pr0n", you mention, is decidedly relevant to the article on pornography, and I do note that it is mentioned in that article. Likewise, a mention of the Google test is relevant as a footnote in the section of an article specifically concerning the spelling of "aluminium" vs. "aluminum". It do believe it is fair enough to mention it, note its bias, and leave it up to the reader to interpret. Dforest 09:22, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Daikon

Hi. Thanks for your edits on Daikon. I was redirecting Raphanus Sativus to Daikon, but then noticed that Raphanus sativus (lowercase s) redirects to Radish. Are Radish and Daikon the same plants, or is one of them taxed incorrectly? Thanks -- Chris 73 Talk 12:31, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, daikon is a type of radish. They are the same genus and species. Interesting that the Daikon article is longer than Radish, isn't it? BTW, I corrected the capitalization of Raphanus Sativus. Thanks. Dforest 15:36, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I redirected Raphanus Sativus to Radish, which seems to fit better. Happy editing -- Chris 73 Talk 17:52, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] flavor profile

I did a google on "flavor profile" -- it returned nothing but "wine-speak" examples, as in "the new 2003 Oak Ridge Chardonnay has a flavor profile of old leathers, unwashed cat fur, etc. etc." I think it's a pretentious way of saying "tastes" and is out of place in an encyl. article about mayo unless you somehow qualify it so that only this phrase can be used. In any case, I have some rice vinegar at home -- I might trying using it the next time. But I still don't see why it would do anything more than merely make the mayo taste slightly different from one made with cider vinegar. After all, we're not Robert Parker here writing for the $300 a bottle crowd.... Cheers, Hayford Peirce 16:17, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Haha, "unwashed cat fur"... yeah I totally understand. It's a foodie term, I can see why it seems pretentious. You're probably right that simple is better here. Though note that I was comparing it to commercial mayo made with distilled vinegar. mmmm $300 mayo... hehe Dforest 16:32, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I'll bet if we whipped up some mayo at home, using some recondite ingredient such as lemongrass juice and peelings from that smelly SEasian fruit (durian? and other weird stuff, then peddled it around at pretentious places we could find someone who would pay $300 a bottle for it.... Hayford Peirce 18:23, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Brilliant. Durian--I like it! But let's keep it hush hush, shall we? Dforest 09:53, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tofu

Your probrably right about the simmering... as for the flattening, i'm specifically thinking about the stuff that one finds in instant soup. Right out of the package, it is hard as a rock, and looks like a cracker crumb, then expands nearly 4 times its size when dropped in boiling water or broth becoming spongelike, soaking up all the broth and flavoring... (yummy). You can sometimes find it in instant ramen, though you can hardly call that "food" persay, even though I live off of it sometimes. I AM a college student afterall... HAHAHA. Thanks, and Peace. CoolFox 03:56, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Flatbread

My pleasure. – You can tell from my "article" that I know very little about the subject. I just wanted a place to pull together all the various related articles I had come across. Thanks for expanding it. Rl 06:13, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, (notice I didn't start a new headline). I'm glad someone actually reads the discussions. I also didn't know 'aluminum' was more widely used on google etc, than 'aluminium'. Although the data points to 'aluminum' being used, I don't really care what is used, just that everyone will be able to edit the page if they want. Thanks, Spawn Man 12:46, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

MMMMMmmmmm....flatbread.....or flattebread in France's Norsic region...I think I'll do a Google search to see which is more widely used.... Spawn Man 01:59, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Hehehe... Dforest 03:46, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm glad you see my humour...Spawn Man 05:25, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Three disc kagami mochi

Sorry, I can't find the images you mention on Google images. Have left a note on kagami mochi talk page.--DannyWilde 01:54, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What on earth are you thinking about?

Your edits to the Japanese beer article are plain stupid. Please stop reediting out my corrections of your mistakes. --DannyWilde 06:12, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

My edits are in good faith, so I would appreciate if you didn't call them stupid. I am not sure what mistakes you are referring to. Ranking by production volume is not a mistake. Comparing Japanese and German beer regulations is not a mistake. Please see Talk:Japanese beer.--Dforest 07:04, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RfM...

Hello, User:Maprovonsha172 filed an RfM here. Please comment there, whether it be acceptance or rejecting. Redwolf24 (talk) 22:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Sure, I accept. Dforest 09:05, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Brain Teasers:

Hi, I'm just posting a friendly notice stating that I have got Brain Teasers on my user page that you're welcome to have a go at. Will post new questions one day after they have been answered. Thanks... Spawn Man 05:06, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

I'll have a look at it. Thanks. Dforest 05:09, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

No Problemo...Spawn Man

[edit] Pocky sticks

Given the vast number of them I've consumed in my life you'd think I'd know how to spell the name properly.

Yeah, an overall Japanese snack article makes a hell of a lot more sense than a hundreds of ludicrously detailed stubs about individual brand names. Why DannyWilde has this peculiar obsession or why Kappa believes every tiny granular speck of knowledge warrants an article completely escapes me. Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not Google2. --Calton | Talk 06:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hardest Questions In The World Section:

Congratulations, you are currently tied 3rd on the Hardest Questions In The World Section's score board with 1 correct answer. You are 2 points away from the score board's leader. Spawn Man 07:09, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations, you are now 1st on the score board with 5 correct answers. Spawn Man 02:59, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

You have now lost your lead. You have 5 correct answers & are 1 point away from the scoreboard leader. Spawn Man 21:38, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Oh no!

I've noticed your edit of Okara and it seems like you know a lot about the subject. You used the term soymilk maker, but it looks like there's no Tofu maker or Soymilk maker article in the whole wide en.wikipedia.org! I own one of those things (Korean "Soylove" – gives tofu, soy milk, okara, tea and whatnot) so methinks we could fill the gap some time. Wikipeditor 09:28, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply; I had assumed you knew those well. I'm a bit busy now anyway, so I'll try and tackle the topic when I have more time. Have fun! Wikipeditor 02:24, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Emergency department

Thank you for your useful edits to the above article. At the moment this article has been nominated for Article improvement drive. I wonder if you would consider clicking on the above link to vote for it to be further improved. Again, thanks.--File Éireann 11:51, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] negi

My edits to the negi page were based on the discussion in the talk page of welsh onion. Can you please respond there to the comment made that "negi" covers various species. After the unpleasant mess you made in the kagami mochi page, I'll be applying verification criteria to your edits as in WP:V. For the time being, rather than reediting the pages, I request you to comment at the above talk page. --DannyWilde 13:26, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Kagami mochi

I missed your most recent edit of this page. Please read WP:V and provide verification to the standards required before adding the word "three" to the article again. --DannyWilde 14:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Just to sum it up, links to some blogs saying "three" aren't adequate. Also, you need to read WP:RS and find a reliable source for your edits. It might be worth your bearing in mind that your "three layers" stuff was added at the same time as you introduced three other mistakes into the article. I only had to remove your other mistakes two or three times. I don't know why you're fighting for the three layers. I've had to remove it eight times I think now. Anyway, verify it. --DannyWilde 14:58, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Please give it a rest. Neither Gishi [1] nor the Tokyo Gas Japanese Culture page [2] are blogs. The Gishi site is about as reliable a source as you can get, as it has a picture of the three-layer type for sale, with a caption clearly describing it as a three-layer kagamimochi. In fact it is the same company website that you previously cited in External links. The Tokyo Gas page explains the various uses of the three-layer type. I'm not sure which "mistakes" you are referring to--is it about the daidai being relatively scarce? Certainly in Japanese fruit markets daidai are far scarcer than mikans. And regardless of tradition, there is no doubt many Japanese use mikans instead of daidai on kagamimochi. Your subsequent edit confirmed this: "A mikan or a plastic daidai are often substituted for the daidai. " I'm just trying to help and I would appreciate your cooperation. Dforest 04:40, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Are you trying to help? Oh, thanks. I suppose that was why you sent my article for deletion. Thanks for the help. Great. You can help me a whole lot by never editing this or any other article I am involved in again, and stick to editing "I heart huckabees" or something. I would appreciate your cooperation. --DannyWilde 07:23, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Ben, please accept my sincere apology if you were offended by having your articles listed on AFD. I had considered discussing it with you beforehand, but I feared that you would disagree. It is my contention that we do not need a separate article in en:Wikipedia for every regional snack food whose article barely merits a half-paragraph of description. The products in question, Kyabetsu Taro and Don Tacos, are virtually unknown internationally. I realize we have some differences of opinion here. I consider you a valuable contributor in Japan articles, so I hope we can reconcile those differences and work together to improve Wikipedia. But how dare you suggest that I never edit any article you are involved with? That is not helpful, and completely against the spirit of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a community based on collaboration. I have never put you down nor questioned the good faith of your edits. In contrast, you have referred to my edits as stupid, nonsense, barmy, vandalism, mistakes, etc. I would appreciate some civility. In addition, you continually mark your reversions as minor edits, in flagrant violation of Help:Minor edit. Only truly minor edits or reversions of vandalism should be marked as minor. Thanks, Dforest 09:02, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Emergency department

Many thanks for your support!--File Éireann 18:42, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Voting?

Hi, may I make a request? could you please vote for my FAC, Dinosaur here:Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dinosaur? It would mean so much to me & I would definitely return the favour if you need anything voted on. I've come so far, but I just want to make sure as voting can turn sour at any moment? Don't feel pressured, but thanks anyway... Spawn Man 02:48, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Just so you know...

Just so you know, that after a full year long recovery from the tse tse immune defective virus, The Hardest Questions in the World Section is back on my user page!! Don't be too quick to tire the section out too quickly, but make sure you pop round to make sure you get a good score on the leader's board.... Spawn Man 04:55, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HQITWS

You are currently tied 2nd on the leader's board, being behind of 1st place by 3 points. Spawn Man 02:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yoko Ono

I updated the article on Yoko Ono based on your suggestion on the article's discussion page. Please see my comments and the changes I made. Let me know if you feel these changes could be further improved. Thanks. JJ 23:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gruyère (cheese) False Cognate

Thanks for your message. I replied to it on my discussion page. I suggest we take any directly related talk and place it on the Gruyère (cheese) discussion page. What's your view? CJ Withers 02:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cask Ale etc

Hi! Thanks for the comments. The cask ale article was moved over almost entire from RateBeer. I made several changes, and then other people have made further improvements. Be Bold!

Keg beer. Hmmm. I have noticed that it is tricky dealing with some spellings, let alone words and expressions on a global basis on Wiki. Keg beer is tricky. In Britain the expression is long used and has a very specific meaning. Usage in America and Australia is - as far as I am aware - confined to the meaning: "beer from a keg" and perhaps wouldn't require explanation, other than a reference to the word Keg. What do you have in mind? SilkTork 08:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RateBeer

Someone else mentioned RateBeer in relation to another article. I am an admin on RateBeer, and a lot of the material I bring over was written by me so there wouldn't be any problem. I try to change the material so that it is less personal and more encyclopedic, but don't always manage. Sometimes it takes a few attempts. I'll take a look at bottle conditioning. There is so much to do on beer. Given the part time nature of working on Wiki - a bit here and there, now and again during the day - it would take one person a year to sort out everything. But I have noticed that there are plenty of other people working. And that when an article gets to a certain size more people join in. That's the encouraging part. The communal, co-operative effort. The majority of edits are positive and good, and make an article more informative, helpful and readable. The very few edits which take an article backwards can easily be dealt with. And then there are the grey areas where people debate over the focus of the material. And that's great as well, because anyone can make an assumption which may have changed or be based on out of date or incorrect sources, so it is good to have assumptions challenged. I'm enjoying doing this. I started working on the beer articles because Wiki was getting a great reputation generally, but not for the beer articles. People within the beer community were making jokes. It seemed to me that a person could sneer, or a person could join in and do the right thing. But the impersonal style of writing is not my thing, so I don't think I'll hang around long after beer is sorted out. I prefer the greater freedom of journalistic articles. Cheers! SilkTork 08:09, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ohsawa

I must confess I don't know much about this guy; he seems to have cultivated a bit of mystery about himself with all the different names, and then there are the other individuals who purport to have been part of the creation of macrobiotics. I just hope my addition about the French spelling was accurate... Badagnani 06:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Well there's no doubt there were people who came before and after him who influenced macrobiotics. Even Hippocrates used the term macrobios. Many of Ohsawa's principles come from Taoism and Buddhism & his followers did much of the work in making his teachings known. But for better or worse, he gets the lion's share of the credit for the Macrobiotic diet as it is known today. For more on the etymology, read this paper: [3] --Dforest 06:58, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Tomitaro Makino, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 04:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Spelt"

"Spelt" is deprecated by whom, and on what grounds? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Spelt is very current in the Home of English. Used everywhere. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)} 16:30, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree; the claim that it is deprecated is simply false, I think, though it's used less often in the U.S. than in the U.K. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Really - Is "spelt" actually preferred in the U.K.? Does it differ at all in meaning or usage from "spelled"? I was under the impression it was falling out of use in general. Dforest 17:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

"Spelt" is probably more common than "spelled" (it's certainly at least as common); there's no difference in meaning. Back in 1965, in the second edition of Modern English Usage, Fowler noted that "spelt" and "spelled" had been equally popular at the time of the first edition, and that there had since een a general move towards the -t forms in those cases where both existed. That seems to have increased since. At the time of the first edition, for example, "dreamed", "kneeled", etc. had been more common than "dreamt", "knelt", etc., but now they're certainly less common. (The on-line version of the new Fowler's doesn't seem to include this issue, though it uses "spelt" not "spelled" throughout.)

Note also that there's a big difference between a word's being less used and its being deprecated. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

• I see that, despite the above, you're still trying to exclude "spelt" from the article, now by rewriting it in a clumsy form. Your edit summary claims that this is to bring it in line with the MoS; could you explain which part of the MoS justifies your edit? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

From WP:MOS:

Cultural clashes over grammar, spelling, and capitalisation/capitalization are a common experience on Wikipedia. Remember that millions of people have been taught to use a different form of English from yours, including different spellings, grammatical constructions, and punctuation. For the English Wikipedia, while a nationally predominant form should be used, there is no preference among the major national varieties of English. However, there is certain etiquette generally accepted on Wikipedia, summarized here:

• Articles should use the same dialect throughout.
• If an article's subject has a strong tie to a specific region/dialect, it should use that dialect.
• If there's no strong tie, try to find synonyms that can be used in any dialect.
• If no such words can be agreed upon, the dialect of the first significant contributor (not a stub) should be used.

Clearly the article Laozi has no strong ties to a specific dialect. Thus it is generally accepted etiquette to find synonyms that can be used in any dialect. For another example, "fall" and "autumn" are both acceptable synonyms in U.S. English (although the former is more common). However, "fall" is often considered obsolete in Commonwealth English, so I generally avoid it in pages that have no strong tie to the U.S. dialect. In the spirit of compromise, I have changed "spelt" to "transliterated", which in the case of Laozi/Lao Tzu I believe to be more accurate. --Dforest 04:21, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

If you'd done this originally, instead of rewriting the summary so as to produce rather tortuous English, there'd have been less of a problem. "Transliterated" isn't a synonym of "spelt", but the principle's OK. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:25, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

There is also romanised, which is a variant description of what we do from Chinese to English. --Fire Star 18:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's better than "transliterated". --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abraham on List of people known as father or mother of something

Could you please explain your objection listing Abraham as "Father of many" on List of people known as father or mother of something? As it is the original meaning of the name Abraham, it seems most appropriate. Dforest 04:30, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, nevermind. Now I see that it wasn't you who reverted it. Dforest 04:42, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

As it happens, I agree that if Abraham is to feature on the list, it would be more useful as the father of monotheism than "of many (see Abrahamic religion)". People discover that the name "Abraham" can be translated as "father of many" within the first few words of the article on him.
Regards, David Kernow 11:07, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I agree that "Father of monotheism" is an apt title. But as "Father of many" is the literal translation of the epithet of which he has been referred to for several millennia, I believe it is best to include both. Dforest 16:47, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I've just rephrased the entry, in order to indicate that Abraham's name itself has the "father of something (=many)" meaning, unlike the other people listed (so far). Hope that's okay. Best wishes, David Kernow 17:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Abraham has of course been called the 'father of' many things; what should the criteria be for inclusion in the list? The thing I preferred about the previous version is that it included a link to Abrahamic religion, which discusses in some detail why he would be known as father of monotheism. Yes, the name itself means "father of many" but his original name was said to be Abram; thus I see it is an acquired epithet or title not unlike the others listed on the page. Regards, Dforest 04:13, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Have just rephrased Abraham's entry; what you think now?  It seems to fit the criterion of brief (mostly one or two-word) descriptions of each field in which someone is known as a "father". Regards, David Kernow 05:17, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ya, red == good

CSS compliant too! :-) No deprecated HTML 3.x tags for this little black duck. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ESL etc.

Hi Dforest. This is the first time I've tried to merge something and I hope I have done it correctly. The order of acronyms doesn't really matter to me, as long as readers can find the page (via redirects ) when they need to. You seem to know what you are doing; do you think everything is in order? BrainyBabe 18:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Partially true editorial comment

Greetings, you reverted my edits... apparently my browser doesn't handle unicode character... but rather than wholesale revert a previous edit try looking to see if any of the edit you are reverting is valid... there were vaild wikilinks that I added as well. Thanks EastCoastGhost 12:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah. Sorry about that. No harm intended. Dforest 13:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I changed your metropolitan area link to New York metropolitan area, which seems more appropriate. Dforest 13:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image uploaded by User:Tommyllew

Hello Dforest, sorry, I am unable to conclude that image is self created by the image page status. Will you clear my doubt please, so that it can be saved from deletion. Regards, Shyam ^(T/C) 12:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Dforest, I really did not notice that. Now it has been tagged with {{GFDL-self}} as uploader did not mention any type of holding the copyright. Thanks once again, Shyam ^(T/C) 16:32, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] mantra

yes, we might want to say that the neuter is much rarer than the masculine. The dash in mantra- indicates the stem (while mantras vs. mantram give the nominative in each gender). Btw, does that quote really say "my hovercraft is full of eels"? regards, dab (ᛏ) 19:36, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Syllabic n

Hi User:Dforest, and thanks for inquiring about debate on syllabic n in Japanese. I located some discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles/misc1#Syllabic n. This happened around the time I joined Wikipedia. There might also be earlier discussion --- I didn't see it, though. If the page had been merged from somewhere else, there might be an old talk page somewhere. Best regards, Fg2 20:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Invitation to Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan

As you are a member of the Japan-related topics notice board, I thought you might be interesting in helping out with our new WikiProject. We'd love to be able to tap into any particular expertise you may have in order to improve Japan-related articles here on Wikipedia. We look forward to working with you. (^_^) --日本穣 06:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

The WikiProject is just formalizing some of what the notice board was doing, making things easier to find and more familiar to those who've worked on other WikiProjects. --日本穣 05:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

So will it supercede the notice board? It seems like there would be a lot of overlap between them. Dforest 05:48, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. I think the notice board should continue to function as just that: a place for announcements and sharing of information. The project page is more for those actively working to improve articles and structure on the site. --日本穣 06:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beer cats

Hi D. It has been suggested by User:BrianSmithson that the Beer and brewery categories should be renamed. The proposal has been supported by User:Syrthiss, and supported and expanded by myself. The notion is that the regional categories should follow the format of "Beer and breweries in Africa" /Europe/Asia/North America/South America/Oceania. "Brewers and breweries" could also be renamed "Beer and breweries by region". And all the countries should also be renamed (and merged if needed) as, for example, "Beer and breweries of Germany", "Beer and breweries of Britain", "Beer and breweries of Poland". The word in each case would be beer rather than beers to allow for general articles on beer culture in each region as well as individual beers.

Comments, suggestions, objections and simple votes to Wiki Beer Project SilkTork 15:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Revert

Quite right. Sorry I missed that. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 05:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Draught beer

Hi D. I've just noticed your ammendments to the Draught beer article. I do tend to agree with you that my focus on the more global understanding of the term was unbalanced, and that the references within the main article were too slight to be picked up on. So I have adjusted the intro to take into account the residual, although still quite widespread, use of the word as beer dispensed from a large container. I think it is more balanced and acceptable now, but please let me know what you think. SilkTork 06:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back! Good points. I've made some adjustments. See what you think. Cheers. SilkTork 08:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HQITW is back!

HQITW is back & you are on the scoreboard!! Spawn Man 22:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Essential Oils

Can you tell me where you how you found the information? I'm trying to edit Flavor and Essential oil and such information is invaluable. Sjschen 06:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and pls reply on my talk page Sjschen 06:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

A lot of what we have been discussing has to do with food engineering and flavouring, and you seem to have keen understanding of the stuff. Aree you interested in helping out with the Flavor article? Sjschen 06:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HQITWS is back!

With my virus gone, HQITWS is back! Spawn Man 22:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Poll

Hi Dforest. Your vote/opinion on brewery notability is requested here: [4] SilkTork 12:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Election day

You changed "national holiday" to "federal holiday." But isn't "national" the better descriptor? A "federal" holiday usually means a holiday designated by the federal government---only federal agencies would have to observe it. A "national" holiday, which has less of an official meaning, implies that it's a holiday for everyone in the nation. And that's what the advocates of the holiday are trying to accomplish---not just a day off for federal agencies and employees, but for everyone to go and vote. Theleek 15:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

You posted on my talk page a link to the national holiday article, which states that the term generally refers to "a statutory holiday enacted by a country to commemorate the country itself." True enough. My view is that the context of the article makes clear that an Election Day "national holiday" is not a Fourth of July or Bastille Day, but a "generic public holiday," which the national holiday article also acknowledges as a definition. In any event, I don't feel strongly enough to revert it; my view would be to stick with "national," but I leave it up to you. Thanks for your thoughts. Theleek 22:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)