Revision as of 01:34, 30 April 2009 edit87.69.176.81 (talk) →South Park and More Crap← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:35, 30 April 2009 edit undo87.69.176.81 (talk) →South Park and More CrapNext edit → | ||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
::::Respectfully submitted, | ::::Respectfully submitted, | ||
::::::] 16:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | ::::::] 16:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
I agree 100% with {{User| |
I agree 100% with {{User|Smedpull}}. The reference is undoubtedly there and must be included as a contemporary parody in popular media. ] (]) 01:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
== Celtic Woman image == | == Celtic Woman image == |
Revision as of 01:35, 30 April 2009
The screen name says it all.
Italics
Proper nouns are simply things that refer to specific person, people, or places (e.g., "John Smith"). They are not automatically italicized; see WP:ITALICS. Samer (talk) 19:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Edit summary on Anderson Cooper
I'm sure you could come up with a better way of describing another editor's contributions (good or bad) as having come out of their behind. That's not quite civil. Toddst1 (talk) 21:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- You're right, I probably could have. I really thought long and hard trying not to say another word of that nature. Under this particular circumstance, I felt the choice of word I used at the time was at least appropriate to say in this, giving the disruptive nature of the user in questioned. KeltieMartinFan (talk) 23:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
User:Mr. Kruzkin Returns
Already blocked by another admin, back on August 3. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Katie Couric and South Park
Please read over the discussions about her being a journalist - Infotainer, Vandalism from 168.253 range and Journalist. I believe this will show that others might find she lacks the credibility to be considered a journalist.
In regards to your assumption that information on Couric in Popular Culture is too much I would advise you to remember that Misplaced Pages is not a paper encyclopedia. You might find the reference of her in South Park to be irrelevant, but it is a way in which she was mentioned in a very popular form of media in the U.S. and I have provided adequate citation to backup the references to the episode.
Also keep in mind that this should be viewed as a biographical piece on Couric and not a fan club page for people who are enamored with her style. You might find the reference to be trivial, however someone may find the South Park reference to be new information that gives a different critique to Couric's persona.
Later SmedPull 11:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- I should be advising you on the same thing. Whether I’m a fan Katie Couric or not, it does not mean a thing to the administrators of Misplaced Pages. Indeed you are right, this is a biographical piece as you described, and not a fan club page. Therefore, a trivial reference on a particular episode of what appears to be your absolute favorite television show, judging by your history record, is something that would not be included. If a show like E! True Hollywood Story were to do such a piece on her, this would not be something that would be included. What you’re putting is not popular culture, it’s as I said...trivial. Wikipeidia has rules against trivial information, known as Fancruft. I should know about that, because I had been a violator of that rule before. I put trivial information on other celebrities’ articles, not necessarily offensive and degratory like the one you’re putting here, and every single time, it got reverted. On top of that, there is no trivial reference of this particular episode on Bono’s article. Truthfully speaking, he was the central figure of this episode, not Couric. So if I have to venture a guess about your intentions here, I would say that you wouldn’t be described as a non-Couric fan, but rather an anti Couric. By all means, correct me if I’m wrong. Nevertheless, this has been discussed before six months earlier, and this particular piece of information does not belong on the Katie Couric article, whether you respectfully deagree with me or not. KeltieMartinFan (talk) 22:50, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
South Park and More Crap
I understand you might find the way in which South Park refers to Couric in the episode More Crap to be offensive and insensitive. However, I do think it would be intellectually dishonest to edit the episode's wiki page in a way that undermines the credibility of Misplaced Pages as a source for honest and well verified information.
Later SmedPull 11:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Just to reinterate on something you wrote to me earlier today. “This is a biographical piece as you described, and not a fan club page.” If this is something you feel very passionate about, why don’t you start a South Park fanpage then. I watched that episode that is in question, and the actual spelling is “kuric” not “couric”, just as Yukichigai (talk) perscribed it. KeltieMartinFan (talk) 23:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- You don't say? I recommend you review the clip Crap Verification and tell me that at 1:10 of the clip there is no reference to Katie Couric made. I also humbly request that you go to SouthParkStudios.com and tell me what kind of results one would receive when doing a website search for the word "Couric (or Courics)" versus searching for the word "Kuric (or Kurics)". I would also like to refer you to Talk:More Crap-European Fecal Standards & Measurements Board to point out the validity of Yukichigai's (talk) recommended edits for citing the EFSM's bogus website as a valid reference for the term "Kuric." Simply put, SouthParkStudios.com is the official website for the show and therefore should be used as precedence over an unverified website.
- Respectfully submitted,
I agree 100% with Smedpull (talk · contribs). The reference is undoubtedly there and must be included as a contemporary parody in popular media. 87.69.176.81 (talk) 01:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Celtic Woman image
Greetings. I've deleted the file File:Lisa Chloë Máiréad Alex Órla Lynn.jpg because it is a non-free image of living persons, which is prohibited on the site. Please see Misplaced Pages:Non-free content#Images 2, point #12, and to an extent, #11 and . If you have any questions, please leave a note on my talk page. Cheers. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 09:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, it sucks, but we do strive to be free. The best option is to try to take a photograph yourself, should you have the opportunity. Folks will occasionally post free images on Flickr...I try to check there periodically myself. One final possibility would be to get CW to release one of their promo images (like the one you uploaded) into the public domain, or under a Commons-acceptable license (GFDL or CC-By-SA, etc). The process of release is a bit complicated, but such a promo pic will of course yield the highest-quality image. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 19:57, 22 February 2009 (UTC)