2003 June 17 to 2005 February 22 | 2005 February 23 to 2005 June 12 | 2005 June 12 to 2005 August 8 | 2005 August 8 to 2005 November 11 | 2005 November 11 to 2006 March 26

Hi (Sorry if this is the wrong place to do this, but:)

I added something to the lego page which you promptly reverted, citing 'no evidence'.

21:47, 12 April 2006 Nohat (rv last addition. there is no evidence for such a distinction.)

20:50, 12 April 2006 Mark Carden (Added the American/Brit distinction between legos and lego)

but at the same time as the edit, I put a note in the Talk page, citing some evidence:

I added a comment in the main article, saying that it seems to be an American-English practice to pluralise 'lego' to 'legos', before reading some of the comments in Talk (under, for some reason, the Trademark topic). I still stand by my edit, and by way of evidence, I did a search on ebay.com and got "13217 items found for legos" and "14925 items found for lego"; on ebay.co.uk I got "13443 items found for lego" and "6 items found for legos".

What now ?

--Mark 21:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nohat, I was wondering if you could make the Wikipedia logo for nds-nl: which was started on the 24th of March. The text can be found here (Nedersaksisch) I would have tried it myself but I don't know which fonts to use exactly. Could you also make a colour version. (is the colour version even allowed? If not then it's fine :)). I think it can best be edited from the Dutch logo, since it's closed. Thanks so much!! Servien 13:28, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nohat, what fonts do you use for the logo and where can I find them, 'cause I'd like to set up the logo on the nds-nl wiki. Servien 18:18, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, never mind the logo, I managed to scrap together a logo nds-nl:Bild:Wiki.PNG and edit it in Microsoft Photo Editor (I copy pasted some letters from other logo's). Where are people when you need 'm... Servien 20:45, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I been directed to ask you if you are able to do the following: to create the Wikipedia logo in a vector format, like SVG. Meta:user:Amgine wishes for the logo to be of the globe/puzzle pieces only and also with the text "Wikipedia - The Free Encyclopedia" on the bottom. Can you do that? Thanks. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:50, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The logo is a bitmapped rendering and it is not possible to create a version of the image in any vector formats, such as SVG. Please see meta:Logo. Nohat 07:04, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just an uninformed thought -- Would it be possible to use edge-finding to make a 3-D model of the globe pieces, and making a vector fmt from that? +sj + 07:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are a variety of ways in which a vectorized interpretation of the logo might be constructed, but then it wouldn't be the Wikipedia logo anymore. Nohat 07:29, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah shit, I feel embarrassed. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 20:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weatherman90 01:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You agreed that all of those images should be deleted because they have been obsoleted. But Image:Con-00b.wav is being used in a number of articles. What should I replace those uses with? Please advise at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2006 April 12. Thanks. Jkelly 18:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you speak spanish? I don't speak good english. I required spanish big logo. Image:Wikipedia-logo-en-big.png Image:Wikipedia-logo-es-big.png. Thanks for your atention. --es:user:ganon (es:Usuario Discusión:Ganon) 18:34, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You aren't understood? :S --es:user:ganon (es:Usuario Discusión:Ganon)

Thanks, but [1] --es:user:ganon (es:Usuario Discusión:Ganon) 22:22, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to thank you for answering Levi P. I find his pugnacious attitude unpleasant and was not looking forward to having to educate yet another person on the inherent conflict with prescriptive claims about language and NPOV. So thanks for that; it's most appreciated.

I will confess that I am worried about your proposal—using a disputed term in a particular way in an article has a way of giving the article an implied bias in favor of that usage or meaning. I recognize that circumlocutions make for weak writing, but maintaining neutrality is paramount. The other difficulty with defining acronym and initialism as you propose is that there is a large class of things, such as the hybrid types, whose membership in one or the other categories defined by the "received" definitions of those words is questionable. I think that if we are going to "define terms" for the purpose of the article, our best bet would be some kind of ad hoc terminology that is not polluted by readers' preconceptions of what the terms might mean.

Again, thanks for your support. If you think the article is suffering at present from confusing and inconsistent circumlocutions, I am sure we can come to a satisfactory solution. Nohat 08:27, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nohat. May I post your above message to me at the Acronym and initialism Talk page and then respond to it there? I have a response, but would prefer to keep the conversation all in one place. There's no more privacy at my own Talk page than there is at the article's Talk page. President Lethe 23:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Nohat 00:21, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I must question your reason for maintaining the logo of the city of San Jose in the article when it seems clear that it is unnecessary and is there just for decorative purposes. The San Jose, California article is in need of cleanup (or it will probably be removed of its featured status) and that pic is a clear candidate for removal. Now that you have added a mention of the logo in the article the logo is now out of place since the logo is mentioned in the lead and the picture is found much further down. Joelito 18:09, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nohat, about amonth ago you removed my use of the Palatino font from {{Cornell}}, and I was wondering why. The reason I had put it in was to conform to Cornell's style guide, which says that the name of the University should be either carnelian on white or white on carnelian (the template currently has the latter), and should be in Palatino. I didn't want to change it back without discussing the matter with you first. Please let me know your thoughts on the subject. Truly, JDoorjam Talk 14:06, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Cornell style guide only applies to documents created by Cornell. For a trademark like "Cornell", the Wikipedia style guide at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) says "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment". Nohat 08:01, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, for what it's worth, the Cornell style guide does say, on page 6, "The logotype should never be retypeset or re-created. Original art or digital master art should always be used for any reproduction." Nohat 08:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know I have created a userbox for WikiProject Writing Systems at Template:User WikiProject WS. It looks like this:

This user participates in WikiProject Writing systems.

Just add {{User WikiProject WS}} to your userpage. BTW, any questions or comments should be directed to the project's talkpage, as I will be spamming this message to all current members. Thanx!--The ikiroid (talk)^{(Help Me Improve)} 22:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]