User:Nunh-huh/sandbox

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I haven't looked for more info about this on Newspapers.com or JSTOR yet, but I thought you might be able to expand it too in case you know more.Zigzig20s (talk) 19:10, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Look at citation 12 for Kennedy. Nothing in that citation says anything. Please don't edit war but click on it and see for yourself. Thank you. Vanguard10 (talk) 06:24, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is no longer a citation 12 there, since you removed it. And then "edit warred" to put it back. I, on the other hand, left a note on the talk page when I reverted your deletion. You should read it and comment there, on the talk page of the article, where such discussion belongs. The paradigm, by the way, is "edit, revert, discuss", not "edit, revert, re-revert to your favored version, discuss". - Nunh-huh 07:47, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would you withdraw your seeking opinions for now? I don't want the typical Wikipedia drama to take place. I am warming up to your ideas so drama is the last thing we need. Vanguard10 (talk) 05:49, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Drama is the last thing we'll get. Third opinions aren't for heightening drama, they're for decreasing it. - Nunh-huh 05:50, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just as I thought we were almost there because I saw a new way to be flexible. Vanguard10 (talk) 05:57, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If we find a way forward, we won't need a 3rd opinion. If we can't, we will need one. So let's see if we can find acceptable wording. - Nunh-huh 06:39, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I'm being a word choice nazi, but just a moment ago, you changed "often" back to "oft" and said that "oft" is correct in your summary. I googled "define oft" and it told me that oft was an archaic and literary form of often used just in poems and jokes. But I am going to take that with a pinch of salt, as I once googled "define senpai" a while back, and it told me it meant "older student", and I didn't believe that then either. If you say so, I might keep the word "oft-repeated" as-is and leave it there. -- MrHumanPersonGuy (talk) 21:45, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Words defined as literary and jocular are used in everyday prose, and not restricted to poems and jokes! But I think you'll find that in addition to noting the word's literary and jocular uses, a good dictionary will note its use "in combination" (my dictionary gives the example "an oft-quoted tenet"; Webster's New World defines it as used "now chiefly in compounds: an oft-heard expression"; similarly The American Heritage Dictionary defines it as "Often. Often used in combination: his oft-expressed philosophy; oft-repeated tales"). "Oft-repeated" is certainly an acceptable and idiomatic use, and is the expected one in the article's context; the word doesn't have, as you wrote, "two missing letters!" And if one were to opt for the less idiomatic "often repeated", it wouldn't be hyphenated, as you had it. Yes, we live in a digital age, but paper dictionaries are, I think, still so much better than googling for definitions. So, yes, I think leaving "oft-repeated" in place as you suggest would be best. - Nunh-huh 22:13, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a connection to the Aldrich family please?Zigzig20s (talk) 13:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was not related to the book. Just the Grand Rapids building I stumbled upon. Totally off topic. Regarding the book, I'd like to find out if they descend from planters.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:23, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't tell, there's not any info I can find on why it's called the Aldrich Building. It may have something to do with the Moses Aldrich who was mayor of Grand Rapids 1868-70. Or it may not. Apprently it's also called the Karl Building, and the Karl-Aldrich Building. But I also have no information on who Mr. Karl was. - Nunh-huh 22:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. In South and West, Didion quotes a man who says the KKK used to play a significant role in Meridian, Mississippi. I wonder how much the book mentions Meridian?Zigzig20s (talk) 08:08, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nunh-huh. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	Merry Christmas!
	Zigzig20s (talk) 10:07, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. Do you have a source for Leonard Shoen's ancestry please?Zigzig20s (talk) 03:23, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]