Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mike Searson (talk | contribs) at 20:57, 18 November 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

spyderco

Hi, I've been trying to clean this article up, please review my messages on the talk page for spyderco and let me know what you think. --User24 14:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Trout bum

Thanks for your input on the article. I have added some explanation for my placing the tags on the article on the talk page.

I was curious as to why you feel the statement in question is a personal attack? I didn't necessarily see it that way. --KeithB 16:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Knife articles

Understood, that you only added to what was already there. I didn't say that what you wrote was awful, or bad writing; just that the articles look awful. Nor was I trying to one-up you. I never mock people who are making a real effort to write well.

You can overreact to my advice if you like, that's always an option. My only concern is that these look like fan sites and not like encyclopedic entries. The reason for my concern is that, eventually, Misplaced Pages administrators will delete them for that very reason. You're kind of new here, so you won't know about that unless you see it happen or read it in the guidelines. If you aren't going to read the guidelines to make them Wiki compliant, you could look at some of the gun pages for a guide. I don't know enough about Strider and Emerson to add anything encyclopedic. But, I am trying to help you. If you don't want the advice, you don't have to take it. But when they delete those articles, you'll know why.

Your comment that the Ernest Emerson page is a biography is not well met. You need to read the Wiki Manual of Style to understand what makes a biography and what makes a fan page. I understand that you didn't start any of these pages, but you are doing the most to add sycophantic puffery to them -- intentionally or not.

I can tell that you are emotionally invested in these knife maker articles, and I understand that it will be difficult to reason with you. That's why I approached you about these problems privately on our talk pages before I fixed them myself. This is how things are done, here. This isn't the usual suspects forum site. If you're going to act like you're in there, then there is no point in including you in discussions on how to make these articles presentable to the rest of the world. Nevertheless, I wanted to try.

Finally, I think it's strange that you should suggest that I don't appreciate someone pulling himself up by his bootstraps from humble beginnings. You are the one who first wrote to me telling me to go back to waiting tables. What it undignified or dishonorable about working for a living, I'll never know. I knew to expect that kind of comment from someone like Rick H., whose bills are all taken care of by his wife and the county.

I didn't know to expect it from you. You're either part of the problem or part of the solution. Use my talk page to let me know which you are let's move forward. Sam 17:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Sam,

First of all, maybe you need to reread what you've sent to me. You said what I wrote was awful.

"I don't mean to dismiss your hard work, Mike, but these are awful."

I don't see how I overreacted. Perhaps we can discuss over the phone or through email.

Also, what's with the attack you made on Rick Hinderer?