User talk:Firstorm

|class="MainPageBG" style="width: 55%; border:1px solid #FFFFFF; background-color:#F5FFFA; vertical-align:top"|

|}

|}

Swem is spelled with one "m" rather two. (Referencing your correction to "Flat Hat Club")

You say you are a former president of this society, and that's your cite for saying that the society's secret words are Latin. Well, I'm a former vice-president of this society, and at the time I was, it was the commonly held view that the words were probably English. You say you've done a detailed study of the society - could you reproduce that somewhere online? What's your evidence that the words were Latin? Boxjam 23:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Nice cleanup of the prose in the Sea Shepherd article. Thank you for your good work! I'll leave you with this standard template message to help you further explore Wikipedia. Sancho McCann 02:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

• Please respect others' copyrights; do not copy and paste the contents from webpages directly.
• Please use a neutral point of view when editing articles; this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&action=edit do so].
• Do not add unreasonable contents into any articles, such as: copyrighted text, advertisement messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Adding such unreasonable information or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism, and will result in your account being blocked.

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!

Since you asked (when correcting Juan Bautista Alberdi), you can cite bibliography as a source (WP:CITE). Or you can simply make a new section called "Bibliography" and list the books there. The code should look like this:

• Item 1
• Item 2

—Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 20:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for those edits to Zimbabwe - great work! Perspicacite 00:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, the original version said "Βούλγαρους" and that was later substituted with the word "βάρβαρους", not the other way around.--   Avg    20:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

The phrasing, "Y was substituted for X", indicates that "X" was employed first and "Y", next. The phrasing, "X was substituted with Y", is not a native construction and does not clearly indicate anything, but could imply that "Y" was employed first and "X", second. Firstorm (talk) 02:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I completed your repair of the article on Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker. The problem was that when you removed the garbage, you accidentally also removed the header which defines the infobox format. However for next time, an easy way to revert recent vandalism is to find the last non-vandalized version, in this case the one on Dec. 6, and perform a null edit on that version. This means open the good edit, click on Edit this page, which gives you a warning that subsequent edits will be lost. But that is what you want, so just save it. The edit summary can be "Revert last 4 edits - vandalism (or spam if you like)". This works as long as there have been no useful edits subsequent to the vandalism. Dirac66 (talk) 03:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, "Dirac66". And thanks, too, for putting this notice here, where I can check it against a fading memory. Firstorm (talk) 16:11, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I've called for the name of the Nobility particle page to be corrected. If nobody complains (and when I remember) I'll do it. --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, O.M. I'd never heard or seen "nobility particle" used before I read the article (I suspect that the wording was invented by a self-taught writer in English, though with the current push here in the States to replace adjectives with nouns, I really don't know). Just how does one go about correcting titles of articles? Firstorm (talk) 02:07, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

:Done. Method here. Best. --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:16, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Wow! I'm surprised and, yes, flattered. Thanks! Firstorm (talk) 02:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

The Oxford English Dictionary says: "Though composed, like mouthful, of n. and adj., the compound was in OE. and ME. a true n., inflected as a whole; hence its plural is properly handfuls, not handsful." David Underdown (talk) 15:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Mr. Underdown. Firstorm (talk) 18:08, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

25px Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits{{#if:|, such as your recent edits to :{{{1}}},}} as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Flat_Hat&curid=2638090&diff=353476450&oldid=352120726] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Flat_Hat&diff=next&oldid=353476450] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Flat_Hat&diff=next&oldid=353477250] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_publications_at_The_College_of_William_%26_Mary&diff=next&oldid=353477879] Jrcla2 (talk) 04:04, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, "Jrcla2". I hadn't known that reversions could be labelled "minor" but now will do so. Firstorm (talk) 13:40, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi. You changed "loaned" to "lent" in the SMOM article. With respect, I have changed it back again, as the original was entirely valid, and you left no edit summary to suggest why you had made the change from one verb to another. "Lent" is the past participle of the verb "to lend", whilst "loaned" is the past participle of the verb "to loan". It has been suggested to me that "loan" may exist only as a noun in some international versions of English, but in European English it is a common transitive verb (as well as a noun, of course). Indeed, it may have advantages in some cultures (including that of SMOM), where the past participle of the verb "to lend" may cause confusion with the similarly formed ecclesiastical proper noun! Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 12:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the SMOM: I've no interest in battling reversions but do believe that "lent" (no, not capitalised!) is more apt than "loaned" in writing of temporary use of another's possessions. And that was taught at Winchester, forty-some years ago. Firstorm (talk) 22:04, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

At Aramaic language you changed "language family" to "linguistic family" with an edit summary to the effect: "Doesn't anyone know what an adjective is?" Yes, I know what an adjective is--it is a word that modifies a noun or nominal phrase. Nouns in English can often function as adjectives (e.g. "railroad track", "family jewels", etc.). The phrase "language family" is standard usage in the linguistic literature. "Language family" means a family containing languages on the analogy of "coin purse". "Linguistic family" is not used in the literature at all in this sense. The Sapirs (father Edward, son David) might be called a "linguistic family" since the son followed in the father's footsteps as a linguist. Contemporary English is not nearly so constrained (and never was actually) as our secondary school teachers 40 years ago led us to believe. It is a vibrant and ever-changing language. --Taivo (talk) 15:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

A singular noun can be used as an adjective, particularly if the noun lack an adjectival form; "language" does not. But, yes, "Taivo", my native tongue is changing rapidly. I regret that most of those changes reduce the precision and subtlety of an extraordinary language. Firstorm (talk) 15:38, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

You did a wonderful copyedit at Darius I of Persia. If you have the time, could you clean up Ahura Mazda as well? warrior4321 04:34, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

:Thanks! Yes, I'll try to do so fairly soon. Firstorm (talk) 12:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Likewise from Wikipedia:WikiProject Namibia: Many thanks for the recent work on Oorlam people and Windhoek. Always a bit difficult for non-native speakers... feel free to visit our other 1759 pages ;P Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 15:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

:Thanks for your kind comment, PGallert. I enjoyed the work and look forward to more. Firstorm (talk) 01:59, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Image:Information.svg Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. --John (talk) 17:55, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

:Again, could you please uncheck the "minor edits" box unless the edits you are making are actually minor? Thanks. --John (talk) 18:07, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

::I think that I'm doing so. If you'd like to PM examples to me, perhaps I'd understand your concerns better. Firstorm (talk) 18:19, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Death_of_Mark_Duggan&diff=prev&oldid=444095628 This] was the one that caught my eye. It isn't minor. I found a bunch more on looking through your contributions. Please don't do this. Thanks. --John (talk) 18:22, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

:Ah, I see that you may have been offended by a change to your writing! Well, of course you may change it back; but "to set afire" and "to set on fire" are virtually identical in meaning, with chiefly a stylistic difference between the two (there is no "modification of content"). Clearly, I prefer the change I made; but I've no proprietary feelling and certainly won't revert your reversion. And I do regret giving offense. Firstorm (talk) 18:30, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

::You misunderstand; I was not offended and did not write the material you changed. I just wanted to ask you not to use the minor edit flag for edits like these as they do not fall within the definition of a minor edit. As I said, I found a bunch of other non-minor edits that were mislabeled and I also notice you have been previously warned for this. Thanks, --John (talk) 18:35, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

:::I'm relieved that you are not -- were not -- offended, as no offense was intended. However, I fail to see how changing "setting on fire" to "setting afire" is not a "minor change"; I think it a stylistic improvement, not a change to the sense of the article. Again, if you think otherwise, do send me a PM in explanation. Firstorm (talk) 18:38, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

::::"Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content." Your "stylistic improvement" is a (minor) modification of content. Therefore it is not a minor edit. --John (talk) 18:50, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

:::::Well, then, consider it a "rearrangement of text without modification of content." How do you see "setting afire" as differing in meaning from "setting on fire"? If a reasonable distinction could be made in actual sense of the intended content, I'd understand how change from one to the other might be considered as other than "minor". Otherwise, I continue to see the revision as a "minor change". Again, I'd prefer a private message, "John"; I'd rather not reply just now nor clutter this page. Firstorm (talk) 18:58, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salvador_Allende&diff=prev&oldid=443071066 Here]'s another example. This was not a minor edit either. I am sorry to labor the point but it is important to me for you to realize and acknowledge that you cannot mislabel your edits as minor as you have been doing. Can you do that? --John (talk) 19:25, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

::Again, "John", I do not understand how you distinguish "setting afire" from "setting on fire" in essential meaning. Again, I'd be grateful if you'd do so. Will you, please? That will help me to understand what you see as a "minor change" and as not one. Firstorm (talk) 19:58, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

:::It is not my job to give lessons in basic English. If you don't understand that changing "on fire" to "afire" is not a minor edit, I am worried that you will be blocked. If you make any more edits like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marmaduque_Grove&diff=prev&oldid=443069214 this one] and label them as minor you are likely to be blocked. If you realize your mistake and do not repeat it, even though you lack the courage to admit it, that will also work, though it is kind of lame. Once again, please do not mislabel non-minor edits as minor. Thanks. --John (talk) 20:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

::::Indeed, "John", I do not think that a distinction in basic meaning can be drawn between "setting afire" (not "to afire") and "setting on fire". And, yes, we may view your refusal to do so while maintaining that a distinction in essential meaning does exist as -- well, I'm not here to fight anyone. Firstorm (talk) 20:28, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I saw you were adding the nationalities of a few people at the 1840 convention. I have a draft article on the convention that gives nearly all the nationalities and some other stuff. If you are interested then you may have it... otherwise ... thanks anyway. Victuallers (talk) 10:14, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

:I am interested, both for the article here and as a former historian -- thanks! Firstorm (talk) 10:16, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Saw your exasperation at Talk:Mahar, and just wanted to let you know I've done a basic teardown of bad material, and will be looking for new and better material to improve it. Are you interested in lending a hand? MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:19, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

----

Message delivered by Dominic at 09:11, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.