User talk:DocRuby

hello, who are you? you were removing all kind of information, but i dont have any idea who you are. i am not against improvements, but you should introduce yourself, if you want to be taken serious by me. Taksen (talk) 21:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you want me to tell you about who I am. I'm just a guy editing those pages, as I mentioned to you in your talk page. I explained why I moved the info around in my Edit Sumamries and the note I included in your Talk page. I expect you to take me seriously on that basis. So do you have a good reason for me not to make the changes? DocRuby (talk) 04:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Universal Serial Bus: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. pcuser42 (talk) 23:31, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pointing out the Upton Sinclair was a cousin of the King of England while claiming to speak for the working man is absolutely relevant and adding to the discussion in the hopes of improving an article that tells a false story (as is typical on wikipedia). Erase it again, and I will broadcast it across twitter and Nostr for all to see forever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.144.246.119 (talk) 21:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had nothing to do with the edits you made. And now you're injecting your misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works into my Talk page in some random section. I'm going to delete this part of my Talk page that you're messing up. You can broadcast whatever you want, and anyone looking will see that you're silly. DocRuby (talk) 22:11, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What the heck was that about? See Homosexuality in ancient Rome#Pathicus for an explanation of the term, which is not act-specific. See also Sexuality in ancient Rome#Os impurum for further information on act-specific terminology. Translators may choose to represent the power roles variously, but the article is trying to give a strict and not a literary translation. Cynwolfe (talk) 04:08, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In article Catullus 16, I revised the English translation of the Latin "Aureli pathice et cinaede Furi" from "pussy Aurelius and catamite Furius" to "cocksucker Aurelius and catamite Furius". I was guided by the explanation in the next section Sexual terminology:

"A male who suckles a penis is denoted as a fellator or, equivalently, a pathicus (line 2)." referencing Forberg 1824, pp. 190–191

However, on closer study, "pathice" is "vocative masculine singular of pathicus"; which is "(of men) someone submitting to sex (anal sex) or unnatural lust, pathic, lascivious; of catamites, prostitutes or books". American English doesn't have an exactly corresponding term indicating the recipient. "Buttfucker" is close; if "butfuckee" was an English word it would be the translation.

But "pussy" is definitely wrong. "Pussy" means vagina. The anus is no pussy; the poem refers to Aurelius and Furius (each a man) as recipients of sex by Catullus, but not as feminine. DocRuby (talk) 04:21, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't want to get into the question of whether "pussy" is the best translation; it may not be. But it's better than "cocksucker," which is too act-specific. Remember that when we insult a guy by saying "you pussy" we often mean "you coward; you aren't a real man", which is the kind of insult intended by Catullus. Pathicus does imply that the male allows himself to be used sexually, and there's an explanation somewhere in the lengthy Sexuality in ancient Rome that particularly in sexual invective the anus and vagina are equivalent: the dominant male might have a preference for a woman or a boy, or not, but the point was that they both served as receptacles. So in the sense of Carmen 16, implications that the pathicus might be used like a woman are part of the "I'm a bigger man than you" rhetoric, since the poem deals with the speaker's character as a "real man". Wiktionary can't be used as a source for an article, only as a link. There are at least a couple of RS used for the explanation of pathicus in the article link above. Here's a useful description by way of comparing pathica, but while Williams refers to the pathicus throughout his book, Holt (cited in the linked section) seems to have given the term a closer and more nuanced examination. There probably is no magic best translation, but the point of pathicus seems to be that it's a general role or attitude. Cynwolfe (talk) 04:42, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do want to get into the question of whether "pussy" is the best translation, because it didn't seem consistent with the meaning of the poem when I read it. Catullus doesn't feminize the targets of the poem, and the question of who isn't a "vir" is considered only in rejecting the targets' postulated thinking of Catullus as less than a man. Right in that line he refers to Furuius as a catamite, which is still male, though an insult to an adult (and is also a recipient of anal sex). "Pussy" rings false. I'm not saying now that "cocksucker" is a better translation, but there should be a better one than "pussy". Which now seems to be pathic, the English word I noted earlier. It's obscure, but so is "catamite"; even the Wiktionary notes their relationship.

Hello, I'm PBASH607. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Universal Serial Bus because it did not appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. PrabashWhat? 02:32, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You messed up on your revert on Universal Serial Bus you reverted to the wrong version, I fixed it this time, just don't do it again kapeesh?PrabashWhat? 02:54, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what happened there. I got a message from Wikipedia that the USB article was changed, and it was obvious vandalism when I looked at the diff. I clicked to revert to the previous version noting that I was reverting vandalism. But after the revert it looked like I had made the vandalism edit. So I clicked "Undo", but the history showed you reverted it back, not my undo. Very strange. DocRuby (talk) 02:54, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bro it's all cool, there was probably an edit conflict, and Twinkle usually knows when a revert has become an edit conflict, and it stops reverting but in your case it just did it. --PrabashWhat? 02:54, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was something else. It couldn't have been an edit conflict. If you look at the time, I reverted an edit at 5:42 PM PT. Doc Ruby made his revert at 7:30 PM PT. - Amaury (talk) 04:50, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think could have caused my clicking to revert content (that looked like vandalism) that I saw in the diff to result in that content appearing to have been posted by me? While it's possible I clicked something other than a revert link, it's not possible that I posted that content.

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Eclipse Gemini, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.eclipse.org/gemini/.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 18:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I revised Eclipse Gemini with original content. DocRuby (talk) 18:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the catch, but the next time you see an arithmetical error, don't just delete it, fix it! BMK (talk) 21:40, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Wild Magnolias, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George French. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DocRuby. You have new messages at Sundayclose's talk page.
Message added 21:00, 6 April 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Sundayclose (talk) 21:00, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DocRuby. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DocRuby. 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]

Hello, DocRuby. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DocRuby. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up, the article is under DS with consensus required in place. Please self revert. PackMecEng (talk) 17:31, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Just a note on DS in general for the topic area. PackMecEng (talk) 17:48, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]