User talk:ArielGold

Main Talk Userboxes Awards Archives Images Email Welcome!     Leave a new message! I will reply and drop a note on your talk page unless I know you'll check back here. Please be sure to sign your posts with ~~~~ so I know who you are! Quick Wikipedia Links: Wikipedia:Tutorial Wikipedia:Help desk Wikipedia:Cite your sources Wikipedia:Verifiability Wikipedia:Civility Wikipedia:Neutral point of view List of frequently misused English words Smiley list Ariel♥Gold - Registered Wikipedian since 2005 “ "Birds sing after a storm; why shouldn't people feel as free to delight in whatever sunlight remains to them? ” NASA Just wanted to thank you for your dedicated updating of the Space Shuttle mission pages. Czolgolz (talk) 17:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC) Hey, thanks! You too! I enjoy watching these missions so much, it is sad they don't get more mainstream television coverage! Ariel♥Gold 18:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC) Halt! Stop it immediately. Dude, stop deleting my message. The user reverted one of my edits here, and was not realizing it WAS constructive. So this user did something wrong. Toothy the beaver (talk) 04:59, 24 May 2009 (UTC) You are blanking another editor's talk page. You cannot simply archive someone else's talk page without permission. If they want it archived, they can do so, it is not your choice to do it without their permission. That editor has reverted your edits multiple times and you have been warned about archiving other people's talk pages. Please stop. If an editor reverted an edit of yours, it is not appropriate to "get revenge" by blanking their talk page. Ariel♥Gold 05:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC) STS-125 ground tracking Ooooops.... I forgot, so jazzed i found the pics, spaced it out. LanceBarber (talk) 15:41, 24 May 2009 (UTC) Hee hee, no biggie, I just didn't want them tagged! Ariel♥Gold 15:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC) done, lol !! LanceBarber (talk) 15:50, 24 May 2009 (UTC) Sweet, thanks! Ariel♥Gold 15:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC) wave vs. waive I won't quibble with you. My complaint wasn't with the word "waive" but with the phrase "waive off". That is, I think, a misuse of "waive" and that "wave" was better. Your reference, although it allowed the phrase, indicated it was influenced by "wave". If "waive off" is coming into use (I hadn't seen it before), I won't stand in the way of progress. The only injury to my pride was that you indicated that "wave off" was incorrect. It's not. Admittedly, the use of the phrase is more obvious on an aircraft carrier (http://usmilitary.about.com/od/glossarytermsw/g/w6770.htm), but any time an aircraft (or, in this case, a spacecraft) is ordered to "go around again" rather than landing, it has been figuratively, if not literally, waved off. Thanks for the comment, though. Paul D. Anderson (talk) 05:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC) Ping It regards what we discussed a few months ago. :) Enigmamsg 07:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC) Ding! Replied ;) Ariel♥Gold 07:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC) Good chuckle Not a problem. I'm glad a good laugh ended your day. (:--The Legendary Sky Attacker 09:32, 5 June 2009 (UTC) Neapolitan articles After thinking about what you said, I've decided that Wikipedia probably isn't the place for what I was trying to present. It is mostly the issue of references as they just don't really exist... at least not in English. In fact, they don't even exist in Neapolitan. The only Neapolitan grammars I have ever been able to find are written in Italian. What I wrote was based on two works: ’A lengua ’e Pulecenella by Carlo Iandolo (an Italian work despite the Neapolitan title) and Il napoletano parlato e scritto by Nicola De Blasi and Luigi Imperatore, but is much more than just a translation. But now I can't delete some of the articles I wrote, because their urls have been changed to redirect to the Neapolitan language page. I will however delete the article on Neapolitan articles and remove the references I put in Neapolitan language to point to them. I apologize for any trouble I've put you to, and will now retire from Wikipedia. --Casaerwin (talk) 14:08, 5 June 2009 (UTC) There's no need to stop editing, Casa, just because the one subject doesn't have references, there are millions of articles out there that references abound for! :) Presenting language online is a difficult thing, to be sure, but there's no reason to delete anything, if you can improve the Neapolitan language article at all with your knowledge of the language, that would be great! Ariel♥Gold 17:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC) With the redirection of two of my pages to the Neapolitan language page two-thirds of the work I had completed has been lost and I don't know how to recover it. That represented quite a few hours of work for me, and I don't want to have to deal with that sort of thing. I've decided to put my work on my own web site as soon as I can acquire a new domain for it.--Casaerwin (talk) 20:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC) All the information is there in the article's history, simply click on the history tab of the page you originally created (to get to it, type it into the chat box, and when you get redirected, just click the link at the top left that says you were redirected, to go the original). Click the history tab, and you can get all the information there, and bring it into the main article that way. That way the information is all consolidated, as that article is not at all long in length. Cheers, Ariel♥Gold 03:42, 6 June 2009 (UTC) OK, that wasn't so bad. I have merged all three of those articles into the Neapolitan language article under the heading of Neapolitan Grammar. Now I will begin work on the other sections. Is there a way to save unfinished work without publishing it? I was thinking possibly of making it all a comment, then removing the comment tags after it's finished unless there is a better way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casaerwin (talk • contribs) 19:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC) Good deal! You can always work on things in your userspace, just create a page, say User:Casaerwin/Projects, (be sure it is in User:Casaerwin space, and not in article space) and work on things there, you can use preview, save when you have to go, find refs, and generally get it up to speed before you put it into the article. See WP:User for more information on what you can and can not do in userspace. Cheers! Ariel♥Gold 03:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC) COI issues Hey, I'd posted a COIN on the now deleted Andrea Rodgers and you went through that after you saw it, so I wanted to enlist your help in looking at something else, if you don't mind. I've come across a rather odd situation during NPP now, but I'm not sure that it's a blatant COI and/or a vio of another sort beyond WP:EL, so before I went ahead and posted a note on the notice board, I wanted a second opinion. This concerns Ken Wahl and Corinne Alphen. User:KenWahlFan has been making some changes based on a lawsuit for which there seems to be no real public references, and he's been linking the law suit file from his google account (which I reverted a couple of times and sent him a message saying it wasn't allowed per WP:EL) and now (s)he's uploaded a pdf file on some hosting space and has linked to it and removed a public domain reference saying something to the contrary. I don't know what to make of it, (s)he has been cooperative with me, but I'm not sure I'm well acquainted with these technicalities to decide what the required action should be. Can you take a look? Thx -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 23:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC) I suggest that you have him review WP:V as well as WP:RS, restore the valid PD reference, and remove the hosted .pdf. It is especially important with WP:BLP articles to be sure that they are well documented, sourced, and cited. Uploading a .pdf and calling it a WP:RS is not acceptable. I'd also suggest posting it to both the BLP and the COI pages. Ariel♥Gold 02:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC) Thanks, I've posted at BLP Noticeboard -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 04:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC) Ken Wahl Page I was told by Wiki user to upload a pdf of the lawsuit and link to that. I did that. What is the problem? That is the file. It's signed. I can't link straight to lasuperiorcourt.org document because you must pay money to buy the file. How else am I supposed to do this? People need to read that lawsuit. The tabloids did a hack job reporting the situation. Thanks. KenWahlFan (talk) 17:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC) Please review what verifiability means in Wikipedia, as well as what a reliable source is. Uploading a .pdf to your personal website is not acceptable as a source, .pdf files can be forged, created, altered, etc. Unless the document comes from a reliable source it cannot be linked. It would be especially helpful if you would read the policy about biographies of living persons, as this is a very serious policy, and one that Wikipedia does not take lightly. Thanks! Ariel♥Gold 05:09, 10 June 2009 (UTC) U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee It may be a puny stub, but you might be pleasantly surprised. Feel free to jump in. :) – B.hotep •talk• 14:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC) Thanks B. hotep! Ariel♥Gold 22:54, 12 June 2009 (UTC) Welcoming Spiral5800 Just so's you know, I already welcomed him (with the beautiful {{welcomeg}} using WP:FRIENDLY), but he blanks his talkpage regularly (something I consider extremely bad Wikiquette, but others don't seem to mind) so the message isn't there any more. Remember to check the History! :D —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 15:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC) LOL Doh! Oh well ;) Thanks for letting me know! Ariel♥Gold 23:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC) Would appreciate your comments.... Just saw Sweethearts (film) on YouTube for the first time, so updated the page here. Would appreciate your 'take'. Thank you, and all the best. Shir-El too 20:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC) Of course you're right, but I'm still a beginner: I try to give what I can, what I know how to do best. The rest will come with time and experience, hopefully. Thank you for replying. Love, Shir-El too 19:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Thank you for that resounding vote of confidence! I appreciate it. BTW how do I tag an article that is poorly researched and biased? I looked up Catherine the Great and it reads like an old Soviet schoolboy's copybook. Do you know how she cut through controversy, superstition and political intrigue to introduced mandatory smallpox vaccination into Russia? She had herself inoculated first! Cheers! Shir-El too 22:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC) Update: someone has worked the Catherine article over already, but I hope to get back to it. Meanwhile I'm compiling info on Hunt Stromberg and need a more comprehensive InfoBox to begin with (he was NOT an actor!) - could you point me in the right direction again? As always Thank you, with love. Shir-El too 20:01, 22 June 2009 (UTC) PS: that is a lovely lift-off shot on your page - really spectacular. Shir-El too 20:02, 22 June 2009 (UTC) Tried 'person' InfoBox, but it shows even less information than 'actor' does. Also I can't figure out why I put information into various categories in the list, but they DO NOT show up on the page! Any ideas? Could it be because I deleted unused categories in-between? Have a good one! 8) Shir-El too 17:07, 23 June 2009 (UTC) Spaceflight crew Starting a discussion about Template:Spaceflight crew regarding its aesthetics and whether it's an improvement on the text listing we had before. Please join in. Rillian (talk) 22:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC) Thanks for the Welcome Thank you very much for the welcome and for the advice, Ariel. And Vanderdecken - I never noticed that you welcomed me, and I didn't blank my talk page on purpose except for the other day to remove all the default "welcome to wikipedia" stuff that appears there initially - it was empty of comments when I did that. But, I also recently have edited my page to add info about myself and I may have inadvertently erased your welcome and never noticed. My sincere apologies - I will be sure to check the history. In the future, I don't have any plans to erase anything anyone takes the time to write on my page - any and all comments are of course welcome. And again, thank you both for your kind welcomes to wikipedia =) Oh, by the way, my main source on the beta angle issue being a concern to NASA regarding their planned dates to finish the ISS and be done with the shuttle program was a NASA representative who was interviewed on the news - this same man was also my reason for creating the beta angle article. He mentioned the term and there was no article for it, so I figured I may as well start one. I wasn't quite sure how to cite him, so I suppose I'm guilty of sounding a bit like a gypsy with a crystal ball ;) Oops!  !Spiral5800 (talk) 01:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC) So I checked, and it turns out what I thought was the default "welcome to wikipedia, this is how you edit a page" stuff was actually Vanderdecken welcoming me - there was a note saying hello there and everything. Next time I stay up hours and hours later than I should, well into the morning, I'll be sure to check three times before hitting save! Spiral5800 (talk) 01:54, 15 June 2009 (UTC) STS-127 Ariel I am not trying to sound like a cock here, but bite me! It doesn't look like your an Admin, but I could be wrong. I was watching NASA TV when they announced the scrub, so I added it. What the fuck do you think it is that I speculated? I speculated nothing. On NASA TV they said the launch was scrubbed due to the leak, that is not speculation, that is a fact. As for breaking news edits, you have done twice as many edits as me, in the past hour updating every little thing, so who is being abusive there? Just admit it, if you can't be first to edit articles in your favorite topic your life would have no meaning. I get that, there are a bunch of you wienies here, that is what ruins this site. Again not trying to be a cock, but I take offense when someone accuses me of doing something wrong, when they are the one doing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subman758 (talk • contribs) 07:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC) A.) I had done no updates to the article since yesterday prior to the official announcement of the scrub. I do not do 'breaking news' updates, and your statement that I'd been updating it during the hour before you is incorrect. B.) Speculating in advance of any official announcement that a launch will be scrubbed, is talking about future events which is not done on Wikipedia. Your edit was made 45 minutes before they officially scrubbed the launch, that's speculation. C.) NASA TV is not a reliable source. D.) Please read the Wikipedia Civility policy. I nicely made you aware of some issues with an edit (speculating in an article) and you come back and not only cuss at me and call me names, but say that because I am not an administrator you don't have to pay attention to what I say? Administrators are no different than any other editor on this project - they simply have additional abilities. Every single editor here deserves respect and civility. Thanks. Ariel♥Gold 07:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Anyone following this see my response to Subman758 on his talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC) NASA TV NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE?? I guess NASA.GOV is not reliable either. Just Curious How can a live TV feed from Mission Control, with the Flight Director Miked could not possibly be reliable? Let me use this as an example since I was there. On 9/11 guess we were not Officially attacked until the President said we were Attacked? Maybe I would have been speculating about seeing the plane go into the North Tower, because I would have written about it before the President said that is what happened. YOU MADE SIX EDITS AFTER I DID. SO YOU DID MAKE TWICE AS MANY EDITS WITH IN THE HOUR, WHEN EVERY LITTLE THING WAS UPDATED. Fight your own battles, if you pick a fight, fight it yourself. You accused me of doing exactly what you did, and that is why I reacted the way I did. You don't own the article, and you don't own the website, so stop acting like you do. You have no right to criticize other peoples edits. Especially when those people probably know way more about the subject then you do.--Subman758 (talk) 12:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Oh one other thing. You say that Wikipedia is NOT a news site. I believe you are wrong on that that one. What is that template? I think it goes "This article documents a current event, information may change rapidly as more becomes known." Something like that. The two articles that come to mind most recently, David Carridine, and Air France Flight 447.--Subman758 (talk) 12:31, 17 June 2009 (UTC) A.) NASA TV is not a reliable source because it is not verifiable. You can say you heard it on NASA TV, but unless you can find somewhere that has that reported, it cannot be verified. Just because someone hears something on TV doesn't make it verifiable. B.) The edits I made to the article were done after the scrub was official. Your edit speculating that the launch would be scrubbed was made 45 minutes before the scrub was official. My edits were to add references as they became available, and to expand the scrub information as more information was online to verify it. I did not speculate, I cited reliable, verifiable sources, and I did not post any information before it was official. C.) I have never once acted like I 'own' any article, I simply asked you to follow Wikipedia guidelines and policies, and not add information to the article before it was officially announced. D.) Information does change rapidly, but again, it needs to be verifiable and sourced, (and in the case of a scrubbed shuttle launch, officially announced). Please refer to What Wikipedia is not which states: "While including information on recent developments is sometimes appropriate, breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information." And again I'm going to ask you to please be civil in your responses. Thanks, Ariel♥Gold 12:49, 17 June 2009 (UTC) New contributing member Hi and thanks for all the work you put in to Wikipedia. I'm wondering if you can help me get starting to be a contributor for Wikipedia. I wan't to helpout with the Human Spaceflight information and obviously your name came up. unfortunately I did see that your'e not accepting adoptes at the moment but maybe you can give me some hint on where to start? Arkaska (talk) 16:51, 17 June 2009 UTC Launch Scrubs, beta cutout, etc. Hey Ariel - thanks again for all your constructive criticism. I just wanted to pop by and say that, despite your being totally right about my source being unverifiable and the "crystal ball" thing, it seems to have turned out that my crystal ball was right - we all get lucky occasionally right? I'm hearing that the next viable launch window will be July 12th? Or was it the 21st? I'm sure you know more accurately than I do - you really keep up on this stuff which I think is awesome. This also makes me glad to have created the beta angle article - which I don't know if I properly thanked you for editing and adding some far better (read: credible) sources to it as references. Due to the fact that beta cutoff has now apparantly become an issue involving this shuttle mission - and therefore beta angle - it's good that there's a page available to let people know what the heck those things are. I do hope that an expert on the subject comes along and adds/verifies/whatever to the article at some point in the near future - I'm just very happy to have started it and thus contributed to wikipedia by starting my first article (and learned a thing or two along the way! It's quite a different experience from making the occasional minor edit, or even major edit, to an existing article.) Spiral5800 (talk) 17:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC) I'm really happy you created that article too! It was a much-needed addition, and I'm really surprised there wasn't one already here! You did a great job with it! July 11 is the next available opportunity for launch, so hopefully no more delays after that! That should give them plenty of time to work this issue. Holler if you ever need anything else, Spiral. Cheers! Ariel♥Gold 16:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Really perplexed... Am expanding the article on Hunt Stromberg and doing my darndest to put in-line citations. The first references were more or less OK, but when I put in > < (you'll have to view the programming on the edit page!) to re-use an already listed reference I get a "Cite error" message on the preview. Until it's sorted out I've put text [placeholders] where I want the references to go. What did I do wrong? Thank you, Shir-El too 00:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC) Answered on your talk page, and fixed it. ;) I know you like to do stuff yourself, but for some strange reason I couldn't get the refs to stop returning errors without putting them into templates. I'm not really sure why. :( Ariel♥Gold 23:16, 25 June 2009 (UTC)