User talk:Skyerise

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Yworo)
Jump to: navigation, search
"Have a cuppa... Coffee?"
Qxz-ad163.gif
This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 30 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
Archives:
2010 · 2011 · 2012 · 2013 · 2014

Hariharananda Giri

Good Morning Yworo. Welcome back! [1] There is a long growing list of supposed "disciples" of his. Shouldn't that be in the body of the page with references proving they are disciples? Red Rose 13 (talk) 14:07, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Let's not quibble about what an infobox should or should not contain. I tried to resolve the ambiguity in the MOS last year, but could not get a consensus for clarification. (Interestingly, Norwegian Lundehund has an infobox that gives classifications & standards that are not in the text (FCI & UKC). But that infobox/article is used as an example at H:IB.) Besides, in the Manning article, I proposed textual support for the awards. Cheers. – S. Rich (talk) 04:35, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Fork

Forgive me. I apologise for not writing the most extensive article in the history of wikipedia right off the bat. If you would give me just a chance to continue editing it, to improve it and add things not already said in other articles (and there's a lot that can be said, it's an extensive topic that would require a full article when complete). Alyxr (talk) 22:36, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Moved from user page

Hi Yworo, Thanks for your message. I work for the New Mexico Department of Cultural Affairs (DCA) and am trying to get involved in Wikipedia because of my dismay over the years about the lack of information and rather poor overall quality of articles about New New Mexico on WIkipedia.I'd like to start getting editors trained and organizing scan-a-thons and edit-a-thons. Please let me know if you live in New Mexico, know other editors who work on articles about New Mexico, or who would be interested in being a Wikipedian-in-Residence with the DCA. This fall I will have an intern working on a project about properties in NM on the National Register of Historic Landmarks and our New Mexico HIstoric SItes to get images and documents uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, but many will need articles and he's a designer not a writer. User:Mimi.roberts 10:36, 22 September 2014‎

American Horror Story

Hello, I'm sorry for accusing you of bias, I deal with it constantly on here, but may I suggest you be more explanatory in your summaries. I was under the influence that you were changing the font status simply out of opinion. I am well aware of WP:MOSBOLD's terms; American Horror Story is an exception among other series due to its anthological nature. Therefore, the "subject tile" is the season title and the series title, validating the bold font. Cheers, LLArrow (talk) 04:23, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

No, because the series title is included in the article title. We don't bold Wikilinks. Yworo (talk) 04:25, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Alright, I'm inclined to agree. Cheers, LLArrow (talk) 04:37, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Cool, I hate pointless arguments. At least it didn't get wikilinked from the bolded title, which is also discouraged. Mentioning it again in order to wikilink it is certainly correct there. :-) Yworo (talk) 04:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC)


The Hum & sources

Hi Skyerise. I've been editing The Hum along with a chap called Brummfrosch, who it turns out is the same Frosch who authored the article that he used to justify changes to the Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions section. That potential COI is in hand as it seems likely that he'll email me a copy.

The issue we're currently having is that his article was published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration, which is a fringe journal, as was the Deming article that is used throughout The Hum entry. The JSE would, I believe, fail were it to go to the RSN (indeed, although only 5 commented, it didn't do too well last time it went there). I'd left Frosch & Deming in a sentence that referred to "scientific literature" but added a sentence after that drew attention to the fact that they were both published in the JSE and that there are potential issues with it, i.e. Further, there has been little mainstream attention; both Frosch and Deming were published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration, which has been accused of promoting fringe theories and ignoring contrary evidence. Brummfrosch cut the second part of that sentence, thus removing the warning about his and Deming's articles.

I've reverted, but as you've been monitoring The Hum page I'd like to ask you for your opinion here on the inclusion/exclusion of that detail on the JSE to head off a possible edit war. Cheers, Bromley86 (talk) 08:54, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Dharmic

See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 October 9#Template:Modern Indian religions writers. By the way, nice username. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:38, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Saiman Miah

Dear Skyerise, I invite you to express your opinion about the article for deletion. --Rossi101 (talk) 19:07, 20 October 2014 (UTC)Rossi101