|Welcome to RL0919's talk page. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your talk page (or the article's talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or let me know where specifically you'd prefer the reply.|
Ye Olde Talk Scrolls
- 1 Deletion of 'Sexual slavery'
- 2 Atlas Shrugged Part III
- 3 Templates of Redundancy Templates
- 4 "Your edit has been reverted by Launchballer."
- 5 Request for comment
- 6 June 2014
- 7 Ayn Rand
- 8 Kidd photo
- 9 John Minson Galt- Edited out because it is on the blog of a top 20,000 author on Amazon?
- 10 Newspapers.com
Deletion of 'Sexual slavery'
Myself and another user were planning to create the category 'Sexual slavery' as an intersection between 'Slavery' and 'Violence against women' but it happens that you deleted that exact category in the past as an admin. I was wondering if you could explain why so we could add that to the 'Talk' page in case for debate? Thank you. --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 19:26, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
- It was a "G7" speedy deletion. An editor created the category page, then two minutes later they tagged it to be deleted. I have no idea why they created it or what made them change their mind, but this is not the sort of deletion that should have any impact on you recreating the page. --RL0919 (talk) 21:12, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Atlas Shrugged Part III
You post-edited me on this article. I agree with your Change Summary that these links are shorter ways to gain access to the same material, but the reason is that they go through redirects. I've been taught to avoid double redirects and link directly, even at the expense of using the # syntax. For example, on Uncyclopedia, we get reports of these overnight on Special:DoubleRedirects, with a recommendation that we recode them. Spike-from-NH (talk) 16:22, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
- These are regular redirects to sections anchors, not double redirects. The use of them is perfectly normal, see WP:NOTBROKEN. --RL0919 (talk) 16:30, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Templates of Redundancy Templates
I find your Templates of Redundancy Templates essay very useful. I'd like to add a sentence or two to it, mostly about wrapper templates. May I? It would seem rather contradictory to fork it... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:24, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
"Your edit has been reverted by Launchballer."
You will be receiving several of these over the next few days because I will be going through User:Storm05's userspace and pillaging some of the more useful article content out of it.--Launchballer 17:54, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
- No problem. I'm glad there is some good use for these old sandboxes. --RL0919 (talk) 18:05, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Request for comment
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC). Your comments
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- | writer = [[Louis Weitzenkorn] ''(play)''<br>Byron Morgan<br>[[Robert Lord]]
Please read the following link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-ford/ayn-rand-and-the-vip-dipe_b_792184.html Here's a quote from that link:
"... it was revealed in the recent "Oral History of Ayn Rand" by Scott McConnell (founder of the media department at the Ayn Rand Institute) that in the end Ayn was a vip-dipper as well. An interview with Evva Pryror, a social worker and consultant to Miss Rand's law firm of Ernst, Cane, Gitlin and Winick verified that on Miss Rand's behalf she secured Rand's Social Security and Medicare payments which Ayn received under the name of Ann O'Connor (husband Frank O'Connor)."
- I'm familiar with this "source". There is a reason that opinion pieces are not considered reliable sources for matters of fact. Opinion writers often distort factual matters to make a point, and are rarely fact-checked. If you read the source that is actually used in the article because it meets our standards for reliability, you will see that Pryor described herself as "a consultant for [Rand's] attorneys", not as a "social worker". An obituary for Pryor in Variety calls her "a film and dramatic rights agent". She had a degree in social work, but having a degree in a subject and being a practitioner in the field are different things. Otherwise there would be many waiters and sales clerks who could call themselves historians and philosophers. --RL0919 (talk) 21:29, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Say I notice that there seems to be a problem with the Kidd photo. The cropped version appears in the infobox as a distorted version of the one with Astaire. I tried cropping myself with the same result. Any idea what may be the problem? Coretheapple (talk) 21:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
- This is entirely a browser caching issue. Clear your browser cache or try viewing with a different browser (one you haven't used to view the page before). I can see the changed version and assure you it is fine. --RL0919 (talk) 21:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
- Oh my God you're right. All those uploads for nothing! Sorry. Coretheapple (talk) 21:30, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
The source for the edit of the John Galt piece doesn't have merit because it is not in a book or journal? Some background, I was researching deeply into the roots of bibliotherapy when I stumbled fortuitously on this factoid. I've published 14 books, but I don't wish to write a book on this factoid or journal article, for that matter. I think it's a nugget of gold which could easily be expanded into a published article in a literary journal. The exact match of the name John Galt letter-for-letter is too perfect, especially considering the nature of the insane dystopia of Atlas Shrugged. This is not coincidence, IMHO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:34, 21 July 2014
- The issue is not whether the material is in a book or on a website, it is that it is self-published. Our guidelines on sources (see WP:SPS and WP:UGC for the details) discourage using self-published material. If the material came from a book that the author published using CreateSpace, that would be excluded for the same reason. --RL0919 (talk) 20:44, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- That's too bad. There is a lot of good information in self-published sources found nowhere else.
You received a Wikipedia email about access to Newspapers.com about 2.5 weeks ago about access to WP:Newspapers.com access through the The Wikipedia Library. We currently don't have record of your response on the Google doc. Please make sure to follow the instructions in that email for obtaining access, Sadads (talk) 16:18, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- Hi, Sadads. I don't seem to have that email. I've been traveling a lot, so maybe I accidentally trashed it from my phone. Is it possible to resend the instructions? --RL0919 (talk) 16:42, 25 August 2014 (UTC)