User talk:NaySay

Welcome!

WELCOME!! Hello, NaySay! I want to personally welcome you on behalf of the Wikipedia community. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you haven't already, you can put yourself in the new user log and the list of users so you can be properly introduced to everyone. Don't forget to be bold, and don't be afraid of hungry Wikipedians...there's a rule about not biting newcomers. Some other good links are the tutorial, how to edit a page, or if you're really stuck, see the help pages. Wikipedia is held up by Five Pillars...I recommend reading about them if you haven't already. Finally, it would be really helpful if you would sign your name on talk pages, so people can get back to you quickly. It's easy to do this by clicking the button (next to the one with the "W" crossed out) one from the end on the left. If that's confusing, or if you have any questions, feel free to drop me a ♪ at my talk page (by clicking the plus sign (+) next to the tab at the top that says "edit this page")...and again, welcome!--ViolinGirl^♪ 21:40, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, NaySay, sorry I didn't sign my name up there. Pretty astute of you to be able to get back to me. Anyway...if someone puts a "clean up" template on your page, it doesn't mean it's vandalized. {{clean-up}} is what a person types if they want to insert what you saw...all it does is get the attention of other editors (like yourself) who will hopefully be able to contribute more to the article, and make it look more...encyclopedic! :) It looks good to me, and I think you handled the situation well. Just because they didn't have a username doesn't mean that they were trying to be sneaky. Let me assure you, unless I'm greatly mistaken, I believe there are very few people who are paid to edit the wiki here. Hope this clears stuff up for you. If it doesn't, feel free to contact me again!--ViolinGirl^♪ 21:40, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting Astrology Page Without Sourcing

Dear Naysay, appreciate you using the Astrology Talk Page before reverting. Article is not sourced, and the version you reverted is sourced. Suggest you please use the talk page and edit commentaries. Thanks.Theo 22:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Objections to Astrology (The Humanist, 1975)

Thank you for your recent contribution at Objections to Astrology (The Humanist, 1975). However, original texts such as these are generally posted to Wikisource and not here, and in any case neither project can accept copyrighted works. Your original contributions are welcome and encouraged. Gamaliel 18:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revising the astrology article

Hey,

I'm still rewriting the astrology article and I wanted to talk to you about a sentence that you wrote that I wanted to change or clarify.

"Many others have assumed there was a religious mechanism in operation, from the original Mediterranean astrologers through Guido Bonatti from Forlì (Italy), William Lilly, and to some extent, Geoffrey Cornelius.^[1]"

Ptolemy, and almost all who followed his work, argued for a casual basis in astrology, as you know. Both Bonatti and Lilly drew hevily on Ptolemy, and I know that Bonatti at least went with Ptolemy as far as arguing for a causal mechanism in astrology. Now, I'm not as well read with Lilly as I should be at this point, but I would think that he would have gone along with Ptolemy on this as well since he puts him so high up on the pedestal in other areas. Do you know for sure if Lilly ever argued one way or the other on this issue?

On another note, what do you think of my changes so far? --Chris Brennan 19:31, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you still have issues with my entry in the history section? I wanted to finish the discussion that was started on my talk page so that I can move forward with the rest of astrology article. --Chris Brennan 23:17, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I pissed you off or something... --Chris Brennan 23:15, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously though, what did I say?? --Chris Brennan 04:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for fixing my notes up on Pleiades (star cluster). I was thinking I probably had messed that up, but hadn't gotten back to check on ti, and I'll try to be more careful int he future. Gene Nygaard 20:24, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hieroglyphics

It was a long (but great fun project) but I have now completed the translation requested of the French Wiki article on hieroglyphics. NaySay 23:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Primo! - Jmabel | Talk 00:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hieroglyph (French Wiki article)

User:Markh has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Hieroglyph (French Wiki article), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process: he wants to get rid of it now that it's merged. Is it OK with you that your specific edits will be lost from the record? If not, you may want it preserved as a history of your contributions. You may remove the {{dated prod}} template, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus is to delete.

The obvious alternative would be to keep it where it is to preserve its history, and turn it into a redirect.

Don't worry if it's already deleted by the time you read this; if you have an issue about this, we can restore it and make it a redirect. - Jmabel | Talk 06:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fr/En Translations

Just a bit of acknowledgement for finishing the Charles Bettelheim translation! Thanks! Tamarkot 03:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finished copyediting & some wl - not bad ;-) One piece, La liste qu’elle conduit aux élections européennes de juin 2004 sur la circonscription Ile de France recueillera 3,6 %. In future tense as you translated; but this is obviously a past even so I changed the tense Bridesmill 22:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Goeffrey Cornelius

Hi,

Did you recieve my email about Geoffrey Cornelius a few days ago? I switched email addresses, so I wasn't sure if it had actually gotten through to you, and I just wanted to check. --Chris Brennan 16:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ptolemy and Astrologers Category

Hi--I noticed that when you edited Ptolemy, you added a note that the Astrologers category should be preferred because nobody uses the Greek and Roman astrologers category. Do you mean that nobody consults the subcategory? Or that nobody adds articles to the subcategory? Why do you think it should be this way? The Astronomers category is much better for keeping its articles in subcategories instead of the more general category. Maestlin 18:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Le père Duchesne

Hi! Thanks for translating my article on the Père Duchesne in English. Actually, during the French Revolution, "le Marais" (also called "La Plaine") was the name given to the most moderate, but most numerous, group of deputies in the National Convention. This alluded to them sitting in the middle of the assembly as well as their indecision being a "marsh" where law projects got bogged down. See: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marais_(Révolution_française). Thank you Jaucourt 2:51, 21 May 2006 (EST)

Great job for the translation! Lapaz 01:00, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

Hi! Just wanted to let you know that User:Marskell had initiated an RfC on my behaviour at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Aquirata. You may wish to comment. Aquirata 13:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion/David Cochrane

I thought I'd let you know that the David Cochrane article has ben listed for deletion. In my view, it is important and in the interests of WP that users knowledgeable about the subject matter make their views known. If you wish to comment, please do so here: [2]. Aquirata 12:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hosta

The genus Hosta is now included in Agavaceae. Many plant families are in a state of flux, which is bound to cause a certain amount of confusion. Please see the family articles on Liliaceae, Hyacinthaceae, and Agavaceae (and also Asparagaceae) for more information. MrDarwin 13:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mirandola

Just came across your work on Giovanni Pico della Mirandola from several months ago, and wanted to say how impressed I was. It's immensely encouraging to find a Wikipedia article that's so informed and pleasant to read. Danohuiginn 02:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mabolo

I've left some links that provide information on Mabolo/Kamagong. Responsiblebum 08:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dorotheus

I left a response on the Dorotheus talk page asking which additions specifically you feel are controversial or minority views, and which astrological historians you referring to exactly? Maybe we should have that conversation over on the Dorotheus talk page. --Chris Brennan 19:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Astrological factors

I have brought up a discussion regarding the deleted category on the WikiProject Astrology talk page. Comments are welcome. — Sam 19:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warning about removing tags

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although we invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Triplicity, was not constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. IPSOS (talk) 21:52, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Refimprove tag

The tags is not directed at yourself, but at the article. Please stop removing it, there is still much room for improvement. It's not your article after all. Sorry I reverted your references, but when you put a snide comment in the edit summary, people may not notice what you actually did or didn't do. IPSOS (talk) 20:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Food poisoning

See my reply to you here. --Una Smith (talk) 22:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kathleen Battle

Hi. This article has been controversial. In view of the material you have added to it, I wonder if you'd like to respond at Talk:Kathleen_Battle#Additional_1990s_material_.2827_April.29 ? --Klein zach 00:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments made by an IP signing in as you [3] at Talk:Kathleen Battle have been partially redacted per WP:BLP. The comments are also serious violations of no personal attacks against other editors. If you made these comments, you may wish to redact much of the rest of the post as well. -- The Red Pen of Doom 11:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My comment above was not related to any material within the article, but to the Talk Page entry made by an IP (which was signed with your name) in which delcarations of "mental illness" and other WP:BLP violations were made. If the comments (see the link above) were not made by you but were instead made by an IP impersonating you, please accept my apologies. -- The Red Pen of Doom 17:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Lincoln Chafee are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. DC T•C 17:50, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Astrology project would like your views on what constitutes appropriate content and sources for astrology-related content

Hi, this is to let you know that there is an important discussion taking place in the WP:Astrology project, which affects the guidelines for content and sources on astrology-related pages. This requires input from its members. It would be very much appreciated if you could leave a comment/express your views on the issues raised.

The link to the discussion is here.

Hope you can find time to add a few thoughts

Thank you, -- Zac Δ ^talk! 14:11, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting your input re the Wikipedia Astrology Project

Hi Naysay

I have joined the Wikipedia Astrology project today and am contacting you as a listed member of that project. There has been a proposal to consider the project dead and merge it with 12 other alternative subjects into a new wiki project which would oversee all aspects of fringe. I think it would be a shame to lose the astrology project on the basis that it has no active participants without contacting the members directly and exploring ideas for new ways to work together on astrology-related pages. It would be very useful if you would visit the discussion and let us know if your interest in the project is still active, or what it might take to rekindle it. Regards Tento2 (talk) 09:19, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, NaySay. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. [4] [5] --Ronz (talk) 15:17, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry you were offended by the comment above. I was a bit surprised that it took you so long to respond, but I'm happy to explain. Basically, I wanted you to understand why your edits to Emotional Freedom Techniques and Mehmet Oz had been undone by other editors. I don't know why they didn't choose to notify you themselves, but I thought it important to let you know. --Ronz (talk) 00:36, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, NaySay. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, NaySay. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Marsilioficino4.jpg

The file File:Marsilioficino4.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Contra-antiscion

The article Contra-antiscion has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No sources/references since 2006

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. kingboyk (talk) 12:13, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Imum coeli for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Imum coeli, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imum coeli until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:06, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Angle (astrology) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Angle (astrology) 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/Angle (astrology) 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.

Salimfadhley (talk) 11:32, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]