User talk:Donaldal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I ought to restrain myself, but I will nonetheless say that I much prefer Gavin in his clean-cut (rather than greasy) persona. But I suppose that's a deliberate career choice. - Nunh-huh 02:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

He can keep the long hair, as long as he shampoos it daily.... <g> - Nunh-huh 04:28, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Jimmy was a good look. But the other looks can be salvaged. (I think, though, he needs to come to terms with the fact that he just don't got that "rock thing" going on....) I didn't see Sutton in Little Women (just not my favorite subject matter), but I confess to a fondness for her brother in LSoH. And yes on Bounce! I hope to see it again on B'way in the near future...revised. I rather liked Wise Guys too, before Bounce, but who knows what a staged version would have been like. Most recently...Lysistrata by Mark Adamo (of that "other" "Little Women") at the New York City Opera, which had its high points. (BTW, Gavin Creel was like logarhythmically better singing "Talent" than Michael Hall was singing "Paris's Dream"<g>. - Nunh-huh 05:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

On my left 
    on my right
is a prince 
    is a jewel
Never arrogant or cruel
   never duller than now
He has heft
   he has height
But he’s deft 
   and he’s witty
Not a morsel of self-pity
   always boosting your morale
He’s a gent in a way that you’ll find in no other
And believe me I don’t say that just because he is my brother
He’s a prince
    he’s a jewel
And he never needs renewal
As a partner, as a critic, as a pal.

I confess that I haven't been too curious about Lestat. Doesn't mean I won't see it, but no plans to as of yet. Impotent vampires and Elton John just don't inspire me...my limitation, I'm sure. Jack Noseworthy took a bit of the blame in San Francisco; I'm presuming, though, that there will have been more than casting changes and it will be in shape for at least a reasonable run when it "arrives" in NY. I'm guessing you're lo longer in Colorado, then?<g> - Nunh-huh 23:07, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I've been a subscriber at the New York City Opera for years, and see the occasional production at the Metropolitan. Are your tastes so catholic as to extend to opera as well?? - Nunh-huh 04:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Jaunting up to NYC from Philly for an opera is more devoted than I'd be, but... So did Mr. Haak regale you with tales of the first preview yet? I've been in the metropolitan area most of my life, yes. - Nunh-huh 05:12, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

That should be easy, just click "E-mail this user" when you're on my user page. It may not work unless you've entered your e-mail in your preferences (which won't reveal it to anyone, and you can remove it later if you like). I don' do mountains... <g> - Nunh-huh 05:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Osteopathic Medicine → Osteopathy

Donaldl I saw your suggestion on Talk:Osteopathic_medicine‘ and your contributions on the page history on Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine. You suggested "Osteopathic medicine in the US" but I think just "Osteopathic medicine" will do, with "Osteopathy" as a main page: Template:Main

I suggest that if there are no further objections before May 12 (5-days grace period), the page split should be done. This does also follow the line of thought on the OMM page.

"Osteopathic medicine" could also be added to the Medicine template: Template:Medicine whereas osteopathy can sit in the alternative medicine category, which should keep most people happy.

I note that the "Osteopathy" talk page Talk:Osteopathy shows that the old "Osteopathy" page [1] already has a long history going back to 2002, and I'm not sure of the politics of the original move to "Osteopathic medicine" so it could raise some controversy unless done carefully. There appears to be no template for proposing section moves as there are for page moves, but you first flagged the idea in March, so anyone who could have objected has had the opportunity. There may however be certain procedures to follow, such as Wikipedia:Content forking, which shows how to make temporary subpages, or am I making too much of this?

apers0n 17:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)Talk

Update: found "split" template. apers0n 12:14, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

As there have been no other comments apart from yours and mine on this subject, it may be better to follow the existing setup. As I was doing this split it occurred to me that it could be done on a subpage Wikipedia:Subpages, although it is now recommended to use subsidiary articles - see Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(common_names)#Subpages - Main|<subpage> and Details|<subpage> templates can be used. Also worth a look is Wikipedia:Summary style. The initial brief article 'osteopathy' can be in summary style, the difference between 'osteopathy/osteopathic medicine' and 'osteopathy/OMM' or 'osteopathy/traditional osteopathy' (?) can use the subpage templates.

I created a short disambiguation page for Osteopathy (disambiguation), but I don't think that should be the first place you land when you search for osteopathy apers0n 17:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] fork - sorry

Unfortunately for you, we already have the lymphatic pump article. Please copy anything useful from your article to the other one. -- RHaworth 07:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)