| Revision as of 18:50, 15 August 2013 editCarlossuarez46 (talk | contribs)501,458 edits resp← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:01, 15 August 2013 edit undoGabeMc (talk | contribs)File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers41,831 edits →Joe from rand B: I'm in!Next edit → | ||
| Line 114: | Line 114: | ||
| :::: Well, if he would agree to adhere to guidelines on civility and personal attacks I would be happy with that, but I don't see him agreeing to a 1RR or 2RR, but maybe I'm wrong about this. ] <sup>(]|])</sup> 00:37, 14 August 2013 (UTC) | :::: Well, if he would agree to adhere to guidelines on civility and personal attacks I would be happy with that, but I don't see him agreeing to a 1RR or 2RR, but maybe I'm wrong about this. ] <sup>(]|])</sup> 00:37, 14 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
| :::::I don't expect him to ''willingly'' agree to anything, which is one drawback to the RFC/U in his case. 1RR and 2RR are standard restrictions for habitual editors like him who aren't indeffed. What we're hoping for is, either at the RFC/U or not, he makes a big fool of himself in front of a whole bunch of people. He's done that in front of a few people many times <span style="border:1px solid;background:#800080">]]]</span> 00:53, 14 August 2013 (UTC) | :::::I don't expect him to ''willingly'' agree to anything, which is one drawback to the RFC/U in his case. 1RR and 2RR are standard restrictions for habitual editors like him who aren't indeffed. What we're hoping for is, either at the RFC/U or not, he makes a big fool of himself in front of a whole bunch of people. He's done that in front of a few people many times <span style="border:1px solid;background:#800080">]]]</span> 00:53, 14 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
| *A few hours ago, Joe posted a derogatory remark to this page. I deleted it, than asked him to refrain from personal attacks on my talk page. He accused me of trolling, and called me a kid. I asked him not to, he kept doing it. Yet another example of personal attacking and lack of competence on his part. |
*A few hours ago, Joe posted a derogatory remark to this page. I deleted it, than asked him to refrain from personal attacks on my talk page. He accused me of trolling, and called me a kid. I asked him not to, he kept doing it. Yet another example of personal attacking and lack of competence on his part. | ||
| * Well, if you want to file an ] I'm on-board and I think the timing is right. I've never filed one before, have you? If you're willing to take the lead I'm willing to follow. I wonder if ] would be interested in joining us? ] <sup>(]|])</sup> 20:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ===The part of the thread with all the diffs of Joey's edit wars=== | ===The part of the thread with all the diffs of Joey's edit wars=== | ||
Revision as of 20:01, 15 August 2013
| User talk: Purplebackpack89 |
|---|
 Archives |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar may be awarded to those that show a pattern of going the extra mile to be nice, without being asked. This barnstar is awarded to Purplebackpack89, for his dedication to comprimise and his ability to work with other editors to come up with amicable solutions which satisfy everyone.
Purplebackpack89, thank you for your valiant efforts in building this project. Ikip (talk) 07:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
|
The Socratic Barnstar | |
| Though I doubt you're going to get anywhere in this debate due to the highly charged nature of the subject matter, your viewpoint on the issue and your line of reasoning shows you are thinker. Keep it up! And don't despair. The service of truth is the hardest service. NickCT (talk) 03:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC) |
|
The Barnstar of Diplomacy |
| Thanks for putting forward the suggestion on ANI that we block, rather than ban, User:LiteralKa. It may or may not pass, but at the end of the day, you did the right thing by suggesting it. The Cavalry (Message me) 21:15, 1 August 2011 (UTC) |
|
The Special Barnstar |
| For your battling abusive administrators and their sycophants. They do more destruction to Misplaced Pages than Joe can ever do and they know it. ...William 16:54, 29 November 2013 (UTC) |
|
The Barnstar of Diligence |
| For all your hard work organizing and maintaining Misplaced Pages:Vital articles. You are an asset to the project; keep up the great work! GabeMc 19:16, 30 December 2013 (UTC) |
|
The Merging Barnstar | |
| Thanks for your recent work on multiple merge & redirects re: Yoko Tsuno. Much appreciated. GenQuest 13:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC) |
Disambiguation link notification for June 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited California League, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Stockton, Oakland Oaks and Sacramento Senators (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) 12:12, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
CfD for LA, CA -> LA was DOA. May it RIP_LA_was_DOA._May_it_RIP-2013-06-17T04:38:00.000Z">
Your nomination of Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_April_12#Category:Neighborhoods_in_Los_Angeles.2C_California was closed as no consensus, a decision that could only have gone better if the closing administrator had gone above and beyond in interpreting votes. I think that the supports made the stronger and more logical case, but the knee-jerk no's couldn't be discounted in their entirety. Sadly it boils down to a small handful of voters who are dead-set on supporting an interpretation of policy that categories for US cities must use the full city / state, even if the article title is not disambiguated. The "strong convention" cited in the close is not that strong, both as evidenced by Category:New York City and by the worldwide conventions that are far more relevant. Repeated attempts at renominating this one category are bound to see the same stubborn responses as seen here. Any thoughts on other approaches, such as addressing the underlying policy or considering a group nomination of undisambiguated cities? Alansohn (talk) 04:38, 17 June 2013 (UTC)_LA_was_DOA._May_it_RIP"> _LA_was_DOA._May_it_RIP">
- I don't know. Maybe we should start a thread at another venue, like PUMP. I've been thinking about nomming Chicago, and of course, since LA closed as no-consensus, it can be renommed at any time pbp 05:21, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
- Chicago has the advantage of being totally non-ambiguous (as if Los Ángeles, Bío Bío was a real cause of confusion for Los Angeles), but it would face the same chorus of no's that we saw for LA. To me, option one is to get consensus that the overall policy for US category names for cities should match the overall policy for place names, using city / state except where no disambiguation is needed. Option two is an either / or that would at least create some small measure of consistency, for potentially ambiguous place names, offering Plan A - have everyone join the party and move Category:Bogotá, Category:Lima, Category:London, Category:Moscow and Category:Paris to Category:Bogotá, Cundinamarca, Category:Lima, Lima Province, Category:London, Greater London, Category:Moscow, Moscow Oblast and Category:Paris, Île-de-France, so that we can avoid conflict and confusion with Category:People from Bogota, New Jersey, Category:Lima, Ohio, Category:People from London, Kentucky / Category:London, Ontario, Category:Moscow, Idaho and Category:Paris, Texas; or Plan B and agree that world cities like Bogota, Lima, London, Los Angeles, Moscow and Paris need no disambiguation and move Category:Los Angeles, California to Los Angeles. The advantage is that either alternative will at least create some greater level of global consistency. Any thoughts on an approach? Alansohn (talk) 14:20, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
WikiProject AFC needs your help... again
WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive
WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from July 1st, 2013 – July 31st, 2013.
Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!
A new version of our AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code cleanup, and more page cleanups. If you want to see a full list of changes, go to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script/Development page. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks.
Delivered at 12:51, 19 June 2013 (UTC) by EdwardsBot (talk), on behalf of WikiProject AFC
WikiCup 2013 June newsletter
We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.
Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. 
Figureskatingfan (submissions) claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: 
Ealdgyth (submissions) was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted 
Hawkeye7 (submissions) 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to 
Piotrus (submissions) for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, 
Casliber (submissions) and 
Sasata (submissions) being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.
A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 10:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Inspector Morse
Please point out where I have said you do not understand anything? The note you removed was not mine. MOS:INFOBOX does recommend that infobox titles use common names. In this specific case the name "Endeavour" is hardly used in any of the books or TV programmes - this is a fictional character, not a real person, and I do not think that name belongs anywhere in the lead. I might suggest a little more co-operation and a less combative approach - we're all trying to improve the encyclopedia. Ian Dalziel (talk) 23:25, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
- Your edit summary reverting me. If you want to change the infobox back to "Inspector", go ahead, but keep the in-line reference to Endeavour in the opening paragraph pbp 00:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Chili Burger II - The Return
Agreed, if you mean the nom. But one edit doesn't give much of a pattern to go from. Any ideas on a drawer to put it in? UltraExactZZ ~ Did 12:07, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
- My first guess was Danjel, but KingofHearts didn't buy it. We're going to have to wait for him to do something else pbp 15:01, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
- That's a pretty good guess, I think. I'll watchlist and keep an eye open. We'll see. UltraExactZZ ~ Did 03:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Swap Garth Brooks for S&G
Technically, you didn't have the !votes to do this swap, as Maunus' was supporting the removal of Brooks, but not the addition of S&G. 6-2 = 67%, not the 70% we need. I'll go ahead and undo this now. GabeMc 01:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
- 6/(6+2)=75%, not 67% pbp 01:54, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Opps. You're right, my bad, will undo now. Thanks!GabeMc 01:59, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
- 6/(6+2)=75%, not 67% pbp 01:54, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
- I take that back. There are 9 total !votes, not 8. So, 6/(7+2) = 66.6666%. GabeMc 02:04, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
- Also, FTR, I noticed that you closed some threads that were not yet 15 days old. Please self-revert and in the future allow 15 days so that more people have a chance to weigh-in. Cheers! GabeMc 02:27, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
- I think the only one I closed that was less than 15 days old was 9-0, so it's unlikely that that would have any other outcome pbp 03:07, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
- No, I agree with your last assertion, I'm just asking you to follow the agreed upon rules for reasons that I should not have to explain. 9-0 can become 9-4 within a week, however unlikely, but again, its the principle and FWIW, we all appreciate your upkeep of the page that is more than daunting as it is, so thanks and cheers! GabeMc 03:21, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
I feel awkward
I feel a little awkward pbp, if you look at my talk page, I had been talking with gabe, and written loads as usual, basically gabe and I have different views and we had started to bicker a bit. He thought I was opposing threads because they were his, and if I'm honest I thought the same about him (although there are many of mine where he agrees but many of them are already loads of support anyway) I tried to be nice and wrote a huge passage saying just by coincidence we just happen to have different views on what is vital and as adults we should be able to interact with others who have different views lets just vote and wait for consensus and not bicker. I thought we had moved on. Today After leaving a comment about me and you always seem to agree, which he dislikes, he has gone over the whole talk page and changed his mind on many of my young threads and changed to oppose, on some of these threads he had already changed his mind once already. All can be seen in the page history. Although he is fully within his rights to vote any way he wants and it could be a complete coincidence, it looks like some kind of "revenge voting" I am not enjoying being here at the moment, I am not sure what I should do if anything, just accept it I suppose. Gabe and I really do just disagree on a lot, I thought we could still collaborate even with different views everyone has one vote per thread, consensus will decide, we have all for want of a better term "won" and "lost" threads, I tried to give gabe the opportunity to be adult, I would like it if he could be. I am not sure where this is going? Any ideas? what is your view? I am fully aware gabe and everyone can see this, and any replies. I really tried to make peace with him and I am genuinely put of voting on his threads of his for fear of backlash. Carlwev (talk) 21:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- I can tell you one thing that you shouldn't do, and that is ask me to talk to Gabe for you. This is the third or fourth time Gabe has pulled this stunt at VA/E, and each time, it's nothing more than a power trip/take-my-marbles-and-go-home strategy. One time, he even tagged or AfD a bunch of articles I created. You could try talking to him yourself, but you've apparently already tried it. Maybe asking Dirtlawyer to talk to him would be a good idea. If that doesn't work, you may have to drag him to ANI or another noticeboard for project disruption. His repeated take-my-marbles-and-go-home strategy is unhelpful for the project. Oh, any chance I can get a diff for us always agreeing (which btw, isn't accurate. Had he done his homework, he'd note there's a lot of things you start that I sit out, and vice verse)? pbp 22:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages Meetup
You are invited to "Come Edit Misplaced Pages!" at the West Hollywood Library on Saturday, July 27th, 2013. There will be coffee, cookies, and good times! -- Olegkagan (talk) — Message delivered by Hazard-Bot at 04:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
WikiCup 2013 July newsletter
We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's Sasata (submissions) currently leads overall, while Pool B's 
Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today, 
Miyagawa (submissions), with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and 
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by Ealdgyth (submissions), and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by Piotrus (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions) and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.
Other than that, there is not much to report! If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
August 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Capitol Corridor may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 2 ""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:
- Junction (Pajaro), ], Morgan Hill (Caltrain Station)|Morgan Hill]] and San Jose's ], the last three of which are also served by Caltrain).
Category:People of the Parent-Teacher Association
Category:People of the Parent-Teacher Association, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:13, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Joefromrandb
Your interpretation of "finding something else to do" is rather interesting. I meant "find something else to do that doesn't involve Joefromrandb". Of course, this is just a suggestion and you've obviously decided not to listen, but filing an edit warring report against Joefromrandb when you're not even involved is only going to escalate your conflict with him. --Laser brain (talk) 18:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- Maybe he shouldn't edit war then. Again, Joe does bad stuff and you complain to me rather than addressing the problem. Joefromrandb has repeatedly both edit-warred, and personally attacked people, from regular editors like me to anons like 71... to admins like you. Furthermore, I see no reason at all why an editor can't ask two other people who are edit-warring to stop. Seems perfectly reasonable. You blaming me for wanting him to stop edit-warring and attacking editors is tantamount to defending his actions as acceptable. You need to spend less time criticizing me and more time looking at Joefromrandb and other disruptive editors' actions. Stop shooting the messenger. pbp 20:02, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- Might as well just stop shooting. I abandoned my account because I didn't want to have a watchlist anymore - it led me into actually engaging in arguments with the antisocial types that make this site miserable. Just let them go. As a corollary to Ron's Law, you also can't fix sociopath. Best to just find another page and get back to doing something you enjoy. There's nothing noble or of lasting value in bickering with disruptive editors. 71.231.186.92 (talk) 01:34, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
CA Amtrak stations by county CfD close
I was just suggesting that the others be reviewed. The comments made in the discussion seemed to be opposed to considering the ones nominated as being part of a series. One point made was to upmerge everything. So there is an open question for that series of categories which is, how small does a subcategory have to be to be viewed as requiring an upmerge? I suppose that the follow on question would be, if more categories are deleted, does any of the tree need to exist? Please understand that I don't have an opinion here just trying to determine consensus and suggest followup for questions that were not answered in the discussion or did not gain a consensus. Hope this helps. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Naud Junction, Los Angeles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tommy Burns (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) 12:42, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Joe from rand B
I agree with you. There is a WP:CIR issue with this user. Should you ever want to take him to AN/I please let me know, as I don't watch the page. Cheers! GabeMc 02:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- I'm going to wait a couple weeks and see if he screws up again. With
threefour (counting yours from last night) appearances on the edit-warring noticeboard in the last 13 days, I consider that a fairly likely proposition. In the meantime, keep collecting diffs. The guy needs to know that being right/thinking he's right doesn't give him carte blanche to break EW, NPA, CIVILity, etc pbp 17:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)- Well, I respect your willingness to give him another chance to redirect his caustic behavior. My thinking is that an WP:RFC/U might be more appropriate than an AN/I report, since this is less an incident than a long-term pattern of battleground behavior. I'll continue to collect diffs and I encourage you to do the same. Cheers! GabeMc 22:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- We could try that, in hopes that it helps him realize how many people find his behavior unfathomable and to get him on more admins' radars. If we want to do an RFC/U, we'll need a desired outcome, namely adherence to guidelines on civility and personal attacks and possibility taking a voluntary 1RR or 2RR pbp 00:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
- Well, if he would agree to adhere to guidelines on civility and personal attacks I would be happy with that, but I don't see him agreeing to a 1RR or 2RR, but maybe I'm wrong about this. GabeMc 00:37, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
- I don't expect him to willingly agree to anything, which is one drawback to the RFC/U in his case. 1RR and 2RR are standard restrictions for habitual editors like him who aren't indeffed. What we're hoping for is, either at the RFC/U or not, he makes a big fool of himself in front of a whole bunch of people. He's done that in front of a few people many times pbp 00:53, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
- Well, if he would agree to adhere to guidelines on civility and personal attacks I would be happy with that, but I don't see him agreeing to a 1RR or 2RR, but maybe I'm wrong about this. GabeMc 00:37, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
- We could try that, in hopes that it helps him realize how many people find his behavior unfathomable and to get him on more admins' radars. If we want to do an RFC/U, we'll need a desired outcome, namely adherence to guidelines on civility and personal attacks and possibility taking a voluntary 1RR or 2RR pbp 00:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
- Well, I respect your willingness to give him another chance to redirect his caustic behavior. My thinking is that an WP:RFC/U might be more appropriate than an AN/I report, since this is less an incident than a long-term pattern of battleground behavior. I'll continue to collect diffs and I encourage you to do the same. Cheers! GabeMc 22:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- A few hours ago, Joe posted a derogatory remark to this page. I deleted it, than asked him to refrain from personal attacks on my talk page. He accused me of trolling, and called me a kid. I asked him not to, he kept doing it. Yet another example of personal attacking and lack of competence on his part.
- Well, if you want to file an WP:RFC/U I'm on-board and I think the timing is right. I've never filed one before, have you? If you're willing to take the lead I'm willing to follow. I wonder if User:John K would be interested in joining us? GabeMc 20:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
The part of the thread with all the diffs of Joey's edit wars
- Since July 31 block
- Edit war at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Music (and edit warring to levy a personal attack
- Edit war at Roger Waters
- Edit war at Patriot Act
- Edit war at Hurricane Electric
- July 31 block and earlier
East Witch
Interesting, I still haven't gotten to reading the Oz novels so I didn't know about the Dorothy takeover. It mentions that Glinda (or Ozma?) taught OZPINHEAD some real magic later on, it makes me wonder if Dorothy also got taught magic and if so, if this would actually make Dorothy a new "Good Witch of the East". If that's the case I'm thinking this would influence the eastern isle of Caldea in Marchen Awakens Romance to some degree. Ranze (talk) 15:51, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Your comment
She is notable as the founder of the PTA, not as a member. No doubt, the other folks who joined after she founded it aren't notable for their having joined. There is a major distinction between people who found notable organizations and those who merely join them. Do you have an example of a mere joiner, not a founder or a leader of such an organization notable solely for being a member rather than a leader or founder? I'm curious, because I still think my statement is correct. But feel free to prove me wrong. :-) Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:50, 15 August 2013 (UTC)