User talk:JDS2005

This user may have left Wikipedia. JDS2005 has not edited Wikipedia since 12 December 2010. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, JDS2005, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 ask your question there. Again, welcome!

(Yes, the stuff above is just boilerplate, I have to admit. But what's below is not.) -- Hoary 07:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citizen Kane[edit]

On this edit of yours: Isn't such paraphrasing normal for captions? -- Hoary 11:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A word changed or omitted here and there is normal (I notice this because I'm deaf as a post and find myself turning on the captions constantly when I watch DVDs), but the discrepancies are quite pervasive, so much as to change the tone, if note the content, of the dialogue, which definitely is not normal. Do you think I need to expand my edit to make that point? JDS2005 06:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think so. Another thing: Has there only been one US-market DVD of the film (or anyway only one with English-language captions)? I'd have ignorantly guessed that there have been more, but really don't know. Perhaps different DVD editions need to be distinguished here.

Oh, and a belated welcome to Wikipedia-editing! -- Hoary 07:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll expand the edit to make the point that the discrepancies are greater than normal.

As far as the DVD releases, I THOUGHT there was only one US DVD, but I'm not absolutely sure of it. I suppose it would make sense that there should be multiple releases...for example, I would have expected, as one of the greatest movies of all time, that there would have been at very least one simpler, more primitive DVD released almost as soon as the format was available, in addition to the much more fully-featured version that I am familiar with, and maybe many more editions on top of that, but I am aware of no such editions. I'll see if there's some place I can find that information, but I'm not sure where to look, IMDB maybe? I know they would be registered with the US copyright office or something, but I'm not sure how to access that.

And thank you for the welcome...although I'm not really new to editing this thing, I've been using and editing it for quite a while. However, the "free" and "open" structure encouraged me, in my laziness, to never sign up, and hence have no user page or anything. One question though...how do you get the four tildes to work? When I type them, the only thing that displays is...four tildes. I've been signing things manually (luckily my Breitling has a secondary time zone that I have set to GMT). JDS2005 07:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On various DVD releases: amazon.com gives me various versions, and that's just for region 2. (Hmm, this is interesting. Perhaps it has started to do IP-sniffing. I've never been offered region-2 discs before.)

The tildes: I just type them in. I wonder whether you're using unusual software (such as an unusual keyboard remapper). When I use a Gecko browser or Konqueror and simply type into the box, I type in four tildes. When I copy from an external editor and paste in, I also use four tildes in the editor. That works with either a US-market or a Japanese-market keyboard. I'm particularly puzzled as you say you get four tildes: it would be less surprising if you got nothing at all. Anyway, what's the software? -- Hoary 08:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Region 2 is Euro, isn't it? So that sort of hints that there might be multiple US (Region 1) DVDs, but that's not even remotely conclusive.

As for the tildes, I'm just using Microsoft's built in remapper to run my keyboard as a DVORAK keyboard instead of QWERTY...but that shouldn't affect anything, as Wikipedia should interpret any given character exactly the same way, regardless of which physical key I punch to get it. But all I get is this: JDS2005 08:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bloodly hell, now it works! JDS2005 08:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an outside observer, does the caption trivia entry make sense to you now? JDS2005 08:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An Automated Message from HagermanBot[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 05:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the museum stuff[edit]

You know, breaking down the Florida ones by county, then recatting them appropriately. It's nice to see someone else who's nearly as OCD as me. :)

By the way, if you do live in Florida, and have a camera, might I talk you into helping in a little project of mine? It's an attempt to get pics of all the NRHP sites in Florida. I have this list to help me keep track, and for other folks to use, if desired. Just an FYI. And gracias again for the museum subcategorizing! :) --Ebyabe 12:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Have you considered using AutoWikiBrowser? Believe me, it really helps on projects like what you're doing. If you need pointers or help or such, please do feel free to ask moi. :) --Ebyabe 12:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

Why did you reintroduce the categories? I redirected them because the categories were to small to have their own category and just distracted from the larger categories. You shoud have discussed it on my talk page first as I put a lot of work into cleaning up the directory. For future reference please discuss why another Wikipedian acted the way they did on their talk page or in some cases the article's talk page if you are unsure.--Jorfer 20:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry I was not clear, but you are correct in the categories I was talking about. I have no problem with using a broader Miami-Dade category for example but to use city categories when there are not enough entries for these subcategories is unneccessary. I still appreciate, however, what you did with the broader organization of the Category:Museums in Florida.--Jorfer 04:42, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you are saying but responding to your example:

Somebody who clicks on Category:Miami, Florida will see 5 categories and 195 uncategorized articles (many of those probably should be categorized further, but that's a different issue). So "Category:Miami, Florida" is very useful for finding things relating to Miami. If "Villa Vizcaya", for example, were categorized under "Museums in Miami-Dade County, Florida", instead of "Museums in Miami, Florida", then the "Category:Miami, Florida" page would not link to it. It would be accessible from the "Category:Miami-Dade County, Florida" page, but it's more relevant specifically to Miami.

I think accessing Miami, Florida is better done through the more commonly used Category:Miami-Dade County, Florida instead of through a lesser used category such as Museums in Miami, Florida. I just have a mental quota on how many entries should be in a category to justify its own category, and these categories do not reach that yet, not that they can't be split off at a later date. For now the broader category seems more appropriate.--Jorfer 13:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your userpage[edit]

A Dark Tower reference? :) Th 2005 04:12, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! JDS2005 22:59, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of PBOC Motorsports Club[edit]

I have nominated PBOC Motorsports Club, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PBOC Motorsports Club. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Moosato Cowabata (talk) 01:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More on the .50 BMG for hunting[edit]

I replied to your question earlier, but I just ran across a perfect quote in P. O. Ackley's Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders, volume 1, page 560. He's answering a question someone asked about the .505 Gibbs, and after answering the question, Ackley points out, This is not enough better than the .458 Winchester to make all the trouble worthwhile because the .458 Winchester will shoot all the way through the largest elephant and it will work through standard actions like the standard FN, Springfield, Enfield, or Model 70 standard length actions. He goes on to add, humorously, I assume, You can steam up the .458 somewhat. In fact, you can load it hot enough that if you hit an elephant under the tail you will bulge his eyeballs. One thing to note, however; all of these hunting cartridges use short, fat bullets with flat bases and round or flat noses, which are designed for short range use. The .50 BMG, while it's an over-capacity case, tends to use long, sharply pointed, boattail bullets that travel very well. While there are some cartridges that will, if loaded right, beat it's accuracy at 1000 yards and beyond, they're few and far between. And most of them, like the .510 DTC EUROP and the .416 Barrett, are just wildcats based on the .50 BMG case. scot (talk) 19:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey request[edit]

Hi,
I need your help. I am working on a research project at Boston College, studying creation of medical information on Wikipedia. You are being contacted, because you have been identified as an important contributor to one or more articles.

Would you will be willing to answer a few questions about your experience? We've done considerable background research, but we would also like to gather the insight of the actual editors. Details about the project can be found at the user page of the project leader, geraldckane. Survey questions can be found at geraldckane/medsurvey. Your privacy and confidentiality will be strictly protected!

The questions should only take a few minutes. I hope you will be willing to complete the survey, as we do value your insight. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Professor Kane if you have any questions.

Thank You, BCeagle0312 (talk) 02:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of PBOC Motorsports Club for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PBOC Motorsports Club is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PBOC Motorsports Club (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 16:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]