Revision as of 05:55, 17 January 2009 editRafaelRGarcia (talk | contribs)2,247 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:51, 5 March 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
(63 intermediate revisions by 44 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Signpost-subscription|right}} |
{{Signpost-subscription|right}} | ||
{{archive box| | |||
*]<br> March 2006 - January 2008 | |||
}} | |||
__TOC__ | |||
Hello, {{PAGENAME}}, and ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or place <code>{{helpme}}</code> on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! | |||
] 08:34, 18 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
== us department of education == | |||
Thanks for contributing the "establishment" section. | |||
:templates substituted by a bot as per ] ] 04:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
It was the closest thing to what I was looking for, an idea how the US managed education compared to other countries, and how it managed education before creation of ED. ] (]) 23:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
== |
== David Souter == | ||
Hi Gloria, | |||
Nice job on the improvements to this article. I stumbled upon it and it's a much better read then I last remember it. :) ] 14:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
I'm Christiane | |||
== Response Requested == | |||
I've just read (scuse my English I am Francophone) an article about Flylady. | |||
I plan to delete the ], as it is not relevant to improving the article. As that section contains a comment from you, I would like to know if you have any objection to such deletion. If so, please post your objection in ]. I will presume silence as consent. Thank you. —] (]) 04:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
I think that you wrote it, is it true? | |||
==Clarence Thomas== | |||
Because I would like to contribute with an article about Marla in french. Misplaced Pages of course. | |||
Thanks for the work. ] (]) 01:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
Yo. There's a cite error in the article for an abc news citation; I think you added those. Please fix that; I don't know how to work that stuff, which is why I just list the whole cite every time, heh. ] (]) 19:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
But for now I just plan to be inspired by your's is it possible? | |||
That was put in by an IP address , but I fixed it with no problem. Thanks for letting me know. I'll leave a note on the IP's talk page not to do that sort of stuff again.--] (]) 22:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
Thanking you in advance. | |||
==Rehnquist== | |||
Sincerely Yours, | |||
Whoa! Thanks for the work, but please give page numbers for all your citations. For example, page 509 for this: "While Rehnquist was often a lone dissenter in cases early on, his views would later often become the majority view of the Court." Please fix what you've added. Thanks. ] (]) 23:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
I'll try to do that in the future (although it's not required in citations, it is helpful I'm sure), although Rehnquist's bio is only on one page in that book so it's easy to find that information.--] (]) 23:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 19:49 | |||
== Barnstar for work on the Nixon article == | |||
:Hello Christiane! I wrote a part of the FlyLady article, but I didn't write the whole thing. I have been planning to add some things to it, so maybe I'll take that opportunity now. I think it's perfectly OK to just translate Misplaced Pages articles from one language to another, without having to start from scratch. Good luck, and by the way, I think your English is very good :) -] 20:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #ffffff;" | |||
::] is the place where you can request translation of English Misplaced Pages articles to French. See ]. ] | ] 05:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ] | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
== walther == | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Cleanup Barnstar''' | |||
You may want to have a look in on ] again. ] has ] only who want to keep the VT mention in the article, so I am alerting those who were not yet contacted. There has been about the outcome of the previous polls. Your continued involvement in the discussion(s) would be welcomed. ··]] 23:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks for letting me know. It was interesting catching up on the debate. --] 01:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot == | |||
] predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! | |||
{|cellspacing=10 style="background-color:transparent;" | |||
|- | |- | ||
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | message ] (]) 14:56, 9 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
|valign=top| | |||
;Stubs:<!--''']:'''--> | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
|align=top| | |||
;Cleanup | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
;Merge | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
;Add Sources | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
;Wikify | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
;Expand | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
:] | |||
|} | |} | ||
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better -- thanks for helping. | |||
Thank you | |||
If you have '''feedback''' on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on ]. Thanks from ], SuggestBot's caretaker. | |||
== Just need a clarification == | |||
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on ]. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ] 23:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
I am just wondering what the reasoning is for this edit ]. Although I don't see problem right now, I was just wondering what the problem was with the way it was written and formatted before. Anyway, I'm suer there is a reason. | |||
== Thank you... == | |||
Go ahead and leave your response here, since I am currently watching your page. Thanks--] (]) 03:14, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
... for your recent contributions on some articles I have worked on. You may notice on the associated talk page of the article ], and some other related articles I have compiled some reputable secondary sourced citations that I have not yet added but which could and will all be used to expand the article. ] 04:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC). | |||
Thanks for the barnstar by the way :) My reasoning for that is that those two paragraphs are general summary paragraphs about things that happened in both his first and second terms in office, so they didn't really belong under the First Term section. I figured that if we add a sentence or two about Vietnam, China and Watergate, we have some good summary paragraphs of his entire presidency. It's ok to move them back if you disagree, I just thought it didn't make sense to talk about second-term goings-on under the First Term section.--] (]) 03:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
== Salvatore Gencarelli == | |||
:Thats cool, I'm not disagreeing, I was just wondering. That makes sense. I didn't look it over too carefully, but where did you move the paragraphs? Did you create a new section? Finally, is there anything else that needs work before its nominated for GA again?--] (]) 03:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
::I moved them just up to the top section, "Presidency," which was already there but just had a picture of him receiving the oath of office on the family Bible. I don't think there are any huge issues with the article as it is, so we could see what the reviewer suggests and implement those when suggested. Was there a previous GA review? --] (]) 03:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::There was a previous GA review in August. See the top of the talk page for what the reviewer had to say. The article at that time was in horrible shape. It was no way ready for that type of review. I came in soon afterward and immediatly attempted to fix as much as I could. At that time though, there were only 49 citations. Now, in just three months time, there are over 120. Thanks to the efforts of ] and yourself, this article is most like;y ready to go again.--] (]) 03:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::Thanks. I just added a few things, about the Nixon Doctrine and his press conferences, and there are a few more things I can think that are important-- the 1972 election was a landslide that brought many other Republicans into office and is considered notable for that (one was ]). I have a book which should have some information on that; I'll look into it and maybe come back and write something about that. Other than that, I think most subjects are pretty well covered. A few other things that could be worth delving into are his Supreme Court appointments, of which he had more than most presidents (why did he choose those people?), Rehnquist especially is an important one, and his pardon (a bit more on the controversy surrounding it and how Ford kind of suffered for that). There was also a controversy regarding his law school, Duke, which was going to rename itself after Nixon if he brought his presidential library there. It's a pretty liberal-leaning school, and the professors went crazy and revolted over that, so Duke didn't get the library. I'll try to find some more information on those subjects.--] (]) 05:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::::The library information seems interesting. I would only suggest that it not be too long based on ].--] (]) 03:19, 13 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
==]== | |||
Hey there, | |||
] has been nominated for a ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the ]. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. Reviewers' concerns are ]. --] (]) 05:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
== Richard Milhous Nixon == | |||
Thanks for the comment on the Genovese crime family user talk page. I noticed that your user page says you have a bazillion interests but knowing such a person as Sal Gencarelli is quite unusual for those without a keen keen interest in the mob. I'm intrigued! Personal friends? ] 10:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
As a recently involved editor to the Richard Milhous Nixon article I would like to inform you that I nominated the article for ]. Lets cross our fingers and hope for the best. | |||
:Ooh. Thanks ] 12:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
Sadly, a recent dispute on the ] page has spilled over to other articles on the presidents. The Nixon article has gone through a few changes, but I reverted the changes with the argument that any consensus reached on the Obama talk page is not binding on other pages. An editor has asked for a discussion. If you would like to join in, please do so at ].--] (]) 02:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:True.Story.of.Jesse.James.poster.jpg}== | |||
::That would be most excellent of you! Anything is great but information specifically on his position in the family and who he associated with mainly would be most interesting. Thank you very much Gloriamarie. :) ] 04:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by ]. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an ] linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check: | |||
:* That there is a ] on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in. | |||
:* That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page. | |||
Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an ]; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale. | |||
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. ] (]) 02:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::My email is brooklyn_mafia@hotmail.com, and I would be happy to talk on there. Thank you Gloriamarie. ] 03:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
== DYK for Durham Performing Arts Center == | |||
== Ron Paul == | |||
Please explain why you chose to remove the Sean Hannity section altogher. I think this was a defining moment in the debate and I would like to form a compromise on the text. | |||
{| class="messagebox {{#ifeq:|yes|small|standard}}-talk" | |||
Could you please make an edit of what I have started and contribute what you perceive to be appropriate text? | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|On ], ], ''']''' was updated with {{#if:|facts|a fact}} from the article{{#if:|s|}} ''''']'''''{{#if:|{{#if:|, |, and}} ''''']''''' | |||
}}{{#if:|{{#if:|, |, and}} ''''']''''' | |||
}}{{#if:|, and ''''']'''''}}, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
|} <!-- ], ] --> ] (]) 08:37, 4 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
== Richard Nixon edits == | |||
] 00:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
Hey there Gloria. Thanks for the work that you have done on the Nixon page. I'd just like to comment on some of your recent edits and my recent changes. As you have probably noticed, I have made some major alterations to the page, especially in the economy section and Vietnam War. | |||
#First off, I don't know if it was you or someone else, but the article is choc full of wikilinks, many of which need to be removed because of ]. If I removed wikilinks, that's why. | |||
I did discuss it on the talk page, but people keep adding entirely unverifiable sources. A blog that links to an article to Texas (which does not even mention Ron Paul) is a joke of a source. This rumor has been discussed for days on the talk page, and no one has been able to come up with a decent source. A quote from Jimmy Wales: "I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced." ] | |||
#Lets go to the economy: I nixed Paul Krugman's assertion because of the wording. It seemed to discredit what some people think and present Krugman's assertions as fact. They may be, but it is not our job to decide that. I favor letting the reader decide. We can present the facts and maybe the reader will say "Hey, Nixon talked about supply side in 1960 and here he is raising taxes" or maybe the reader will say "He did the best thing for the times" -- we don't know. But we shouldn't state the opinion of a far-left newspaper columnist as fact. | |||
:However, personal biographies are held to a different standard than regular articles. Negative information is treated in a different way. In this case, the refutation of an allegation of negative information-- very negative information if it is true-- should be given special consideration. You have not had it on the talk page for days, because I have been watching the article every day and I just noticed it before going to bed Friday night. On Saturday, when I saw that you had removed the information entirely, citing the source, I wrote on the talk page and tried to look on ProQuest. Since you just added that yesterday (or during the night EDT Saturday morning), and it is 6:08 EDT right now, the information could not have been up for "days." Put a citation tag and give it a few days to see if a good citation can be found.--] 22:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:#Quote: ''"Federal Reserve chairman Arthur Burns encouraged Nixon to check the power held by labor unions, which had kept the rate of inflation high despite high unemployment; business owners kept prices high due to fear of wage increases."'' - This seemed a bit odd and random, and that's why I removed it. If we can incorporate it somewhere with proper context, then we will see. | |||
::As I said in the talk page, I am fine with someone adding it back with the citation tag. I would just prefer it if someone can find the source ASAP. ] | |||
:#I've taken many of the passages that had been previously written and reworded them, providing context and clarity, then repositioning the sentences. I haven't deleted or moved anything randomly. | |||
:::I'll do that, and I'll work on finding the source. I'd like to get to the bottom of it as well.--] 22:23, 20 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
#Regarding this, I put it in the Federal government initiatives section word-for-word. So it is now redundant. | |||
==About the tag== | |||
#Regarding edits like these: I changed the way that the citations are on the page to make the page more like other political articles such as ]. All the books are placed down below in the references section, and to refer to them, we write the author's name, date of publication, and page number(s) in this format: ''Frum, David (2000), p.X'' instead of the full citation. You can refer down to the references section to find the book. It may be a difficult concept to grasp, but I've found that it is better for the articles. | |||
Yes, my edit with "unscientific" made it more neutral, but unfortunately I can't count how many times I and others had to re-add that wording, as recently as last night, so - as the person who added the tag - I would have preferred that it remain until it was apparent that the wording was likely to last more than a few hours. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 16:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
#Regarding Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers: I also did not see the significance of adding this to the article. Perhaps the ] article could benefit from this? It says that the papers had nothing damaging against Nixon, but he sued not to have them released -- why? This is placed quite randomly. | |||
:Is it the same person taking it out or many people?--] 16:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
#Regarding Civil Rights Quote:''"Strategically, Nixon sought a middle way between the ] ] and liberal Democrats, whose support of integration was alienating some Southern white Democrats."'' -- This was uncited. Quote: ''"...and enforced the law after the Supreme Court, in '']'' (1969), prohibited further delays."'' -- This was uncited. And then the book thing again. | |||
::Honestly, I haven't checked who has been taking it out, but I know that "unscientific" is in for a while, then it's out, and there has been little stability regarding this. I'm not referring to your changing the 2nd one to "similar" - that was a good edit - but other edits of the debate sections and the Pres campaign in general have been misleading and incorrect. A very similar issue has come up - there are people editing many articles in which Ron Paul is discussed with POV, non-neutral wording. We just have more of it - although I see that you are trying to bring neutrality to the piece. So am I. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 16:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::Perhaps we can watch who is taking it out and ban them? I think it's OK the way it is now.--] 16:48, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::Hope springs eternal. I'll watch to see if there's any pattern of removal which would justify a block, or if it's random helpful editors. In any case, I didn't re-add the tag, just wanted you to know what I thought about this. I'm more than willing to wait and see. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 16:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::::OK, sounds good.--] 17:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
Just so you know, I plan on going through the rest of the article and making other major changes. I like to think that I'm pretty experienced in this field; other FA articles that I've written or worked on substantially include ], ] and Nixon's wife ]. I don't mean to be boastful or condescending because I hope we can genuinely work together to make the article even better. | |||
==Suggestion== | |||
Since you have an article with more info - probably a section on family (his, I mean) would work to include what we have plus any added material about his wife, parents, if available - like other candidates have - the wife and kids stuff doesn';t belong in medical career, obviously. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 17:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Good idea.. I'm going through adding information in order as it appears in the article, but I'll do that when I'm done.--] 17:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
::sounds good<strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 17:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
If you disagree with anything I said above, please let me know. Thanks for taking the time to read! | |||
Be careful that it not sound a little like a puff piece - do they not have any critical commentary? <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 18:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:I'll take another look. I'm not done yet. :)--] 18:22, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
::Ha... that's why I said it here not there! <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 18:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
Best, ] (]) 00:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
Me again - I fixed several ref tags that weren't right - not sure what happened there. You know how to use "ref name"? <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 19:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Sorry about that, I guess I was working too fast! I'll pay more attention.--] 19:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
::NO, no - sorry if that sounded critical - I was just going to tell you what refname is if you didn't know - no problem, you;re in the middle! I'm not looking over your shoulder (just feels that way, huh?) - I just was curious to see what you came up with about his family and the tag had munged it. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 19:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::I tried to look up more things on his family, but there's surprisingly little other than about his wife. There is some info on various Myspaces of his kids and grandkids (apparently he has another great-grandchild on the way) but those aren't really great sources, so I don't think I have much to add on that front for now. I found some info on one daughter who is a doctor, but it would be odd to only have information on one child so I won't add any of that. Should the family part be at the end or the beginning?--] 19:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::Uh - I think it could be in either beginngin or end - I've seen it handled both ways. I'll take a look. I answered your Edwards question on his talk page, by the way, in a way-too-long comment... and I was really not directing anything negative in it at you - it's my take in general about these political candidate's articles, many of which I edit and watch. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 18:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks for the note! I understand now why you made the edits in question, and I agree with them perhaps with the exception of not mentioning the Pentagon Papers. He took the New York Times to the Supreme Court over them, which I think qualifies as an event worth mentioning. From what I read from the source I cited, he did it even though he wasn't personally implicated because Kissinger wanted him to protect the presidency in general (quite ironic in hindsight!) I hadn't noticed that the article was too full of wikilinks, and I don't believe I've added an excessive amount, sorry if I had. I don't think that was mentioned as an item in the GA review, but perhaps it was. I agree with Krugman on some of his statements regarding Nixon, and I think what he says in this instance is correct-- let me know if I'm wrong about that. Nixon did create a lot of government programs, which I've expanded a lot on since I started working on Nixon's article. I see what you mean about citing opinion vs. fact-- perhaps if there is someone who disagrees with Krugman, they could be cited as well. I thought that the {{tlx|cite book}} template was pretty much the standard for citing books, but if there is a preferred way, I guess I don't have a problem with that. It's just new to me! The Southern Strategy is often cited as something that Nixon did- maybe we can find a source defining it, since that's basically the definition of it. I believe there's a separate Misplaced Pages article on it as well. Maybe fact tags could be used on these until a source is found- I think the Supreme Court case is cited by the same source as the desegregation from PBS, just not listed with a particular cite on that phrase. Those are just my thoughts, I'm glad you shared yours as well! Thanks for working on the article. It was pretty bad a few months ago when I first started working on it.--] (]) 21:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Joe Turnham Page == | |||
== My Baptism of Fire == | |||
I tried to clean up the Joe Turnham page by adding more news sources and a headshot. When you have a moment please look and see if you're satisifed that this page passes the notability test. | |||
Thank you for your kind welcome. | |||
== ] AFD == | |||
I very much feel that my intervention on the discussion of ]'s notability was a baptism of fire. | |||
I'll try and take it at a far more relaxed pace from here on in. | |||
] (]) 00:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Arafat holster == | |||
Just saw your comment . Obviously I agree with you! I don't understand what their problem is - I never edited this list before, but have referred to it, and came upon the deletion nom so I've jumped into the fray. I really don't get it. Seems to me another example of the people around here who can't really contribute, so spend their time crapping on other people's contribution. Really gets me mad. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 19:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Yeah, usually I am a bit of a deletionist when it comes to every Joe Six-pack who wants to have a Misplaced Pages article, but for things like that, it seems clear that it has a purpose... and I find it very interesting.---] 21:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
::Sure, lots of articles can't be justified, and I occasionally support deletes, but this kind of list is under attack in various forms, and I think it is not justified. I hate to see this end up gone - there's no good reason for it. We're not a paper encyclopedia and this is a good list. I hope other people notice this and speak up. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 21:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
Wow, thanks for adding that bit. We were discussing it on the talk page ages ago, but no one found a reliable source. Thanks for the ref! Cheers. --] (]) 04:35, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
==Lost finale (with spoiler)== | |||
:Thanks for the note! I'm glad I could help.--] (]) 21:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
In a good way absolutely. I thought it was a brilliant switch, and the show was poignant, well-acted on several people's part, very well-written - to me, it redeemed what was a disappointing first half of season, and last year was spotty, someimtes weak,. Last half of this season had some memorable shows - a few were excellent - but the finale and its change are genius, if they can really carry it off and not have this one show as a taste of what could have been. I really loved it. Sorry you had it spoiled - my policy is to never read anything if I'm anticipating a movie or tv ep - even pictures give things away. The finale opening credits did too - but I didn't care much because I had long ago guessed that Walt or Michael would show up - I expected that to be handled very differently though. My best example of a movie being spoiled for me - like totally destroyed - was about Sixth Sense. But since I don't know if you've seen it (you should!) - I won't post it here now. I could have killed someone. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 21:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Giuliani== | |||
Great work on ]! ] 03:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
== |
== Frank Mankiewicz == | ||
I'm still unsure what the schooling of FM's children has to do with anything. Plenty of parents in DC supported (and still support) public education, integration, etc. while sending their children to private schools. | |||
Great work on the Infomatist page. What name do you play the game under? | |||
:Hi. Thanks! I don't actually play the game, but I have a friend who does and I figured I'd write the article. :) Once I found out more about it, I really wanted to start playing it, though, I'll have to soon.---] 08:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
That the article is a stub and needs more info is also irrelevant: surely it needs ''important'' biographical information. For instance, FM's coining of the term "retronym," his work for Hill & Knowlton, etc. | |||
==Ron Paul== | |||
What we have here looks very much like an attempt to inject POV: to bring up a minor detail intended to show that someone is/was a hypocrite. Never mind that even David Frum (Mr. NPOV himself, I'm sure!) doesn't show that FM sent his children to private schools to ''avoid'' busing. DC schools weren't that wonderful back then, with or without busing. And that's original research on my part, done when I was in grade school. | |||
Hello. Yes, I added the POV-section tag to the Ron Paul article. I'm a complete novice at using the tag, but I believe it links directly to the appropriate section - Controversial Racial Remarks - of the Talk page (it does for me). My proposal is to remove the section completely and make note of the controversy in the footnotes. If needed, I can draft text for possible use in a footnote. Best regards. ] 13:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
There must be hundreds of Misplaced Pages articles on people who raised their kids in DC in the 60s and 70s. How many of them discuss which school they sent them to, and for what reasons, and how that related to, or could be mentioned in connection with, their political views? | |||
==Giuliani Revert== | |||
Thanks for cleaning up the aftermath of my revert. I originally meant to do it myself but spent so much time figuring out how to revert in the first place (easy actually, but it took me a few false starts to find that out....) I couldn't get to it. Also very much appreciate your work on the article in general.] 18:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
Please revert your revert. | |||
== Question Regarding userpage boxes == | |||
I have a dumb question regarding userpage boxes. I clicked on your userpage after seeing your edits on the Ron Paul article. I'm new, so I have a quick question. Where did you find all those boxes such as "This user eats sushi" to put on your userpage? I copied a couple, but I want to find more. Thanks and keep up the good work on the Ron Paul article. I've been following it for awhile now --] 06:59, 15 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
Thanks ] (]) 21:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
==]== | |||
Good job on adding all the hyperlinks.--] 03:35, 22 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Thank you--] 17:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
:You are free to revert it if you feel that it's a POV addition. I'll make a note on the talk page.--] (]) 21:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
==Header on Ron Paul article== | |||
==Thomas== | |||
Hey Gloria, | |||
Because you have been a contributing editor to Clarence Thomas in the past, please comment: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2009-01/Clarence_Thomas | |||
] (]) 05:55, 17 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
Yeah, I added the sub-header and then header to the section because that is what it is primarily composed of. A response by Ron Paul and surrogates to the remarks. I think someone would be hard pressed to honestly say that the section is about the remarks (it doesn't contain the remarks, describe the remarks or remark on the remarks). The section is at least 90% response to the mysterious remarks or possibly more. It is a undue weight mess that takes up too much of the article and serves no real purpose. It is neither informative, well written or particularly interesting. I would like to keep the header (or something similar) until the keepers of the article decide to change it. I would try and change it myself but feel that trying to condense it into 5 or 6 sentences would be a monumental effort (considering the history of the section and related editors). I hope I explained myself well enough and if the header gets removed (without a good reason) I am adding a npov tag. That is not a threat in any way. Just telling you how I would proceed. ] 21:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Informatist== | |||
A "{{]}}" template has been added to the article ], suggesting that it be deleted according to the ] process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's ], and the deletion notice explains why (see also "]" and ]). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the <code><nowiki>{{dated prod}}</nowiki></code> notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on ]. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the ], the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the ] or it can be sent to ], where it may be deleted if ] to delete is reached. ] 12:42, 24 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Gay rights== | |||
Gloriamarie, good question. The article on ] was renamed ] in 2006. See extensive discussion at ]. It looks like someone is essentially recreating the same article at ]. If you examine the words "gay rights" you are not including Transgender people (gay). Plus there's the contingent of people who consider "rights" to be ]. The words "social movements" seem to me to describe various points of view on the subject. In politician articles, it's better to use neutral language... example: there's a reason we call it "Abortion" section versus a "Right to life" section. Peace, ] 19:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
Material you have added to the article is being challenged. I think you should comment at http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Clarence_Thomas and at the medcab page. ] (]) 16:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
==FairTax== | |||
Gloriamarie, I noticed you support Ron Paul so I thought I would offer this article that argues how the FairTax plan is least destructive of the goals of Austrian economics and libertarian ideals. Some reading that is not covered that well in the Misplaced Pages article. The libertarian party is somewhat split on the issue with the common problem of incrementalism. ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>21:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)</i></small> | |||
== ] == | |||
==Ron Paul== | |||
Gloriamarie, thank you for your recent work on this article. I can't tell you how much I appreciate it, since I'm pretty much the only editor who's worked on any MA-related article. This one needs so much work! I wanted to draw your attention to ]; it's pretty close to getting submitted for FAC. If you could take a look at it, that would be great. It's already got some looks from a couple of editors familiar with the FAC-process, but another pair of eyes couldn't hurt. Again, thanks so much. --] (]) 06:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
I'd personally like to wait a bit longer. There are a few edit conflicts still simmering, and I think there is some cleanup work that has yet to be done, like organizing content into more logical paragraphs and trimming the longer sections. Still, you can go ahead with it if you want. Some GA input could put some of those rogue editors in their place.--] 23:31, 8 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
== |
== BJ Lawson == | ||
==BJ Lawson== | |||
It is good to see you answering the fact templates and helping verify the article. The work continues, but it is all becoming ]. Good stuff :) ] <sup>]</sup> 00:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Proposed deletion of B.J. Lawson== | |||
==POV at Barack Obama FAR== | |||
] | |||
] seems to say that there is concensus (even on Rezko) someone may conclude. This is not the case. I am writing to you because you are a recent talk contributor. There is a debate on ig the article should remain a Featured Article or if it no longer qualifies (if edit warring stops then it may qualify, being a FA or not doesn't say Obama is good or bad). ] 19:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
A ] template has been added to the article ], suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process{{#if: Non notable person whose only claim to fame is that he ran for Congress and was unsuccessful. His campaign seems to have been a run of the mill affair without any real controversy. The article appears to have been written to support candidacy|  because of the following concern:|.}} | |||
:<b>Non notable person whose only claim to fame is that he ran for Congress and was unsuccessful. His campaign seems to have been a run of the mill affair without any real controversy. The article appears to have been written to support candidacy</b> | |||
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's ], and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "]" and ]). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the <code>{{tl|dated prod}}</code> notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on ]. | |||
== Thanks, but I'm not getting involved == | |||
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the ], the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the ] or it can be sent to ], where it may be deleted if ] to delete is reached.<!-- Template:PRODWarning --> ] (]) 23:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
I don't find political candidacies all that interesting, first of all, and I am worried some things about me might cause conflict, especially on pages for right wing candidates. ] 02:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Speedy deletion of ]== | |||
== Removal of negative material from ] article == | |||
] A tag has been placed on ], requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under ], because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a ], such as at ]. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time. | |||
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding <code>{{tl|hangon}}</code> to '''the top of ]''' (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on ''']''' explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact ] to request that they ] the page or have a copy emailed to you. <!-- Template:Db-repost-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 13:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
In the thread at ], you were one of those who commented in opposition to the suggestion. By my count (including opinions later expressed elsewhere), this wholesale deletion of information from the main article is supported by three editors and opposed by six. | |||
== Bruges == | |||
Nevertheless, the three keep trying to implement their proposed deletion. You can read a lengthy discussion at ]. I've reverted the deletion three times already today, as well as spending a lot of time trying to explain to them why their approach contravenes Misplaced Pages guidelines, but the edit war continues. I'm calling the situation to the attention of the other editors who chimed in earlier, in the hope that the matter can be resolved on the ] page without resort to dispute resolution. Thanks for any help you can give. ]<small> ] ]</small> 05:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Beware that there is distinctly partisan activity going on, on the ] page. Keep an eye on it. Regards, ] 05:51, 15 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
Hay Gloriamarie, are you sure your source for the population of Bruges is correct? It sounds quite impossible to me there lived 200,000 people in Bruges in the 1800s. I'm pretty sure that number is wrong. Greets, ] (]) 08:45, 7 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Moving articles == | |||
I had been wondering about the figure as well since it was so different from what was previously (uncited) on the page. The source is an 1896 textbook. It could be incorrect, but I've found several other sources that assert the same thing: The Chicago Tribune - Dec 30, 2001: "By one account, in the year 1500 Brugge had a population of 200000, making it twice the size of London, but its fortunes were soon to reverse. ..." | |||
Hi there! It's actually incredibly easy to move article pages to a different name. There's a tab between "history" and "watch" that says "move." I would recommend, though, that you attempt a quick discussion on those pages before you initiate the move, just to give people an opportunity to give their opinion. If there's no objection, give it about a week then move them. In the meantime, feel free to look over the policy on naming conventions: ]. I'm not particularly familiar with it myself. Good luck! --] 13:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
in 1928: "Its population, once more than 200000, is now 52894." | |||
: "Bruges grew fat and by 1500 the population had ballooned to 200000, doubling that of London." --] (]) 09:21, 7 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
== New harvest article == | |||
==Requesting your input== | |||
There was only 1 revision and not much content, so I'm just pasting it over here. ] (]) 19:34, 23 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
Could you please weigh in on this: ]?--] 20:17, 22 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
{{Infobox Organization | |||
== Neutrality == | |||
|name = New Harvest | |||
|image = | |||
|image_border = | |||
|size = | |||
|caption = | |||
|formation = 2004 | |||
|type = | |||
|headquarters = | |||
|location = {{USA}} | |||
|membership = | |||
|language = English | |||
|leader_title = | |||
|leader_name = | |||
|key_people = ] | |||
|num_staff = | |||
|budget = | |||
|website = | |||
}} | |||
'''New Harvest''' is a non-profit organization promoting research on the development of ] and other meat substitutes. | |||
'''Research''' | |||
I have also sourced my additions; many times you have removed text supported by those citations. The thing that upsets me most is that you refuse to allow anyone to say Paul is against gay marriage when he has said federal officials imposing a new definition of marriage to be "an act of social engineering '''profoundly hostile to liberty'''" and "Americans '''understandably fear''' that if gay marriage is legalized in one state, all other states will be forced to accept such marriages." Your edits are profoundly hostile to ] and Wikipedians understandably fear having supporters of political candidates whitewash and guard their articles. ←]<sup>]</sup> 22:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
:He has not said that he is "against gay marriage" and in fact when asked about it has said something to the tune of "anyone can have any relationship with someone else and call it what they want." You can certainly say he's against gay marriage if that is actually the case and reliable sources say so, as is the case with ] and many other candidates. Most people (and especially Republicans) are against gay marriage, so if I was trying to get Ron Paul elected by my edits, I would actually want you to include that tidbit! I don't care whether it's included as long as it's sourced, and the one source you've given has the above quotes, but those are regarding federal and "activist judge" intervention and Paul has said that he believes states should have the right to choose. He voted against the FMA, which you forget to mention in your edits. That would have banned gay marriage at a federal level. I don't know whether he is personally against gay marriage, but he has voted for it to be decided by the people on a state level. That can be proven. Your assertion cannot. It is original research for an editor to decide that he is against gay marriage when he hasn't said so and neither has a reliable source. Find a reliable source that says it and you can include it. If he's as against it as you say, it shouldn't be that hard to find one good source.--] 22:59, 24 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
::And you don't think being against gay adoption implies his position on gay marriage? ←]<sup>]</sup> 23:03, 24 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::Please give the source that says he is against gay adoption, or whether one time he voted against a bill which included an amendment (not included in the final bill, so not central to it) that prohibited federal funding for adoptions by unrelated people. He votes against most federal funding for anything.--] 23:15, 24 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::The amendment had nothing to do with funding, it was simply a single-issue prohibition. He apparently takes his faith more seriously than his strange-bedfellow libertarianism. ←]<sup>]</sup> 09:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::::Where is the citation for the assertion that it had nothing to do with funding? What is the name of the bill? If he takes his faith more seriously than libertarianism, wouldn't he have voted for the Federal Marriage Amendment?--] 15:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Current version of article lead-in== | |||
'''Notes''' | |||
No, I don't support that sentence. Not notable enough for the lead-in.--] 23:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
<references /> | |||
'''External links''' | |||
==Newsletter remarks== | |||
* | |||
I have started to summarize and condense the newsletter remarks section on the Ron Paul talk page. Would you mind weighing in with your thoughts. Thanks. ] 15:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
] | |||
== Barnstar == | |||
==]== | |||
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};" | |||
<div style="padding:5px; background-color:#E1F1DE;">'''Dear uploader:''' The media file you uploaded as ] has been listed for ] because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as '''''for non-commercial use only''''', or '''''for educational use only''''' or '''''for use on Misplaced Pages by permission.''''' While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Misplaced Pages, this is in fact '''not''' the case. Please '''do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them''', because images on Misplaced Pages need to be compatible with the ] or another ], which allow anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our ] for more more information. | |||
|rowspan="2" valign="top" | ] | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Current Events Barnstar''' | |||
|- | |||
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your outstanding work expanding the article on ''']''' in the wake of his sudden passing, I hereby present you with this barnstar. --] 19:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
'''If you ''created'' this media file''' and want to use it on Misplaced Pages, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{tl|GFDL-self}} to license it under the ], or {{tl|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to license it under the ] Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{tl|PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. | |||
== Newsletter article controversy == | |||
'''If you ''did not create'' this media file''', please understand that '''the vast majority of images found on the internet are not appropriate for Misplaced Pages'''. Most content on the internet is copyrighted and the creator of the image has exclusive rights to use it. Misplaced Pages respects the copyrights of others - do not upload images that violate others' copyrights. In certain limited cases, we may be able to use an image under a claim of ] - if you are certain that fair use would apply here, you may choose one of the fair use tags from ]. If no fair use rationale applies, you may want to contact the copyright holder and ]. | |||
The source supposedly exonerating Paul uses the words "smear" and "derogatory comments" -- if you want to claim it wasn't controversial in the face of terms such as those you will need a source saying so. The extent to which your edits appear to be biased in support of Paul is very disturbing and irritating to me. If you can't keep your professed support of Paul from interfering with your editing then you shouldn't be editing his article at all. ←]<sup>]</sup> 05:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
If you have any questions please ask at ]. Thank you. ] (]) 09:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:Idw-noncom --> | |||
My edits speak for themselves. They are neutral. Your edits, your edit descriptions, and behavior on talk pages also speak for themselves. You can say "derogatory comments" then, but it has not been called a "controversy" by a mainstream source so to do so is original research. This is a minor point anyway.--] 16:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Awesomeness == | |||
:Would you be happier with "Newsletter article smear" as is supported by the source cited? I doubt it. The use of the word "controversy" is pervasive on Misplaced Pages for things like this. ←]<sup>]</sup> 19:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
::I don't see how "Alleged newsletter remarks on race" is not sufficient, but that is a minor point and I don't care about it as much as you seem to. I do not like someone saying that I have no business editing a certain article just because I give my opinions about it on the talk page, when I have written a majority of the article in question, and when I was a contributor to the original insertion of the section in dispute and reverted it untold times when it was blanked by anonymous users. My edits are neutral and yours '''have not been''' for the most part. That is what is important. I don't appreciate it. I'd rather spend my time contributing to Misplaced Pages.--] 20:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
Your user page is very nice! ] <small>]</small>  18:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Paul's legislation == | |||
== Milw0rm article == | |||
I want to try to talk to you about in hopes that we will not have to resort to mediation. Why do you think it is permissible to include what Paul says about himself without including the legislation that contradicts those statements? How is that not a violation of ]? ←] 06:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
I have moved the article to ].] (]) 13:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
I have no problem with it in ] in the section on abortion. However, the section in the main article is supposed to be a summary, but your version has an inordinate focus on abortion, mentioning it in four separate places and in at least two full paragraphs while other positions get only a few words or no mention at all; at least two other editors have agreed with me on this on the talk page since yesterday. To say that it conflicts is original research without a source and to include two pieces of legislation in full detail while ignoring other important information is not only not NPOV but causes undue weight and the section to be unbalanced. That's pretty clear to those who have responded on the talk page. Why are you concerned about one subject being NPOV and not all the others? Why the focus on abortion at the expense of ''everything else?'' From the responses on the talk page, you are the only one so far who sees your version as NPOV. --] 06:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Archiving talk page== | |||
:The problem is with the statements suggesting he is a social libertarian and wants abortion relegated to the states. You yourself have included statements to that effect. The fact remains that he has introduced federal legislation that would make abortion murder, allow states to outlaw sex acts and same-sex marriage, display the ten commandments and nativity scenes. The focus is not specifically on abortion (but if it were, like I say, what other issue has resulted in more domestic bombings?) but the legislation which conflicts with his statements. We have had an article on the ] since January 2006, and it concerns a lot more than abortion. ←] 08:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Have you considered ] your talk page. It takes a while to load and is almost 100 kilobytes long. I would suggest archiving the first 53 discussions which are of 2007. ] (]) 13:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
::The problem is not in including those acts; it's focusing so much on them in what is supposed to be a summary article. Saying that he believes in states' rights or that he does not believe in allowing federal judges to overrule states' decision-making is much more informative. To argue your point a bit, both of the legislative acts in question do not go against what he has said about abortion; they would simply take away the Supreme Court and federal courts' ability to overrule states' decisions on abortion, because he thinks states should be allowed to decide either way. States would not be required to outlaw abortion, and it would be as before ''Roe vs. Wade'', where some states outlawed it and some did not. He doesn't believe in the federal governmment interfering, ''which includes the Supreme Court''. The Constitution also allows Congress to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court if they deem it fit. So, I'm not sure what your point is. The end result of the bills = states deciding, which is what Ron Paul has said he's for. I don't see how that goes against his stated position at all. The Sanctity of Life Act would have no effect other than states being able to write their own laws on abortion. You can and see that the entire thing except for the first sentence deals with limiting the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.--] 09:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::The Sanctity of Life Act would do a lot more than move jurisdiction around, it would make murderers out of thousands of doctors and their patients. If you are not opposed to including the acts, how would you summarize them? ←] 09:55, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::From what the bill says, it would seem to allow states to decide whether abortion was murder; the bill does not say that it would automatically make all abortion murder. I think it's overkill to have both pieces of legislation because they are similar. A summary would be something along the lines of "Paul introduced the Sanctity of Life Act in 2005, which would take jurisdiction on abortion away from the United States Supreme Court." That basically is repeating what's already said about ''Roe vs. Wade'', though, so I don't think it's necessary. Why do you think abortion should make up such a large part of the Political positions section? --] 10:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::::I know we disagree about its importance, but Paul has made abortion a major part of his campaign, and I think it deserves a paragraph. I don't think the bills are alike, the SLA deals only with abortion but the WTPA covers much more. You removed sources saying that defining life as beginning at conception in law would make abortion murder. ←] 15:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::::I really don't think he has made abortion a "major part of his campaign," other than an appearance at one event. One paragraph is quite different from 2.5+ or 3 paragraphs as you previously had it, but I think enough is said about it as it is. What more can you possibly say other than he is an "unshakeable foe" and he wants to overturn ''Roe vs. Wade''? You'll have to discuss it on the article's talk page; I'm not the owner of the article or anything.--] 17:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Possible move of Nazi plunder == | |||
== Ron Paul.. == | |||
I have started a discussion on possibly moving ]. As you are currently a reasonably active editor, as well as a past contributor to the article, I hope you can find some time to make comments at ]. ]]] 17:47, 4 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Do you have a source of him saying that he wants to increase legal immigration? He is the only candidate with the exception of Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter to address the number of immigrants in his platform: | |||
==]== | |||
] | |||
This is an automated message from ]. I have performed a web search with the contents of ], and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://empa7hy.wordpress.com/2008/07/08/milw0rm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our ] for further details. | |||
This message was placed automatically, and 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 and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on ]. ] (]) 17:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
"But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation. This is insanity. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods." | |||
The bot said that I copied text from a site which was actually a copy of the text I had previously written for the milw0rm Misplaced Pages article, which had been speedily deleted with no discussion. The text is mine and originally from Misplaced Pages.--] (]) 17:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
] 07:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== The Hedonistic Imperative == | |||
A source would be needed to say he wants to decrease legal immigration if that is said or if it it is said that he wants to increase it. I can't think of anything off the top of my head, but he has said many times he wants the current illegal immigrants to get in line just like everyone else does. I think he is more for more equality of all immigrants rather than increasing or decreasing. I think what he's saying is that if 60 million new immigrants are allowed in, they would be allowed to speed up past others who have been waiting for years (I assume this is in reference to Mexican immigrants) rather than waiting as applicants from other countries do, because it's just inconceivable that so many could be allowed in legally without speeding up their applications in some way and not fully processing them as they currently do. According to the article ], 1,000,000 legal immigrants come in per year. Increasing that number by 60 times would obviously cause havoc in many ways, first of all by increasing the bureaucracy needed to approve all those immigrants and handle the paperwork in any sort of timely manner, secondly by increasing the amount of immigration so dramatically, and thirdly by pushing even further back those immigrants who may have already been waiting patiently for years. It would be more accurate from the above statement to say that he does not want to increase the number of legal immigrants by 60 times the current rate, not that he doesn't want to increase legal immigration at all.--] 09:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
I've copied the final version of the deleted article (10 February 2007) to ]. Let me know if you needed all the previous revisions - 92 of them. ] (]) 09:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
== more on Paul == | |||
==Pit Bull== | |||
OK, I haven't read back through what's been going on, so I didn't know I was stepping into something that had been discussed at such length - I'll try to catch up on that, but I don't think I'll change my opinion about this needing to be in the lede. It's too big an issue - I have read many comments all over the place from people considering supporting Paul for his anti-war stance and struggling with his abortion position. It's not at all a minor thing to a large part of the electorate, and de-emphasizing it here is not a good idea - it may be seen as POV editing, which I recall this article had its share of a few months back. I haven't been watching it closely lately, so I don't know how it's been now. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 01:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Gloriamarie, | |||
Thank you for your contribution. Please check the pit bull discussion for my response (which is a bit long for user talk). Thanks! :) ] (]) 19:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
The POV thing is still there, but mostly on the part of one editor. Many editors have been driven away by his consistent behavior. It is difficult to reach any sort of compromise on even the smallest phrase, it seems, without days of discussion and what seem like hundreds of comments saying the same thing over and over. It's very frustrating. I don't consider this POV editing due to the background of the dispute, but it's good to have fresh eyes coming to the article anyway. The thing about the position is that it's best understood when discussed fully, which it is now under the Political Positions section. It's not as easy as saying he's "pro-life" when for some reason he gets a 65% rating from NARAL and most "pro-life" politicians get a rating closer to 0%. It's best to explain it. That's my position, anyway.--] 02:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Dora Kent == | |||
:Regardless of whether he has voted in a way that NARAL views as being pro-choice, ''his position'' and ''his self-description'' and '''all''' evidence is that he is pro-life. Gloriamarie, you're ] - this is so clear. I see no harm in keeping "pro-life" in the lede - he'll likely win over as many votes as he'll lose, and in any case that's not what I'm concerned about here, and I hope you're not either. (Which editor?) <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 03:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::No, that's not what I'm concerned about; mainly I do not want the issue to devolve into going around and around with one editor adding something, then another, then another and then having a whole paragraph on abortion in the lead. You're convincing me, though, and I think it's fine to have it in the lead. (The editor's name starts with B and ends with 4.)--] 03:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::Glad to know my persuasive powers are intact. <strong>] </strong>|<small>]</small> 03:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::Hi Gloria! I am so thankful there are level heads such as yours keeping the RP article intact. I apologize that my combining the abortion sections of the talk page may have confused; I will respond to the combined section shortly. I felt the need to horn in (and "be bold") because it seems that the POV tag might otherwise stay up indefinitely. I intend to finish my comments on the article soon and then make them as I propose if there is no substantial timely response. I guess my concern is to demonstrate to anyB4ody that the POV concerns have been addressed in relation to the points raised. My goal is to see the POV dropped asap, does that sound like a reasonable approach? And do you have any special insight on which remaining POV issues are the most volatile? Thanks! Would of course also appreciate your experienced insight as to my first ]. :D ] 17:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Hi, I'm back. Could you do me the kindest favor and dialogue with Photouploaded on what would be acceptable coverage of Paul's pro-life positions? Seems he did not like the idea of editorial FN from lead, so he tried four FNs from lead instead, and I tried it as zero FNs from lead and restoring the editorial FN to the positions section. I think though that if you and Photo can reach consensus it will be much more stable. Thanks! ] 15:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
{| style="border: 2px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" | |||
== 3RR == | |||
|rowspan="2" valign="top" | ] | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em; color: black" | '''The Citation Barnstar''' | |||
|- | |||
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray; color: black" | Your careful attention to detail is much appreciated. —] (]) 15:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
|} Hey, Gloriamarie, nice work digging up all the sources for ]! —] (]) 15:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Can you? == | |||
Thank you for at least the partial revert of Turtlescrubber's deletion of the end of the positions section. I replaced the other portion and then realized that I was in violation of the ] policy, which forbids more than three reverts in a 24 hour period, so I reverted myself back. However, it turns out that you are in violation of the policy because your four edits all undo at least part of someone else's edits, within the last 24 hours. However, since nobody has told you about the ] policy yet, you can't be blocked for it. If I had let my edit stand without reverting myself, I could have been blocked, typically for 24 hours. ←] 04:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
In the page ''']''' you made a by adding a number of citations to the article. One of those citations is causing a cite error. Could you go back and fill out the full source information for the reference tag <nowiki><ref name="discovery 2008"/></nowiki>? Thanks. ] (]) 23:48, 8 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
Thanks for the heads up. The first and the last edit you pointed out, I believe, would not apply because I was not undoing anything but just improving them. The last edit, I took nothing out, but reordered the sentence so it made grammatical sense. Anyway, I'll keep that in mind.--] 07:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
: I thought is was maybe ], but that blog doesn't include all the information you sourced from it. Please have a look there. You use the reference three times. ] (]) 17:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire == | |||
I'm not sure what the reference was supposed to refer to, and since it was a double reference supported by another citation I just removed it.--] (]) 16:52, 13 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
I was scrolling through the history of the ] article to see when something else was added, but noticed that you removed the KBE after his name and left a comment that non-British citizens can not be referred to as KBE or Sir. That is only partly correct. For recipients that are not British the "knighting" is only honorary, so they may not be referred to as Sir or Dame, but there is no prohibition in them using the post-nominal abbreviation. Not that I'm going to add it back or anything as Guiliani doesn't use the abbreviation after his name (except on trips to the UK), so there isn't a reason to use it in his Misplaced Pages article. --] <sup>]</sup> 18:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== ] and ] == | |||
Thanks for pointing that out-- I guess I got too overzealous in removing the title from both his article and ] because the KBE looked pretty silly :) --] 20:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Hi, you addressed User:Lessig yesterday for his edits in Phil English. Unfortunately you did not think of reverting his edit there. Oh, and you might want to take a look at this ]-talk by ] yesterday in NYC: http://blip.tv/file/3309463 - at least the first minute or so. Greetings --] ] 20:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
==Re: Public domain policy== | |||
Hello. Please see ]. Use as little non-free content as possible. --] (] - ]) 02:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
== |
== Edit-warring == | ||
thanks for tidying up the article. The new organisation was a good idea, and made sense. ] 12:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
I'd be obliged if you would discuss your edits to '']'' in a bit more detail. Not only are you edit-warring and in danger of violating the ], but you haven't really bothered to address my concerns. You've reinserted a statement about SIDS which is both factually incorrect and largely at odds with the source you're using to support it, which is a major problem. The overall thrust of your edits is, in my opinion, probably tipping the scale too far away from independent, reliable third-party sources and toward primary-source promotional material and self-description, but we can discuss that and I think we'll reach a suitable compromise. But please slow down with the edit-warring, take the time to discuss your changes (in particular the SIDS thing, which is just incorrect), and we'll both be happier. I promise, I can be reasonable. (As a side note, to avoid developing too much of a back-and-forth dynamic, I'll probably ask for outside eyes at the ]). ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 00:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
== Re Comment on Ron Paul == | |||
:I haven't engaged in any "edit warring" as I simply reverted your revert of my thoughtful edit which improved the article a great deal. If anything, I would say that you are edit warring since rather than fixing what you object to yourself, you have gone to both my talk page and the article's and made accusations without contributing to the conversation. You can take the sentence out if you object to it and I can have an arbitrator look at it if I decide it should be in the article, but it's fine to take it out with a note on the talk page. --] (]) 01:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
I felt I was commenting on a discussion on the apparent internet prominence of a candidate with little other media support. The point I was making was that controvesy generated by the appearance of ads for his campaign on notorious neo-nazi hate sites would cause an increase in internet traffic around his name thus explaining the amount of web traffic. | |||
My desire to add to the discussion has obviously rattled a number of feathers therefore I will desist in future. | |||
--] 08:07, 12 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
Fyi, I'm likely to be collaborating with others at the BLP after the protection is lifted in a few days and I see where you had some interest in the article awhile back. The article would benefit from more attention from a larger variety of Editors I think. ] (]) 14:16, 24 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
No problem, I don't want to ruffle any feathers either, but I just didn't see how that theory contributed to moving the discussion forward. He's certainly not a neo-Nazi, and he actually did get quite a bit of media support after he raised more than almost any other Republican candidate last quarter. He's been all over my TV the last week. Barack Obama's support does not come from being endorsed by Fidel Castro, for instance.--] 09:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Rudy Crew page under threat of deletion== | |||
I would like your reaction to the controversy surrounding the biographical article on ]. Do you think that the article is POV? or worthy of speedy deletion? | |||
An editor tagged the biography article on Crew, an education chancellor under NYC mayor ], the longest tenure chancellor of education (NYC) in recent memory prior to Joe Klein, for speedy deletion. It seems that it got tagged, simply because it had comments that were embarassing to Giuliani devotees. | |||
== Happy Birthday! == | |||
Crew gets 209,000 hits in a yahoo search. Given that Crew has indeed been quite notable, e.g. getting interview by high profile media, such as ], I consider the moves by the editors to be highly partisan /POV. ] 04:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Possible Additions== | |||
===]=== | |||
Strickler is an American television and theatre director; Nominated for three ] (1992, 1993, 2005) and won once in 1992; Nominated for two ]s and won once in 1993; Directed Guiding Light, ], and ]; She is close friends with ], Linda and David Laundra. , , , , | |||
===]=== | |||
Goldberg is an American writer and producer on ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], and ]. His writing partner is ]. | |||
===]=== | |||
Burger is an American TV writer and producer on ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]. | |||
===]=== | |||
Kettner is an American writer and producer on ], ], ], ], ], ]], ], and ]. She won a 2003 ] Award (she shared it with ]). | |||
===]=== | |||
Fisher is an American television producer; Nominated for three ] and won once for Outstanding Drama Series (2005-2007); Served as a producer on ], ], and The Original Max Talking Headroom Show. | |||
=== ] === | |||
Blackwell is an American television network executive who was responsible for the rise of soap opera centric cable network, ]. Under Blackwell, as general manager, the channel grew in distribution to more than 67 million homes and secured rights from NBC and CBS -- in addition to sib ABC -- to run same-day daytime soap episodes. The channel also acquired off-net primetime skeins such as "One Tree Hill" and "The OC" (and before that, "Melrose Place," "Beverly Hills 90210" and "Dallas"); SoapNet also extended its stable of original programming -- including its first-ever scripted entry, a spinoff of "General Hospital," and reality entry "The Fashionista Diaries." Blackwell left ] in October of 2007. | |||
===Linda Gase=== | |||
] is an American television writer who has worked on ] (co-]), ] (co-executive producer), ], ] (executive story editor; co-producer), ] (executive story editor), ] (]). | |||
=== 2 IMDB Links === | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
=== Morgan Gendel === | |||
] is an American TV writer & producer | |||
1996 ] nominee; 1996 ] nominee for Outstanding Drama Series; writer on ], ], ], ]; ] of ]. | |||
=== John Leekley === | |||
] American writer & producer on ], ], ] | |||
=== Jeffrey Stepakoff === | |||
] is a Jewish American writer for ], ], ], ], ], ]. He developed and wrote ]’s ] and ]. His 2007 book, Billion-Dollar Kiss: The Kiss That Saved Dawson's Creek and Other Adventures in TV Writing, was critically-acclaimed. | |||
=== Thania St. John=== | |||
] is an American writer and producer on ], ],], ], ], ], ], ], ], and ]. | |||
{{mbox | |||
== Writers/Producers == | |||
|type = notice | |||
*] (American writer and producer on ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]) | |||
|image = ] | |||
*] | |||
|style = background:yellow;border: 1px solid #CC9999; | |||
*]: American TV writer and producer on ], ], ], ], ] | |||
|text = Happy Birthday, <b> {{ROOTPAGENAME}}, </b> from the ]! Have a nice day! ] <sub>]</sub> <sup>]</sup> 04:11, 4 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
*] (ex-Head Writer of ]) | |||
}} | |||
*]: American TV producer of ] & ] ; | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:Charityinternationallogo.jpg== | |||
*]: American TV director of ] from 1984-2002. Nominated for 17 ] and won 7 times. Winner of a DGA Award. ; | |||
*] (American TV producer & TV executive) (ex EP of ], ex-VP of ]) , , | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] (Emmy nominated writer-]) | |||
*]: American TV writer/producer on ], ], ], ], ], ], ],] | |||
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
] is an American ] and screenwriter. She has been awarded three grants from the New York Foundation for the Arts: two in playwriting for Abandoned in Queens and Three Italian Women, and The Geri Ashur Award in Screenwriting for her original screenplay Truly Mary. | |||
'''PLEASE NOTE:''' | |||
Her short play Posing was nominated for a Pushcart Prize, and The Actual Footage won the Tennessee Chapbook Prize for Drama. Both plays are published in Poems & Plays. She has written the short film adaptation Physics for HBO's Women: Breaking the Rules series, and she has won two Daytime Emmy Awards for her work on ]. | |||
* I am a ], and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have questions, please post them ]. | |||
Censabella's half-hour independent film Last Call (directed by Robert Bailey) has been an official selection in festivals throughout the world, including the ], the Other Venice Film Festival, the Hermosa Shorts Film Festival, the Sedona International Film Festival, Anthology Film Archives, and the ] where it won the Best Short Drama award. | |||
* I will automatically remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again. | |||
* If you receive this notice ''after'' the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request. | |||
* To opt out of these bot messages, add <code><nowiki>{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}</nowiki></code> to your talk page. | |||
* If you believe the bot has made an error, please ] to turn it off ]. | |||
Censabella's teaching experience includes the New School for Drama, the Actors Studio Drama School (where she developed the playwriting program with Romulus Linney), ]'s School of the Arts, ]'s Undergraduate Writing Program, City University's MFA Writing Program, The Sewanee Writers' Conference, and Summer Literary Seminars. She is a member of the ] and the ], East, and graduated from ]. External Links: ; | |||
Thank you. <!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> ] (]) 01:06, 18 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
== WikiWomen's Collaborative == | |||
*] is an American author of The Book of Funnels (Winner of the 2006 ] Discovery Award), the chapbook HourHour. In 2006 he was given a Creative Capital Innovative Literature Award, and he has also received awards from the Poetry Fund and the ]. He teaches at ] in ], and his work has recently been translated into German, Slovene, French, and Portuguese. | |||
*] | |||
*] is an American screenwriter. Positions Held: GH ( 1996- 2002) | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*]: American screenwriter | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*]: American documentary producer & conspiracy theorist. Very notable: | |||
*] is an American TV producer. Positions Held: ]'s ] (March 1986-January 1989). Awards & Nominations: Nominated for several ]. | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*]: Prolific TV director | |||
*] | |||
*]: American actress, writer & director. | |||
{| style="background:#ffdeb5; border:1px solid #f60; margin:0.5em; padding:0.5em;border-radius: 8px;" | |||
==]== | |||
|- | |||
Tassler is an American television executive, a graduate of ]-bachelor of fine arts in theater), and holds the position of President, ] since September 2004. Her boss is ], President, ]. Tassler oversees CBS' prime time, late night and daytime programming, as well as program development for all genres. | |||
! colspan="2" style="font-size: 150%;" | WikiWomen Unite! <br /> | |||
|- | |||
'''Other Positions''' | |||
| <div style="background: #fff;margin-right: 10px;">]</div> | |||
*Executive Vice President, Drama Series Development, CBS Entertainment (July 2003 -September 2004) | |||
| style="text-align: left;" | Hi '''{{ {{{|safesubst:}}}ROOTPAGENAME}}'''! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Misplaced Pages are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the '''WikiWomen's Collaborative'''.<br/> | |||
*Senior Vice President, Drama Development, CBS Entertainment (1998- July 2003) | |||
As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by: | |||
*Vice President, Drama, CBS Productions (August 1997 - 1998) | |||
*Liking the and share your tips, projects, and connect with other WikiWomen | |||
*Vice President, Drama Development, Warner Bros. Television (199? - 1997) | |||
*Join the conversation on our | |||
*Director, Movies and Mini-Series, Lorimar/Warner Bros. Television (1990- ?) | |||
*Reading and writing for our | |||
*External Links: & | |||
We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our ] (under construction) to see how else you can get involved!<Br/> | |||
<br/>Can't wait to have you involved! ] (]) 04:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
<!-- EdwardsBot 0380 --> | |||
== WikiWomen's Collaborative: Come join us (and check out our new website)! == | |||
==Live Through This== | |||
] was a shortlived ] series. | |||
*Executive producers: ], Bernard Lechowick, ], ] | |||
*Producer: ] | |||
*Line producer: Michael Siry | |||
*Director: ] | |||
*]: ], ], ], Bernard Lechowick | |||
*Cast: Jane McGregor, Jessica Welch, Sarah Manninen, Tom Lock, Matthew Carey, Bruce Dinsmore, David Nerman, Jennifer Dale, Ron Lea | |||
==Undue deletion of ] article== | |||
Greetings, I recall by the history of various Rudy-related articles, that you were a party to some debates. I thought that you would be interested in thwarting the ] deletion (via an ] nomination of the RG Controversies article. | |||
Hope you can get a moment to pipe in. ] ] 03:29, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
{| style="background:#008080; border:1px solid #40E0D0; margin:0.5em; padding:0.5em;border-radius: 8px;" | |||
== Ron Paul 1996 campaign controversy == | |||
|- | |||
! colspan="2" style="font-size: 150%;" | WikiWomen - We need you! <br /> | |||
Thank you for your help improving the Ron Paul article. I would greatly appreciate your opinion as to the recent edits made by Vidor and Terjen under "1996 campaign controversy". I am unable to characterize them neutrally right now and, if formal WP complaint procedures are applicable, I would rather not be the one to initiate them unless I am sure I have the right forum. For now your immediate comments and helpful edits would be highly valuable. Disclosure: I am sending this message to exactly 5 editors. ] 16:53, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Fox News Attacks Decency== | |||
Thought that you'd find this new article interesting <]> and the associated press release. ] (]) 18:06, 25 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Thank You == | |||
You've been a tireless custodian of the ] article. Thank you, from one Wikipedian to another. ] (]) 05:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Blanking of ] connection with ]== | |||
Hi. One editor has opted to delete this from the Giuliani Partners article, saying that it belongs in the ] article. (] helped ] flee when the U.S. ] was pursuing her.) Another editor has blanked the article from the campaign article, on the grounds that it belongs in the Giuliani Partners article. | |||
I hope that you can weigh in. ] (]) 18:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Ron Paul Revolution== | |||
] http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ron_Paul_Revolution#Ron_Paul_Revolution | |||
If you have time I would like to hear your comments on this page. Thank you.--] (]) 00:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
==] roll call== | |||
{| style="background:#cedff2" | |||
|- | |- | ||
| <div style="background: #fff;margin-right: 10px;">]</div> | |||
|] | |||
| style="text-align: left;" | Hi '''{{ {{{|safesubst:}}}ROOTPAGENAME}}'''! The '''WikiWomen's Collaborative''' is a group of women from around the world who edit Misplaced Pages, contribute to its ], and support the mission of free knowledge. We recently updated our website, created new volunteer positions, and more! <br/> | |||
|Greetings from the ''']'''. Your name is listed on our ], but we are unsure how many of the people listed there are still active contributors to the League's activities. If you are still interested in participating in the work of the League, please follow the instructions at the ''']''' to add your name to the active members list. Once you have done that, you might want to familiarise yourself with the ], which has replaced the old ] subpage. As the old system is now deprecated, the main efforts of the League should be to clear the substantial ] which still exists there. <br>The League's services are in as high demand as ever, as evinced by the increasing backlog on our requests pages, both ] and ]. While ] and ] reviewers regularly praise the League's contributions to reviewed articles, we remain perennially understaffed. Fulfilling requests to polish the prose of Misplaced Pages's highest-profile articles is a way that editors can make a very noticeable difference to the appearance of the encyclopedia. On behalf of the League, if you do consider yourself to have left, I hope you will consider rejoining; if you consider yourself inactive, I hope you will consider returning to respond to just one request per week, or as many as you can manage. Merry Christmas and happy editing, '']''. | |||
Get involved by: | |||
*Visiting our ''']''' for resources, events, and more | |||
*Meet other women and share your story in our ''']''' | |||
*Participate at and "like" our '''''' | |||
*Join the conversation on our '''''' | |||
*Reading and writing for our '''''' | |||
*Volunteer to write for our blog, recruit blog writers, translate content, and co-run our Facebook and receive perks for ''']''' | |||
*Already participating? Take our and share your experience! | |||
Thanks for editing Misplaced Pages, and we look forward to you being a part of the Collaborative! -- ] (]) 01:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
|} | |} | ||
<!-- EdwardsBot 0437 --> | |||
== Edit-a-thon Invitation == | |||
<font color="forestgreen">]</font>‑<font color="darkorange">]</font>''' <small>(<font color="red">]</font>)'''</small> 18:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
==AfD nomination of ]== | |||
]An editor has nominated ], an article on which you have worked or that you created, for ]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "]"). | |||
{| style="background-color: #E0FFFF; border: 1px solid #0000FF;" | |||
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at {{#if:Teacher Tax Cut Act | ] | ] }} and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Please join the ''']''', June 20, 2013. <BR>Build content relating to '''women in science''', '''chemistry''' and the '''history of science'''.<BR> Use the hashtag '''#GlamCHF''' and write your favorite scientist or chemist into Wikipedian history! | |||
|} ] (]) 14:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
== ThatCampPhilly Edit-a-thon Invitation == | |||
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the ] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you.<!-- Template:AFDNote --> ] (]) 16:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
{| style="background-color: #E0FFFF; border: 1px solid #0000FF;" | |||
== us department of education == | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Please join the '''[[Misplaced Pages:Meetup/Philadelphia/2013 September 27 ThatCamp | Misplaced Pages Edit-a-thon | |||
]]''' at '''''', September 27, 2013, held at the ]. Bring your own content to work on, or get an early start on ] with our resources about '''women in science''', '''chemistry''' and the '''history of science'''. ] (]) 15:52, 24 September 2013 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
== Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
Thanks for contributing the "establishment" section. | |||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
It was the closest thing to what I was looking for, an idea how the US managed education compared to other countries, and how it managed education before creation of ED. ] (]) 23:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
== David Souter == | |||
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Nice job on the improvements to this article. I stumbled upon it and it's a much better read then I last remember it. :) ] 14:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
== January 2014 == | |||
] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on . | |||
== Response Requested == | |||
:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: | |||
*<nowiki>then known as the World Transhumanist Association, and is a prominent figure in the </nowiki>{{red|''']'''}}<nowiki> movement, inspiring a strain of transhumanism based on paradise engineering and ending suffering.<</nowiki> | |||
Thanks, <!-- (0, -1, 0, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->] (]) 03:41, 13 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on . | |||
I plan to delete the ], as it is not relevant to improving the article. As that section contains a comment from you, I would like to know if you have any objection to such deletion. If so, please post your objection in ]. I will presume silence as consent. Thank you. —] (]) 04:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: | |||
*<nowiki>*'''Operation Shoshana''' </nowiki>{{red|'''('''}}<nowiki>now known as the ]</nowiki> | |||
Thanks, <!-- (1, 0, 0, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->] (]) 04:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
== A brownie for you! == | |||
==Clarence Thomas== | |||
Thanks for the work. ] (]) 01:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
Yo. There's a cite error in the article for an abc news citation; I think you added those. Please fix that; I don't know how to work that stuff, which is why I just list the whole cite every time, heh. ] (]) 19:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thank you for contributing to El Chapo's article. Your work is greatly appreciated! ]<small> (</small><big>]</big> • ]<small>)</small> 02:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
*Hi, thanks again for updating/improving El Chapo's page. Just to let you know, I will be using your information to further organize the article. I think I'll be following a similar format to the one found on ] so the article can flow chronologically when possible. ]<small> (</small><big>]</big> • ]<small>)</small> 18:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
That was put in by an IP address , but I fixed it with no problem. Thanks for letting me know. I'll leave a note on the IP's talk page not to do that sort of stuff again.--] (]) 22:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
== |
==Revert== | ||
When an edit includes 2 things, as I added to ], and one of them needs to be changed, you don't need to revert it. You can simply make a good faith edit. Your revert also removed the category "Prisoners and deatinees of Mexico" that I added. Try to make good faith edits without being overly aggressive with the reverts. Thanks. ] (]) 04:37, 23 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
:My apologies - I didn't see the category addition. Thanks for your edit. - ] (]) 05:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
==Disambiguation link notification for February 23== | |||
I'll try to do that in the future (although it's not required in citations, it is helpful I'm sure), although Rehnquist's bio is only on one page in that book so it's easy to find that information.--] (]) 23:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
== Barnstar for work on the Nixon article == | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 08:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #ffffff;" | |||
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ] | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Cleanup Barnstar''' | |||
|- | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | message ] (]) 14:56, 9 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
==Big Trouble in Edith Piaf City== | |||
Many moons ago, seven years and more actually, you did wonderful reference work on the article ]. Unfortunately, the most cited reference, a "Yahoo" article, no longer exists. It's listed as reference #1, with multiple other citations. If you know a good deal about her, and/or have access to good sources, and if you know/know of any of the other primary editors of Madame Piaf's page, it would be good to work on the article. At present it looks well documented but parts of it aren't. | |||
Thank you | |||
With apologies to Meredith Wilson, Regards ] (]) 05:42, 5 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Just need a clarification == | |||
== ] == | |||
I am just wondering what the reasoning is for this edit ]. Although I don't see problem right now, I was just wondering what the problem was with the way it was written and formatted before. Anyway, I'm suer there is a reason. | |||
Go ahead and leave your response here, since I am currently watching your page. Thanks--] (]) 03:14, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
You were involved in this article. I invite you to a page move discussion. --] (]) 23:59, 28 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
Thanks for the barnstar by the way :) My reasoning for that is that those two paragraphs are general summary paragraphs about things that happened in both his first and second terms in office, so they didn't really belong under the First Term section. I figured that if we add a sentence or two about Vietnam, China and Watergate, we have some good summary paragraphs of his entire presidency. It's ok to move them back if you disagree, I just thought it didn't make sense to talk about second-term goings-on under the First Term section.--] (]) 03:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:WildintheCountryMoviePoster.jpg== | |||
:Thats cool, I'm not disagreeing, I was just wondering. That makes sense. I didn't look it over too carefully, but where did you move the paragraphs? Did you create a new section? Finally, is there anything else that needs work before its nominated for GA again?--] (]) 03:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
::I moved them just up to the top section, "Presidency," which was already there but just had a picture of him receiving the oath of office on the family Bible. I don't think there are any huge issues with the article as it is, so we could see what the reviewer suggests and implement those when suggested. Was there a previous GA review? --] (]) 03:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::There was a previous GA review in August. See the top of the talk page for what the reviewer had to say. The article at that time was in horrible shape. It was no way ready for that type of review. I came in soon afterward and immediatly attempted to fix as much as I could. At that time though, there were only 49 citations. Now, in just three months time, there are over 120. Thanks to the efforts of ] and yourself, this article is most like;y ready to go again.--] (]) 03:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::Thanks. I just added a few things, about the Nixon Doctrine and his press conferences, and there are a few more things I can think that are important-- the 1972 election was a landslide that brought many other Republicans into office and is considered notable for that (one was ]). I have a book which should have some information on that; I'll look into it and maybe come back and write something about that. Other than that, I think most subjects are pretty well covered. A few other things that could be worth delving into are his Supreme Court appointments, of which he had more than most presidents (why did he choose those people?), Rehnquist especially is an important one, and his pardon (a bit more on the controversy surrounding it and how Ford kind of suffered for that). There was also a controversy regarding his law school, Duke, which was going to rename itself after Nixon if he brought his presidential library there. It's a pretty liberal-leaning school, and the professors went crazy and revolted over that, so Duke didn't get the library. I'll try to find some more information on those subjects.--] (]) 05:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::::The library information seems interesting. I would only suggest that it not be too long based on ].--] (]) 03:19, 13 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> ] (]) 22:04, 19 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
==]== | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:Newharvestnonprofitlogo.jpg== | |||
] has been nominated for a ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the ]. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. Reviewers' concerns are ]. --] (]) 05:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 17:35, 4 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Richard Milhous Nixon == | |||
== ] == | |||
As a recently involved editor to the Richard Milhous Nixon article I would like to inform you that I nominated the article for ]. Lets cross our fingers and hope for the best. | |||
Sadly, a recent dispute on the ] page has spilled over to other articles on the presidents. The Nixon article has gone through a few changes, but I reverted the changes with the argument that any consensus reached on the Obama talk page is not binding on other pages. An editor has asked for a discussion. If you would like to join in, please do so at ].--] (]) 02:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:True.Story.of.Jesse.James.poster.jpg}== | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692007949 --> | |||
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by ]. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an ] linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check: | |||
:* That there is a ] on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in. | |||
:* That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page. | |||
Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an ]; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale. | |||
== April Fools? Nope! Welcome to the Women Scientists worldwide online edit-a-thon during Year of Science == | |||
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. ] (]) 02:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
{| style="background-color: pink; color:black; font-family:Avenir; border: 3px solid #000000; margin: 0.5em; padding: 0.5em;border-radius: 10px;" | |||
== DYK for Durham Performing Arts Center == | |||
{| class="messagebox {{#ifeq:|yes|small|standard}}-talk" | |||
|- | |- | ||
! colspan="2" style="font-size: 130%;" | | |||
|] | |||
''Join us!'' | |||
|On ], ], ''']''' was updated with {{#if:|facts|a fact}} from the article{{#if:|s|}} ''''']'''''{{#if:|{{#if:|, |, and}} ''''']''''' | |||
|- | |||
}}{{#if:|{{#if:|, |, and}} ''''']''''' | |||
| <div style="background: #fff;margin-right: 10px;"></div> | |||
}}{{#if:|, and ''''']'''''}}, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
| style="text-align: left;" | | |||
|} <!-- ], ] --> ] (]) 08:37, 4 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
<big><big>] -<br /> | |||
a ] initiative<br /> | |||
] ] ] | |||
*Hosts: ], ] | |||
*Sponsor: | |||
*April-December 2016</big></big> | |||
*<code><nowiki>#wikiwomeninred</nowiki></code> <code><nowiki>#yearofscience</nowiki></code> <code><nowiki>#contentgap</nowiki></code> | |||
|} | |||
<small>(To subscribe, ]. Unsubscribe, ])</small> --] (]) 01:59, 1 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Rosiestep@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Wikipedia_talk:Meetup/Women_in_Red/9/Invitation_%26_Thank_you_%26_Barnstar&oldid=712958431 --> | |||
== |
== David Pearce education == | ||
Hi, you introduced that David Pearce attended Brasenose College, Oxford with this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=David_Pearce_%28philosopher%29&type=revision&diff=227731157&oldid=227730168 Do you have a citation for this? ] (]) 19:17, 13 June 2016 (UTC) | |||
Hey there Gloria. Thanks for the work that you have done on the Nixon page. I'd just like to comment on some of your recent edits and my recent changes. As you have probably noticed, I have made some major alterations to the page, especially in the economy section and Vietnam War. | |||
== Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
#First off, I don't know if it was you or someone else, but the article is choc full of wikilinks, many of which need to be removed because of ]. If I removed wikilinks, that's why. | |||
#Lets go to the economy: I nixed Paul Krugman's assertion because of the wording. It seemed to discredit what some people think and present Krugman's assertions as fact. They may be, but it is not our job to decide that. I favor letting the reader decide. We can present the facts and maybe the reader will say "Hey, Nixon talked about supply side in 1960 and here he is raising taxes" or maybe the reader will say "He did the best thing for the times" -- we don't know. But we shouldn't state the opinion of a far-left newspaper columnist as fact. | |||
:#Quote: ''"Federal Reserve chairman Arthur Burns encouraged Nixon to check the power held by labor unions, which had kept the rate of inflation high despite high unemployment; business owners kept prices high due to fear of wage increases."'' - This seemed a bit odd and random, and that's why I removed it. If we can incorporate it somewhere with proper context, then we will see. | |||
:#I've taken many of the passages that had been previously written and reworded them, providing context and clarity, then repositioning the sentences. I haven't deleted or moved anything randomly. | |||
#Regarding this, I put it in the Federal government initiatives section word-for-word. So it is now redundant. | |||
#Regarding edits like these: I changed the way that the citations are on the page to make the page more like other political articles such as ]. All the books are placed down below in the references section, and to refer to them, we write the author's name, date of publication, and page number(s) in this format: ''Frum, David (2000), p.X'' instead of the full citation. You can refer down to the references section to find the book. It may be a difficult concept to grasp, but I've found that it is better for the articles. | |||
#Regarding Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers: I also did not see the significance of adding this to the article. Perhaps the ] article could benefit from this? It says that the papers had nothing damaging against Nixon, but he sued not to have them released -- why? This is placed quite randomly. | |||
#Regarding Civil Rights Quote:''"Strategically, Nixon sought a middle way between the ] ] and liberal Democrats, whose support of integration was alienating some Southern white Democrats."'' -- This was uncited. Quote: ''"...and enforced the law after the Supreme Court, in '']'' (1969), prohibited further delays."'' -- This was uncited. And then the book thing again. | |||
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> ] (]) 17:25, 11 August 2017 (UTC) | |||
Just so you know, I plan on going through the rest of the article and making other major changes. I like to think that I'm pretty experienced in this field; other FA articles that I've written or worked on substantially include ], ] and Nixon's wife ]. I don't mean to be boastful or condescending because I hope we can genuinely work together to make the article even better. | |||
== List of YouTubers == | |||
If you disagree with anything I said above, please let me know. Thanks for taking the time to read! | |||
There is another deletion discussion on ]. If you would like to weigh in, you can do so by checking out the discussion ]. <span style="background:red"><span style="color:white">Mr. C.C.</span><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 04:53, 30 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
Best, ] (]) 00:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
== GAR for Ron Paul == | |||
:Thanks for the note! I understand now why you made the edits in question, and I agree with them perhaps with the exception of not mentioning the Pentagon Papers. He took the New York Times to the Supreme Court over them, which I think qualifies as an event worth mentioning. From what I read from the source I cited, he did it even though he wasn't personally implicated because Kissinger wanted him to protect the presidency in general (quite ironic in hindsight!) I hadn't noticed that the article was too full of wikilinks, and I don't believe I've added an excessive amount, sorry if I had. I don't think that was mentioned as an item in the GA review, but perhaps it was. I agree with Krugman on some of his statements regarding Nixon, and I think what he says in this instance is correct-- let me know if I'm wrong about that. Nixon did create a lot of government programs, which I've expanded a lot on since I started working on Nixon's article. I see what you mean about citing opinion vs. fact-- perhaps if there is someone who disagrees with Krugman, they could be cited as well. I thought that the {{cite book}} template was pretty much the standard for citing books, but if there is a preferred way, I guess I don't have a problem with that. It's just new to me! The Southern Strategy is often cited as something that Nixon did- maybe we can find a source defining it, since that's basically the definition of it. I believe there's a separate Misplaced Pages article on it as well. Maybe fact tags could be used on these until a source is found- I think the Supreme Court case is cited by the same source as the desegregation from PBS, just not listed with a particular cite on that phrase. Those are just my thoughts, I'm glad you shared yours as well! Thanks for working on the article. It was pretty bad a few months ago when I first started working on it.--] (]) 21:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
], an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 19:50, 10 March 2021 (UTC) | |||
== My Baptism of Fire == | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:Milw0rmcnn.jpg== | |||
] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 20:06, 22 September 2021 (UTC) | |||
Thank you for your kind welcome. | |||
==MfD nomination of ]== | |||
I very much feel that my intervention on the discussion of ]'s notability was a baptism of fire. | |||
] ], a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> ] (]) 18:29, 3 October 2021 (UTC) | |||
I'll try and take it at a far more relaxed pace from here on in. | |||
] (]) 00:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Arafat holster == | |||
Wow, thanks for adding that bit. We were discussing it on the talk page ages ago, but no one found a reliable source. Thanks for the ref! Cheers. --] (]) 04:35, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks for the note! I'm glad I could help.--] (]) 21:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Frank Mankiewicz == | |||
I'm still unsure what the schooling of FM's children has to do with anything. Plenty of parents in DC supported (and still support) public education, integration, etc. while sending their children to private schools. | |||
That the article is a stub and needs more info is also irrelevant: surely it needs ''important'' biographical information. For instance, FM's coining of the term "retronym," his work for Hill & Knowlton, etc. | |||
What we have here looks very much like an attempt to inject POV: to bring up a minor detail intended to show that someone is/was a hypocrite. Never mind that even David Frum (Mr. NPOV himself, I'm sure!) doesn't show that FM sent his children to private schools to ''avoid'' busing. DC schools weren't that wonderful back then, with or without busing. And that's original research on my part, done when I was in grade school. | |||
There must be hundreds of Misplaced Pages articles on people who raised their kids in DC in the 60s and 70s. How many of them discuss which school they sent them to, and for what reasons, and how that related to, or could be mentioned in connection with, their political views? | |||
Please revert your revert. | |||
Thanks ] (]) 21:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
:You are free to revert it if you feel that it's a POV addition. I'll make a note on the talk page.--] (]) 21:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
==Thomas== | |||
Because you have been a contributing editor to Clarence Thomas in the past, please comment: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2009-01/Clarence_Thomas | |||
] (]) 05:55, 17 January 2009 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 14:51, 5 March 2023
24 December 2024 |
|
Archives |
|
us department of education
Thanks for contributing the "establishment" section. It was the closest thing to what I was looking for, an idea how the US managed education compared to other countries, and how it managed education before creation of ED. 199.184.238.224 (talk) 23:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
David Souter
Nice job on the improvements to this article. I stumbled upon it and it's a much better read then I last remember it. :) Wizardman 14:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Response Requested
I plan to delete the "Name Change" section of the "Steve Fossett" talk page, as it is not relevant to improving the article. As that section contains a comment from you, I would like to know if you have any objection to such deletion. If so, please post your objection in that section of the article's talk page. I will presume silence as consent. Thank you. —Danorton (talk) 04:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Clarence Thomas
Thanks for the work. RafaelRGarcia (talk) 01:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Yo. There's a cite error in the article for an abc news citation; I think you added those. Please fix that; I don't know how to work that stuff, which is why I just list the whole cite every time, heh. RafaelRGarcia (talk) 19:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
That was put in by an IP address in this error, but I fixed it with no problem. Thanks for letting me know. I'll leave a note on the IP's talk page not to do that sort of stuff again.--Gloriamarie (talk) 22:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Rehnquist
Whoa! Thanks for the work, but please give page numbers for all your citations. For example, page 509 for this: "While Rehnquist was often a lone dissenter in cases early on, his views would later often become the majority view of the Court." Please fix what you've added. Thanks. RafaelRGarcia (talk) 23:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I'll try to do that in the future (although it's not required in citations, it is helpful I'm sure), although Rehnquist's bio is only on one page in that book so it's easy to find that information.--Gloriamarie (talk) 23:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Barnstar for work on the Nixon article
The Cleanup Barnstar | ||
message Jojhutton (talk) 14:56, 9 November 2008 (UTC) |
Thank you
Just need a clarification
I am just wondering what the reasoning is for this edit ]. Although I don't see problem right now, I was just wondering what the problem was with the way it was written and formatted before. Anyway, I'm suer there is a reason. Go ahead and leave your response here, since I am currently watching your page. Thanks--Jojhutton (talk) 03:14, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar by the way :) My reasoning for that is that those two paragraphs are general summary paragraphs about things that happened in both his first and second terms in office, so they didn't really belong under the First Term section. I figured that if we add a sentence or two about Vietnam, China and Watergate, we have some good summary paragraphs of his entire presidency. It's ok to move them back if you disagree, I just thought it didn't make sense to talk about second-term goings-on under the First Term section.--Gloriamarie (talk) 03:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thats cool, I'm not disagreeing, I was just wondering. That makes sense. I didn't look it over too carefully, but where did you move the paragraphs? Did you create a new section? Finally, is there anything else that needs work before its nominated for GA again?--Jojhutton (talk) 03:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- I moved them just up to the top section, "Presidency," which was already there but just had a picture of him receiving the oath of office on the family Bible. I don't think there are any huge issues with the article as it is, so we could see what the reviewer suggests and implement those when suggested. Was there a previous GA review? --Gloriamarie (talk) 03:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- There was a previous GA review in August. See the top of the talk page for what the reviewer had to say. The article at that time was in horrible shape. It was no way ready for that type of review. I came in soon afterward and immediatly attempted to fix as much as I could. At that time though, there were only 49 citations. Now, in just three months time, there are over 120. Thanks to the efforts of User:ERcheck and yourself, this article is most like;y ready to go again.--Jojhutton (talk) 03:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just added a few things, about the Nixon Doctrine and his press conferences, and there are a few more things I can think that are important-- the 1972 election was a landslide that brought many other Republicans into office and is considered notable for that (one was Jesse Helms). I have a book which should have some information on that; I'll look into it and maybe come back and write something about that. Other than that, I think most subjects are pretty well covered. A few other things that could be worth delving into are his Supreme Court appointments, of which he had more than most presidents (why did he choose those people?), Rehnquist especially is an important one, and his pardon (a bit more on the controversy surrounding it and how Ford kind of suffered for that). There was also a controversy regarding his law school, Duke, which was going to rename itself after Nixon if he brought his presidential library there. It's a pretty liberal-leaning school, and the professors went crazy and revolted over that, so Duke didn't get the library. I'll try to find some more information on those subjects.--Gloriamarie (talk) 05:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- The library information seems interesting. I would only suggest that it not be too long based on WP:Undue weight.--Jojhutton (talk) 03:19, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just added a few things, about the Nixon Doctrine and his press conferences, and there are a few more things I can think that are important-- the 1972 election was a landslide that brought many other Republicans into office and is considered notable for that (one was Jesse Helms). I have a book which should have some information on that; I'll look into it and maybe come back and write something about that. Other than that, I think most subjects are pretty well covered. A few other things that could be worth delving into are his Supreme Court appointments, of which he had more than most presidents (why did he choose those people?), Rehnquist especially is an important one, and his pardon (a bit more on the controversy surrounding it and how Ford kind of suffered for that). There was also a controversy regarding his law school, Duke, which was going to rename itself after Nixon if he brought his presidential library there. It's a pretty liberal-leaning school, and the professors went crazy and revolted over that, so Duke didn't get the library. I'll try to find some more information on those subjects.--Gloriamarie (talk) 05:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- There was a previous GA review in August. See the top of the talk page for what the reviewer had to say. The article at that time was in horrible shape. It was no way ready for that type of review. I came in soon afterward and immediatly attempted to fix as much as I could. At that time though, there were only 49 citations. Now, in just three months time, there are over 120. Thanks to the efforts of User:ERcheck and yourself, this article is most like;y ready to go again.--Jojhutton (talk) 03:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- I moved them just up to the top section, "Presidency," which was already there but just had a picture of him receiving the oath of office on the family Bible. I don't think there are any huge issues with the article as it is, so we could see what the reviewer suggests and implement those when suggested. Was there a previous GA review? --Gloriamarie (talk) 03:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Ron Paul
Ron Paul has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured quality. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Andrew Kelly (talk) 05:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Richard Milhous Nixon
As a recently involved editor to the Richard Milhous Nixon article I would like to inform you that I nominated the article for WP:GA. Lets cross our fingers and hope for the best. Sadly, a recent dispute on the Talk:Barack Obama page has spilled over to other articles on the presidents. The Nixon article has gone through a few changes, but I reverted the changes with the argument that any consensus reached on the Obama talk page is not binding on other pages. An editor has asked for a discussion. If you would like to join in, please do so at Talk:Richard Nixon.--Jojhutton (talk) 02:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:True.Story.of.Jesse.James.poster.jpg}
Thank you for uploading Image:True.Story.of.Jesse.James.poster.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
- That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Durham Performing Arts Center
On 4 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Durham Performing Arts Center, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
BorgQueen (talk) 08:37, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Richard Nixon edits
Hey there Gloria. Thanks for the work that you have done on the Nixon page. I'd just like to comment on some of your recent edits and my recent changes. As you have probably noticed, I have made some major alterations to the page, especially in the economy section and Vietnam War.
- First off, I don't know if it was you or someone else, but the article is choc full of wikilinks, many of which need to be removed because of overlinking. If I removed wikilinks, that's why.
- Lets go to the economy: I nixed Paul Krugman's assertion because of the wording. It seemed to discredit what some people think and present Krugman's assertions as fact. They may be, but it is not our job to decide that. I favor letting the reader decide. We can present the facts and maybe the reader will say "Hey, Nixon talked about supply side in 1960 and here he is raising taxes" or maybe the reader will say "He did the best thing for the times" -- we don't know. But we shouldn't state the opinion of a far-left newspaper columnist as fact.
- Quote: "Federal Reserve chairman Arthur Burns encouraged Nixon to check the power held by labor unions, which had kept the rate of inflation high despite high unemployment; business owners kept prices high due to fear of wage increases." - This seemed a bit odd and random, and that's why I removed it. If we can incorporate it somewhere with proper context, then we will see.
- I've taken many of the passages that had been previously written and reworded them, providing context and clarity, then repositioning the sentences. I haven't deleted or moved anything randomly.
- Regarding this, I put it in the Federal government initiatives section word-for-word. So it is now redundant.
- Regarding edits like these: I changed the way that the citations are on the page to make the page more like other political articles such as Margaret Thatcher. All the books are placed down below in the references section, and to refer to them, we write the author's name, date of publication, and page number(s) in this format: Frum, David (2000), p.X instead of the full citation. You can refer down to the references section to find the book. It may be a difficult concept to grasp, but I've found that it is better for the articles.
- Regarding Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers: I also did not see the significance of adding this to the article. Perhaps the Role of United States in the Vietnam War article could benefit from this? It says that the papers had nothing damaging against Nixon, but he sued not to have them released -- why? This is placed quite randomly.
- Regarding Civil Rights Quote:"Strategically, Nixon sought a middle way between the segregationist George C. Wallace and liberal Democrats, whose support of integration was alienating some Southern white Democrats." -- This was uncited. Quote: "...and enforced the law after the Supreme Court, in Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education (1969), prohibited further delays." -- This was uncited. And then the book thing again.
Just so you know, I plan on going through the rest of the article and making other major changes. I like to think that I'm pretty experienced in this field; other FA articles that I've written or worked on substantially include Ronald Reagan, Nancy Reagan and Nixon's wife Pat. I don't mean to be boastful or condescending because I hope we can genuinely work together to make the article even better.
If you disagree with anything I said above, please let me know. Thanks for taking the time to read!
Best, Happyme22 (talk) 00:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note! I understand now why you made the edits in question, and I agree with them perhaps with the exception of not mentioning the Pentagon Papers. He took the New York Times to the Supreme Court over them, which I think qualifies as an event worth mentioning. From what I read from the source I cited, he did it even though he wasn't personally implicated because Kissinger wanted him to protect the presidency in general (quite ironic in hindsight!) I hadn't noticed that the article was too full of wikilinks, and I don't believe I've added an excessive amount, sorry if I had. I don't think that was mentioned as an item in the GA review, but perhaps it was. I agree with Krugman on some of his statements regarding Nixon, and I think what he says in this instance is correct-- let me know if I'm wrong about that. Nixon did create a lot of government programs, which I've expanded a lot on since I started working on Nixon's article. I see what you mean about citing opinion vs. fact-- perhaps if there is someone who disagrees with Krugman, they could be cited as well. I thought that the
{{cite book}}
template was pretty much the standard for citing books, but if there is a preferred way, I guess I don't have a problem with that. It's just new to me! The Southern Strategy is often cited as something that Nixon did- maybe we can find a source defining it, since that's basically the definition of it. I believe there's a separate Misplaced Pages article on it as well. Maybe fact tags could be used on these until a source is found- I think the Supreme Court case is cited by the same source as the desegregation from PBS, just not listed with a particular cite on that phrase. Those are just my thoughts, I'm glad you shared yours as well! Thanks for working on the article. It was pretty bad a few months ago when I first started working on it.--Gloriamarie (talk) 21:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
My Baptism of Fire
Thank you for your kind welcome. I very much feel that my intervention on the discussion of Guilio Prisco's notability was a baptism of fire. I'll try and take it at a far more relaxed pace from here on in. PlanetNiles (talk) 00:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Arafat holster
Wow, thanks for adding that bit. We were discussing it on the talk page ages ago, but no one found a reliable source. Thanks for the ref! Cheers. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:35, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note! I'm glad I could help.--Gloriamarie (talk) 21:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Frank Mankiewicz
I'm still unsure what the schooling of FM's children has to do with anything. Plenty of parents in DC supported (and still support) public education, integration, etc. while sending their children to private schools.
That the article is a stub and needs more info is also irrelevant: surely it needs important biographical information. For instance, FM's coining of the term "retronym," his work for Hill & Knowlton, etc.
What we have here looks very much like an attempt to inject POV: to bring up a minor detail intended to show that someone is/was a hypocrite. Never mind that even David Frum (Mr. NPOV himself, I'm sure!) doesn't show that FM sent his children to private schools to avoid busing. DC schools weren't that wonderful back then, with or without busing. And that's original research on my part, done when I was in grade school.
There must be hundreds of Misplaced Pages articles on people who raised their kids in DC in the 60s and 70s. How many of them discuss which school they sent them to, and for what reasons, and how that related to, or could be mentioned in connection with, their political views?
Please revert your revert.
Thanks RogerLustig (talk) 21:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- You are free to revert it if you feel that it's a POV addition. I'll make a note on the talk page.--Gloriamarie (talk) 21:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Thomas
Because you have been a contributing editor to Clarence Thomas in the past, please comment: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2009-01/Clarence_Thomas
RafaelRGarcia (talk) 05:55, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Material you have added to the article is being challenged. I think you should comment at http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Clarence_Thomas and at the medcab page. RafaelRGarcia (talk) 16:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Maya Angelou
Gloriamarie, thank you for your recent work on this article. I can't tell you how much I appreciate it, since I'm pretty much the only editor who's worked on any MA-related article. This one needs so much work! I wanted to draw your attention to I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings; it's pretty close to getting submitted for FAC. If you could take a look at it, that would be great. It's already got some looks from a couple of editors familiar with the FAC-process, but another pair of eyes couldn't hurt. Again, thanks so much. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 06:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
BJ Lawson
BJ Lawson
Proposed deletion of B.J. Lawson
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article B.J. Lawson, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- Non notable person whose only claim to fame is that he ran for Congress and was unsuccessful. His campaign seems to have been a run of the mill affair without any real controversy. The article appears to have been written to support candidacy
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and Misplaced Pages's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Albatross2147 (talk) 23:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Education Improvement Tax Cut Act
A tag has been placed on Education Improvement Tax Cut Act, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}}
to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Burzmali (talk) 13:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Bruges
Hay Gloriamarie, are you sure your source for the population of Bruges is correct? It sounds quite impossible to me there lived 200,000 people in Bruges in the 1800s. I'm pretty sure that number is wrong. Greets, Wikifalcon (talk) 08:45, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I had been wondering about the figure as well since it was so different from what was previously (uncited) on the page. The source is an 1896 textbook. It could be incorrect, but I've found several other sources that assert the same thing: The Chicago Tribune - Dec 30, 2001: "By one account, in the year 1500 Brugge had a population of 200000, making it twice the size of London, but its fortunes were soon to reverse. ..." The New York Times in 1928: "Its population, once more than 200000, is now 52894." Lonely Planet: "Bruges grew fat and by 1500 the population had ballooned to 200000, doubling that of London." --Gloriamarie (talk) 09:21, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
New harvest article
There was only 1 revision and not much content, so I'm just pasting it over here. Jay (talk) 19:34, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Formation | 2004 |
---|---|
Location | |
Official language | English |
Key people | Jason Gaverick Matheny |
Website | www.new-harvest.org |
New Harvest is a non-profit organization promoting research on the development of in vitro meat and other meat substitutes.
Research
Notes
External links
Category:Non-profit organizations based in the United States
File:Newharvestnonprofit.jpg
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Newharvestnonprofit.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Misplaced Pages by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Misplaced Pages, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because images on Misplaced Pages need to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License or another free license, which allow anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.If you created this media file and want to use it on Misplaced Pages, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.
If you did not create this media file, please understand that the vast majority of images found on the internet are not appropriate for Misplaced Pages. Most content on the internet is copyrighted and the creator of the image has exclusive rights to use it. Misplaced Pages respects the copyrights of others - do not upload images that violate others' copyrights. In certain limited cases, we may be able to use an image under a claim of fair use - if you are certain that fair use would apply here, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list. If no fair use rationale applies, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.
If you have any questions please ask at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. Thank you. feydey (talk) 09:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Awesomeness
Your user page is very nice! Jared (t) 18:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Milw0rm article
I have moved the article to User:Gloriamarie/Milw0rm.Jay (talk) 13:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Archiving talk page
Have you considered archiving your talk page. It takes a while to load and is almost 100 kilobytes long. I would suggest archiving the first 53 discussions which are of 2007. Jay (talk) 13:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Possible move of Nazi plunder
I have started a discussion on possibly moving Nazi plunder. As you are currently a reasonably active editor, as well as a past contributor to the article, I hope you can find some time to make comments at renaming Nazi plunder. Unschool 17:47, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Milw0rm
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Milw0rm, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://empa7hy.wordpress.com/2008/07/08/milw0rm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.
This message was placed automatically, and 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 and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
The bot said that I copied text from a site which was actually a copy of the text I had previously written for the milw0rm Misplaced Pages article, which had been speedily deleted with no discussion. The text is mine and originally from Misplaced Pages.--Gloriamarie (talk) 17:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
The Hedonistic Imperative
I've copied the final version of the deleted article (10 February 2007) to User:Gloriamarie/The Hedonistic Imperative. Let me know if you needed all the previous revisions - 92 of them. Jay (talk) 09:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Pit Bull
Gloriamarie,
Thank you for your contribution. Please check the pit bull discussion for my response (which is a bit long for user talk). Thanks! :) Astro$01 (talk) 19:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Dora Kent
The Citation Barnstar | ||
Your careful attention to detail is much appreciated. —Ben Kovitz (talk) 15:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC) |
Hey, Gloriamarie, nice work digging up all the sources for Dora Kent! —Ben Kovitz (talk) 15:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Can you?
In the page In vitro meat you made a revision as of 02:17, 8 August 2009 by adding a number of citations to the article. One of those citations is causing a cite error. Could you go back and fill out the full source information for the reference tag <ref name="discovery 2008"/>? Thanks. 75.69.0.58 (talk) 23:48, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
- I thought is was maybe , but that blog doesn't include all the information you sourced from it. Please have a look there. You use the reference three times. Debresser (talk) 17:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the reference was supposed to refer to, and since it was a double reference supported by another citation I just removed it.--Gloriamarie (talk) 16:52, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Phil English and User:Lessig
Hi, you addressed User:Lessig yesterday for his edits in Phil English. Unfortunately you did not think of reverting his edit there. Oh, and you might want to take a look at this TED-talk by Lawrence Lessig yesterday in NYC: http://blip.tv/file/3309463 - at least the first minute or so. Greetings --h-stt !? 20:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Edit-warring
I'd be obliged if you would discuss your edits to Medical Hypotheses in a bit more detail. Not only are you edit-warring and in danger of violating the three-revert rule, but you haven't really bothered to address my concerns. You've reinserted a statement about SIDS which is both factually incorrect and largely at odds with the source you're using to support it, which is a major problem. The overall thrust of your edits is, in my opinion, probably tipping the scale too far away from independent, reliable third-party sources and toward primary-source promotional material and self-description, but we can discuss that and I think we'll reach a suitable compromise. But please slow down with the edit-warring, take the time to discuss your changes (in particular the SIDS thing, which is just incorrect), and we'll both be happier. I promise, I can be reasonable. (As a side note, to avoid developing too much of a back-and-forth dynamic, I'll probably ask for outside eyes at the Medicine WikiProject). MastCell 00:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- I haven't engaged in any "edit warring" as I simply reverted your revert of my thoughtful edit which improved the article a great deal. If anything, I would say that you are edit warring since rather than fixing what you object to yourself, you have gone to both my talk page and the article's and made accusations without contributing to the conversation. You can take the sentence out if you object to it and I can have an arbitrator look at it if I decide it should be in the article, but it's fine to take it out with a note on the talk page. --Gloriamarie (talk) 01:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Peter T. King
Fyi, I'm likely to be collaborating with others at the BLP after the protection is lifted in a few days and I see where you had some interest in the article awhile back. The article would benefit from more attention from a larger variety of Editors I think. Mr.Grantevans2 (talk) 14:16, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Happy Birthday!
Happy Birthday, Gloriamarie, from the Misplaced Pages Birthday Committee! Have a nice day! Logan Talk 04:11, 4 February 2011 (UTC) |
Orphaned non-free image File:Charityinternationallogo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Charityinternationallogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have questions, please post them here.
- I will automatically remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}
to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please ask an admin to turn it off here.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 01:06, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
WikiWomen's Collaborative
WikiWomen Unite! | |
---|---|
Hi Gloriamarie! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Misplaced Pages are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative. As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:
We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can get involved! |
WikiWomen's Collaborative: Come join us (and check out our new website)!
WikiWomen - We need you! | |
---|---|
Hi Gloriamarie! The WikiWomen's Collaborative is a group of women from around the world who edit Misplaced Pages, contribute to its sister projects, and support the mission of free knowledge. We recently updated our website, created new volunteer positions, and more! Get involved by:
Thanks for editing Misplaced Pages, and we look forward to you being a part of the Collaborative! -- EdwardsBot (talk) 01:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC) |
Edit-a-thon Invitation
Please join the Chemical Heritage Foundation Edit-a-Thon, June 20, 2013. Build content relating to women in science, chemistry and the history of science. Use the hashtag #GlamCHF and write your favorite scientist or chemist into Wikipedian history! |
Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 14:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
ThatCampPhilly Edit-a-thon Invitation
Please join the Misplaced Pages Edit-a-thon at THATCamp Philly, September 27, 2013, held at the Chemical Heritage Foundation. Bring your own content to work on, or get an early start on Ada Lovelace Day with our resources about women in science, chemistry and the history of science. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 15:52, 24 September 2013 (UTC) |
Nomination of David Pearce (philosopher) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Pearce (philosopher) is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/David Pearce (philosopher) (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjmulder (talk • contribs) 21:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
January 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to David Pearce (philosopher) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- then known as the World Transhumanist Association, and is a prominent figure in the ] movement, inspiring a strain of transhumanism based on paradise engineering and ending suffering.<
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:41, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ariel Sharon may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- *'''Operation Shoshana''' (now known as the ]
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
A brownie for you!
Thank you for contributing to El Chapo's article. Your work is greatly appreciated! ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC) |
- Hi, thanks again for updating/improving El Chapo's page. Just to let you know, I will be using your information to further organize the article. I think I'll be following a similar format to the one found on my sandbox so the article can flow chronologically when possible. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 18:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Revert
When an edit includes 2 things, as I added to Joaquín Guzmán Loera, and one of them needs to be changed, you don't need to revert it. You can simply make a good faith edit. Your revert also removed the category "Prisoners and deatinees of Mexico" that I added. Try to make good faith edits without being overly aggressive with the reverts. Thanks. Juneau Mike (talk) 04:37, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
- My apologies - I didn't see the category addition. Thanks for your edit. - Gloriamarie (talk) 05:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joaquín Guzmán Loera, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enrique Camarena (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Big Trouble in Edith Piaf City
Many moons ago, seven years and more actually, you did wonderful reference work on the article Edit Piaf. Unfortunately, the most cited reference, a "Yahoo" article, no longer exists. It's listed as reference #1, with multiple other citations. If you know a good deal about her, and/or have access to good sources, and if you know/know of any of the other primary editors of Madame Piaf's page, it would be good to work on the article. At present it looks well documented but parts of it aren't.
With apologies to Meredith Wilson, Regards Tapered (talk) 05:42, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Robert P. McCulloch (prosecutor)#Requested move 20 December 2014
You were involved in this article. I invite you to a page move discussion. --George Ho (talk) 23:59, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:WildintheCountryMoviePoster.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:WildintheCountryMoviePoster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:04, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Newharvestnonprofitlogo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Newharvestnonprofitlogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
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 Misplaced Pages 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) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
April Fools? Nope! Welcome to the Women Scientists worldwide online edit-a-thon during Year of Science
Join us! | |
---|---|
Women Scientists - worldwide online edit-a-thon -
|
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:59, 1 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage
David Pearce education
Hi, you introduced that David Pearce attended Brasenose College, Oxford with this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=David_Pearce_%28philosopher%29&type=revision&diff=227731157&oldid=227730168 Do you have a citation for this? Riceissa (talk) 19:17, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of Braxton Lloyd for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Braxton Lloyd is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Braxton Lloyd until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 17:25, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
List of YouTubers
There is another deletion discussion on List of YouTubers. If you would like to weigh in, you can do so by checking out the discussion here. Mr. C.C.I didn't do it! 04:53, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
GAR for Ron Paul
Ron Paul, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. SecretName101 (talk) 19:50, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Milw0rmcnn.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Milw0rmcnn.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 20:06, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
MfD nomination of User:Gloriamarie/The Hedonistic Imperative
User:Gloriamarie/The Hedonistic Imperative, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Gloriamarie/The Hedonistic Imperative and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Gloriamarie/The Hedonistic Imperative during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:29, 3 October 2021 (UTC)