Welcome!

Hello, StradivariusTV, 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
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  - UtherSRG 01:04, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

I reverteed your edit of octopuses => octopi. See octopus for reason. - UtherSRG 01:05, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

VERY INTERESTING.

Isn't it, though? StradivariusTV 20:42, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the work you've done in putting in the conjugations for Old English and Greek (and maybe elsewhere, i haven't noticed). These things are very important but time-consuming, and I'm glad you're willing to do some of the work. Benwing 05:21, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Sorry for the mess I made of Greek nouns before. I thought character codes were preferred, so I had to enter them by hand (which is bound to introduce error). StradivariusTV 06:15, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

aslımda biz ameliyat görüntülerini izlemek istiyorduk ama bir türlü bulamadı lütfen bize yardımcı olun

aslımda biz ameliyat görüntülerini izlemek istiyorduk ama bir türlü bulamadı lütfen bize yardımcı olun

You might want to check out the Turkish Wikipedia. Strad 00:06, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why is vandalism a loser that nobody will ever like?

Just curious, but what is your opinion about political stencils? Are the vandalism, propaganda, or art?

-Nina

If you have a response email me: ninas(at)easystreet.com

Thanks for fixing Transmission Control Protocol - that darned Google Toolbar bug strikes again! I usually double check, but I was at work and heard somebody coming... forgot to go back. ;) — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib Reverts} 01:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Strad 01:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Wiktionary’s entry for campi. I have provided three citations for it, thereby proving that it exists. Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 19:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. Strad 20:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just a note. It is not good to convert HTML to TeX in certain inline formulas, per WP:MSM. The reason is that TeX formulas can look too large and take too much room when embedded in text (as opposed to when they are on their own line). Just I thought I'd let you know. You can reply here if you have comments. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but I thought exp(x²) looked bad right next to a closing parenthesis. I'll keep what you said in mind the next time I decide whether to change inline formulas. Strad 19:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right too. Uhm... :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 00:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Stradivarius!

In 2005, you put a table of a demonstrative pronoun into the article Proto-Germanic. This was translated into the corresponding German article, when it was created in 2006. Recently, the table has been suggested for deletion from the German article, because of lack of sources. (Incidently, you added a source to the English article, in the same edit; but you have not explicitly stated that this was the source for your edit.)

If you remember or could reconstruct your source, could you please provide it? Cf. de:Diskussion:Urgermanisch#Ulmos Allzweck-Pronomemfrage, and the further links and references there.JoergenB 21:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Strad. Rewording from integral to integer is fine. I'm a bit confused by the other change you made, which was not mentioned in the edit summary. You changed "he calls the equation...'absurd' because it would lead to a negative value for " from "" to "." Neither seems obviously a wonderful example. In the first, the solution is negative, but it's not a quadratic. In the second, there is one positive and one negative solution, and from the article I'd have thought Diophantus would take the positive and disregard the negative one. I just need you to clarify your source, since of course the article presents this as an example from Diophantus. Unless you had a good reason for the change, it should go back; in any case, the sentence, while confusingly placed sandwiched between references to quadratic equations, simply speaks of solutions he accepted, presumably more generally. Wareh (talk) 19:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. I just got confused by the fact that it's a linear equation surrounded mainly by discussion of quadratics. Strad (talk) 00:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is confusingly presented, but to really clarify it we'd need a citation to a source that could be checked. Wareh (talk) 03:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Strad. Your further contribution at our little development page User:Noetica/ActionMOSVP would be appreciated. I hope you'll come back and take another look, now.

– Noetica^♬♩ Talk 07:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Strad. I can't access the http://www.jstor.org/pss/606376 to get information about Manchu loanwords. Did you give me the right website address? Sonic99 (talk) 01:27, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's right, but unfortunately JSTOR requires a subscription to access the articles and they don't let anyone reproduce them. Do you belong to a public library or have access to a university library? Chances are they can give you access. If you want I can give a bit of a summary of what they say about Manchu loanwords. Strad (talk) 02:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Strad. I don't belong to a public library or an university library in the U.S. Yes, please give me some informations of what they say about Manchu loanwords in Mandarin Chinese from http://www.jstor.org/pss/606376. I want to provide more information to the Mandarin Language Wikipedia Article. Thanks. Sonic99 (talk) 03:09, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on the Welsh wikipedia. I took the liberty of making your user talk page over there redirect to this one, in case not everybody saw the message on your user page. Regards, — Alan^✉ 04:35, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Strad (talk) 04:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised that is the format being encouraged (no LaTeX inline). The problem with using regular text in line is that they do not look the same as the LaTeX symbols. This make the articles look sloppy, I think. Please see the discussion sanpaz (talk) 03:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pnawn da i chi. Just out of interest - why is this and inappropriate use of cquote? Diolch. --Joopercoopers (talk) 14:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cquote is for pull quotes—that is, quotes that are not part of the flow of the article text. You can see in this article that there's an excerpt of a Kennedy speech that's just kind of floating there, isolated from the rest of the article. That's what cquote is appropriate for. Strad (talk) 17:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Ape index, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Intromission (talk) 10:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Ape index. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ape index. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:16, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to say that your changes look neat and rational to me. When I first saw the article, it struck me that it was an awkward amalgam of two things, trying to give the modern stuff in a straightforward way, and then mixing in the historical dimension. Lots of readers will want to skip the history and that's fine, it's good to have it there, but best in a way that's easy to skip. It looked like a big job of reorganization and repackaging, and I didn't dare then to try it, but it looks as if you've started it nicely. With good wishes Terry0051 (talk) 19:46, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Strad (talk) 20:22, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the formatting, I like the larger version since the subscripts are otherwise a bit small to read easily (I'm partially-sighted myself so it might be a bit easier for you). Tim Vickers (talk) 17:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The larger version looks cleaner as well. Plain HTML can't deal with simultaneous superscripts and subscripts quite right. Strad (talk) 17:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain me why some articles (particularly Boaz, on which I have been working for a long time, in my spare hours) supposedly do not need a floating toc? The Boaz article, per example, does not have extensive headlines or titles which make a floating toc inconvenient. My intention with a floating one is occupying less room, for practical and aesthetic reasons. I have an rsi, and it is very uncomfortable for me having to overuse my limbs to read long articles (and I like long ones).--Algorithme (talk) 22:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion about this here. Every time you have forced the TOC layout (and it seems you have done this numerous times), it has been reverted. Take a look at the featured articles; every one I've clicked on lets the TOC take the default position. Strad (talk) 02:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you correct the spelling of minuscule in this image, since it's displayed in an article? I'd do it myself, but I've never nearned to edit a PNG image. Many thanks, Wareh (talk) 19:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I no longer have the image nor do I have equipment to create a new one. It's probably just better to remove it from the article. Strad (talk) 19:24, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the reply. It doesn't bother me that much. Someone more skilled than I can correct it eventually. Wareh (talk) 15:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi; I replied to your comment on Talk:Ground meat. Cheers. Tomalak Geret'kal (talk) 20:26, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]