User talk:Jeffrey Scott Bernstein

Welcome!

Welcome to the Citizendium! We hope you will contribute much and well. You'll probably want to know how to get started as an author. Just look at the front page for other helpful "get started" links. Please join the mailing list(s) that concern your particular interests. Be sure to stay abreast of events via the Citizendium-L (broadcast) mailing list (do join!) and the blog. You can test out editing in the sandbox if you'd like. If you need help to get going, the forums is one option. Again, welcome and have fun! --Larry Sanger 13:43, 6 October 2007 (CDT)

Stanley Kubrick

I see from the history here that you made many edits in a short period of time. Please use the "preview" button a tad more if possible, since it makes the page history and recentchanges a easier to read and is a tad easier on the servers :) Aaron Schulz 20:07, 6 October 2007 (CDT)

Thank you very much, Aaron, for your assistance. You have every right to rap me on the knuckles! I do not wish to complicate matters! In future I will be sure to preview the page before saving it. Thanks again. (Haha! Oops! I forgot to add the tildes, so I have to save the page again! Haha, sorry, I promise to try harder!)Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 20:14, 6 October 2007 (CDT)

Waldo

Thanks for your kind words! I hope to have the article finished within a couple of days. The problem, which you as a writer I'm sure you know about, is that sometimes that there's *too* much material -- it's very difficult for me to winnow it down into a general article. If I could write about "art" meaningfully I'd do so, but I can't, so most of the article has to be narrative. I wasn't sure what to do with the Joyce material -- since you like it, I'll be sure to work it in. That's a nice picture by the artist you directed me. Reminds me more, perhaps of the American painter Thomas Hart Benton who, of course, is far better known than Waldo. All the best, and keep up your own contributions: I've glanced at them previously but was waiting to see a more final version. Hayford Peirce 16:41, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

"The problem . . . is that sometimes there's *too* much material." Indeed. Isn't it somewhat ironic that so much of writing is deciding what NOT to say? Best wishes for your continuing cerebral adventures! Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 16:47, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

As Anatol France, or Oscar, or *someone* supposedly wrote, "I didn't have time to write you a short letter, so I wrote a long one." Hayford Peirce 17:01, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

Hugh Hefner

Hi Jeffrey, I moved the article as it is a name. I hope I didn't mess you up,but I figured the sooner I did it the better before you added stuff! Also, notice the workgroups link in the list to the left. I think Alfred Hitchcock should be in the Visual arts workgroup and leave out the CZLive. That one goes in automatically when we do the {{subpages}}. Good to see you hard at work!--Matt Innis (Talk) 19:36, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, Matt. I still don't have much of an idea about workgroups. Sorry. I need to learn about them. Also, I screwed up with the title, "Hugh hefner". How do I change it to "Hugh Hefner"? Oopsy.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 19:39, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

No problem. There is a learning curve. You'll have it down in no time. What you do is copy this: {{speedydelete}} and put it on the top of the talk page for Hugh hefner and I (a coonstable) will delete it for you. For more details see CZ:Article Deletion Policy. Matt Innis (Talk) 19:47, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

Thank you, Matt. I shall do my best to learn all of the technical details as quickly as possible. A hundred years should do the trick.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 19:49, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

Hopefully I'll still be here :-) Matt Innis (Talk) 19:56, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

style

From my own experience here, and comments from Larry that I occasionally see, I would say that we *always* write out the name of states, ie, always Maine, never Me. or ME. It's the New York Times that uses 1960's in their style manual; I myself like it, but no one else does, so it's not used here. The — (em dash) is used here, *without* a space on either end of it, ie, November 25, 1965—October 3, 2005. It's easy to put in the em dash -- go down to the Special Characters at the bottom of the edit screen and just click on the — at the very start of the special characters. It will appear where you left the edit cursor in the edit screen. Feel free to ask me about anything else -- I may be wrong in my answer, but at least these are issues that I myself have been concerned about. Hayford Peirce 11:21, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

Thank you, Hayford. In my own writing, I swear by the em dash (but weirdly I can't find it on my laptop; only on my "big" computer); so thank you for pointing it out for me at the bottom of the screen. Also, thank you for clearing up the names of states for me (you and Professor Jensen are in complete agreement here). One more question: what's the meaning of life? Haha, just kidding. Well, personally I think it's: to veer from the path of fate in order to be able to choose between destinies for oneself and achieve the most authentic self (fullest realization of one's potential). Stay well.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 11:28, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

sig

Jeff, use the four tildes here[1] instead of typing your name. -Matt Innis (Talk) 21:17, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

You're not slow! You are running me ragged! :D --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:20, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

And yes, I have no idea about accuracy, but I do like your prose on Cary Grant. --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:23, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

I am sorry, Matt! When I want to do something, I get INTO it! And I am INTO this! Haha. And thank you for the compliment. BUT I have two questions; I still can't figure out this workgroup issue for these two pages of mine:

• U.S. commercial aviation history to 1966‎
• Milestones in early flight (1919 - 1938)‎

Can you help? Haha, sorry, I'll go to bed. It's 3:25 a.m. here.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 21:25, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

I can give you a link[2] :-) These are your *only* choices. Read the 'Workgroup Home' and it will give yu a hint abut what they are looking to do and then you can decide. At the very least, you are looking at CZ:History Workgroup. Now GO TO BED!  :-) Matt Innis (Talk) 22:10, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

You got the idea![3] --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:42, 10 October 2007 (CDT)

dangling modifier

Hi, Jeffrey, I "reply"ied to your email to me of several days ago about the dangling modifier as soon as I received it, oh, 3, 4, 5 days ago. *Today* I just got an email saying that it was undeliverable. Veddy strange! So, anyway, yes, you are absolutely correct. I dunno if that construction you cited is a dangling modifier or not, but I do know that it is clearly incorrect and that it should be changed to whatever you suggested. Best, Hayford Peirce 10:31, 15 October 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, Hayford. Coincidentally, I just changed the offending danglesome construction just mere hours ago. Why the email was returned must remain a mystery.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 10:37, 15 October 2007 (CDT)

thanks

re Daniel Webster-- you have a sharp eye for detail! thanks! Richard Jensen 13:57, 15 October 2007 (CDT)

Paper plus

Hi Jeffrey, good call. See my reply at Talk:paper and also check out Paper (disambiguation). Ciao! Aleta Curry 21:01, 1 November 2007 (CDT) Come run your mouth

Oh, wow, more work. Why can't I keep quiet? Haha. Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 21:03, 1 November 2007 (CDT)

Hee hee--actually, you're partially off the hook--I cut-and-pasted from your comments. You still have to think about "papers", though--bwah, ha, ha...Aleta Curry 21:05, 1 November 2007 (CDT) Ooh, sorry, that should be Talk:papers, of course! Aleta Curry 21:07, 1 November 2007 (CDT)

Okay, never mind all that--Stephen's way too fast for me! Aleta Curry 21:12, 1 November 2007 (CDT)

Symphony

Congratulations on Symphony Approval! Great work. Keep them coming ;-) Matt Innis (Talk) 12:32, 7 November 2007 (CST)

Thank you, Matt. I should be posting a developed article on Shostakovich within the next four days.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 13:09, 8 November 2007 (CST)

Violin

Is this all your own stuff, it looks great. I wonder if the history section might be spun off into its own article. The article is already a tour de force and it looks like there is more to come. Just an idea, I'll let you mull it over. Chris Day (talk) 23:34, 20 November 2007 (CST)

Thank you. Yes, all this is my own work. It has been the most difficult article to write, because of its triple history (manufacture, violin compositions, performance). Hard choices had to be made, and I am far from sure that what has eventuated is the best format for all of the information. As you say, it may very well need to be broken up into different pages. I have emailed music editor Michael Scott Cuthbert, suggesting that someone with a Greater Brain than I should make decisions about adding, subtracting, reformatting, and so on.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 23:43, 20 November 2007 (CST)

I just made a start on the Violin/Related Articles, note the use of definition templates for defining the instruments. I added a little blurb for the cello but left the viola and double base for you to play with. I also copied some external links from wikipedia. I have no idea if they are useful but thought it would be a starting point. Chris Day (talk) 23:56, 20 November 2007 (CST)

Party! You're invited!

Your friendly neighbourhood Mistress of Ceremonies here, reminding you about the December write-a-thon! Please drop by and add yourself to the list of partiers--or non party-goers--as the case may be. You can leave a comment, question or excuse there, too--or talk to me Aleta Curry 02:42, 5 December 2007 (CST)

Led Zeppelin

Jeffrey, I just want to thank you for voting for Led Zeppelin in the Draft of the Week. I never expected anyone to vote for it but I do appreciate it :) Thanks! Meg Ireland 17:09, 4 March 2008 (CST)

Jeff!

I see you're online. How come you're not at the PARTY?

Theme this month is "Something you absolutely love!"

Or anything else.

Aleta Curry 18:10, 5 March 2008 (CST)

Yes, welcome back, Jeff! --Larry Sanger 22:54, 6 March 2008 (CST)

I am very grateful for their criticisms...

Dear Mr Jeffrey Scott Bernstein:

I am very grateful for their criticisms, which are true, honest and constructive. As we explain to another respectable author, Mr. Todd Coles:

"Regard to article Calcidius, can you investigate and verify as there is no more complete article nor more extended in any other encyclopedia known nor even the most famous - and for pay - like Encarta, nor in the Catholic nor in the encyclopedias known of Philosophy. I led many months of investigation in order to make this article, and yet he had to leave to present a lot of data very interests that are the result of my own discoveries, because it gave my honor word to Mr Sargen, that was not going to use to expose any assumptions Citizendium or discovery that I have made but only to talk of others, and only on the findings of other authors...

I think the biggest help I need is in the spelling and syntax, as I am Spanish, and I do not have enough experience in the English language.

Therefore, you have every right to correct my articles to be more correct in the English language. In fact, it is an obligation that we have to have every citizen of Citizendium to help refine the draft, which has increasingly higher quality. And of course, I assure you, and any author or publisher, all my permission honest, and my full appreciation also for any help improve English prose in my articles. I'm sorry, because I may be a nuisance to you, and cause more work for you, for my great defects in the English prose. I hope you understand that I forever lived in country where English is not a language widely used nor even as a second or third language, which makes it very difficult my learning English, and every time I have more years old ...

Kind Regards, --Georgeos Díaz-Montexano 20:20, 6 March 2008 (CST)

Dear Georgeos Díaz-Montexano, It was my pleasure to assist you in bringing your wonderfully interesting article to CZ. That this article is, as you say, one-of-a-kind and groundbreaking, excites me and makes me all the more pleased for you. Congratulations on your fine work! My "assisting" you was in the absolutely smallest way possible. I approached your article exclusively as a faithful servant to your ideas, doing my best, and in my small way, to help translate the language into a form that resembles the labor of a native English speaker. I hope I have not changed the sense of any of your ideas, for, as I must repeat, my intention was solely to assist in bringing out your meaning, not to alter its content in any way whatsoever. I enjoyed your article thoroughly, an enjoyment which inspired my humble servant-work.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 20:50, 6 March 2008 (CST)

Dear Jeffrey Bernstein-Scott: Exactly the same feed and desire for you. Please always bear in mind at all times that I am Spanish, and with whom I hardly practise English in my country. Therefore, if at any time use a word that might sound or seem uncomfortable or annoying, never think that this is the real intention. I give my word of honor, that when that happens, it will be simply because of poor command of English prose, and not for other intention. Every time I ask you for an explanation for something, you can always presume with confidence, and absolute security, good faith and good intentions, my questions and even my complaints. Kind Regards, --Georgeos Díaz-Montexano 21:15, 6 March 2008 (CST)

Rectification of errors...

Dear Jeffrey Scott Bernstein: I do not understand why you change my original expression of italian peninsula by iberian peninsula (see diffs).

In my original article said italian peninsula, which is where Plotinus taught his doctrine. The change that you have done has changed a historical fact that is pointed out in my article, and now causes a grave mistake for knowledge. But in addition, you have made the change, and now you also presents a question mark ? at the end.

It is very good (and I am going to always be very grateful) that you will help correct prose and syntax English, but please, if you change my original concepts, historical facts known and corrects, by others who are wrong, then it may appear that I have committed such errors of knowledge, and of course, the article loses quality.

An expert on these issues might think that the original author of this article (ie, myself) are an ignoramus who does not know that Plotinus taught his doctrine almost exclusively in the peninsula of Italy, and which also I am as ignorant which I confused the Italian peninsula with the Iberian peninsula ...

If there are errors in my articles historical anachronisms, or incorrect data, of course, I am very grateful that somebody can correct these alleged mistakes, but so far, this is not the case. The only objection against my Calcidius article is the issue of English prose, namely that must be perfected English prose.

Please, I ask you, with great kindness and respect that you deserve, but to revise all the changes you have made in my article, and that you can ensure that these changes do not alter the basic concepts, and the historical facts , and correct data that through my knowledge I originally written.

It can correct prose, syntax, spelling, without changing names of countries like Italy by Iberia, causing a serious historical mistake ...

Once again, for you, my greatest thanks!, and my most sincere apologies for any inconvenience it may cause to you with my clumsiness in the mastery of English prose. Kind regards, --Georgeos Díaz-Montexano 21:05, 6 March 2008 (CST)

Yes, I know; that's why I put the question mark in bold; I knew you would deal with it quickly, within minutes or hours (I hoped). And the draft I saw had "Italic peninsula", not "Italian" -- hence I was mystified. Obviously I wouldn't have changed "Italian" for "Iberian", unless I was under the spell of the Weird Sisters. Unfortunately, to my great discredit, it was what one calls an "injudicious decision". Obviously, with the benefit of hindsight, I realize I should have divined "Italian". After I logged out, I thought to myself, "I should have left 'Italic peninsula' and just let the next person figure it out." I recognized that I should have gone back and restored the original, eccentric "Italic peninsula". I just knew it would be a problem, because Iberian didn't sound right, but as I say, I hoped the black question mark would inspire you to fix it fast. Two bad decisions on my part. Sorry. Thankfully the error due to my injudicious behavior remained for only a very short duration of time. I should stay away from such activities, I guess, unless I become even more stringent in my method.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 21:19, 6 March 2008 (CST)

Dear Jeffrey Scott Bernstein: It is not necessary so many apologies. You have acted with good faith and good intentions, and that is really important in this universe... You can suggest and make any changes that you deem best for English prose, for example, if you believe it is better to say that Plotinus disclosed his doctrines in the Peninsula of Italy, which say that he disclosed his doctrines in the Italian Peninsula or Italic Peninsula, there is no problem, because it does not change the historical fact nor the original sense; but is not the same Peninsula of Italy' or Italian Peninsula or Italic Peninsula which Iberian Peninsula. In any case, I see you have understood very well my arguments, despite my English so poorly. Kind Regards, --Georgeos Díaz-Montexano 22:11, 6 March 2008 (CST)

Please, help....

Dear Jeffrey Scott Bernstein:

Please, i needed your help, what is this? this paragraph requires a fix In my original article (in Spanish) all is normal... I not understan this... I'm sorry. Kind Regrads, --Georgeos Díaz-Montexano 22:33, 6 March 2008 (CST)