Misplaced Pages

Talk archives 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

File:800px-PotbellySeahorse TNAquarium-cropped.jpg

Zionism

There is an important query for you there from Jayjg, which I hereby echo. Please share your thoughts on how we should proceed. Eager to get your insights and suggestions here, as always. BYT 23:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Your quote

"Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing there is a field. I'll meet you there. When the soul lies down in that grass the world is too full to talk about."

Nice. Fourdee

Islamophobia

Your edit summary on Islamophobia says the paragraph needs to be clearer, but not to the extent that I brought it to. Are you saying that to some degree it should be vague, fail to represent its source, or be difficult to comprehend? The previous version of the paragraph was all of those things. I think a response to an arguement should be represented as clearly as the argument itself, in the interest of neutrality. Xiao t 20:44, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

thanks

Pattern blindness I guess. I just assumed that since it looked so different it must have different content. Good catch. Also, not sure if you did it or not, but many of the animal rights category articles I saw said "further reading" in place of external links. If you see anymore of this, you might want to change it. It is not recommended under style guidelines (it is easily confused with "see also" and hides the fact that they are external sites). Thank you again! VanTucky 00:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

you're unfortunately mistaken

On the naming of External links...see Misplaced Pages:Guide_to_layout#Standard_appendices_and_descriptions. You're confusing external links with a section that provides links only to other related published sources. For the sections in the particular articles (and for the vast majority of articles), not all of the external links are properly categorized as further reading. External links is the proper section header, as it is extremely important to notify users/readers that the links lead away from Misplaced Pages. Otherwise there is no warning, and just assuming that people know is not acceptable. VanTucky 03:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Well I disagree. It is misleading. From the guidelines I've read, it says that the moniker Further reading is only when the links are confined to related published works. Not all the links conform to that standard, and it does not make room for other links in the cases that the current version of links does conform. Therefore, I will be reverting to External links where I think appropriate. Since it too is acceptable, and is much more common, I don't see a reason not to. VanTucky 03:19, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Where both kinds of links are present, that is when two separate sections are needed. Otherwise, when links that do not fall under the further reading def are present, the section should be titled external links. VanTucky 03:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Input sought

Hi. I imagine you've got WT:NPA watchlisted (or maybe you prefer not to be reminded of it so often), but I just wanted to bring your attention to the most recent topic on that page, where there's some discussion of seeking mediation. I'd appreciate if you could have a look at that topic, which I think might contain a possible way forward. If you'd prefer not to discuss it in that venue, I'd be open to alternatives, such as email or IRC or what-have-you. -GTBacchus 08:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

similar one ?

Zeq 10:01, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

hmmm

And again . --SakotGrimshine 14:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

My RfA :)

Thank you for commenting on my RfA, which closed successfully with a tally of 76/0/1! I hope I will meet your expectations, and be sure I will continue trying to be a good editor as well as a good administrator :) If I may be of any assistance to you in the future (or if you see me commit some grievous error :), please drop me a line on my Talk page. Again, thank you, and happy editing! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you again for your support. I was, quite honestly, slightly shocked to receive a vote from such an experienced and bold user/admin/... :) I sincerely hope I can live up to your (and everyone else's) probably high expectations. Best wishes, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Brandt AfD

You know, you're right. Thanks for the heads up. No more posts until tomorrow. J Milburn 18:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

That was 5 times not 8. Your own BADSITES contribs have definitely swayed my vote. Best wishes, SqueakBox 18:41, 10 June 2007 (UTC) SqueakBox 18:41, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Companion animals

Is there something I am missing in the PETA article talk as to why certain people seem to be so strongly aganist companion animals, even to the point of comparing PETA to the KKK?--Migospia†♥ 06:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

"Muslim bashing"

I was somewhat offended by your incivilty in this diff and elsewhere in that thread. What were you referring to as "Muslim bashing" in that article? Arrow740 01:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)