User talk:Ann O'nyme

Welcome to official user-dom, Anne O'nyme! In case you haven't already found them, some useful links are Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers, Wikipedia:Naming conventions, Wikipedia:Manual of Style, and Wikipedia:The perfect article. Most questions are answered at Wikipedia:Help; if you have a question not answered there, then you can post it to the Village pump.

I like your username - my own anonymous email address is cyanonym@hotmail.com.

A word of warning: when comments are posted, the raw text appears without vocal inflections or body language; the lack of these nonverbal cues tends to make the raw text appear to be more terse/rude than the sender actually intended. This is stating the obvious, but people seem to forget it in the heat of the moment. In Wikipedia, it sometimes results in an exchange of insults during a dispute over the content of an article. So my word of warning is this: don't be surprised if someone makes comments to you that seem unnecessarily brusque; and try not to take it personally. It is a side-effect of the medium.

Cyan 06:14, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for hints & advice! I haven't read the help yet, I more in learning by examples ;) -Ann O'nyme

I've posted comments on your talk page. Cyan 06:14, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Thanks. How do you insert time? -Ann O'nyme

The answer is at Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page, about half-way down. By the way, Principle of indifference isn't my article - you don't need to clear changes with me. Be bold! Also, it's best to post comments to me on my talk page - that's where I keep the closest watch. Cyan 18:44, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Well... I'm learning... -Ann O'nyme 23:36, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Hello, please see: Talk:European motto about the european motto issue. At18 16:09, 17 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Hi, Ann! I've reverted an edit done by you in EU, since Ceuta and Melilla are part of EU. My arguments are at the talk page of EU. Please, don't be angry at me ;) I hope you're enjoying Wikipedia, I've been here for a couple of weeks and it's great fun! I noticed we share a common interest: European Union. So, see you around. Feel free to write me. Marco Neves

Hi Marco! No problem... see EU page. I arived recently too... I'm adicted ;) --Ann.

I copy that from Talk:Pope John XXIII:

Last edit:

remove borders around pictures

Why? It was clearer before. Is there a Wiki-policy on that? --Ann O'nyme 22:55, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

There are two reasons.

Borders existed in publishing to mark the location where a picture would be inserted in the printing process. That was there only function, in the days of hot metal. Computer pages don't need them.
Borders don't always appear cleanly on some browsers. Some of us some months ago had a problem where the border would not line up correctly around some pictures. On occasion pictures would not be centred in the box but appear to the left or the right, leaving a hideous overly large border on one side of the picture and throwing captions into chaos. It was discussed and it was agreed that the border command was not necessary and was simply a design hangover from the hot metal pre-computerisation days that people, copying the look of pre-DTP newspapers. The options were either to go through a pointless and tedious process of designing a whole new set of commands to ensure borders worked OK on all browsers and then changing tens of thousands of commands around pictures, check every picture placed on a page in every conceivable browser to make sure it worked, and if it didn't go through an equally pointless exercise of continually changing the specifications to get it right through a time-consuming process of trial and error, or simply remove a command that in practice had no design benefit, was irrelevant to computer layout but which simply threw up problems for some people using some forms of some browsers.

Brion specifically said the command could safely be removed, having been told of the problems arising. Since then, few users include the command (given that most cut and paste the command list from past articles and most articles written in the last few months dropped the command). Where the border exists it is usually in old articles that predate the discovery that it could go hideously wrong on some browsers. Where it is found it is generally removed. (Similarly the old tab commands that were used for pictures is where found is being replacing by the <div></div> command, because the tab command mucks up pictures or lets text overwrite images occasionally. And the idea of leaving out a pixel specification has also come unstuck when it turned out that the presumption that the picture would automatically be placed correctly proved incorrect, as pictures shot off the page and again collided with text.

Leaving out the border command makes the page cleaner, less hot metal looking and makes the picture appear correctly in all browsers. Keeping it in involves the risk that someone on some form of browser may be presented with a deformed page, with a picture to the left or right in the box, sometimes indeed bigger than the box, and with captions all skewed all over the place. I hope that clarifies the situation. FearÉIREANN 01:56, 30 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks. --Ann O'nyme 03:24, 30 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Glad to help. BTW you're addicted? NOOO! Break free, now. Kick the habit! :-) Otherwise you'll never ever ever escape the curse of wiki, and find yourself dreaming of edits, waking up in cold sweats muttering revert, revert or worst of all, find when you wake up that in your sleep you've written in your memory a 30K article on some topic, which you will then have to write down immediately; to hell with job, marriage, wedding plans, funerals, holidays, you'll find yourself saying "I've gotta finish that article now!!!" or "OK. Christmas dinner, or that paragraph on Christopher Columbus . . . mmm . . . which do I want?"!!! Or in other words, as you may have realised by now, wiki is more addictive than heroin (and if you are on a pay per minute system, almost as expensive!!!) lol :-) FearÉIREANN 04:52, 30 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I don't yet dream of it but as soon as I'm in front of a computer... I can't resist!!! Break free, now. Well... Thanks for advice! Exactly what I've been thinking for weeks ;) Help! --Ann O'nyme 11:07, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I have replied to your post on Wikipedia:Protected page. -- Cyan 20:14, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Thanks. --Ann O'nyme 20:48, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Posted on Talk:Current events:

"Suicide bombing" was created because on the contrary of what append for centuries (at least in Greek-judeo-roman-christian-muslim world) the attacker planed to die in the attack. In fact suicide is even the very key part of the plan.

First point: It's a new war tactics. A new concept. A neologism is needed. (Previous exemples: guerilla, blitzkrieg...)
Second and very important point: By committing suicide, the attacker breaks centuries-old traditions. The attack is against the Greek-judeo-roman-christian-muslim civilisation! (May be why "kamikaze" wasn't reused...) Therefore "suicide bombing".

Do a google search for "bombing" and "suicide bombing" and you'll have confirmation that "suicide bombing" is more informative.

Look for "bombing" in WWII. No need for "homicide". Bombing and especially "suicide bombing" is about killing people, everybody got it.

"Suicide bombing" is prefered to "homicide bombing" because it's older and widely used: "about 181,000" google hits to "about 3,300".

Redefining vocabulary is not NPOV. It is not information. It a well-known propaganda strategy. It is vandalism.

--Ann O'nyme 19:26, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Please REVERT the redirect of Suriyani_Christians_of_Kerala to Saint_Thomas_Christians

The former is about suryani christians of kerala , which is only indirectly related to Saint_Thomas_Christians . I hope you are not aware of the history of this in kerala.

This is about the culture of syrian christians of kerala. They are popularly known as Syrian Christians in view of the Syriac (classical form of Aramaic) liturgy used in church services since the early days of Christianity in India and not for any syrian migration. I have just started the article and allow me to continue it

Tinucherian 06:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did NOT made this redirect. --Ann O'nyme 16:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Eurozone

May I suggest not to simply delete the countries you just did, but instead moving them to the right section? If you are doing this already, please ignore this message. Thanks! Miguel.mateo (talk) 00:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added:

Since Saint Barthélemy and Saint Martin were broken away on 22 February 2007 from Guadeloupe to be formed into two new French overseas collectivities, they are in legal limbo until ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon.

--Ann O'nyme 02:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw it, well done, thanks! Miguel.mateo (talk) 11:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]