User talk:Dfred


I love your articles, but I also love the marlin(e)spike that you used for the photo accompanying the Marlinespike hitch article. Do you know if there is any way to get one of those online? A link would be very much appreciated if you have one. Torfason (talk)

In the edit summary here, you write, "unfortunately the suffix trick doesn't work with an intervening apostrophe". I don't understand, what's this "suffix trick" you're speaking of? The link goes to the article about the person proper, not any possessive property of his (and in cases where you do include the apostrophe in the link, it's because it's part of a [proper] name, as with "McDonald's"). If you meant to point to his work A Sea Grammar / A Seaman's Grammar, you ought to link that (there currently doesn't exist an article for that, though). As an aside, to avoid redirection, "John Smith (explorer)" should be used in place of "John Smith of Jamestown", anyway. Regards – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 17:13, 28 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Dfred, sorry you had a bad experience with HighBeam and then furthered by a newsletter you didn't want to receive. We mainly wanted people to know that the donations like HighBeam are part of a larger initiative which will continue to provide more and diverse free research opportunities in the future. Anyways, apologies for the inconvenience or frustration. Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 14:24, 30 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for helping out. You provided some valuable information about infobox images. --WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 04:07, 26 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:18, 9 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added Debian Squeeze 6.0.8 to the {{Timeline Debian GNU/Linux}} template, just like you did last October 30. You immediately reverted your change, and I don't know why. Your comment at the time was "reverting due to messed-up legend; timeline experts take a look...". Well, I'm no expert, but it looks fine to me. Let me know if the current version needs more attention. Larry Doolittle (talk) 02:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]