User talk:Tamtrible

Hello, Tamtrible, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for registering an account. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Introduction  5    The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page   Help   Tips How to write a great article Manual of Style Be Bold Assume Good faith Get adopted

If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or get instant online help at IRC. You can also place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will come shortly to answer your questions.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:List of winter festivals|ts=08:51, 20 December 2013 (UTC) Yunshui 雲‍水 08:51, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just wanted to comment on your recent addition to List of vampire traits in folklore and fiction, that you can use "Gifted" for any vampire traits that are specialized to particular characters; it might help make the Blade entry cleaner. I do like the analysis though! :) Perhaps it can go in a footnote? -AngusWOOF (talk) 19:36, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was mostly just moving around what was already there, though I think I did a few grammar fixes and the like. Tamtrible (talk) 05:29, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tamtrible. I see you've joined in with my project of sorting out this article a bit. Firstly, thanks a lot :) I also see you noticed that BTVS the movie doesn't appear in the weaknesses table. In fact, I found there to be a total of 19 rows that appear in one or more of the tables but not all of them - this was after I added two rows that only appeared in the second table to each of the others, which means that all of those 19 appear in at least the first table. I would have thought it possible that the rows for some settings have not been added to some of the tables because they would be a row full of 'dunno's for those tables, but of course it may just be that whoever added them to one or two tables didn't get round to adding them to the rest. The case of the two folklore rows not appearing in the last table is somewhat different, in that it can be argued that the question of which other supernatural creatures appear, for example, doesn't make sense when the 'setting' is folklore.

Anyway, I think the Buffy movie doesn't currently appear in any table apart from the first one. I think it should have its own row separate from the Buffyverse, because certain vampire traits and other aspects differ between the film and the other Buffy media, making them definitely distinct settings; however, I am considering sorting the Buffyverse row to directly under the 1992 movie, since they can be thought of as adaptations of the same original idea, similarly to how, for example, the US remake of Being Human is directly under the UK original, and the Blade film series comes just after the Blade comics. Of course, this should probably only be done after the BTVS movie row has been added to the other four tables.

My second point is about Magic: the Gathering; the other tables (possibly all of them, I can't remember if it was one of the 19 I mentioned) have entries for Innistrad, which from the relevant Wikipedia article I found was an instalment in the Magic franchise, which is why when I was doing the first table I renamed the row to reflect the overall setting. For now I left the link directing to Innistrad, even though it turned out that that wasn't the first appearance of vampires in the game. There's another row that seems to have been added recently to most or all five of the tables, headed Ravnica, which turns out to be another release in Magic. I put this directly under the Innistrad row, but mainly because of course they seem to be a single setting. I did the same for the Marvel comics and Blade comics rows, for the same reason. I wanted to compare the entries in the pairs of rows that seem to refer to different instalments in the same setting once they were adjacent in the rest of the tables, to decide whether they should indeed be merged into single rows, or if not, why not.

Just to give you some context for what I saw that you had come across in your editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Dent (talk • contribs) 15:10, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to help sort, just start on a different section, so we don't accidentally cross-post. And *please* feel free to fix any of the problem ones, or put them where you think they need to go... Tamtrible (talk) 07:44, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, another user and I are trying to open a DRN so we can remove or fix the topic sentence of that page. I have seen your attempts earlier on, and I hope you would be willing to help us once more. This really needs to go through. If you are interested, just leave a reply on my page, or here. Thanks, ReallyFat B. (talk) 08:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Tamtrible (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Caught by a web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. At least, not as far as I know. It's vaguely possible that this has something to do with my boyfriend trying to set up his bitcoin miners, but he didn't even succeed, and I don't *think* that would mess up my Wikipedia editing. I just want to fix the vandalism on the Multinational Holidays page... Tamtrible (talk) 08:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC) Tamtrible (talk) 19:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The IP address you're using has been blocked, because it acts like a

IP Block Exemption, this would only be done if there was an actual need for you to edit from this IP address. PhilKnight (talk) 20:11, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I... um... don't even understand what you just said. I am... not *that* web-savvy. I'm just trying to edit the pages I help maintain, I logged in like I usually do (unless this is because of the ZenMate peer to peer blocker thingumy...)

It was ZenMate. All better now.

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

Hi Tamtrible, there is a discussion happening at Talk:Domestication#List of domesticated animals that you might be interested in. Regards, William Harris • talk • 19:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Types of mythological or fantastic beings in contemporary fiction, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Wizard of Oz. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tamtrible. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tamtrible. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Types of mythological or fantastic beings in contemporary fiction is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Types of mythological or fantastic beings in contemporary fiction until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bright☀ 14:48, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tamtrible. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tamtrible. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Tamtrible, Im once again removing Asian elephant from the List of domesticated animals, please do not submit it again backing it up with your personal opinion, if you cant give a scientific peer reviewed source giving a clear indication this species should have been domesticated. I run, since 2006 the global database of elephant individuals at www.elephant.se, and have only been able to record a total of 7 or 8 generations, from either species of elephants. This is too less numbers to discuss any kind of domestication, full, semi, or whatever. Just because a species has been captured and tamed, during long time, it doesn't make them domesticated, if all specimens were in fact wild.born, and captured and brought in captivity from the wild. And IF this should be a definition of a semi-domestication, a term which Im not sure is backed up by science, then that should cover the African species as well, but also hundreds of wild species, including tigers, lions, zebras, cape buffaloes, Eland antelopes, etc, the list will be longer than that page can handle.

In fact there were more African captured and tamed as Asians since last 20 yrs, but neither species has been bred for more than 7 generations, compared with one example, lions at UK circus with apr 35 generations, and if the African lion should be considred domesticated, or semi-domesticated, whatever that means, then hundreds of species are, and why not any species, humans ever captured and tamed?

With this in mind, the list of domesticated species, in questionable cases, should be backed up with reliable scientific sources, not with someone opinion, or personal interpretation.

Dan Koehl (talk) 12:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since I believe you have been pushing your opinion with good faith, I did not report you to edit warring, but strongly advice you to follow the recommendations suggested at how to avoid being involved in edit warring and instead discuss your opinions at the talk page, rather than once again change that page according to your personal opinion and beliefs.

Talk page discussion is a prerequisite to almost all of Wikipedia's venues of higher dispute resolution. If you wish at any time to request a

Dan Koehl (talk) 13:41, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

Table of herbs and spices is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted

.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Table of herbs and spices until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 00:05, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you've repeatedly posted on the Medicinal plants talk page as if it was a forum, which it is not. It is ONLY for discussing its own article. Please stop abusing talk pages.

As for your list, I suspect it is unworkable and understand why people would delete it. It might really be better to get on with something else until you understand Wikipedia a bit better. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 00:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Timtrent was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at List of culinary herbs and spices instead.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Your table may well be a worthwhile addition to that article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to
  Draft:Table of plants used as herbs or spices
  and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to
  Draft:Table of plants used as herbs or spices, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7
  }}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:38, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tamtrible! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:38, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at

Draft:Table of plants used as herbs or spices. Thanks! S0091 (talk) 20:20, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Velella was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at List of culinary herbs and spices instead.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I find this table useful. At present it is only two editors who have opposed a re-writing of the existing article. A better and more thoughtful proposition on the talk page might be useful. I, for one, would support such an integration

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to
  Draft:Table of plants used as herbs or spices
  and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

 Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:49, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

User:Tamtrible could you please respond to my questions in Talk:List of domesticated animals. You did not supply any sort of real reason for undoing my edit. And now due to your delay someone has made a substantial edit already, so if the column is to be deleted I've got to do the whole thing my hand again. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 03:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Pichemist was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Already exists at List of culinary herbs and spices

_Signed, Pichemist ^{( Contribs | Talk )} 20:28, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.

Thanks @Ritchie333. I meant to make essentially the same point in my reply at AfCHD but forgot, namely that the solution to this was outside the scope of the AfC process, probably from the first review onwards and latest when the draft had reached the rejection stage. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is there somewhere that *is* the right place to discuss this? As per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_culinary_herbs_and_spices#Anyone_up_for_completely_changing_this_page?... , there is not sufficient consensus to replace the existing page with my page, and in any case my page has a slightly different focus (including containing non-culinary herbs). What I think the fairest result would be is removing the redirect that keeps me from moving my article to mainspace, then once both versions of the topic are "live" (and thus open to editing by multiple people and so forth), discussing whether they should be merged or not. As it is, I basically am stuck in a loop of "Can my article be its own thing?" "No, that's too similar to the other article. You should just improve that other article instead." "Hey, guys, want me to replace this article with a better version?" "Nope." "Then, can my article be its own thing?"...

My article is a sortable table (rather than merely a list), with a default sort by species instead of common name (thus you don't, eg, have completely separate entries for "cilantro" and "coriander", though both are mentioned), and with more information (part used, general type of use, et cetera). I think if both lists were in mainspace and they ended up merged, the result would look a lot more like my list than it would the existing list of culinary herbs and spices.

The redirect and draftification was from a much, much earlier iteration of the page, several years ago, where I hadn't added many herbs yet. I have since added a lot more, including a few culinary herbs that aren't on the list of culinary herbs and spices as well as basically all the ones that are, but because of the redirect, it's still just hanging out in limbo.

If AFC is not the right place to take this, then please tell me *where is*. Tamtrible (talk) 21:55, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be quite an unusual (and indeed frustrating situation) where you're trying to follow the usual change and discuss process, but being obstructed by unnecessarily poor arguments.

I have carried on the discussion at Talk:List of culinary herbs and spices‎ and replaced the text with your draft, explaining why. If those opposing it (and it seems to be only one editor, making weak arguments) continue to give blowback, I can escalate this further, but I'm hoping it won't come to that. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:51, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you modify your table to address a new concept, not presently available on Wikipedia, viz. plants used both as medicines and flavouring agents?

It is a curious fact, which one day may be explained, that many (perhaps most) of our flavouring plants are also used medicinally. Why should that be so? Even tobacco was first tried as a medicine. Another curious fact is that one and the same alkaloid (e.g. caffeine; yohimbine) is made by completely different plants.

Plants are champion chemists. If attacked, they can't run away. So they have evolved the ability to make many defensive chemicals. Some turn out to be useful to humans, or appealing to them.

A useful start would come if someone - you? - collected all the examples together in a table or list. Then maybe someone would spot the underlying pattern.Ttocserp 13:28, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 in the 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]