• 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! Alientraveller (talk) 19:34, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you corrected some spelling errors on Talk:Survivor: Micronesia. While correct spelling errors and typos is good on articles, it is not recommended to alter other editor's comments on Talk pages, even if you are just correcting their typos. It could be misconstrued and cause unnecessary conflict. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've placed the following reply on your talk page:

"Thank you for the kindness of your counsel.

I gladly accept your sensible suggestion."

Wordsmith (talk) 13:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you are copy-editing Quantum of Solace, and your contributions are appreciated. Can I ask you, though, to be a little more civil with your edit summaries? Saying "The ignorant" and "...not be used as verbs by the intelligent, whether the rest of you like it or not" is unnecessarily condescending. Can you please explain your improvements without this distaste and in a way for other editors to learn? Thanks, Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:50, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bless your heart, Erik, and thank you. You are so right. I am so wrong. I feel guilty and ashamed of my careless indiscretion. Whatever my not-so-well-hidden feelings might be, I show myself arrogantly boorish and insensitive. A man who imagines himself kind, caring, loving and compassionate (as I do of myself) ought never to permit the devil within to arise, as I'd so obnoxiously done just then. Would you kindly assist me in cleansing that Edit Summary of my offensive and clumsily tawdry comment, please? —Wordsmith (talk) - 16:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you see things my way! :) Just read up on WP:CIVIL and use edit summaries more objectively next time. Happy editing! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just checking - it's no big deal - but the correction about Holbrook Working "which Holbrook Working was also involved with." to "with which Holbrook Working was also involved." suggests to me (along with the spelling of your name) that you are not a native English speaker. Most native English speakers find Churchill's "a situation up with we should not put" to be incredibly hilarious. If you don't, please consider leaving this type of correction off your list.

Hope this doesn't seem too picky.

Smallbones (talk) 19:23, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

_____________________________________________________________

That parody of parochial pedantry has always amused me mildly — but little more.

I'll extend my appreciation more fully sometime soon on your talk page.

— Wordsmith (talk) 02:25, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{Your quote neglects the word "which" from the expression that may first have appeared in The Strand, in 1942,

{before others erroneously attributed it to my friend Winston six years later:

" the anonymous postscript was offensive impertinence, up with which I will not put." }

_____________________________________________________________

I inadvertently reverted one of your edits on Survivor: Palau while reverting edits before yours.

I will attempt to restore your edit. Thanks for your work on WP.

Plastikspork (talk) 16:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

_____________________________________________________________

Thank you for the kindness of that neighborly word.

— Wordsmith (talk) 22:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

_____________________________________________________________

Hello there, I hope you are doing well.

I noticed this edit, and I would like to discuss it with you.

I wrote that sentence in a specific way for a specific reason a couple years ago. While I can see you were making the paragraph tidier in wording, it sort of defeats the purpose of its intent. Not that I'd expect you to have known that, or anyone in particular :) By saying "Administrators undertake actions on a voluntary basis" I meant to imply that administrators, with only a couple exceptions by policy, are not obliged to do anything. I do not have to clean out CSD, for example. It's only if I want to. The new wording introduces the idea that we're not paid, which was not the point. Perhaps you can help me word it better? Keegan (talk) 05:05, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

_____________________________________________________________

Oh, get out !!

Don't tell me we have the same birthday.

.

Bless your heart for such a thoughtful response to my revision.

.

I never imagined for a moment that the one who'd written that line had had money on his mind.

My revision, as it stands, conforms completely with your point and your purpose, just as you've explained them to me.

I'm with you, Keegan.

Had your statement ("on a voluntary basis") meant "not paid," I would have replaced it with "without pay."

Never fear. I doubt we'll find a dictionary anywhere that will lead your readers astray.

Not a single significant listing for voluntarily connotes anything in the matter of money.

(Except in Wiktionary, but what do they know.)

(—:

You will feel happy to see that of sixteen definitions, and twenty-one synonyms or elaborations upon that word,

all the connotations of voluntarily at merely Dictionary.com (as a token example), you'll find barely two hints to the concept of compensation.

Bless your heart for setting such a good example in your message for me.

~ ~ Wordsmith (talk) 16:00, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voluntarily

Adjectives with the same connotation as the adverb cited:

considered, purposeful, planned, intended, designed. deliberate. free, unforced, natural, unconstrained.

Voluntarily implies having given previous consideration, or having exercised judgment: a voluntary confession; a voluntary movement;

done, made, brought about, undertaken, etc., of one's own accord or by free choice;

acting in accord with the will; acting or done without compulsion or obligation.

.

voluntarily. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. (accessed: July 11, 2009).

_____________________________________________________________

Rumor mill malfunction. Durova³⁴⁸ 03:39, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking for some good copy-editors to take a look at some articles I wrote and I felt a little suspect about submitting them to the LOCE because what you get there in terms of editors is kind of a mixed bag imho. Pluss it takes forever. I noticed you're pretty good. So would you mind taking a look at a small little article I wrote? Here a DYK style hook to get you interested: Did you know...

• ...that convicted American felon Matthew Cox was so bold in committing over $15 million of mortgage fraud that he allegedly even took out a mortgage under the name of The Simpsons character "C. Montgomery Burns"?

Thanks in advance. Quadzilla99 (talk) 10:50, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

________________________________________________________

Kindly forgive my missing your message.

I'd been away for fully a year from the day before you wrote it.

Thank you so much for your generous praise.

— Wordsmith (talk) 04:20, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

________________________________________________________

Thanks for the correction of Lexicon. your comments also made me smile!

1. How did you detect the problem?
2. What are the top issues you generaly come accross?

BO; talk 18:55, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kindness of your comment.

In reply to your questions,

1. Just while reading one among several interlinked articles by fans of linguistics.

I'd been looking in each case for the meaning attributed to one such term or another.

2. Nothing special. I like clean, strong speech. Simplicity lends strength to the word.

— Wordsmith (talk) 05:00, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit removed all of the episode summaries, which I do not think you intended to do. While I agree there is some room for improvement in the footnotes, I suggest bringing them up on the talk page. The tables tend to be a rather contentious subject. The wording is on the bland side to leave the specific details to the episode summaries. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:18, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm not reverting your revision to Eponym, but I would submit to you that "time periods", while a bit unattractive (I prefer "periods of time"), is not exactly redundant. A period, fundamentally, is a completed process—a span of time, yes, but also a thought, an event, a cycle. For instance, as I'm sure you know, what Brits call a "full stop", Americans call a "period", because it marks the completion of a sentence. Since there are different kinds of periods, to specify what kind of period one has reference to, while it may be unnecessary, is not wrong. I hope you've enjoyed this moment of pedantry. ;0) J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 16:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the only one guilty of pedantry here, J. D.

What I've enjoyed, indeed, is your gracious restraint, as well as your intelligent example in the fourth from the last word in your parenthetical statement here.

I rather suspect that a man of your credentials with an affection for excellence will broadly embrace, upon further contemplation, your very own example, as well as the Simple Definition provided by your own Orthoglossary's Merriam-Webster, every one of which renders period fundamentally as an interval of time, as has every reputable dictionary I've ever consulted since infancy:

Simple Definition of period

• a length of time during which a series of events or an action takes place or is completed

• a length of time that is important in the history of the world, a nation, usw

• a time that is important in the life of a person.

I feel sincerely grateful to you for your quite graciously expressed impressions, yet your second full statement is false.

A period is neither a process, a thought, an event, nor a cycle.

The unequivocally fundamental meaning of a period is an interval of time.

Neither of us, nonetheless, will have any trouble finding a dictionary somewhere that invokes that popular but perfectly redundant expression, period of time.

I, like you, regard some once venerable sources as unworthy of unquestioned acceptance. You've confessed to criticizing the books you've read most often, in a motion for their own improvement.

As to the matter of necessity in your penultimate statement, let me confess this about me:

while my writing still fails in my quest for succinct,

I regard any word not necessary as deadwood.

Wordsmith (talk) 14:23, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind remarks (in which I've taken the liberty of updating a wikilink, since the conversation it referred to has been archived). I wouldn't continue to dispute with you over period, except that you call my earlier assertion false. I'm sure you didn't intend to accuse me of lying. Moreover, if you will look at the full definition of period on the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (which I would argue is the more accurate):

Full Definition of period

1 : the completion of a cycle, a series of events, or a single action : conclusion
2 a (1) : an utterance from one full stop to another : sentence (2) : a well-proportioned sentence of several clauses (3) : periodic sentence
   b : a musical structure or melodic section usually composed of two or more contrasting or complementary phrases and ending with a cadence
3 a : the full pause with which the utterance of a sentence closes
   b : end, stop
4 obsolete : goal, purpose
5 a (1) : a point . used to mark the end (as of a declarative sentence or an abbreviation) (2) —used interjectionally to emphasize the finality of the preceding statement (I don't remember — period)
   b : a rhythmical unit in Greek verse composed of a series of two or more cola
6 a : a portion of time determined by some recurring phenomenon
   b (1) : the interval of time required for a cyclic motion or phenomenon to complete a cycle and begin to repeat itself (2) : a number k that does not change the value of a periodic function f when added to the independent variable; especially : the smallest such number
   c : a single cyclic occurrence of menstruation
7 a : a chronological division : stage
   b : a division of geologic time longer than an epoch and included in an era
   c : a stage of culture having a definable place in time and space
8 a : one of the divisions of the academic day
   b : one of the divisions of the playing time of a game

you will see not only that my statement concerning the meaning of the term is not false, but also that definitions having to do with intervals of time are decidedly secondary to those involving completion of a thought (or utterance), an event, a cycle. Other dictionaries, both American and British, tend to give more priority to temporal senses of the word, but all agree that it also comprehends the senses I have mentioned. (See also the etymology of the word.)

Finally, while I agree that economy in writing is usually a virtue, parsimony, or strict utilitarianism, can make for very arid, sterile prose.

Thanks again, at any rate, for your compliments, and for your interest in my blog. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 16:20, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested &so are others. We need an intermediate step. But lets keep this separate form individuals. DGG ( talk ) 22:42, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your problem report. I've just edited the article to address it ... 7½ years later. CWC 10:12, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]