User talk:TacoDeposit

Indefinite wikibreak

Talk directed specifically to me will be kept and archived when I feel like it. Spam (the same thing posted on the talk pages of multiple Wikipedians) will be read but eventually deleted.

Contents

1 Jazz category links 2 Berceuse 3 Thank you a thousand times 4 invasion of iraq cleanup 5 User:212.159.30.247 6 A Thousand and One Thanks, now 7 teh teh 8 Women's Names 9 Mike Garcia makes his descision 10 Template:Did you know 11 Adminship 12 thanks for the nom 13 Adminship 14 Adminship for deeceevoice 15 Chomsky 16 Maurreen 17 Jeopardy 18 Oops 19 Thanks 20 Bureaucratship request 21 Cats 22 Pre and Post WWII Judo 23 Adminship questions 24 Jeopardy 25 Votes 26 Deadminship 27 Semicolon in Crow T. Robot 28 Repug 29 Rollback 30 00 31 Polar Bear 32 Order of the Arrow 33 Wonder Woman 34 Thank You 35 Deleting self references 36 Thanks TacoDeposit 37 Betrayal at Krondor Article

Jazz category links

I noticed you changed the links to the Jazz musicians category from the articles about Jackie McLean and Jimmie Lunceford to links to the Jazz saxophonist category. Has a decision been made to replace links to the Jazz musicians category? If it has been, I would have liked to be consulted, since I added most of the links. If there has been no such decision, could you add a link to Jazz saxophonists instead of modifiying the link to Jazz musicians. Thanks.

Thanks also for making sure the Jazz saxophonist category is complete. John FitzGerald 14:14, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I just had a look at how many articles you altered. Forget my request. The jazz musicians category is screwed. What was so bad about it that it had to be destroyed? Don;t bother to answer. I've had enough of occurrences like this. John FitzGerald 14:25, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Here is an explanation of my actions.

1. I noticed there were some subcategories of the Jazz musicians cagetory, including Jazz Guitarists, Jazz Bassists, and Jazz Pianists.
2. I noticed the Jazz Guitarists subcategory was woefully incomplete.
3. I added all the jazz guitarists I could find on Wikipedia to the Jazz Guitarists subcategory.
4. Since there is no need for musicians to be listed on both the Jazz Musicians category and on the Jazz Guitarists cateogry, since the latter is a subcategory of the former, I removed the guitarists' listings from Jazz Musicians category.
5. I created a Jazz Saxophonists category using the same reasoning above. It is a subcategory of both Jazz Musicians and Saxophonists.
6. I added all the jazz saxophonists I could find on Wikipedia to the Jazz Saxophonists subcategory.
7. Since there is no need for musicians to be listed on both the Jazz Musicians category and on the Jazz Saxophonists category, since the latter is a subcategory of the former, I removed the saxophonists' listings from Jazz Musicians category.
8. Since there is no need for musicians to be listed on both the Saxophonists category and on the Jazz Saxophonists category, since the latter is a subcategory of the former, I removed the jazz saxophonists' listings from Saxophonists category.

I'm sorry this upset you so. I was not aware I needed to consult with anyone before doing what I did. There were no discussions in the talk page for the Jazz Musicians category. If I'd known you'd be so upset, I certainly would have consulted with you prior to doing anything. Taco Deposit | Talk-o Deposit 14:59, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

I think I said I wasn't going to reply to any message, but I'm still unhappy. Anyway, you say "there is no need for musicians to be listed on both the Jazz Musicians category and on the Jazz Guitarists category." But there's no need for them not to be, either, eh? What harm is done by having them listed twice? That way you have a general jazz reference and a specific one. Anyway, I didn't add those links for the good of my health. And why were there were no discussions on the talk page? – because you didn't announce your intention of overhauling the category. If you'd announced you were going to change all my links, we could have discussed it. Strangely enough, I am incapable of predicting what you're going to do. John FitzGerald 18:23, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

On second thought, I thank you. This is a perfect example of one of Wikipedia's fundamental flaws. For example, even if you had published your intentions, I would have been unlikely to see it. The damage done by a few lost links is minor compared to the damge done when people insist, for example, on adding demonstrably untrue content to articles. You can't have an infinite watch list. So thanks forr clearing the scales from my eyes and freeing me from contributing to this furile enterprise. John FitzGerald

Berceuse

You're welcome. It's a pleasure to see something so immediately expandable while scrolling through recent changes. Happy editing! Antandrus 04:39, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thank you a thousand times

Thank you so much for explaining your username on your userpage. It is...attention-grabbing, and the origin is much less disgusting than I'd anticipated. Joyous 00:50, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)

invasion of iraq cleanup

Due appreciation for your cleanup today on the NPOV mess at 2003 invasion of Iraq. -Joshuapaquin 19:32, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)

User:212.159.30.247

Blocked him. Evercat 19:49, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

A Thousand and One Thanks, now

How kind of you to nominate me for adminship! I appreciate the gesture, and I've accepted. Joyous 23:06, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

The votes have been tallied, and I'm now an admin. I'm looking forward to many cozy hours of tidying here. Cheers! Joyous 00:59, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

teh teh

Thanks for your help in keeping the teh page free frm vandalism. You're a great wikipedian. I was thinking about starting some sort of award for you, because you deserve one, but alas, I'm lazy. Maybe later. :) — unsigned by User:Mckaysalisbury

Women's Names

Whoops, I just now noticed the new additions, thank you! :) Those are really great! At one point, "Mary" and "marry" had occured to me, but I know that many people pronounce them quite a bit differently, depending on where in the world they are from. I love Opal and Ruby, those are great... oh, I just thought of another: Jade. :) func(talk) 05:01, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Mike Garcia makes his descision

Hello, there. I just replied to you. I just decided to become an admin. -- Mike Garcia 22:36, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Template:Did you know

-- [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 12:48, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

Adminship

I'm flattered by your nomination. Thank you. I haven't decided whether to accept. Maurreen 07:27, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

thanks for the nom

Where in IA? Useta be in DM for 6y & liked it there. alteripse 21:30, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

Taco, thank you for suggesting this. I think I'd prefer to wait a little while before considering it, because I've only been here since November, and while I've racked up a few thousand edits, I feel I need more experience dealing with editing disputes. But I very much appreciate you thinking of me for it. Best, SlimVirgin 21:17, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

Adminship for deeceevoice

This is a joke -- right? If it's not, thanks for the vote of confidence -- but you should know you gave me one helluva laugh. deeceevoice 22:25, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Not being argumentative for the hell of it, but why would I want to be an administrator? (After your note, I read the brief description of what an administrator does.) How do you think it would benefit Wikipedia (other than having just one more)? It hardly seems worth the trouble. Wikipedia definitely needs some more color up in here! They probably haven't got more than a handful of black administrators -- if any at all. But given my run-ins w/various Wikipedians (including other administrators) and my bluntness, I really don't think I fit the profile of an administrator. Nor do I think my nomination would be successful. Besides, my impression of administrators is that they're simply Wiki cops (and often arrogant ones at that) -- and my people and cops don't often get along. :-p Grácias por tu apoyo y tus palabras graciosas, pero estoy contenta como una persona non grata. Paz. deeceevoice 07:43, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Chomsky

Thanks, Taco. It's definitely been interesting, learning how to stick to objective presentation of other people's arguments instead of constructing my own arguments (which is what I'm accustomed to from the newsgroups). Russil Wvong 20:12, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Maurreen

Just a word to the wise, in case you nom User:Maurreen again on RfA: in a talk with me, they indicated they are male (and, IIRC, that that is their given name, from their parent(s)). --Jerzy (t) 06:54, 2005 Mar 10 (UTC)

Jeopardy

Well, the test is the test. There's not a whole hell of alot one can do to prepare, but I can give you the details. Assuming nothing's changed in the past year you'll be given 50 questions shown on a screen, much as if they were on the actual show. You will have several seconds to write down your answer (doesn't have to be in the form of a question), before they move on. You're not supposed to be able to go back to an old question, but of the answer comes to you 20 seconds too late theres nothing they can do to stop you from writing down the answer then. There's really no time at the end to go back, but if an answer is on the tip of your tongue it might help if you make some sort of mark at that number to remind you of the question and which number it was (you'll likely have several blanks at the end, and you'll want to get it in the right one). They won't tell you what your score was, or what is needed to pass; they'll just read out the names of those who passed at the end. Word is that you need 35 correct, but they wouldn't comment on that. When I took the test it seemed a little literature heavy, but I wouldn't count on that being the case in general. There's a Jeopardy book available at Barnes and Noble (and only there, I think) about Jeopardy, and it has a sample test at the end, which is about the best practice you can get. On that test, and the one I took, it seemed the first question was perhaps the most difficult, and I wonder if that's often true, or a fluke. Just so you know, when I took the test I think 13 out of 60 to 70 passed. I believe that was somewhat typical.

Perhaps the most useful information I can give you is to prepare for the telegenic aspects, because that's what they'll be looking for in choosing the contestants who pass the test (they are by no means guaranteed to appear on the show just for passing). For example, you know how they have the chat with Alex bit? Well, they want 5 examples of interesting things you might say in that before you even take the test. Having some interesting things prepared I suspect would give you an edge; I can tell you its not fun to try to think of those things at the last minute. (However, if you're selected to appear on the show, in the information pack they send you they ask for a bunch more, and it seemed in my case those are the ones they look at more. They pick 3 or 4 they like and have you pick one of those to say, but you're not at that stage yet.) Likewise they want you to look nice, and they will take a photo of you. If you pass the test you will play a short mock game in which they are looking more for stage presence, projection, pacing, and other things more than right answers (though right answers might help; I really don't know if they keep track). They'll also ask you a little about yourself (I don't remember if they look at what you entered on your sheet or if it was more "tell us about yourself" stuff) and it can't hurt to try to be a little friendly and witty there. So do well with those, but you probably shouldn't overdo it.

That's about all the advice I can give right now. If you're selected to be on the show all I can say is it's all in the buzzer. I really underestimated that, thinking I was young enough that my reflexes should be a match for anyone's, and I was wrong. I spent weeks studying, and I'm thinking it might have been better spent playing video games. Hope that's some help. Good luck. -R. fiend 04:05, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

After Alex finishes the question a series of lights comes on, and you must ring in after that. If you do so early you're locked out for a fraction of a second, which is a considerable amount of time if someone else is ringing in too. Just a week or so ago, in fact, they did something they never did before, as far as I can tell, and they showed the lights on camera for a moment. The blind guy who was a 5 time champion was on in the Ultimate tournament, and before they started the game Alex explained to the viewers that they were making a slight change and adding a sound synchronized with the lights to aid the player who couldn't see. During the explanation they showed the lights, which are a string that runs up the left side and across the bottom of the display monitors. That's your cue and you half to time it just right. I have no idea how anyone who can't see could have timed it well enough to win 5 games without that additional sound, which they had never used before. So I found the timing (surprisingly) to be the toughest part, which should not be dismissed lightly. If Ken Jennings had not been a wizard with that buzzer he never would have won 74 games, I can tell you.

Anyway, there are basically 3 steps to getting on the show. The first is getting to take the test. I don't know how it was with you, but here in Boston you had to sign up online, and only some of the people who signed up were even randomly (I assume) selected to take the test. If you are certain to take the test then you passed the first bit, which I think may eliminate many people though dumb luck. That may narrow down the pool substantially, but I can't be sure. Then there's the test, which I guess usually gets the pool down to around 1/4 to 1/6. After that I think only a small number get selected to be on the show, which I think involves more dumb luck, but also what they think of you and the form you filled out. With probably a couple hundred people in each try-out city they go to, as well as those who take the test in LA (who have another advantage I can tell you later, if you like) there must be thousands of people in the contestant pool, and with only 2 new players a day, 5 days a week, maybe 30 to 40 weeks a year (I'm not sure how many weeks reruns, touraments, and special weeks take up, but it must add up) we're talking few people getting on the show. The Ultimate Tournament, nice as it is, is taking up much of the spring season right there too. Anyway, I found the test to be not too tough; I was confident I passed it, using 35 as the passing grade. I don't know about you but I had the advantage of being a good median age at the time (29) so I was enough in touch with pop culture to know Jennifer Garner appeared in "Daredevil" but also having a good grasp of the high culture elements as well. I think any solid wikipedian should be well above the typical test taker, so I imagine you'll pass. On the B&N book test I think I only got 37 or 38 as well. Again, good luck. -R. fiend 19:16, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Actually the book I'm thinking of is this one (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0760753741/qid=1112041912/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-7900048-2891038?v=glance&s=books). I'd say its worth the 10 bucks. It says its hardcover, but I think that's probably a mistake. Mine is certainly paperback. The one you mentioned might be useful too, though; but I can't be sure. -R. fiend 20:34, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oops

Oops... sorry about that. Thanks for the reminder. -- ran (talk) 18:25, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

...for supporting my RFA this week; I'll put the admin powers to good use, I promise. Yes, I had originally not wanted to be an admin, but Tuf-Kat and Mindspillage persuaded me to change my mind; they were right. Happy editing! Antandrus 00:50, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Bureaucratship request

Have we bad blood betwixt us, sir? I'm wondering why you opposed me. Please reply in kind, me lad. [[User:Blankfaze|]] 00:54, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cats

Do you really think that Cats is a direct adaptation of Eliot's Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats? Even after having both read the poetry collection and seeing the play? Certainly it's the source material, no doubt about it, but to me it is really in fact a rather loose adaptation, as any play, even a musical, must of necessity be of a poetry collection. That type of poetry can never be staged in a way that a "straight" play can be a word-for-word, scene-for-scene adaptation of a novella. Just looking for your comments; doubt that its important enough to attempt to revert, but would like to hear from you about it when/if you have time. Rlquall 04:09, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You explained your position perfectly; I wasn't going to revert anyway, but thanks for your time and comment. Rlquall 01:19, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Pre and Post WWII Judo

i just saw the changes you made to the Brazilian_Jiu-Jitsu article. i don't know enough about the subject to explain it properly or authoritively (sp?), but what the previous person was referring to, i think, is that Douglas MacArthur banned judo schools during the post WWII occupation of japan. as i understand it, judo's focus evolved more into a sport and away from pure hand-to-hand fighting echnique so that the japanese practitioners could gain permition from the occupation authority to re-open the schools. i believe this may have been when judo and jiu-jitsu diverged. (but i am not sure.) judo becoming a bit more sport and points oriented, while jiu-jitsu remained oriented to the most practical way to handle a particular situation or position. now that i think about it, i am going to post this comment on the talk page of the BJJ article so that someone there may be able to give more historical accurancy on this. uri budnik

after posting the message above i went it and reworked the article a bit. but you are right, the parts you deleted were awkward at best. i moved the reference farther into the article. uri budnik 19:43, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Adminship questions

I noted your question regarding the (now apparently mandatory) adminship interview questions.

I believe that the adminship interview questions are harmful and should not be used. I have believed this as long as we have had such questions. I also believe that oppose votes based solely on novel criteria that lack consensus support (such as having written a featured article) are harmful to the project.

The adminship process should respect the dignity of nominees. It was never intended to be a highly politicized process. Nominees should not be rejected for specious reasons, and should not be asked to supply stock answers to canned questions. These people are volunteers, after all, not job applicants; Wikipedia is not a military organization whose operation is based on obeisance. I believe that a contributors' history and reputation within the community are far better yardsticks by which to gauge their suitability for adminship than either the interview questions or the various attempts at objective criteria.

The Uninvited Co., Inc. 17:08, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Jeopardy

Congratulations! Glad to hear you passed. I'm not entirely sure what it is about the interview and whatnot that they're looking for. I didn't think I did all that well either. Alot of it is luck, I really think, hope yours is good. -R. fiend 18:14, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Votes

I didn't; there seem to be problems with edit conflicts not resolving properly on that page. I've had to vote several times for some to get it to stay. --SPUI (talk) 21:44, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Deadminship

Maybe during the summer - RC patrol and VfD backlog work was taking up too much of my time anyway. Feel free to nominate me again in, like, 3 months - I might reconsider. But for now, I can't go on WP:AN/I or WP:RFC without feeling an inclination to bash my head into the wall at the utter stupidity of certain admins' arguments. I'll sure miss that shiny rollback button, though... ugen64 22:04, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Semicolon in Crow T. Robot

I apologize for my foolish oversight. I only looked at the difference between the two (without HTML rendering) and failed to notice that the é was not terminated properly. Considering the effort I put into ensuring that I was on solid grammatical grounds, my error is even more embarrassing. I've restored the semicolon. — Jeff Q (talk) 17:31, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Repug

Why was Repuglican moved to Repug? Clearly Repug is the short form; the long form of Repuglican should be the main article. Kelly Martin 23:43, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

Rollback

Why did your use your rollback button here (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Darth_Vader&diff=13484858&oldid=13484076)? I have reverted back. Admins should either explain their rollbacks in talk, or limit use of the rollback button to cases of clear and obvious vandalism. The edit you rolled back was legitimate and your rollback seemed to be due to a content disagreement. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 16:06, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

OMG! You mean that's true? Are you sure? The anonymous addition was "in... Episode VI... Christenson now plays the elderly Skywalker". I rolled it back as vandalism. I found it so unreasonable that I was certain it was a lie. I'm still not convinced but in light of past "corrections" to Star Wars video I can't rule it out. My apologies. Thanks for catching it. - Tεxτurε 21:37, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

00

Why does 00 redirect to Robert Parish? Gerrit ^{CUTEDH (http://topjaklont.student.utwente.nl/)} 11:55, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Double zero jersey? - Tεxτurε 15:59, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Polar Bear

Because the rule developed at the tree of life project is to have mammal species capitalized. Admittedly there has been thought given to changing this, but until it happens wholesale, it is better to at least be consistent. Pcb21| Pete 21:18, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Order of the Arrow

Our concerned brother in CT also did some editing to the Firm Bound in Brotherhood article, which I have reverted as well. Gentgeen and myself have already left him a comment or two. Thought you might like to know just in case. KC9CQJ 05:30, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Wonder Woman

Well, last year[[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wonder_Woman)] you asked who the hell this "Birdman" was who married Wonder Woman. Well, I think I found him [[2] (http://www.moviepoopshoot.com/comics101/63.html)]. And thanks to you, I now have an unhealthy obsession over a comic-book superheroine. -- SterlingNorth 00:23, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank You

What a year! My first year in Wiki, a featured article and now administrator. Thank you for your support. Tony the Marine

Deleting self references

I see you have deleted the reference to Wikipedia:sockpuppet from the article on Internet sock puppet. I don't understand the logic for that. Would it not be useful to people new to wikipedia to see what the policy is on an issue like this? Zingi 16:29, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot for your advice on my talk page. It is not very clear to me. Zingi 16:05, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks TacoDeposit

Thanks for your support on my Adminship request.

Betrayal at Krondor Article

Thanks for your compliments on my article. I consider that game to be one of the best of all time and I thought it deserved more. I tried to update it to conform to the POV standards, though I'm not sure how I did. I have no problem with you changing some of the wording around if you feel it would work better. Thanks again for the compliment. (And hopefully I did this talk thing right--I'm a n00b at this.) Grimm C 12:07, Jun 13 2005 (EDT)