User talk:Aleta Curry/Archive 5

Welcome!

05:10, 16 April 2007 (CDT)

Dogs

Nice work. :-) --Stephen Ewen 02:46, 31 May 2007 (CDT)

Aw, shucks! Thank you! Aleta Curry 02:48, 31 May 2007 (CDT)

re: Film

Aleta, it's in the "Workgroups and granularity" forum, but I didn't get many responses. The only opinion voiced other than mine suggested the Media Workgroup for film. Here's a direct link. I recently noticed there is a separate Journalism Workgroup, so the Media Workgroup isn't supposed to be focused on that.

BTW, I agree that the forums are a pit. There's way too many of them for the number of Citizens.

--Eric Winesett 00:41, 6 June 2007 (CDT)

Thanks for the link!Aleta Curry 03:47, 6 June 2007 (CDT)

Good job!

That's exactly where it goes! Do you know how to add the checklist? --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:22, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, and No, and I hate doing such things (sticking out tongue). Are we "allowed" to "checklist" our own stuff? That seems wrong, somehow....Aleta Curry 21:26, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Hehe, YES, not only allowed, but required! Hehe.. It's easy.. look to the left of this page and you will see the checklist under "project pages". Click on it and copy the whole thing. Then go to Talk:Working dog and paste it to the top.. It's that easy ;-) I'll watch if you fall :-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:35, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

okay, no "project pages" at the left, PLUS we've got a storm coming and I'm losing power. Must sign off and check back later. Ciao. Aleta Curry 21:38, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Hey, that's cheating! lol. PS> you have to scroll up (we're at the bottom of you talk page) --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:44, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

I *did* scroll up, but missed the black printed headings; I only noticed the bullets--duh! Well, I never claim to be visual--here's proof....Aleta Curry 18:00, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

User:Aleta Curry/dogs

Yep, that is what you do, (though make sure you put a space between your first and last names). Besides, you are the only big-time-important-CZ-person here I think? --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:27, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

checklist

You almost had it! I fixed that one.. (you can review the things I changed in the history). I also added the instructions to the bottom of the checklist to the left so maybe that will help. All you have to do is copy and paste the whole thing to the 'top' of the 'talk' page and fill it in according to the instrcutions, then delete the instructions. Keep trying, I am using you to find out the best way to present this :-) Don't give up! --Matt Innis (Talk) 08:39, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Yay! That's it.. it's all down hill from here ;-) Now you have to teach somebody else, it's a right of passage! By the way - you are allowed to edit the instructions, too! --Matt Innis (Talk) 19:54, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

I have to teach someone else??!!!

Now stop that! I think you're making this up as you go along!

Edit the instructions? Um...

Aleta Curry 17:46, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

CZ Live

You're right, I really wanted to do it. However, there was a substantial opposition and for a reason I respect, see this thread on forum. The only way I see for the moment is to keep CZ Live equal to Internal Articles. And so, CZ is still aLive ;-). Best, --Aleksander Stos 03:53, 11 July 2007 (CDT)

references

It looks like Kjetil beat me to it! - You've got friends. :-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:05, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Oh, how splendid! I'll go look! Aleta Curry 20:12, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

re

Alex/Aleks, both are OK, but "Dr Stos" is not acceptable :-) BTW, at times I have a similar problem when addressing people. Maybe we could adopt a guideline (in CZ:Professionalism policy, say) that suggests using the first name as the default. Well, I do not know; there might be some cultural nuances/differences between "continental" and "anglosaxon" approach, and I know only a few samples of the former. --Aleksander Stos 07:13, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

I am probably the very last person on earth--at least of my age--who believes that all persons should be addressed by a courtesy title until otherwise instructed. The problem here, of course, is which one? Cultural norms do come into play--an MD in England would be called Mr, the same person Dr. in the US--even socially. Are all adult females Ms if they are not Dr or Rev? We will have a mishmosh of Misses, Ms-iz and Mrs, I'll be bound.

If first names are the default, I suggest we will always have to use the formal name, until instructed otherwise: ie Charles=Chas, Chuck, Charlie? is Catherine 'Cathy' or 'Cate'? William is Will or Bill? And at least one CZer I have come across prefers to be called by his last name.

Aleta Curry 18:01, 20 July 2007 (CDT) (Aleta, whose nickname was "Tita", but now seems to be "Honey, where's my...?")

popups

Hey, did popups work for you? --Matt Innis (Talk) 08:47, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

Hi Matt! Yes they do, thanks, but they don't work the way I thought they would. I had in mind that a box would open with either the first line of the article th popup related to, or a note about the subject (like a Jeopardy! answer, i.e. if you were looking at Christianity the popup for Jesus would say: "Jesus, 1st Century itinerant preacher whom Christians believe to be the Son of God" or some such).

Instead, I get Jesus in bold and a whole bunch of editing tabs. I still have to double click to find out something about Jesus, which takes me out of the article I was looking at into the new one.

Aleta Curry 16:40, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

That is what I get and that is not what it is supposed to be. I'll check your note on the forums. --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:51, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

Gay (word)

Aleta, I'm sorry to say so but I would like to take a few steps back with Gay (word) -- the plans I had for expandng this entry, and for giving a thorough and judicious etymological history, have been quite muddled by the last set of edits. I do want to have some attention to US usage in and as it may differ from UK, but it's inaccurate to say the word simply meant "happy"; the OED is a far more authoritative dictionary, and it's the one we need to at least start with before we integrate readings from other sources. Also, there is a political history to the word -- see my comments on the Talk page -- which needs to be expanded. I've also asked Stephen to reinstante the section headers, which would have made this much more clear. Russell Potter 20:51, 28 July 2007 (CDT)

p.s. please pardon my perhaps hasty judgment; I've worked over the article, retaining some very good bits, and expanding. If we can just wait until I'e compiled a more detailed list of dictionary citations, I think we can have a more accurate statement there. It's moving along! Cheers, Russell Potter 21:36, 28 July 2007 (CDT)

Hi Aleta, I just wanted to say hi, and let you know I made some comments at the Talk:Gay (word) page. It is nice to see it evolving and pleased to see your interest in it as it grows. --Ian Johnson 08:01, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

p.p.s. as partial penance for my petulance, I've had a go at Marmite. Up next, all those other mystery British foodstuffs: Bovril, Sanatogen tonic wine, Port Negus, and others .... cheers, Russell Potter 07:58, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

Okay, first the compliments, then the smack on the wrist:

Russell, I think you're among the most valuable players on the team and I've been very impressed by your drive and dedication and the extent of your contributions to the project.

Yes, well, maybe your reaction was a little precipitous and the teensiest bit defensive, but we're all guilty of the same from time to time. Come to think of it, in light of the fact that you bothered to write notes rather than just having a fit, I don't think you need that smack on the wrist after all.

So, while I have you in a penitential mood, can I ask for help?

1. I’m looking for the article Ain't Jus'Any Ole Dawgs by Dr. Sally Reed. Bloodlines Magazine Jan./Feb 1992. Quoted at website http://www.thedogplace.com/Reference/TFT/tft_history1.htm

Bloodlines Magazine is published by the United Kennel Club. (Kentucky? USA) Local libraries here can’t help; don’t know if they can do anything if I go beg and plead at the National Library in Canberra, but in any case I can’t afford to make a special trip to do that.

I’m writing to UKC to see if they have a low cost reprint service or something, in the meantime, are you able to find out what public libraries have it, maybe I can contact them? Or some other brilliant idea?

2. If I want to cite an old article, this one: The Boke of St. Albans, by Dame Juliana Berners first published in 1496, and I didn't look at a copy of the original, but at an electronic reproduction of the original in a library, how do I note it?

Ian: Hi from me, too. I hope you get a lot of satisfaction and little agita working on your articles. I'll go look you up on your userpage now.

Okay, that's all from me for the present.

Aleta Curry 17:40, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

I really like the style you bring to your input here. I like to smile, and that is all good. (I loved your witch's cackle laugh BTW.) Don't know if you saw but Russell may have flown the coop today. His user page is where I saw that. I am very new here but I have so far enjoyed a healthy experience of interaction, so 'so far, so good'. Okay, best away for some ZzzZZzzZZsss. --Ian Johnson 17:47, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

roolz

Hey the way I see it, I have 'til the end of Wednesday to do my edit! But I will bow down to you and give you my blessing for putting your name first, since you've already done both. :) I really just put my name there so people would know what one of their options were. --Todd Coles 21:34, 31 July 2007 (CDT)

Just stirrin'--heh heh heh. I was glad to see you fellows getting the ball rolling! Aleta Curry 23:35, 31 July 2007 (CDT)

Ok, ok, now I see you've created 3 new articles. No one likes a show off! :) I guess that ups the ante for next month eh? --Todd Coles 08:51, 1 August 2007 (CDT)

Bwah, hyah, hah hah. Catch me if you can! Aleta Curry 16:46, 1 August 2007 (CDT)

Thanks for your comment on Hebrew Bible, I replied on the talk page. Ciao! David Hoffman 19:03, 1 August 2007 (CDT)

Re: Article of the month

Hi,
Ekhem, I do not 100% understand. Did you mean CZ:Article of the Week? If so, then I can see no traces of any dogs :-) (and I can not move it to the end of the list). Could you please provide a link, if applicable? Regarding inaccuracies in the article itself, you're welcome to bring your improvements. Also, feel free to leave your comments on the relevant talk page or to contact an active Biology Editor to propose re-approving the text. Aleksander Stos 02:33, 3 August 2007 (CDT)

Oh, right--so it gets voted on. That's all right, then--I have time. Oh, jeez, there's plenty on the Talk page already--I'm trying to actually make some edits rather than just complaining. Aleta Curry 04:39, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

Look forward to more collaboration

Aleta, I look forward to continued and increased collaboration. I have made lengthy and well-documented arguments against the banishment of the word "Oriental". You may have missed these. You may have seen these but dismissed them as so much nonsense. You may agree with these arguments for all I know. I just wanted to drop you a quick personal note to let you know that I do not easily anger and that I always enjoy exchanging information with dynamic people like yourself. Will Nesbitt 19:40, 5 August 2007 (CDT)

Will, I'm sorry--I left a long post in reply here yesterday, and it seems to have disappeared. The only thing I can think is that I hit 'preview' but did not actually "save".  %^^&(%#*&!!! I'll come back and speak to some of your points later. Apologies, again. Aleta Curry 18:19, 6 August 2007 (CDT)

Dogs (photos)

I have some photos of Scottish terriers available CCPL (cc-by-sa) if you need them.

http://highlandgames.wikia.com/wiki/Scottish_farm_(photos)

Also some border collie photos (a few not yet uploaded) and, for what its worth, alpacas and Highland cattle.

Is there some place where links to such photos are listed for possible future use?

James F. Perry 08:25, 6 August 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, James! Oh, there's so much to do! I'll definitely have a look, and save this link on my workpage.

Re listing of photos--Stephen seems to be the image guru around here, I would drop him a line.

Aleta Curry 18:28, 6 August 2007 (CDT)

Article of (insert time interval here) - Dog

Okay, I'll un-nominate it for now. Did I do this once before? Anyway, I suppose I'm letting my enthusiasm the the best of me.

This is the first time I've seen it. For the record, I think your enthusiasm is just fine. Aleta Curry 18:30, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

Approval recommended

Aleta: I've nominated your article for approval and left some notes and suggestions on my User talk page. Roger Lohmann 07:08, 10 August 2007 (CDT)

Thank you! Aleta Curry 17:03, 10 August 2007 (CDT)

Anthro workgroup?

As a new editor, I was just checking on the listings in our workgroup - does this article really belong under the Anthropology Workgroup?

Lee R. Berger 14:29, 11 August 2007 (CDT)

Hi Lee--which article? One of mine? Aleta Curry 17:13, 11 August 2007 (CDT)

You are right. It almost certainly doesn't belong there in any narrow, precise disciplinary sense. It also isn't clear that it belongs under Sociology. At least if those categories are taken to mean what most contemporary anthropologists and sociologists mean by them.

But, the real question is - where then would you put it? Under history, I suspect the historians would raise the same questions. Yet, everything, as it is said, has to be someplace. The current classification scheme - which will resolve itself in the end - doesn't necessarily assure that that particular someplace will always be the right place in any precise sense.

Butler is a clear, well written contribution on an interesting and more general topic - I would call it household organization - for which the author has a very clear and stated plan for further development. And human social organization is a topic of both sociology and anthropology, although not necessarily in this exact sense.

Fortunately or otherwise, no suitable word or category yet exists in CZ or beyond for this category. I raised this issue in an earlier posting suggesting additional applied social science categories (this one would probably be something like household-iatrics (i.e., the study of household organization and practice) - home economics or consumer science, perhaps?

I would suggest we not hold the article hostage while we - the CZ community - try to solve this problem of classification. When a later and better classification becomes available, I suspect the author will not object to re-categorizing it. Until then it is, broadly speaking both sociology - knowledge of social relations - and anthropology - knowledge of humans.

So, I'd say let's leave it there for now and let's re-categorize it when a better category comes along.

Hi Aleta,

I think so - Famous dogs and Working dog.

Lee R. Berger 03:13, 12 August 2007 (CDT) Le

write-a-thon

I put the banner up on the main page.. I have no real concept of what time it is in australia, forgive my ignorance. :) --Todd Coles 16:48, 4 September 2007 (CDT)