User talk:Aleta Curry/Archive 5

Welcome!

05:10, 16 April 2007 (CDT)

Dogs

Nice work. :-) --Stephen Ewen 02:46, 31 May 2007 (CDT)

Aw, shucks! Thank you! Aleta Curry 02:48, 31 May 2007 (CDT)

re: Film

Aleta, it's in the "Workgroups and granularity" forum, but I didn't get many responses. The only opinion voiced other than mine suggested the Media Workgroup for film. Here's a direct link. I recently noticed there is a separate Journalism Workgroup, so the Media Workgroup isn't supposed to be focused on that.

BTW, I agree that the forums are a pit. There's way too many of them for the number of Citizens.

Just curious: you say on your user page you are "now residing in Australia." So you are not Australian? --Eric Winesett 00:41, 6 June 2007 (CDT)

Not by birth--I've lived all over--born in the USA, as the songster said.... Thanks for the link!Aleta Curry 03:47, 6 June 2007 (CDT)

Good job!

That's exactly where it goes! Do you know how to add the checklist? --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:22, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, and No, and I hate doing such things (sticking out tongue). Are we "allowed" to "checklist" our own stuff? That seems wrong, somehow....Aleta Curry 21:26, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Hehe, YES, not only allowed, but required! Hehe.. It's easy.. look to the left of this page and you will see the checklist under "project pages". Click on it and copy the whole thing. Then go to Talk:Working dog and paste it to the top.. It's that easy ;-) I'll watch if you fall :-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:35, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

okay, no "project pages" at the left, PLUS we've got a storm coming and I'm losing power. Must sign off and check back later. Ciao. Aleta Curry 21:38, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Hey, that's cheating! lol. PS> you have to scroll up (we're at the bottom of you talk page) --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:44, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

I *did* scroll up, but missed the black printed headings; I only noticed the bullets--duh! Well, I never claim to be visual--here's proof....Aleta Curry 18:00, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

User:Aleta Curry/dogs

Yep, that is what you do, (though make sure you put a space between your first and last names). Besides, you are the only big-time-important-CZ-person here I think? --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:27, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

checklist

You almost had it! I fixed that one.. (you can review the things I changed in the history). I also added the instructions to the bottom of the checklist to the left so maybe that will help. All you have to do is copy and paste the whole thing to the 'top' of the 'talk' page and fill it in according to the instrcutions, then delete the instructions. Keep trying, I am using you to find out the best way to present this :-) Don't give up! --Matt Innis (Talk) 08:39, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Yay! That's it.. it's all down hill from here ;-) Now you have to teach somebody else, it's a right of passage! By the way - you are allowed to edit the instructions, too! --Matt Innis (Talk) 19:54, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

I have to teach someone else??!!!

Now stop that! I think you're making this up as you go along!

Edit the instructions? Um...

Aleta Curry 17:46, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

CZ Live

You're right, I really wanted to do it. However, there was a substantial opposition and for a reason I respect, see this thread on forum. The only way I see for the moment is to keep CZ Live equal to Internal Articles. And so, CZ is still aLive ;-). Best, --Aleksander Stos 03:53, 11 July 2007 (CDT)

references

It looks like Kjetil beat me to it! - You've got friends. :-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:05, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Oh, how splendid! I'll go look! Aleta Curry 20:12, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

re

Alex/Aleks, both are OK, but "Dr Stos" is not acceptable :-) BTW, at times I have a similar problem when addressing people. Maybe we could adopt a guideline (in CZ:Professionalism policy, say) that suggests using the first name as the default. Well, I do not know; there might be some cultural nuances/differences between "continental" and "anglosaxon" approach, and I know only a few samples of the former. --Aleksander Stos 07:13, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

I am probably the very last person on earth--at least of my age--who believes that all persons should be addressed by a courtesy title until otherwise instructed. The problem here, of course, is which one? Cultural norms do come into play--an MD in England would be called Mr, the same person Dr. in the US--even socially. Are all adult females Ms if they are not Dr or Rev? We will have a mishmosh of Misses, Ms-iz and Mrs, I'll be bound.

If first names are the default, I suggest we will always have to use the formal name, until instructed otherwise: ie Charles=Chas, Chuck, Charlie? is Catherine 'Cathy' or 'Cate'? William is Will or Bill? And at least one CZer I have come across prefers to be called by his last name.

Aleta Curry 18:01, 20 July 2007 (CDT) (Aleta, whose nickname was "Tita", but now seems to be "Honey, where's my...?")

popups

Hey, did popups work for you? --Matt Innis (Talk) 08:47, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

Hi Matt! Yes they do, thanks, but they don't work the way I thought they would. I had in mind that a box would open with either the first line of the article th popup related to, or a note about the subject (like a Jeopardy! answer, i.e. if you were looking at Christianity the popup for Jesus would say: "Jesus, 1st Century itinerant preacher whom Christians believe to be the Son of God" or some such).

Instead, I get Jesus in bold and a whole bunch of editing tabs. I still have to double click to find out something about Jesus, which takes me out of the article I was looking at into the new one.

Aleta Curry 16:40, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

That is what I get and that is not what it is supposed to be. I'll check your note on the forums. --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:51, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

Gay (word)

Aleta, I'm sorry to say so but I would like to take a few steps back with Gay (word) -- the plans I had for expandng this entry, and for giving a thorough and judicious etymological history, have been quite muddled by the last set of edits. I do want to have some attention to US usage in and as it may differ from UK, but it's inaccurate to say the word simply meant "happy"; the OED is a far more authoritative dictionary, and it's the one we need to at least start with before we integrate readings from other sources. Also, there is a political history to the word -- see my comments on the Talk page -- which needs to be expanded. I've also asked Stephen to reinstante the section headers, which would have made this much more clear. Russell Potter 20:51, 28 July 2007 (CDT)

p.s. please pardon my perhaps hasty judgment; I've worked over the article, retaining some very good bits, and expanding. If we can just wait until I'e compiled a more detailed list of dictionary citations, I think we can have a more accurate statement there. It's moving along! Cheers, Russell Potter 21:36, 28 July 2007 (CDT)

Hi Aleta, I just wanted to say hi, and let you know I made some comments at the Talk:Gay (word) page. It is nice to see it evolving and pleased to see your interest in it as it grows. --Ian Johnson 08:01, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

p.p.s. as partial penance for my petulance, I've had a go at Marmite. Up next, all those other mystery British foodstuffs: Bovril, Sanatogen tonic wine, Port Negus, and others .... cheers, Russell Potter 07:58, 29 July 2007 (CDT)