My account[edit]

Jim, Welcome to Wikipedia. I have noticed that you are contributing to articles fairly regularly, as such how about joining up and becoming a member. There are advantages to creating an account if you want to contribute regularly. To join, create an account and then introduce yourself to the community at the new user log. – AxSkov 09:40, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

AxSkov,

Thank you for your welcoming. The problem is, though, that this is not my computer so how's that work? Also, I might not be around much in the coming months ... or I might be around a lot. I have to wait & see how much time I've got to spare. Another thing, is there already a Jim at Wikipedia? - Jim 15Mar05

Jim, I'll be happy to answer any of your questions, if you direct them to my talk page. – AxSkov 11:25, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've created an account and, yes, it seems that "Jim" had been taken so now I'm Jimp - Jim(p) 24May05

Welcome!

G'day Jim, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! – AxSkov (T) 14:12, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

G'day AxSkov,

Thanks for those tips. I hope to be hanging around Wikipedia, it should be fun. I've just got to find time.

moved from User talk:210.237.26.133

It would be really helpful iot you could log in before doing changes. Just look in the upper, righthand corner to see if you are logged in or not. -- Egil 11:26, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably right. However I don't always have the time to log in. Jimp 15Sep05

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Australia page as being an expatriate/overseas Australian. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Australian Wikipedians for instructions.--Rmky87 02:27, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've noticed that you are signing your posts manually. The mediawiki software can easily add your user and the time and date by just typing ~~~~ at the end. Evil Monkey - Hello 19:14, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Might want to include this in your IP list unless it's an imposter at talk:metre. An Australian who posts from Japanese IPs is a tad unusual. You're sure you can't do anything about your login situation? Femto 15:01, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The same IP edited a posting of yours here. Is that you or an impostor? --Angr (t·c) 07:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, another drawback is apparently that one could happily edit away from their IPs but not get any "you have new messages" box until this account is logged in again. Femto 15:07, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, those two edits were mine. You're right an Australian who posts from Japanese IPs is a tad unusual but not impossible. I should make more of an effort to login but sometimes I either haven't the time or the computer is not working properly. Sorry to cause headaches. Jimp 27Dec05

Not really headaches. Just some heck of confusion. :) Femto 10:15, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Problem: I've just sent myself a new password ... by mistake. The thing is that I never gave Wikipedia my e-mail address so how can I get my new password? Will I ever be able to log in as Jimp again? Just in case I'm creating an alternate account. First Sockpuppet of Jimp is I. Jimp 01:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

... okay, seem's like all this fuss was over nothing but I now have a sockpuppet. If he starts making a nusance of himself, this sockpuppet of mine, be sure to inform me. Jimp 01:55, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to have had a rather funny consequence. It would seem that my sockpuppet has indeed run amuck and created five more sockpuppets in its image.

• User:Second sockpuppet of Jimp
• User:Third sockpuppet of Jimp
• User:Fourth sockpuppet of Jimp
• User:Fifth sockpuppet of Jimp
• User:Sixth sockpuppet of Jimp

No, none of these are me. Jimp 00:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

unblock|Curps has blocked me. The reason: my account is too similar to that of First Sockpuppet of Jimp. Take a look at First Sockpuppet of Jimp's user page. On that page I clearly state that this is me. Check the page history. It is me. On that page I also stated that the reason I created that account was here on this page. Well it was until I archived it.

Let me just retell the story. When I set this account up I did not include any e-mail address. A while ago I accidently hit E-mail new password instead of Log in. How could I recieve my new password if Wikipedia didn't have my e-mail address?

I imagined that I'd never be able to log in as Jimp again so I decided to create a new account. I choose a name that would make it clear that it is the same person. Before I logged out as Jimp I stated on the new page that this was me. I also gave my reason for doing this on this page as mentioned above.

As it turned out my password was not changed and the whole fuss was over nothing. So I forgot about First Sockpuppet of Jimp. Take a look at my list of contributions as First Sockpuppet of Jimp ... one contribution only. I am not using this account for the purpose of vandalism.

Today I discovered that someone had thought it would be funny to create the following accounts.

• User:Second sockpuppet of Jimp
• User:Third sockpuppet of Jimp
• User:Fourth sockpuppet of Jimp
• User:Fifth sockpuppet of Jimp
• User:Sixth sockpuppet of Jimp

None of these are account...}}

Clearing an autoblock

Due to the nature of the block applied, we need additional information before we can decide whether to unblock you. It is very likely that you are not personally blocked. If you are prevented from editing, it may be because you are autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address. Without further details, there is nothing further we can do to review or lift your block. Please follow these instructions:

1. If you have a Wikipedia account, please ensure that you are logged in.

   Your account name will be visible in the top right of this page if you are.

   If it isn't, try bypassing your web browser's cache.

2. Try to edit the Sandbox.

   If you are able to edit the sandbox, you are not blocked from editing. Either the autoblock on your IP address has already expired, or you weren't blocked in the first place. Either way, you can resume editing.

3. If you are still blocked, follow the directions below:
   1. Copy the {{unblock-auto|...}} code generated for you under the "Unblock request" section.
   2. Paste the code at the bottom of your user talk page, and click save.

      If you cannot edit your own talk page, use the Unblock Ticket Request System to make your request.

--   Netsnipe  ►  03:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Next time, please follow the established procedure set out at Wikipedia:Doppelganger account. --  Netsnipe  ►  03:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

... Sorry I had to run & have to run yet again. Thanks for your advice, Netsnipe. I haven't time right now to sort this out but as I was saying I discovered those fake "sockpuppet" accounts today & found them a little funny. I left a message on the talk page of last of them. I thought it would be fun to leave another as the First Sockpuppet. This is what must have go me autoblocked. If you ask me, I think all these sockpuppet accounts should be deleted including the first one which is the only real one. Jimp 04:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jimp,

I just want to let you know that 210.138.233.26 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) redirect the userpage of that IP to your userpage: [1]. If that is your IP, than it is understandable, if it is not, you might want to revert that redirect. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 08:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. 210.138.233.26 is me thus the redirect.

Measurement[edit]

Inspired by some of the last few weeks incidents, I've collected various material on Pseudoscientific metrology. I'd appreciate it if you would review it. -- Egil 12:17, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've also posted this request: Wikipedia:AMA_Requests_for_Assistance#Pseudoscientific_attack. -- Egil 14:43, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A pseudoscientific attack: that's exactly what seems to be happening here. I'll have a look at your page. Splitting Ancient weights and measures article was a good idea. I'd been thinking of doing that myself. Jimp 8Aug05

For your information, I have now submitted a request for arbitration: User:rktect -- Egil 11:34, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry, but when I saw an anon ip blanking two sections it just screamed vandalism to me. Thanks for clarifying what actually happened, and don't worry, I won't revert it in the future :). Amren ^(talk) 16:17, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Since you left a statement, you may be interested to know that there is now a Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rktect/Evidence. -- Egil 13:48, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry, I was patrolling RC and saw an anon ip blanking a large chunk of an article, so I reverted. I didn't realize you had a real plan in mind when doing it. I've seen many vandals comment "see talk", and then have nothing on talk, and I saw that your IP had no comments on talk and assumed the same. I hadn't realized you signed your post Jimp. Anyways, I've reverted my revert, and sorry once again.  —siroχo 04:37, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, problem. I guess it could look like vandalism deleting chunks from an aritcle.

You are doing great work across many unit articles. Thanks for all effort. Bobblewik 14:47, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Bobblewik. Jimp 4Oct05

Hello, because of your interest in science articles, I thought you might like to know that the article on Metrication is a featured article candidate, please vote here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Metrication. Thanks Seabhcán 13:25, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The mysterious colons on Talk:Metrication indicate an Analogy.

--DavidCary 05:10, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from User talk:58.90.18.65

Are you planning to do the other tables of units as well? It would be better to use the same format for all of them. --DannyWilde 09:13, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I had been. Now it's done. Jimp 5Nov05

Yeah, I plan to add other English units, but haven't gotten around to it (I gotta sit down and do the math, after all). It seemed absurd to have metric only, given that a substantial chunk of Wikipedia's readership is American or used to the old English system. Dunno how many still use Imperial units, though. --Calton | Talk 08:04, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid flip-flopping between 'degree Fahrenheit' and 'Fahrenheit' or 'degree Celsius' and 'Celsius', I propose that we have a discussion on which we want. I see you have contributed on units of measurement, please express your opinion at Talk:Units of measurement. Thanks. bobblewik 22:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistics[edit]

Is this what's happening to my "hundred", "pretended", "cases", etc.? Jimp 4Oct05

Hard to say without knowing more about you and your accent. Where are you from? --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 07:18, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know either. As you may have gathered from some other comments on User talk:64.194.44.220, other people have also found his behavior odd at times. Best not to worry about it! --Angr (t·c) 05:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC) grey is a colour[reply]

Might it be wise to split out Sound changes as a new article Phonological history of the English language? Also mightn't be nice to have somewhere a list of phonemic splits and mergers in English which is ordered not by history but by geography and/or such a list grouped according to the phonemes it involves? Jimp 19Dec05

It seems like it might be wise to do so. 64.194.44.220 04:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for trying to organise the various articles about English phonological developments. I have some comments on the individual articles (which I'll put on the relevant talk pages), but mostly I think they're better organised now.--JHJ 11:51, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did what I thought would work. I was sure others would had different ideas but I thought I'd get the ball rolling. Glad to see that you think I'd made some improvement, JHJ. Also glad that people have taken up where I'd left off. Jimp 27Dec05

Hi Jim,

A comment on your recent revert on phoneme. I agree the example should be kept, but dreamt (bimorphemic) and pumpkin (monomorphemic) are legitimate counterexamples, phonemically /drɛmt/ and /pɐmkɪn/. By your argument, it would be impossible for any language to contrast nasal stops before plosives, because a homorganic epenthetic plosive could always be said to intervene in the phonetic detail. Since we're discussing phonemics, not phonetics, dismissing such contrasts is inappropriate. Perhaps we could word it that non-homorganic nasal-plosive sequences are rare in English morphemes, and in the typical homorganic case an archiphoneme could be argued to exist? kwami 06:02, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

By all means add this information. But let's not allow User:64.194.44.220 to vandalise the article. Jimp 20Dec05

I don't know how removing something that's not correct is vandalizing the article. The article previously said that only the nasal consonant /n/ can occur before /t/. That's not true. dreamt /drEmt/ has /m/ before /t/. 64.194.44.220 18:54, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removing something that's mostly correct albeit with a few exceptions without first discussing its removal is not the best way to go about things. Jimp 21Dec05

These have been unmerged. For a discussion on why they've been unmerged, see talk:æ-tensing. Foogol 15:05, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've merged them back. Jimp 08:03, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Angr. I'm honoured. Sorry I hadn't got around to acknowledging this barnstar award sooner but ... well, I was still in the midst of organising and merging the articles on English phonology. Now I'm just about finished, however ... maybe, always maybe, you never really finish ... I've only got a few loose ends to tie up and that'll be that. Anyhow, gotta go, thank you. Catch you round. Jimp 07:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think, maybe, I've tied up those loose ends; i.e. I've fixied all the links to the pages in question ... all that I could find anyway. Still these articles could, perhaps, do with some nicening up. That for another day though. Jimp 20Jan06

What the hell have you done with South Australian English and West Australian English? Did you see the lengthy debate and vote at SAE, about maintaining it as a separate article!? The decision was that there should be separate articles on regional varieties of Australian English, just as there are for regional varities in other countries. That debate is no longer visible, but even that is a minor consideration. I note that you put "merge to" notices up on April 11 and merged on the 15th; that is not long enough for reasonable objections, especially when a debate has already decided against that course of action. Grant65 | Talk 12:54, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I s'pose the current soluation is good enuff for both of us. Jimp Эːli Sept06

Hi Jim,

If you're going to go through and reorder the IPA vv the pronunciation respellings, could you italicise parentheses and other punctuation marks as you go? It's a lot of extra work otherwise to clean up the formatting.

Thanks, kwami 16:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if I'm doing this I will but, y'know, I don't think I'm up for going through and reordering a whole bunch. Hey, Kwami, why do you change the order of the stress marks? I mean, we don't mark stress explicitely in English orthography so why not just stick with the IPA's style and put them at the beginning of the syllable? Jimp 17:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just following the dictionary convention. I also don't have the bandwidth to make many changes right now. kwami 18:21, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misc[edit]

On the one hand, I like the way you are talking about colors seriously, on the other hand, when you edit a Wikipedia talk page, you don't write Jim, you write ~~~~ . Georgia guy 01:36, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you see, I just created an account yesterday and am still yet to figure out how to use it but I think I know what you're talking about. I'll try logging in. Of course, my official Wikipedia user name is not "Jim" (that must have been taken long ago) but "Jimp". I'll see whether this works ... Jimp 24May05

No, no luck. Somehow I've disabled the cookies on this computer so I can't log in. The problem is that I don't know how to enable them. What to do? How's about I just type Jimp in anyway and figure it out later? - Jim ;-) 24May05

What made you think New Guinea was not part of the Australian continent ? Is Britain part of Europe ? Is Japan part of Asia ? Is Java part of Asia ? Are these continental islands part of their continent ? There is a schoolboy myth that 'Australia' the State occupies an entire continent and therefore anything not under control of the Commonwealth of Australia is not part of the continent, but that is a myth. 211.30.95.182 03:25, 1 January 2006 (UTC) Actually I apologise, I responded before reading the rest of the page; I can explain the reason you were not taught to include New Guinea as part of the continent; and that reason is money, or specifically the world's richest deposit of gold & copper in West Papua discovered in 1936 by Standard Oil by using a Dutch company and geology team as cover. As neither the indigenous people nor the Dutch would ever allow a US corporation to mine the sacred mountains of the Amungme people, the Rockefellers and other executives needed a new more US business friendly colonial power to claim West Papua; at the same time they wanted the oil from Sumatra & Borneo, and all sorts of mineral wealth; by supporting Sukarno's claim to be the leader of Java they got his 'Republic' included in the 1949 Federation of the 'United States of Indonesia' which within 8 months fell prey to Sukarno's military and were claimed as part of the 'Republic of Indonesia'; it took 13 to 16 more years but the U.S. executives eventually got access to the wealth of Asia and northern Australia that they had wanted. The confusion about Papua, so that people cant even agree what to call the country; is so that the pass 40 years of genocide in West Papua went unreported in the global media while they keep digging up the gold & copper. Rockefeller and Ford Foundations are the main academic backers to support anything to add confusion and misinformation to discredit West Papuan demands for a end to the ethnic cleansing.211.30.95.182 03:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this interesting but depressing history lesson. Yes, as I say, considering the Commonwealth of Australia to occupy the whole continent is geologically and biologically flawed. However, isn't the same true of splitting Eurasia in two? Yes, that is what I was taught. If what you write is true, then it's a shame we were taught such things. But, of course, that's what we have been taught and isn't there some degree of conventionality involved when defining a continent? Yes, it's better to include not only New Guinea (the whole NG, of course, not just PNG) but the other Australasian islands but is this what the World considers to be the continent? Jimp 20Jan06

Thanks. I don't know why I didn't pick that up earlier :-) —ptk✰fgs 06:32, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Jimp 06:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re your recent edit to Melbourne - I was puzzled by your edit summary, which implied that a comma, for example, within the quotation marks was 'American'. I too happen to prefer the comma outside ... it seems more logical, however I'm pretty sure that at least in older editions of the Australian government Style Manual it was specified that commas should go inside the quotes. I don't have any copies with me to allow me to verify this. The labelling of this style of punctuation as 'American' also struck me as a bit antagonistic. Stumps 07:20, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the detailed reply. When I get back 'home' to Australia — if I remember — I'll try to find the old Style Manual just for interest's sake. Maybe I'm mistaken where I read that recommendation that commas etc go inside the quotes, but wherever it was it stuck in my mind precisely because I didn't like it. Cheers. Stumps 07:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working in Warsaw for a few years. Stumps 09:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Obviously you care about the spelling. Please note that the notice that you change on Swedish krona will be replaced by these 2 templates {{Standard coin table notice}}, {{Standard banknote table notice}}. A global solution must come to term. What do you think about making a parameter to the template like british_english = Y to override millimeter with millimetre? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:16, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It will have to have a default value. I will make millimeter the default value since English language claims that 2/3 of the native speaks are from the U.S.A. What do you suggest for the parameter name. british_english may be politically inappropriate. What about Commonwealth_English? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 04:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am in complete agreement with you. I will stick with the orignal proposal british_english. Commonwealth is too long to type. As long as the output value is correct, I really don't care what the default value is. Ultimately, we the editors should cater to the readers. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 05:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I can do BrE. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. DTOx 11:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi; I saw that you participated in a previous debate over the location of punctuation in relation to quotations marks, and since I'm not particularly familiar with the Wikipedia system of punctuating quotations, I'd like your opinion on something. Should it be:

George writes that it "gives the impression that it is actively speciating to fill the many ecological niches through its range".

Or,

George writes that it "gives the impression that it is actively speciating to fill the many ecological niches through its range."

I'd like to add an example such as this one to WP:MOS to clarify what exactly a fragment is. The easy cases are dealt with, but it's unclear how a sentence such as this one should be punctuated. Thanks! --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 01:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll post my relpy on your talk page Jimp 04:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks alot! I guess then that we can't just add a rule to the MOS. The problem then is that when someone who doesn't know the system quotes someone, the editor cleaning it up doesn't know whether or not the period was originally there. But I guess it might not really matter that much; in most cases at least. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 06:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think my bot may have incorrectly flagged the transwiki as complete for wikt:Transwiki:Australian English vocabulary / Australian English vocabulary.  :-( I'm asking the devs what can be done about a transwiki of an entry with almost 20,000 edits... --Connel MacKenzie - wikt 23:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice on quotes, albeit given indirectly. I shall keep it in mind as I edit wikipedia. May I ask you punctuation questions in future if I have any? Thanks also for sanctioning the war. I might form a coalition with Asa01 if he is open to a strategic alliance. :) Rintrah 13:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I can send your regards to Asa1. But I don't think it is proper I do so with Petrus4, for I am supposed to be at war with him. :) Rintrah 02:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean Jim; I can't see any formatting that was lost by my edit. Grant | Talk 06:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree, Grant | Talk 06:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's the status and outcome of this discussion, Jimp? I began being against the proposed merge, but know I'm for it. Does anyone demanded a vote? Should we ask for one? The Ogre 17:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also believe that Pre-Roman Portugal should be also merged. The Ogre 17:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great work, Jimp! The Ogre 14:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]