User talk:Pnelnik

Welcome!

Hello, Pnelnik, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Amalthea 13:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid this edit was a mistake. Variables should be italicized in this context, but digits and punctuation should not. This is codified in WP:MOSMATH, and it matches TeX style:

${\displaystyle n\geq 1.\,}$

Michael Hardy (talk) 15:06, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for pointing that out. Pnelnik (talk) 23:00, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Fungi the Dingle Dolphin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. mhking (talk) 01:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would apreciate it if you could have allowed at the very least a few days of discussion as to whether the original article should remain or be deleted. No discussion has taken place thus far. From the first time it was suggested that the original article should be deleted until the final deletion just 16 minutes were given, it was some time after 2am in my time-zone and alas I was asleep.

Further, I'd welcome contributions to the discussion as to whether the original article should remain. The question is how note-worthy are the articles about Fungi in The Irish Independent [1], The Irish Times [2]? How important is it that Fungi has been mentioned on both the BBC [3] web-site and the New York Times[4]? Is it relevant that RTE [5] has broadcast a documentary about Fungi.

Also a google search for fungi dingle dolphin gives over 11,000 hits. For example I found a mention on The Times (of London) website [6]

Thanks Pnelnik (talk) 10:24, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the thousands of Google hits and the news articles that you cite, there did not appear to be much more than the limited news coverage and the promotional vehicle that the dolphin has become for the community where it resides. Simply because something is newsworthy does not necessitate a Wikipedia article (as noted in WP:NOTNEWS). It certainly is not a travel guide to point out promotional items or features of a community (WP:NOTTRAVEL). And Google hits in and of themselves are not a marker of notability in terms of what should be or should not be included in Wikipedia (WP:GOOGLEHITS).

I would strongly suggest than any discussion of the dolphin in and of itself in relation to the community would better go in the Dingle article itself. The subject (IMO) is certainly not notable enough to warrant a separate article on Wikipedia. --mhking (talk) 11:59, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that was what I was going to say. The subject might not be worthy of its own article for reasons stated, but it would be a terrific addition to the main article and probably better served there as well. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 19:42, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't delete anything; I'm not a Wikipedia Admin, nor do I desire to be one at this point. I do participate rather extensively with the Wikipedia Recent Changes Patrol, and as such, flag quite a few articles for deletion. Most often, admins who do indeed delete articles agree with my rationale and follow through with the recommendations I've made. But there are plenty of examples when admins have overruled my recommendations and not deleted an article I've suggested be deleted. Likewise, there are articles I have sent to AfD -- and I stand by that process, no matter which way the articles come out.

Am I heavy-handed at times with my choices and recommendations? Yes. Very much so. Does it tick some folks off? Given the responses of some I've talked to in the past, yes, it does, and yes I do. Is there any malicious intent? Not at all. I am providing the best I know how to within the community here. And on that note, there are others who are even more draconian and harsh than I am.

You mention "many people" are upset with me; please point them out, so that I may discuss this with them. I have no problem talking to anyone in that vein; and have no problem learning from interaction and conversation.

Finally, you suggest I may be hiding something by archiving my talk page. I routinely archive my talk page when it gets long. It got long, I archived it. If you wish to point to a particular conversation, I'll certainly refer to it appropriately. I'm not hiding anything. I don't have a reason to hide from anything.

If I have upset you with my suggestion, I apologize. However, I do stand behind my decision and recommendations. Rightly or wrongly, I would not make them if I didn't stand behind them. --mhking (talk) 15:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About this edit summary. It is possible to have an 18 man squad for a football game, if you include those named eligible to either play or to be subs. Take a look at this recent post on the Arsenal website. ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 13:36, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed you can have an 18 man squad, but the original wording had 18 man team.
Which sounds best:

• captain of the football team
• captain of the football team which had 18 players in the squad
• captain of the 18 player squad

Go with which ever you like.
Though it would probably not be good to revert to the original and have captain of the 18 man football team.
Pnelnik (talk) 13:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please inform yourself better next time. The national football team of Germany wasn't 2nd at the time, when the FIFA announced that they would be seeding teams for the play-off draws in Europe. Fulcher (talk) 17:55, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed the wording was inaccurate, it should have read those teams in danger of ending up second in their groups, rather than those teams in second place. At the time Germany were only slightly ahead of Russia and they still had a potentially difficult match in Moscow coming up. Pnelnik (talk) 02:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't the place for your personal speculations. Btw, did you know that Poland is the only neighbour-country of Germany that never won a single match against Germany? ^{[citation needed]} Pathetic, huh? Fulcher (talk) 19:27, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's Luxemburg's record against Germany?

There was no original work, I took the information from the citations I provided. I just reworded them. The only problem was that I was slightly sloppy and the meaning was changed slightly. Pnelnik (talk) 02:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: [[7]]. "Fix common typos using AutoWikiBrowser RegExTypoFix rules". PB666 ^yap 04:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your name has been in mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pnelnik for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. O Fenian (talk) 18:20, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see that a while ago on the Rocky Road to Dublin (film) page you added a link to the film on youtube. My guess is that the version on youtube is pirated and has not been authorised by the copyright owners. Wikipedia needs to respect intellectual property and should not be used to promote illegal distribution of films.

Did you check the copyright before posting the link? Perhaps we need to clarify the use of links to youtube videos on wikipedia. Thanks.

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) 17:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]