Revision as of 21:16, 21 September 2007 editAussieLegend (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers173,395 edits →Reguest for comment at WP:WQA: revised time frame.← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:26, 22 September 2007 edit undoGoldDragon (talk | contribs)13,004 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
Line 203: | Line 203: | ||
We had a festival here in india, and i was the co-ordinator for the event, so was busy with that stuff, i will be free today after some time, was, actually i was trying to give a link to what is stated there as a reference, but am not sure how to do that, was thinking of looking at some other pages but since internet was a bit slow yesterday so skipped it. how do we provide a link as a refrence to what is stated in the statement ?? --] 06:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC) | We had a festival here in india, and i was the co-ordinator for the event, so was busy with that stuff, i will be free today after some time, was, actually i was trying to give a link to what is stated there as a reference, but am not sure how to do that, was thinking of looking at some other pages but since internet was a bit slow yesterday so skipped it. how do we provide a link as a refrence to what is stated in the statement ?? --] 06:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
:Did you noticed the change that i made in sandbox, pls confirm is that approach is ok ! | |||
--] 06:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Hi, | |||
Sorry for the delayed response, I am travelling currently, and will be back in my home town in 3 day's. | |||
Thanks very much for your patience.!] 21:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Wikiquette help == | == Wikiquette help == | ||
Line 229: | Line 219: | ||
I should clarify that I am not familiar with your political views, and I'm not making this request because I expect you to "take my side" in the discussion. I would simply welcome your input in resolving a contentious, if minor, controversy that has been vexing me for some time. ] 21:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC) | I should clarify that I am not familiar with your political views, and I'm not making this request because I expect you to "take my side" in the discussion. I would simply welcome your input in resolving a contentious, if minor, controversy that has been vexing me for some time. ] 21:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
Here's the compromise version that GoldDragon supported in April, but now rejects: . ] 02:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Sandbox vandalism == | |||
How do I remove the sandbox talk one? I tried and failed. Would you please remove it for me.--]] 14:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks, I reversed what you did and just deleted the things I did not want on the page. I hope this is ok. I need the things to help me remember. --]] 17:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Adoption == | |||
Hello ], I would love to be your adoptee User, however I will not be able to serously concentrate on Misplaced Pages, until October.] 06:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
==] RFC== | |||
That's fine. There wasn't a clear consensus either way IMHO. I don't consider the opinions of anonymous IP's. ] 00:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Suggestion re: Wikiquette board == | |||
and I think this is partially why many editors who post there or ] are unsuccessful getting their message heard is that they don't know how an ideal post should look in order to help uninvolved volunteers get each side of the story. So what I'd like to do is create a small series showing examples of good and not so good ways to post in the spirit of the instructions for this template {{tl|OOCOT}} with input/collaboration from editors who volunteer on these boards often (starting with Wikiquette.) ] 06:54, 17 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Wikiquette? Try respect for living people == | |||
The comment I removed made wildly inappropriate and demeaning statements comparing the actions of the subject of the article to the actions of a mass murderer dictator and a disgraced ex-president. Not only is that utterly without a single shred of validity, it maligns and attacks a real, live person who deserves our respect. Talk pages are not free-fire zones on ]. ] 17:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Take it to the BLP noticeboard if you want to discuss this further. It's not a Wikiquette issue in the least. ] 18:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::How much time have you or anyone else on "WQA" spent dealing with BLP issues on Misplaced Pages? I would guess none, because you don't seem to have a clear grasp of what the policy means or how it's interpreted. The ultimate intention of BLP is that on Misplaced Pages, before any other considerations, we consider the impacts of what we publish on the lives of living people, and unless there is a compelling encyclopedic reason to do otherwise, we leave out controversial, titillating or negative material. Whether the comment was maliciously intended or not, extending the comparison from a kid dancing in a home movie to the actions of a mass-murdering dictator is so clearly insulting and inappropriate that I cannot fathom how you cannot see it. Misplaced Pages is not a free speech zone. Nobody has the "right" to post anything on a Talk page, and most certainly there is no right to compare the actions of a boy to the actions of Hitler. We are above that sort of slime on Misplaced Pages. There can be no compelling encyclopedic reason to allow a Misplaced Pages user to make that Talk page post, and that is the '''real''' Wikiquette violation here. I shall waste my time with this matter no more. Do not, repeat, '''do not''' revert those comments, for the sake of all that is good and decent about Misplaced Pages. ] 19:04, 17 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::Three people represent a consensus which can justify violating the BLP policy? Are you joking? You must be. ] 10:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Your recent edits== | |||
Hi, there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to ] and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should ] by typing four ]s ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the ], and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button ] located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you!<!-- Template:Tilde --> --] 17:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Reliable source== | |||
Is it possible to use a scanned copy of a national newspaper as a reference to support a statement ? can that scanned image be uploaded in any article to provide cradible reference ? | |||
For example i have a High Court judgement regarding a report published in a national newspaper, the judgement in itself has that report, and court order was that it will not comment on the report but the case of defamation is baseless and was subsequently quashed by the court, this in a way confirms that court did not regarded the report as baseless, on the contrary confirms that newspaper is well known for its intregity and longitivity. Can the High Court judgement be used as a reference in any article as a reliable source of information ? if yes then its OK otherwise can a scanned copy of the same report be used in the article as a reference ? | |||
] 18:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Thanks a lot, regarding ] if we quote directly from the judgement, then i guess it will not violte the the OR policy, also incase i don't even need to upload the scanned newspaper cliping, so i guess same report can be used as a reliable source of information, as the said report is present in the copy of the court judgement. this is just for confirmation.] 19:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Adoption program == | |||
Hi! I see you've been making lots of adoption offers (good for you!) | |||
Could you do everyone a favor though and follow the instructions at the top of ] - which says ''if you offer adoption to someone on this list, please change their adoption request userbox to read <nowiki>{{Adoptoffer}}</nowiki>''. That removes the user from the 'offer requested' list which makes it much easier for the rest of us to see who still needs an offer. Thanks! ] 20:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Sock case== | |||
I just wanted to notify you that "new" user Rushmi, whom you adopted, may be the sock of an old experienced user misrepresenting himself. If you have feedback you may review . Best wishes, ] 21:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Dear Sarcasticidealist, | |||
:Because I was following Rushmi/Shashwat's posts I checked out your contributions. I was actually very relieved that you were his adopter; I could see that you were balanced, detached, and acted with integrity. Because of this, I would value your opinions at the following Afds, if you were so inclined. | |||
:*http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Shri_Ram_Chandra_Mission_%28Shahjahanpur%29 | |||
:*http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sahaj_Marg | |||
:*http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Shri_Ram_Chandra_Mission_%28Chennai%29 | |||
:*http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Institute_of_Sri_Ram_Chandra_Consciousness | |||
:I look forward to future interactions with you! ] 01:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Star Wars Kid== | |||
BLPN isn't looking very interested, but it's slightly closer to a consensus. Thank you for sticking with this. I know this is a minor issue, but if a complaint isn't made somewhere, FCYTravis might remove a similar comment in the future. Once the BLP issue is resolved, I'd like to see FCYTravis unlock at the very least his talk page, but he didn't respond to the request, so I would assume the admin notice board would be the place to go. ] 02:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:I actually have an account I use when I need to upload an image or create a page. Other than that, I'm just too lazy to hit "Sign in." Sometimes things come up, but I guess it's good to look out for the interests of anon users, too. | |||
:The Admin noticeboard convinced FCYTravis to unlock his talk page. ] 06:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::I'd support taking it somewhere else, and I could see ] being an appropriate place. | |||
::I said it before, I don't care about the comment; I care that a user (admin or not) feels he can remove a comment from a talk page, ignore a consensus (from the notice board HE wanted to go to) stating that there was no reason for the comment to be removed, not be open to another interpretation of the comment (always claiming the comment compared Hitler and the Star Wars Kid), and placing the burden of proof on us. He's acting like he can unilaterally edit talk pages. That's not how[REDACTED] works. ] 16:25, 21 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::: I just ran across this: ] ] 16:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Reguest for comment at ] == | |||
This is just a courtesy note to let you know that I'm really busy at the moment driving family members everywhere (I've done {{Unit km|220|0}} in the past 4 hours alone) so I'm unable to focus on what you need right now. I'll try to add something in the next 12 hours. Cheers. --] 10:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Just as a note, I actually did not implement the compromise proposal, and I'm not prepared to do so now, as it omits relevant information, and also in light of new advice from GroundZero who moderated a later dispute. Second, I'm puzzled about how CJCurrie would over-worried about pizza being "gratuitous" and a "slur", when he has no reservations about maintaining similar content on ]. ] 17:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
I think I'd better revise that figure to 24 hours. I've actually just now finished the draft version but it's 7:14 am and I haven't been to bed yet. I'd like to review it before posting when I'm properly awake and I'll try to do that this afternoon. --] 21:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:26, 22 September 2007
Welcome!
|
Paul Chalifoux
Franco-Albertan includes anybody of French heritage, regardless of whether their primary language is English or French. Bearcat 15:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Edmonton municipal election, 1941
I noticed this on new-page patrol. I then saw that you have created many arricles on individual municipal elections in Edmonton. Why do you think that these various elections are individually notable, and should have separate articles about them? They seem to me not gratly different from the local elections that occur in thousands of towns and cites all over the world. If we were to have a separate articel on each such election in each such munipipality, even Wikipedi would goran under the laod -- and what is more i don't think that these articles pass WP:N. Why do you think that these articles should exist as separate articles? You have obviously put a lot of time into this. DES 05:56, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- I got your note, and I take the points you made. I still don't think that these articels pass WP:N, But I hate to simply AfD them, and lose your extensive work. (I also don't relish tagging each and every one -- although i would probably use WP:AWB for the purpose. There has been a general agreemetn that purely or primarily media local coverage of inherently local events does not suffice to pass WP:N
- Yet when all of these are taken together, there is soem value in the information. What would you say to merging these into a single large article on Edmonton elections, or perhaps, if that would be too long, a single article for eavery twenty or tenyear period? I would like to get your input into this possibility before creatinmg a mass AfD, as I hope this could be a positive way out of the situation.
- Oh by the way, if you use four tildes (~~~~) to sign your posts on talk pages, there will be a link to your user page in your signature, as well as a timestamp. This is helpful to others (or if you have edited your signatuire so as to not include any link, I urge you to restore a link to your user or talk page, or both.) DES 15:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- It is my general view that fewer larger articles are better than more smaller one. For example, i merge articles on individual books into single articles on the series to which they belong. I think this helps give a better overview of the topic, reduces reposition particularly in articles that would otherwise be quite short, while keeping things in a joint article provides some pressure not to go into excessive detail that is not notable. Here, my specific thought was that while any particular election is quite probably not notable, perhaps the elections overall, as a series, should be considered notable.
- I am not holding off just because of your work, but that work helps make it clear that these articles are a good-faith effort to improve the project, so I want to avoid acting rashly, while not letting things drag out overly, either. Of course you don't WP:OWN the articles, and an article on a non-notable subject is not saved just because lots of work was put in, but that suggests being a trifle cautious about the matter.
- As to the signature, all i can say is that no link shows up -- you might want to look at what is in the signature field in your preferences, since that is what is used by the four tilde code. I have seen some users who sort of fake a sig while not using the tilde mechanism, and I thought that perhaps you were one. DES 20:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- The signature is now indeed fixed. You can later vary it if you choose -- some include a link to the relevant talk page as I do, some to the contributiosn list, etc etc.
- As to involving more people, that is indeed a good idea. There are several possible ways to do this, but I think that perhaps the Request for comment process would be best in thsi instance. i will start an RFC on this topic, and send you amsg with a link. We can see what, if anything, others say about the matter. You are quite correct that this is a judgement call, not a clear cur policy issue one way or the other, and no one person's view establishes consensus or polciy (except soemtimes Jimbo's, but i can't see him involved in this one). DES 20:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
RFC started
I have created an RFC page at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Edmonton Election Pages and briefly stated my concerns there. I hope we will get a number of people discussing the issue helpfully. DES 20:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- While seeking out people who are likely to favor one side, and asking them to comment simply because of their views is generally frowned on (see WP:CANVASS) letting people likely to have legitimate interests know about an RfC can be helpful. Are these people who are already[REDACTED] editors? If not, perhaps you could ask them to join in on other articles first for a little bit to get an idea of how[REDACTED] works. If there is a place where they are likely to see a posted notice about this discussion ,but others who might be interested but perhaps have differing views might also see it, posting a notice there would be a particularly good idea. I have posted a mention at WT:N, the talk page of the primary notability guideline, for instance, and will mention it on the village pump. DES 21:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
June 2007
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. An article you recently created, Edward Carey, may not conform to some of Misplaced Pages's guidelines for new articles, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do and please read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. A tag has been placed on Edward Carey, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}}
on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Misplaced Pages guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Coren 00:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Grandness of President
- Well, while I lived over there I used to be a member of the Australian Wine Club of Edmonton, and we always referred to the title as Grand President, but if you really don't like it, i don't mind if you change it back, its just a title anyway!. Tazchook 23:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Elections RFC result
The RFC did not have nearly the level of participation I had hoped for. But there was clearly no support for deleting these articles. It is possible that an AfD would get a different group of editors, and thus a different result, but that would be forum shopping to a degree, and I'm not convinced enough that these ought to be deleted to do that. I do think that User:Johntex had some valid points about the benefits of a merge, or perhaps an overall summery article, but that is an editorial decision i won't attempt to impose. Feel free to continue with these articles whenever you choose, I won't be using AfD on them.
I apologize for not re ponding to you sooner -- I've been rather busy on-wiki with some completely different stuff, see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Naconkantari and User:DESiegel/RFC Draft/Naconkantari if you are interested.
I will close out the RfC. DES 03:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
RE: Edmonton municipal election, 1960
Yeah I have no problem with that, it's just that "red" links spoil the page, though if you're going to create articles for those links that's okay. Thanks for letting me know seven+one 20:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Alberta municipal elections
Hi. No need to merge the Edmonton article! The main article is going to be too long as it is. Plus, we have articles on many municipal elections. See Vancouver municipal election, 2005, or Winnipeg municipal election, 2006. You might want to check out previous provincial election pages. I worked a lot of on the Ontario municipal elections, 2006 page and the Ottawa municipal election, 2006 page. Like you, last year I was trying to get info on Ottawa elections and city councils, but unlike you I didn't finish the job (or come anywhere close, really). Anyways, check those pages out for what kind of info should exist. Go right ahead and create articles on St. Albert elections if you want! (BTW, I'm also an inclusionist, so I'll support you along the way) -- Earl Andrew - talk 17:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
User:Ultrabias
I have approached this editor again on this issue, because really, his that I've seen edits are perfectly fine, in fact, quite good. And he seems to know a great deal about the topic. Misplaced Pages needs more editors interested in making Muslim articles adhere to NPOV. If he would just cut the insulting edit summaries, (and the inflammatory talk page replies when challenged about them) he'd be a valuable contributor to the project. So I suggest talking to him first as we have (he is a bit arch, and certainly coasted along the edge of WP:CIVIL with you, but he's not like, totally out of control). Though to be honest, I suspect he's not going to stop. Shame in a way, but totally unacceptable. Your Wikialert sums up the problems completely from my point of view. Dina 14:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
WQA
I was completely unaware. Thank you for telling me. ColdFusion650 20:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- For the record, you are correct in assuming I was joking about exiling users to the Black Sea. ColdFusion650 21:00, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- In hindsight, perhaps it wasn't a good idea. The point was to use a joke to lower the tension and show I wasn't angry or anything. Perhaps I should have included the link. ColdFusion650 21:31, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Heya SI. :) Just wanted to congratulate you on a job well done on that particular dispute. :) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 01:01, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
- (Copied from User talk:KieferSkunk) Thanks. I initially did it because I'd posted one and figured I should probably contribute to a couple as well, and because I felt guilty about being a rapid article creator/expander without giving back with many of the less sexy tasks that keep Misplaced Pages going, but I had fun - I think I'll stick around that page. I'd always appreciate pointers, though. Sarcasticidealist 01:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
- Had the same experience myself - see my WQA on User:JAF1970 toward the top of the page. :) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 01:12, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Editor Review
Hiya - I've added a reply to your comments. Glad I could review and I hope it helps. If you ever need anything please feel free to ask if you think I can help out. Very Best, and, of course, Happy Editing . Pedro | Chat 15:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- No, in fairness they do not. I would take the approach in that instance of personally warning the user against abusive edit summaries. It certainly isn't vandalism but it is borderline trolling. I think you did the right thing. Pedro | Chat 19:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey, could you help me out
Could you help me out and verify I'm not going crazy. I tried to input my userbox, {{User:Lighthead/Photek}} onto the Misplaced Pages artists list; but the page went all wonky on me. Could you do it for me anyway you feel would be the way and tell me what happens. Maybe I'm doing it wrong. And trust me this isn't some reverse psychology test; I'm just really frustrated because I've been trying to do this for like 3 days, and I'm going slightly nuts. Well, anyway thanks. þ 23:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
-- I'll try him but it doesn't seem like you put his username right (for there is a dead link). Either that or he was blocked, I doubt it. But thanks. þ 03:48, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Karl Belanger
His info was already merged into the target page. Open your eyes. GreenJoe 00:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- If you look at the history, someone had removed the information. I checked and reverted it after I got your last note. GreenJoe 01:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- Here is the proof. GreenJoe 01:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- No hard feelings. I've been dealing with anonymous IP's for the last few days, they can fubar things. :-) GreenJoe 01:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- Here is the proof. GreenJoe 01:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Candidates for the Canadian House of Commons
You rock. Bearcat 02:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Matthewmccauley.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Matthewmccauley.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 16:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
You deserve a cookie
David Latta
Hey, I noticed that you just created this disambiguation page, but none of the people listed actually have articles. Are you planning to create each of the separate articles for these people? If not, how about you change it from a disambiguation page to an article about just one of the David Lattas? If you need help, feel free to drop me a line on my talk page. GlassCobra 08:09, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- That's a decent solution, considering you changed all the links to their more specific counterparts. I'm cool with that. GlassCobra 08:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Sid Ryan
Hi Sarcasticidealist, I'm just loosely following this editing battle, but I'm unsure why you removed User:Ross Crea's last edit. I understand that this is the same person as the previous anon, but I don't really see how the content is POV. It's written in the first person, but that 's just an editing issue, is it not? The lack of sources is also not a POV issue. Cheers,--Bookandcoffee 00:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Hey thanks for the reply SI. Sorry if I came across too blunt with the "battle" term. I would agree that this is more of a good faith/new editor issue, so hopefully it does resolve itself. Cheers,--Bookandcoffee 01:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Wiki alert comment
Thank you for letting me know. I am happy to learn I can participate there. --CrohnieGal 14:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Wong-Rieger
Thank you for fixing my erroneous inclusion of Durhane Wong-Rieger in the category of candidates for the House of Commons; I meant, of course, that she had been a candidate for the Ontario Legislature. (Do we have a category for that, by the way?) DS 13:34, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Talkpage Shenanigans
I don't know what the cookie thing is about, but I think you deserve one from me as well. I'm a newer contributor, don't have much time at all (to study the full extent of Wiki functions and protocols--have to learn it over time), and as a Misplaced Pages newbie briefly got lured into a petty pissing contest on a talk page. (Well, I didn't know at first I'd gotten myself involved in the pettiness. I'm honestly so green, I didn't realize that people could or would easily access deleted talk page entries, or hunt down targeted users' contributions, etc.--I just thought delete meant delete (now I know better), so twice when a user seemed snotty and boorish to me, I let myself vent at him on the talk page, deleted the emotional responses, and thought I was leaving neutral responses and cooperating in the Wiki spirit. But he started charging me with sending him secret "messages" in the form of deleted talk page entries (Yikes.), and reported me to the authorities.) I'm glad the authority was you. Sarcasticidealist, thanks for adjudicating respectfully, pointing out the proper protocol at issue, and presenting such a wonderful, Canadian model of keeping on the productive track. I learned a couple little lessons from you there, technical and social--I can imagine they'll even help in other venues. Cheers! Blanche Poubelle 16:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
I am new to[REDACTED] editing, although for information purpose i have been scanning[REDACTED] for quite some time, but only recently i decided become an editor as well, i have gone through your userpage, and i am sure you will be able to help me understand working of[REDACTED] in general, like what is ok and what is not, basicly i am an engineering student, and have interest in writing and publishing, i am on my way to publish my first book, and currently doing research regarding the same subject. I thought it will be benifitial for me to start with an article on[REDACTED] with so many user's here, it will help me a lot to gather information. I am interesting in knowing how wikiepdia works, how its policies are implimented and how is it made sure that article is in accordence with all the policies of wikipedia.
Now that i have accepted you as my mentor, how do we move ahead. Should i remove that tag from my user page ?
Best Wishes --Rushmi 06:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
As such i have no immediate goal, but i am interested in long term goal, as i wish to contribute to[REDACTED] for long term on subject's which i am interested in like world politic's, semiconductor physics, religious organizations and also helping in keeping[REDACTED] article detailed, and covering wide range of information related to subject at hand, I have picture of world book (Oxford publication's) when i look at any article. Is it possible to achieve that on wikipedia ?
To start with i would like to learn about policies governing layout of any article. Also can we make a test page somewhere and get it verified by someone if the layout is in accordence to[REDACTED] standered ? --Rushmi 06:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
We had a festival here in india, and i was the co-ordinator for the event, so was busy with that stuff, i will be free today after some time, was, actually i was trying to give a link to what is stated there as a reference, but am not sure how to do that, was thinking of looking at some other pages but since internet was a bit slow yesterday so skipped it. how do we provide a link as a refrence to what is stated in the statement ?? --Rushmi 06:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Wikiquette help
I was wondering if you could give me a hand with this. I was hoping we were done with the whole thing, and now it seems to be a bit out of control. I don't believe I should be the one to respond, but this user's behavior has gone from bad to worse fast. If there's another user or a different WP page to go to, point me there. Thanks for your help. --Cheeser1 03:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- I've responded at my talk page, FYI. --Cheeser1 04:33, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Request
Would you be willing to look over a discussion that User:GoldDragon and I are having on the Joe Volpe page? Our differences are primarily centred around a single paragraph in a section marked "Other Controversies", having to do with Volpe's interactions with the Career Foundation.
GoldDragon and I expressed our views on the matter several months ago, in a section of the talk page entitled "The Placement Agency". I am now prepared to accept a compromise proposal that GoldDragon brought forward several months ago; GoldDragon, however, is no longer willing to settle for this version.
GoldDragon has also added a line about pizza to the main article, that I believe to be gratuitous (and perhaps a little insulting, as regards Volpe's ethnic background).
I should clarify that I am not familiar with your political views, and I'm not making this request because I expect you to "take my side" in the discussion. I would simply welcome your input in resolving a contentious, if minor, controversy that has been vexing me for some time. CJCurrie 21:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Just as a note, I actually did not implement the compromise proposal, and I'm not prepared to do so now, as it omits relevant information, and also in light of new advice from GroundZero who moderated a later dispute. Second, I'm puzzled about how CJCurrie would over-worried about pizza being "gratuitous" and a "slur", when he has no reservations about maintaining similar content on Mel Lastman. GoldDragon 17:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)