User talk:GoodDay

This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

Hello to all fellow Wikipedians. Be assured I'll be as courteous as possible & hope to provide worthy answers to your questions (about wiki edits), I'm looking forward to meeting you. GoodDay 22:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC).

You may be wondering why my archives only start at August 2007. The reason: I didn't archive my pages before that date, I merely deleted them (as I didn't know how to archive). Therefore, if anyone wishes to see material before August 2007? check out this talk-page's 'history'.

I've a secondary userpage called User:GoodDay/My stuff, which is where 'my stuff' has been transfered from my Userpage.

My Mentors

Danbarnesdavies & Steven Zhang. These gentlemen, will help me tweak my behaviour/conduct on Wikipedia; particularly in the areas of British & Irish politics.

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Lieutenant Governor of Ohio, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bruce Johnson (politician) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:23, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

My mistake. I meant to fix the link to Bruce Johnson (Ohio politician). -- GoodDay (talk) 16:27, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy Christmas

I hope you have a Merry Christmas and receive lots of gifties!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:29, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

You too, Jeanne. GoodDay (talk) 02:43, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Question

I noticed that you edit European royalty, so I was hoping you might have an idea/opinion regarding a Willem van der Haegen. On the Antipope Felix V article, an anon IP has used James H. Guill, A History of the Azores Islands,Volume 5 ,pg.139 as a source stating that a daughter, Margaride, of Amadeus VIII(later antipope Felix V) married a Willem van der Haegen, grandson of John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy.[1]

Despite an exhaustive search, I have found nothing that indicates either individual(Margaride or Willem) existed. A search for James H. Guill's credentials resulted in him being mentioned as a historian of the Azores. If no other information concerning these two possibly fictitious individuals exists, should I remove the information?

Do you know of any reputable sites/books that could be consulted? I have searched Leo van de Pas site with no luck. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:55, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't have much knowledge of the anti-popes, sorry. GoodDay (talk) 00:44, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Controversial moves

Any editor may revert a controversial move, per BRD (except of course for me thanks to the COI gang of pro-dios editors). Dolovis (talk) 23:37, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I certaintly understand your frustration. GoodDay (talk) 00:47, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

You might think about using WP:BRD to help out on these matters. It is the right thing to do, and I can't do it all by myself. Dolovis (talk) 16:41, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm in a tight bind, having just gone through a Rfc/U. There are many eyes watching me. GoodDay (talk) 17:24, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, GoodDay. HandsomeFella (talk) 18:27, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Anyways, I've spent enough time on this topic today. Besides, my major concern is the North American hockey team articles. GoodDay (talk) 18:29, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Ten nine eight.....HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!

Can you realise in a few hours it'll be.....2012?!!!!!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:42, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm over 11-hrs away, from the new year. GoodDay (talk) 16:43, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't you worry...it's coming, it's coming.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:46, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I wonder what events will occur in 2012. Will US Prez Obama be re-elected? Who'll be his Republican opponent? Will Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh survive the Diamond Jubilee celebrations? GoodDay (talk) 16:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Hmm---I wonder if the Mayan Calendar will prove to be accurate....Goodbye cruel world......--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:28, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

2012 has arrived (AST)

I shall endeavor to continue my new Wikipedian ways, with the assistance of my mentors. GoodDay (talk) 04:19, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

That's an excellent New Year's resolution, GoodDay!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:26, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

When no longer a Member....

I could remove you from WikiProject British Empire if you like. I am a new member myself. Vought109 (talk) 08:07, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

That & removal from WikiProject Commonwealth, would be appreciated. GoodDay (talk) 08:08, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Done. Vought109 (talk) 01:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Vought109. GoodDay (talk) 02:02, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Why do you want out, GD? -- MichiganCharms (talk)

Those WikiProjects went stale. GoodDay (talk) 05:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

That implied they were active at some point... the Commonwealth Realm wikiproject was more active than the Commonwealth one!-MichiganCharms (talk) 05:59, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't been around both WikiProjects for years. Just lost interest in them. GoodDay (talk) 06:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Gustaf Adolf

Hey GoodDay.

You say: "In the infobox, the Monarch's title is always shown". But he wasn't a monarch, was he? Can you point me to a guideline, and does that guideline refer to the "protagonist" (so to speak) or does it refer to his parents?

HandsomeFella (talk) 07:52, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

By using Gustav VI Adolf 'position' at the time of his eldest son's death (i.e. Crown Prince), you'd create the erroneous impression that Gustav VI Adolf 'never' got to be King. GoodDay (talk) 07:55, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence and Avondale, is another example. GoodDay (talk) 08:02, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Since it also said "(later King Gustaf VI Adolf)" in the infobox, such an impression would not be possible for anyone who can read. But I'll leave it as it is, since there are other similar occurrences, e.g. Prince Alexander John of Wales, besides your example. HandsomeFella (talk) 10:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The UK, Britain, Scotland, Ireland, Wales and England

Forgive me if this is out of place. But after going through some of your talk pages it seems you have issues with how the above mentioned places are defined. As a Briton, let me try and explain it for you using facts, not opinion. I am aware that much of what I say you will already know, but regardless I am going to start from the start.

The British Isles is the name given to the collection of islands including Great Britain and Ireland. Great Britain is the physical island that consists of Scotland, Wales and England. People from these places are 'British', much like anyone from North America is 'North American'. However, the people of Britain often identify themselves as 'Scottish', or 'English' (depending on where they are from), rather than 'British'. This is perfectly correct, and they have the right to call themselves this instead of 'British', just as you would call yourself a 'Canadian', instead of a 'North American'.

The United Kingdom is the political union of the Nations of Britain and Northern Ireland. People from the republic of Ireland are not part of the United Kingdom.

Now here is the part I think you have the biggest problem with.

I'll start with these definitions as given by the Oxford Dictionary:

Nation: a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory:

Country: a nation with its own government, occupying a particular territory

The United Kingdom, as previously mentioned, is made up of the Nations of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. These are definitely nations - they all include a large body of people that are united by their own common descent etc. and they inhabit a particular territory. Scotland has it's own devolved government - The Scottish Parliament. This, by definition, makes it a country. Northern Ireland has it's own devolved government - The Northern Ireland Assembly. This, by definition, makes it a country. Wales has it's own own devolved government - The National Assembly for Wales. This, by definition, makes it a country.

I have seen you mention before that these places are not countries, but constituent countries making up one larger country. But this, deduced from the facts above, is incorrect. Each 'constituent country' as you call them is, by itself, a country. It just so happens that all of these countries are part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - A UNION, not a country. The Union itself is presided over by the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - which is NOT the government of a singular country. By accepting to be a part of the Union, each country of the UK must accept the laws of the UK Parliament, but it would be possible for any one of the countries to secede and become independent, with their current government remaining intact. Since it is possible for countries to secede with their respective governments remaining intact, it makes sense to conclude that Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland are all countries in their own right - not sub-countries or just 'nations'.

92.22.12.224 (talk) 06:31, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm currently volunteering to stay clear of that topic, until January 17, 2012. GoodDay (talk) 06:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Dear IP. And yet the British nation is also just that – a nation. Personally, my nationality is British – I do not feel particularly English – which it appears is what you are saying matters. Therefore the British nation has its country (by your definition) – the UK. What a pickle, eh? ✝DBD 18:08, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Daniel, could it be that you are saying . . . (gasp) . . . the IP may not be the ultimate authority on this matter? But I was about to petition for the admission of Louisiana to the United Nations! HuskyHuskie (talk) 03:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

English Wikipedia?

I'm discouraged: See Portland Winterhawks (NHL Entry draft section), WP:HOCKEY's latest diacritics discussion, João V of Portugal, João VI of Portugal - (for a few examples). GoodDay (talk) 19:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Let it never be said that you are not melodramatic. As this world becomes more internationalized, I think we will all have to learn to cope with odd spellings. As Wikipedia is international, we all have to share in the confusion. What seems lacking is the will to stand up and make a reasonable line in the sand. The NY Times style of using french and spanish accents seems to me to be the best and most sensible solution, but I seem to be in the middle, and in a smallish group. Omit the other diacritics as incomprehensible to anglophones. This push for correctness, and original language rights is way out of line to me. I really think that those pushing the idea refuse to see the opposing viewpoint; of course this rock-headedness also applies to those who would banish them completely. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 19:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I dread the day, these non-english groups start wanting entire article content changed. For instance, imagine trying to read an article with nearly every word diacriticized? GoodDay (talk) 19:47, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Why would we worry about an absurd and obviously impossible scenario? Other than for names, there are only a small number of loanwords that use diacritics. Resolute 19:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

At this point (of my discouragment), I wouldn't be surpised by how far these non-english pushers will go. GoodDay (talk) 19:59, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

If I may, an honest (and perhaps naïve) inquiry? What on earth is the basis for the objection to the inclusion of funny squiggles and accents? I mean, they're not English, that's true, but what harm do they cause? HuskyHuskie (talk) 03:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

They've no educational value & are an eye sore. Their usage is due to 'mother-tongue pride' of some editors. GoodDay (talk) 03:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, I've no dog in this fight, so my comments here should be taken as mere milquetoast observations:

• The "eye sore" allegation is true if that's how one feels. It certainly seems to be a matter of opinion.
• As far as "educational value" is concerned, I think I disagree. I've no idea how old you are, but I recall 30 years ago the fact that all three American news anchors (Rather-CBS, Jennings-ABC, and Brokaw-NBC) each pronounced differently the name of the leader of Poland's Solidarity movement, the future President of Poland, Lech Walesa.

1. Rather pronounced it "Vuh LESS uh"
2. Jennings pronounced it "Vuh LENSE uh", and
3. Brokaw pronounced it "Vuh WENSE uh".

I always wondered how they could not get their shit together on such a simple name as one of the most notable people in the world. Well, anyway, about 15 years later, I was learning a bit of Polish (it's amazing what a man will do to woo a woman) and I learned that in Polish the man's name is rendered "Wałęsa". So what, you say? Well, everyone got correct that a Polish "W" is pronounced like an English "V" (which is true in many languages), but that little squiggly on the "e" actually adds an "n" sound to the short e, which explains why Jennings and Brokaw pronounced the "n" in the middle syllable. And that slash across the "l", it turns out, causes the "l" to be a different letter which sounds, not like and "l" at all, but like an English "w". Turns out that Brokaw was the only one who got it all right. And only once I learned the Polish squigglies (and that's about all I learned--I only had three lessons), the mystery was solved. So, while it certainly doesn't prove the squigglies belong in Wikipedia, it does seem to me that they do have educational value.

• As to your observation about them being placed due to "mother-tongue pride", I would imagine that's very likely true. But how does it follow then that they should be discluded? I write most of my work about a university to which I have been connected in one way or another for four decades. Does that make my edits unacceptable? Pride is a powerful motivator to do good, sometimes.

Okay, that's all; Good Day! HuskyHuskie (talk) 04:22, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

This is the English language Wikipedia, however. French belongs on French Wikipedia, Polish belong on Polish Wikipedia, Czech belong on Czech Wikipedia' etc etc. GoodDay (talk) 04:30, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, yeah, of course you're right about that. I just don't see what harm is caused by writing "Wałęsa" instead of "Walesa". If a person knows the squigglies, he's happy, if he doesn't know them, he just ignores them. When I see a squiggly that I don't recognize (which is often; I'm only acquainted with Spanish, French, and Polish), I just read the letter the way it would read in English without a squiggly. I ignore it, and don't get why it matters to you. Oh well, I'm going in circles, and it really doesn't matter to me either way; Good Day! HuskyHuskie (talk) 05:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

It's alright. I'm known for my linguistic stance. GoodDay (talk) 05:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Not to pick on your last correspondent, I still find it surprising how people feel that we have to be -educated- about the use of language, no? Your current nemesis holds to the idea that strictly speaking, it's -wrong- to simply strip the diacritics. Yet, every day, in millions of cases, that is what is done. Do those millions care? Not really. Do they need to be changed? Is it Wikipedia's mission to do that? If people really cared that English speakers got the pronunciation right then the names would be reconstructed in English terms without the diacritics. E.g Vawesa. But they don't bother, and we don't bother either. And we all get along somehow ... ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 15:36, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

It still buggles my mind, how anybody can/could argue for non-english usage on English Wikipedia (unless they're arguing due to 'mother tongue' pride). Imagine what it would be like, if 'entire content' of articles were written with diacritics? GoodDay (talk) 16:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Well of course it is Wikipedia's mission. As an encyclopedia it is our mission to get it right and to educate. Which is why we avoid using slang words even though they might be the most "known" to users. In the same vein we should use peoples correct name not a "slang" (for lack of a better word) version. We have a higher standard at an encyclopedia than a typical sports column. I won't even bother refuting GoodDay's non-English crap cause its has been shot down by so many people so many times to show him that diacritics are not non-English that it is truly sad that he keeps trumpeting that. -DJSasso (talk) 16:37, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Djsasso's views aren't important on the subject, Alaney2k. He's already mentioned that he doesn't care about the topic. GoodDay (talk) 16:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh but I do care about keeping xenophobic POV pushers such as yourself in check. So in that respect it does matter to me. I do think its a ridiculous topic to argue about. But as long as you keep trying to damage the wiki with your hate filled speech then yes I will be involved in the topic. -DJSasso (talk) 16:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Put the xenophobic charge to rest, please. The english language is used across multiple countries/cultures. GoodDay (talk) 16:45, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't change the fact that the things you say are xenophobic. -DJSasso (talk) 16:46, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

They're not xenophobic, sorry. Now, if you're here 'merely' to provoke me? I'll have to ask my mentors on how to deal with 'you'. GoodDay (talk) 16:48, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

No you are clearly trying to provoke other users such as myself with the hate speech you spew to users who speak more languages than you do. -DJSasso (talk) 16:50, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Please leave (concerning this topic). We're not ever going to agree, so your presence & argumentation 'here', can only be viewed as provocation & harassment. GoodDay (talk) 16:53, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Not when you posted here first disparaging me prior to my commenting. That would be you provoking. -DJSasso (talk) 16:58, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll ask you one more time -- STOP harassing me. GoodDay (talk) 16:59, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

GoodDay has the right to control the content posted to his talk page. If he has requested for an editor stop posting here, then that editor must follow his request. I have seen examples where other editors have been blocked for continuing to harass and bait users after they have been requested to stop. I know that some administrators may believe that they are above being sanctioned for disruptive editing. I certainly hope that is not the case. 17:09, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually users can't ban users from their talk pages. I know other editors have explained that to you in the past. As long as he continues to make accusations about me or others on his page. We have the right to defend ourselves on his page. He is more than welcome to remove this whole section if he chooses and then the discussion is closed. But editing only parts of it is against talk page guidelines. -DJSasso (talk) 17:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Or you could exercise some self-control and consideration. Squabbling is so very childish. Not to mention tiresome. ✝DBD 18:05, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Diacritics & Ice Hockey

Given our latest flair up (Djsasso & myself). I'd agree to an interaction ban & a voluntary topic ban from ice hockey articles (for a designated period of time), for both of us. GoodDay (talk) 19:51, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

See the below discussion. Sometimes it's best to keep your thoughts to yourself. It has gotten you into trouble quite a bit. Additionally, your personal views on topics (like diatricts) are views you are entitled to, but consensus and policy override that. There is no clear consensus on that at present, so that needs to be addressed through dispute resolution. Anyways, see below discussion. Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 20:32, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Very well. GoodDay (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Djsasso has agreed to an interaction ban with you. Additonally, you are not to make any changes relating to diacritics, broadly construed, for an indefinite period of time, as it seems to be the main issue at present with you in your interactions with other editors, and there's a pretty strong consensus about this. There are plenty of other things you can edit on Wikipedia. Lots of articles can be cleaned up. Vandalism can be reverted. Write a new article, etc etc. Djsasso has also agreed not to make changes to diacritics. I'm off to work now, I can be reached on my talk page, and I will not be actively watching this talk page (as I am working). Regards, Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 21:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I can't pipe-link/delete dios on any Ice hockey articles & Djsasso can't remove pipe-links from or add dios to any Ice hockey articles -- Understood. GoodDay (talk) 21:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, neither of you can do either. I think you should consider not making changes to diacritics anywhere for the time being though. Seriously, I used to do nothing but mediation, and I must say, while it's tough, article writing can be very satisfying. Google "24" without quotes. See hit number 1. An article I worked on is the number one hit on Google. :) Try it. Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 21:50, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Okie Dokie. I'm sorry that you & Dan have now both had your mentorship abilites & unbiased methods questioned, but that's in the past now. GoodDay (talk) 21:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm a big boy. I wouldn't have taken you on if I wasn't prepared to take some flak. But really, you need to help me help you, and often the easiest way to do that is to bite your tongue, and think about how someone would react if you said it to someone who would react in the worst possible way. For example, if you made a derogatory remark about someone from Isreal on an article talk page (as an example) if you said it to someone from Israel in person, they'd probably punch you in the face. So of course, you wouldn't say it.

That's generally how I try and act. And that's what we're here for. We're here to guide you, but not to be your advocates. As a kid, I wasn't very controlled, and I rarely considered the consequences of my actions. A child psychologist taught me something very simple, they called it "Stop, Think, Go" and I use it to this day. In short, before you do something, stop, think about what you're doing, and if you're sure it's right, then go ahead and do it. If you're not, then ask us.

I'm more than happy to help you edit other areas, and I am sure DBD is in agreement. Building content is a great leveller. How about the three of us work on an article that you're interested in and get it to GA status? Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 22:07, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (It's located here) Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 20:32, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Reply

I have no idea why I'm wasting my time talking to you, but I'll give it a try. I can't remember a single moment when you were actually useful. I just can't. Your comments are either offensive or simply childish. Your quest against diacritics is almost comical. What's the deal with "~"? Childhood trauma? Why don't you start working on articles for real? And do you know what really upsets me? Is that if Jimbo Walles had supported your point of view you would be right now showing everybody. Since he supported me, you've kept your mouth shut. Not only that, you, SergeWoodzing and that Waaharazing... something, I can't remember his name, have lied from the begining to the end and have caused one major hell for nothing, for an article that none of you actually care. And you don't need to ask me sto stop complaing about your offensive comments. Just stop making them. --Lecen (talk) 21:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Lecen, go away & in future, stop accusing me of xenophobia & prejudice. GoodDay (talk) 21:45, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Come now, Lecen. It's no wonder GoodDay gets a bit irked at times? Do I support it? No. But comments like these definitely don't help GoodDay cease and desist, do they? Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 21:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

BTW Lecen, I stopped commenting at Jimbo's because of the aforementioned attacks 'there'. GoodDay (talk) 22:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)