Jump to content

User talk:Randy Kryn

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For entertainment porpoises only:
"Time: Illusion stirred into gravity"
- Motto of The Salvation Space Force
(new comments on bottom of page please)

If you've never seen...

[edit]

. . .Veiled Christ, a statue in Italy that depicts a knobbly-kneed Christ in the tomb, please give the image two or three clicks. This almost unbelievable 1753 sculpture ("how'd he do that?"), carved from one piece of marble, has one of only two Wikipedia article's which have to prove, with sources, that the artwork was not the work of an alchemist. Step right up, and don't miss the modern looking couch, the two tasseled pillows, or the crown of thorns and other torture things down by the feet. All carved from a single block of marble.

Literally steps away from Veiled Christ sits another "how'd he do that?" sculpture, also carved from a single block of marble (or created by alchemy).

p.s. While writing aloud about impossible statues carved from one piece of rock...who can forget flowers made of glass!

One of life's pleasures

[edit]

Watching Secretariat run his 1973 Triple Crown races in order while knowing three things: 1) Secretariat's trainer and jockey realized only after the second race that he could run full speed from start to finish. 2) While drastically being held back during the Kentucky Derby and Preakness, Secretariat still holds the fastest time in all three Triple Crown races. 3) Sham - the horse Secretariat trashed like a dancing bear in the Kentucky Derby - still holds the Derby's second fastest time.

Here's the 1973 Kentucky Derby...Secretariat's jockey holds him back...holds him wayyyy back, almost last. Next the Preakness...holds him back... And then: the Belmont..."He is moving like a tre-men-dous machine".

Vandal masterpiece...

[edit]

An IP wedding proposal

[edit]

July 8, 2022: during three edits in three minutes an IP proposes marriage on the same page as the above masterpiece, creating their own. Wikipedians have a romantic side, even the bots, so nobody reverted until I did after two hours with a note saying that it should be enough time, and wished him luck. Does anyone know of an earlier proposal on Wikipedia, especially on such a good page for it and so perfectly played out - he seemingly decides to marry her right there, between two edits. Film scene scenario worthy (Hallmark, are you listening?).

This one time at band camp I vandalized a page

[edit]

The docents ask people: "Find the cat". Letting the coolness of it lead me to break my oath as a Wikipedian, I now self-identify as a vandal. (in other vandal news, in 2023 an IP spent a great deal of time removing all the vowels from several articles. Wh ddn't thnk f tht?).

Always interesting

[edit]
"The problem with Wikipedia is that it only works in practice. In theory, it can never work." quoted by User:Kizor in the New York Times
"I think Wikipedia is quite possibly the best invention since the library." a quote by User:Srleffler.

See and listen to Wikipedia edits as they occur. Designed by Stephen LaPorte and Mahmoud Hashemi of hatnote.com, the link was copied from a user page, don't remember where, but deservedly displayed on quite a few as well as having its own article. Just who is making all this noise? Well...

...the size of our stadium

[edit]

Here is Paine Ellsworth's subpage about how many Wikipedians can dance on the head of a pin.

************************************************


Always precious

[edit]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:10, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda Arendt. You have given out many of these but I hope you've deservedly kept tenfold for yourself! Randy Kryn (talk) 08:01, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CKC's tags

[edit]

In response to your comments at their talk page, there is presently a discussion going on at Talk:World War II. Wehwalt (talk) 15:26, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:GEOCAPS and RM of galactic center

[edit]

Randy, I would (once again) suggest that you zip you fly up before you do yourself an injury and you may (once again) take this as a compliment. In the RM for galactic center, you have advanced an argument based on what might reasonably be seen as a pettifogging interpretation of GEOCAPS (contrary to the spirit of the guidance per WP:P&G and WP:5P). This, however, is not my primary concern. You have recently edited (partly reverted) GEOCAPS (see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Edit to MOS:GEOCAPS). In my post there, I would observe that, given your involvement in the earlier amendment, your revert to GEOCAPS would appear to be disingenuous. I now see this edit you have made at User talk:Rotideypoc41352#Close at Galactic Center#Requested move 21 March 2025. It makes clear a motive for your revert - to maintain a wording at GEOCAPS to give the appearance of substance to a WP:PETTIFOGGING argument. The revert is made without regard for the merits of the edit or that you participated in achieving consensus through iterative editing. Your edit and the apparent reason for your edit to GEOCAPS might therefore reasonably be seen as disruptive and WP:POINTY. I would consequently suggest you revert your edit at GEOCAPS. While I do not believe that you have willfully been misleading in your edits (ie you plain forgot) you are now reminded of your involvement in the discussion leading to the amendment of GEOCAPS and your involvement in that amendment. Maintaining a narrative that you were unaware and not involved would now be a deception. I would therefore suggest that you strike the linked edit at User talk:Rotideypoc41352#Close at Galactic Center#Requested move 21 March 2025. I would remind you that the MOS is a CTOP and you are CTOP aware of this. Cinderella157 (talk) 09:20, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware that what had been removed was that different than what you replaced it with (having never memorized the language). In any case, I added back some of the language that was removed, it was quickly reverted, and your preferred wording was back in place when you wrote the above. The point was to assure that other editors know that the names of places are considered proper names, which is less clear in the present (as compared to the long-term) wording. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:22, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manias

[edit]

I've found tulip mania, balloonomania, and pineapple mania, but I suspect there are many more. It would be nice to have a series or footer template. Viriditas (talk) 23:22, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just found Pokémania. Viriditas (talk) 23:25, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like most of them are over at List of manias. Template needed? Viriditas (talk) 23:26, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The social manias should be separated out. Viriditas (talk) 23:28, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Viriditas, and good luck with the navbox, could be a good one. List of manias? Hmmmm, has it been distributed to See also (sounds like a good candidate)? Wikimania? Randy Kryn (talk) 23:46, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
List of phobias has the same get-up-and-go to it. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:48, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Checks notes on clipboard: "How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop? get Randy to talk about adding a link to see also?" Glad to see you haven't been taken over by the pod people...yet. Stay away from those little pink flowers! Viriditas (talk) 23:55, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For those who may have missed it: User:Randy Kryn/See also stats gives a good indication of the value of See also. If only there was an essay... Randy Kryn (talk) 00:01, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Surreal Barnstar
Salutations to the "smallest known dinosaur, bee hummingbird" guy. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:27, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Go D. Usopp, a nice surprise. You'd think that the information that the bee hummingbird is the smallest known dinosaur would be higher on the page, arguably important enough to go into the lead. The unneeded wording that editors added to carefully explain that birds are dinosaurs, a commonly known fact, seems undue. Brevity could trim the sentence to its basics and move it up the page, it does not need to carefully explain to the readers that birds are what they are. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:33, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chess navbar

[edit]

Hey, I thought it would be good to remove that since it's a quite non-notable opening, not even having an independent ECO code. So I think it was a good idea to take that off. I'm not sure how it got on in the first place. Dayshade (talk) 14:22, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dayshade. I assume it got there because the chess opening has a Wikipedia article, so it is presented and linked in the "Chess openings" section in the {{Chess}} navigational box. Nothing unusual or out-of-place in its use on the navbox. Thanks for discussing it though, and for working within Wikipedia's chess collection. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:27, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are tons of opening articles that don't have a spot in those lists. Seems like a slim majority don't, looking at Category:Chess_openings. It also frequently transposes into other openings even with its low playrate, and isn't seen as having any uniqueness in the type of play, and it's barely more than a stub, with most of the body just being lists of moves in certain games. Dayshade (talk) 14:30, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, maybe you'd prefer to add more links instead of taking that one off? Dayshade (talk) 14:31, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean Dayshade, there are 186 articles about chess openings! The article in question, Semi-Italian Opening, was created in 2012 so has been around for awhile. Prefer to leave it in and maybe add more, but would adding all 186 be worthwhile? Maybe, if it is to be a comprehensive navbox. Would you mind if this discussion was moved to the chess navbox talk page to bring in other editors? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:35, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead, I am new so I will look for a section from you there. I personally would say remove Semi-Italian and only keep the more notable ones, since Semi-Italian would certainly be in the lower half of notability among those articles, but adding more seems fine, although it might get too long. Dayshade (talk) 14:39, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've started it on Template talk:Chess. Dayshade (talk) 18:07, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:28, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your attempts to notify me at Template talk:Navbox

[edit]

Hi, please note that none of these edits sent me a notification. The first one failed because of a typo in my username; the second and third failed because neither of them was a new post. There are three requirements for a successful notification: (i) a new post must be created; (ii) the new post must include a link to the recipients user page; (iii) you must sign the new post. It must all be done in the same edit; amendments to an existing post will not trigger a notification. This is explained more fully at WP:MENTION. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:00, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Redrose64. After editing I erased my signature and then re-signed the posts, so surprised that the last one at least didn't reach you. Thanks for pointing out that it didn't reach you and for the link, I'll read Mention to see if I've been getting that wrong. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at the diffs, you'll see that the edits were seen as amendments to an existing poat. See in particular this one, where you altered {{u|RedRose64}} to {{u|Redrose64}} and altered the minutes in the timestamp from 20 to 21. Even if you blanked out the previous sig and added four tildes afresh, the system sees only the change to the rendered page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:17, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Redrose64, did not know that. I thought once an edit was made and then re-signing the post with four tildes sends a ping. The more you know... Randy Kryn (talk) 22:05, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Randy, hope you are keeping well. I saw your ping at WP:VPT#"add template to favorites", but I'm not actually experiencing this function, so I can't comment (I'm using Google Chrome). Anyway, all the best :) --woodensuperman 09:02, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, unless you mean the bookmark next to the star for adding to the watchlist when in template space? --woodensuperman 09:05, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Woodensuperman. This is about a long tab at the top of each navbox template placed to the right of 'watch' which reads "add template to favorites" and which was/is causing problems to spacing when viewed with the Monobook skin. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:22, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay, I can see it as a bookmark icon, the same size as the watchlist icon. Not really causing me a problem, although I don't expect I'll use the feature! --woodensuperman 10:00, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Woodensuperman: Its position and appearance are skin-dependent, see Wikipedia:Favorite templates. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:07, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On a related matter, the thread at Template talk:Navbox has been moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#"add template to favorites", where further replies have been left. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir

[edit]

I am writing to inform you that I recently made a votive offering at the altar of the see also goddess. You may witness my devotion to Her over here. Please notice my highly unusual use of the see also section as a way to encapsulate the historical timeline of works about the topic of fascism restricted to the year 1995. This is also a homage to Old Wikipedia circa 2004. As a historian and see also devotee, I am curious about your opinion regarding these utmost important matters. Viriditas (talk) 00:47, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Viriditas (and Sir yourself). Again, as always, nice article. The See also section seems a bit tangential, and if I were the goddess of see also I'd consider sending it to other shores, but your authorship of such a detailed page gives you the right to see also what you may. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:44, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. I'm using the see also section to show other notable works on fascism that were published at the same time as her speech about fascism. Do you think this kind of usage should be restricted to categories? Viriditas (talk) 20:32, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it. Viriditas (talk) 22:57, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I really had no opinion, and it's an area I know little to nothing about, categories or otherwise. I hope you are doing well Viriditas, and the summer (if you are in an area which has summer months) is going fine. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:49, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I should explain further, as you are tossing my name into edit summaries. The reason I thought they were tangential links was because you 'See also'ed several speeches about the same topic from the same year, a topic sorting decision I've never seen before. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:56, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to do things that have never been seen before. I thought you knew that? Viriditas (talk) 07:42, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question

[edit]

You are an expert when it comes to the work of Ray Bradbury, no? Here's my question: why have most (I realize there are one or two exceptions) of his film and television adaptations failed to have an enormous box office success? This bothers me. What do you think the answer is here? Perhaps it is the same thing that happened to Frank Herbert during his lifetime? It is generally acknowledged that the Star Wars franchise borrowed greatly from Dune. In the same way, perhaps more successful works have borrowed from Bradbury? That's my theory. Viriditas (talk) 22:06, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Viriditas. Although not a subject matter expert on Bradbury or his writings, just a past researcher, past fan (there are several later books I've never read), and acquaintance, I can muster a guess that because his works are more cerebral than action a full translation to the screen would be difficult. Fahrenheit 451 adaptations are likely the most successful (action, explosions, etc.) even though they broke no records. I guess Bradbury's body of work for readers greatly surpasses the scope and influence of the adaptations, and his legacy, along with Heinlein's and less than a handful of others, pertains to influencing the dreams and goals of generations of scientists and space age personnel to do what they did. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:33, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Randy_Kryn&oldid=1303521755"