User talk:Joie de Vivre/Archive 1

If you are here to talk to me, please read this first.

Welcome!

Hello, Joie de Vivre, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -- Cielomobile ^minor7♭5 01:21, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Raw foods diet. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Mwanner | Talk 18:26, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

You wrote: "Please join me on the Talk page for discussion of your recent deletion of the external links."

You're on. I have to tell you, though-- I've done little else but fight spam for several months now, and I've never seen links as commercial as these are stay on as External links. Cheers! -- Mwanner | Talk 19:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Close Move poll (Oral contraceptive -> combined oral contraceptive pill)

Hi, Mets501. I'm writing in regards to the fact that you closed the above-mentioned Move poll. When I proposed the move, another user (Lyrl) went ahead and made the move only a day and a half after I officially proposed it. Of course I am in support of my own proposal, but I think that that person's action was a bit hasty, especially since at the time it was two days before Christmas and many people are busy. I opted at that point to leave the change intact, with a note stating that the debate was still open, since I didn't think it should have been done so hastily. Then you closed the move poll, so now there is no official place for people to voice their opinions. My questions: Why did you close the poll? What can we do to make sure everyone has time and a place to be heard? Thank you. Joie de Vivre 18:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Joie: thanks for your concerns. Requested moves really have no minimum participation; your proposal was passing at 3-0 when I came in, so I decided to close it. If anyone strongly objects to the recent move, they can feel free to leave a message on the talk page of the article and discussion can be reopened. Thanks. —Mets501 (talk) 18:37, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Magick

Honsetly, I have read the article, and I see nothing about how many many discourage using the word magick. In most online communities I have been to, it was discouraged. I can control my temper fine, thank you. And it still stands that the man who created Wicca did not use 'magick'. There is simply no reason to distinguish between 'stage magic' and other types as well. It's just a way, the way I see it and probably others as well, to make someone feel 'special'. Magic is magic, and its easy to use common sense to tell between stage magic and ceremonial magic. Disinclination 20:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Sex

You could try NPOV postings at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society, law, and sex and Wikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality -- Samuel Wantman 02:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Articulate editor at your service. What's up? Nina Odell 14:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Just a moment, I'm actually editing a number of articles right now; can you tell me how you got here? Joie de Vivre 14:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Samuel was on my watchlist, and I saw your post there. NinaOdell | Talk 03:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm being watched! :) --Samuel Wantman 04:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

You're also famous:).NinaOdell | Talk 16:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Your post to WP:3O

Your post there is not entirely appropriate, but I will give you advice on how to proceed.

1. For the conflict at the article, consider posting it to WP:RFC. If that doesn't help (bear in mind that that process can take time), follow up with the dispute resolution process- information for this can be found on the RFC page (the box on the right).

2. If you feel that you are suffering personal attacks, post it to WP:ANI. There is also WP:PAIN, but that is being considered for deletion so the first may be a better option. Also, these may require some time too- I'd assume that admins are very busy.

Hope that helps, --DarthBinky 23:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I'm a pretty new editor, so DarthBinky's advice is probably better than anything I could tell you. The one thing I'll add is that before using WP:PAIN, the offender must have been previously warned (e.g. by using the npa2 or npa3 template). PubliusFL 01:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thank you. I hope you realize that I was only trying to make it easier to follow the discussion and for others to chime in on whether or not to rename the page.

To avoid any confusion, why don't you move your "Well, since the U.S. Constitution" comment below Exploding Boy's (which is where you should have put it chronologically, anyway) so that Exploding Boy's comment is directly below mine. Just change the indentation so that his comment is indented one level more than mine and yours is indented one level more than his. That should make it easier to follow the discussion.

Thanks.—Chidom ^talk  23:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Invitation.

Hello, I saw your edits to Horace Griffin and would like to invite you to join WikiProject LGBT studies. We'd love you to join us! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

A WikiProject is basically a group of editors that get together to improve articles on a particular topic. It acts a center for editors to ask for help with their articles (like requesting peer reviews, to discuss issues related to that topic (such as if there are article disputes or edit wars that could do with an outside view), or to gather discussion about issues to do with that topic but aren't directly related to articles (such as to develop naming conventions or discuss suitable categorisation). You can get involved with as much or as little of this as you want - if you just want to edit articles, we can help with that, through peer reviewing or general suggestions, if you are a wikignome than we have plenty of opportunities for you to do that as well. A WikiProject doesn't have control of the articles it oversees, but it can organise things so that it is much easier to improve them. I hope I've answered your question, please feel free ask me any questions you have! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:27, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I haven't heard from you in a while. Are you still interested? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 12:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my tardy reply, it's been somewhat hectic on-wiki. :). Basically go here, add your name to the list and you're a member! You can edit the collaboration, or contribute to discussions on the talkpage, and vote on XfDs. If you're into other processes, we have a peer review you can use, or a Jumpaclass department where you can compete to improve stubs for points! Just check it all out! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Archive Comments

I would like to let you know now, since you are new to wikipedia, that you are not supposed to delete comments from your talk page. You should archive everything that is on your talk page. 75.3.55.12 05:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I find your sudden courtesy, a direct departure from your previous rudeness and persistence in harassing me, to be a bit unsettling. Joie de Vivre 05:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Missionary position image

Look, you made this into a 'popularity contest' all by yourself. Barely anyone agrees with you. Give it a rest. Whoop whoop 00:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

DFLA Redirects

I've already started. --Briancua 05:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Reparative therapy

Thanks for your definitive and neutral contributions. As a recent example, you provided ref's for the major scientific bodies which condemn RT [1], and pointed out that there are religious/moral objections. [2]

I'm also looking into the "minority" viewpoints of Nicolosi, Moberly, etc. Please help me to avoid any accidental appearance of advocacy in the article text. The minority viewpoint must be indicated clearly as such, right? --Uncle Ed 20:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

International symbol for chill

Is a palm-down straight-wrist action while making a little swoosh noise. =) Joebobsamfrank

Elevator? Joie de Vivre 00:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Yah. Didn't catch your full name, but remembered the batty-boy. User:Joebobsamfrank:Joebobsamfrank 00:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

template color

Text must be readable, template or not. It is barely visible on dark background. Common sense is your basic policy. I see you changed it into gray again. Please make it lighter, for better contrast. `'mikka 18:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the Talk page for the template would be a better place to talk if you still have concerns. Joie de Vivre 19:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

you need to back off on reverts.

you are violating WP:3RR at the article Marriage. consider this a warning, i'll be reporting it next violation and it's likely (unless the admin is in a forgiving mood) that you'll be blocked. r b-j 22:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to inform me of the three-revert-rule policy. I have been an editor for a little over four months, which may be why your mention, above, was the first I had heard of it. As a newer editor who does not have a history of such interactions, I believe that in this instance, lenience would be appropriate. We shall see. Joie de Vivre 23:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Corporal punishment

Thanks for calling my attention to the matter at Talk:Corporal punishment. (I'm actually just back from a long wikibreak, coincidentally a few days after your message, and your compliment was a nice welcome back, so thank you.) I'll be posting at Talk:Corporal punishment presently. Happy editing! –Sommers ^(Talk) 04:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hi, Joie de Vivre, welcome to WikiProject LGBT Studies! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles of interest to the LGBT community. Some points that may be helpful: Our main aim is to help improve LGBT-related articles, so if someone asks for help with an article, please try your hardest to help them if you are able. Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it. The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as article quality assessment, and a project-wide article collaboration, both of which you are welcome to take part in. We also have a unique program to improve our lower quality articles, Jumpaclass, so please consider signing up there. If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign LGBT topics. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. And once again - Welcome!

Good to see you. ;) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Poster

The things you have mentioned are either because I used British spelling or did it for a specific reason. Needs has not been captalised in order to bring focus to the word You. "And we need people who can help us write them" adds a psychological impetus to someone looking at the poster "Oh, they need people. I wonder if I can help." is the response we're looking for. Want is less urgent, less rallying. Sanitized is a dreadful word, we've been erased for considerably longer than years, and I can't get the rest to fit. :) I have changed Globe to globe and added a that, though. So, gonna put it up somewhere? ;) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 01:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Female bodybuilding page moves

First of all, regarding your moving of female bodybuilding to "women's bodybuilding" - the reason that you gave for the move may seem legitimate to you, but the page has been around for quite a while under the "female bodybuilding" title. Since numerous editors have been happy with the existing title, you really should discuss it before just boldly jumping in and taking action. Also, for what it's worth - a Google search for "women in bodybuilding" turned up 859 matches; a search for "female bodybuilding" returned approximately 480,000. This suggest to me that the term "female bodybuilding" is in fact much more common, and thus is more likely what a user would tend to search for.

I also see that you moved list of female bodybuilders to "list of female professional bodybuilders". I guess you like the parallelism with the list of male bodybuilders, but the list of female bodybuilders includes some amateurs as well. Therefore, including "professional" in the page name is not accurate. As above, this is a page that many editors have worked on without taking action to move the page, so perhaps you should ask why nobody has moved it before just going ahead and doing it. fbb_fan 01:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I just popped by the request exactly what Fbb fan has done above. The page names are to be the most frequently used term - I've been a bodybuilder for 12 years and would have never thought to look up Women in bodybuilding (not even sure that it makes sense either). As above I seriously urge you to discuss such sweeping changes on the article's talk page before enacting. Thanks Glen 01:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Definition of Lesbian

Many editors have accepted the current definition. Please take any concerns you have about the text to the article's talk page before making changes. On the talk page, perhaps we can talk about your stated concerns that readers may think the article refers not only to humans but to animals. Gwen Gale 18:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

WP:LGBT Coordinator Election Notice This is just a quick, automated note to let you know that there is an election being conducted over the next 7 days for the position of "Coordinator" for the LGBT WikiProject. Your participation is requested. -- SatyrTN (talk · contribs)

there has never been, and will never be, a husband or a wife in a marriage

apart from being a bit ironical up there, i would like to know why neither husband nor wife must be mentioned in the headline of marriage. There are no reasons mentioned, and you didnt choose to, either Flammingo^Parliament 21:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I answered that on the Talk page. I think the word you're looking for is "ironic". Joie de Vivre 21:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! But no. I wasnt. And you didnt.Flammingo^Parliament 21:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Before you made the above comment, I had already responded at the Talk page. Check the time stamps if you don't believe me. Joie de Vivre 21:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Husband/Wife AfD

Hi! The "S" is for "Society Topics", I don't know if this will get you to the delsort page Category:AfD debates (Society topics), if not, then go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, and the 3rd section down is a list of the categories. We try not to put too many in the "Indiscernible" category, and this seems to be the one that fit the topic the best. Of course, anyone is able to change these categorizations... They're there to get the attention of people who are interested in one area, but perhaps not in another. I'll get both of them sorted, but I think since they were combined, there's no problem with that... but I'll double check for you. SkierRMH 00:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

AfD technicalities

The steps are described in Template:AfD in 3 steps. The bot noticed that you haven't done the last one, which was that of including Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wife to the log of the day Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 February 13. This step is required to make more people aware of the deletion proposal. As for the other page, generally one use a single AfD if they are related, as you actually did. The procedure is Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_list_multiple_related_pages_for_deletion, and it essentially tells to do the regular procedure for the first page, and then just link the other pages to delete to the same discussion page. Tizio 16:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

fact tags

I replied at User talk:Flammingo. Reach me at my talk page if the problem continues. — coelacan talk — 19:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

You're fine. You probably only needed to tag the most disputed sentences but there's nothing wrong with asking for citations. — coelacan talk — 21:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Joie de Vivre 22:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

February 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Marriage, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by VltavaHF (talk • contribs) February 14, 2007, 07:20(UTC).

Nice choice of words

Hey, Joie. I liked your copy-edit to "Jesus did not come to die" here. You made it clear that the church isn't "teaching a fact" but "giving its viewpoint". --Uncle Ed 15:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

mikka

He is a vandal with a Nazi agenda. What do you propose to stop him? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.181.191.166 (talk • contribs) 03:14, February 15, 2007 (UTC).

Anon blocked. This is sock of indefinitely blocked LevKamensky (talk · contribs) who cannot abandon the idea of glorifying his father without proper references. `'mikka 16:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

??? Joie de Vivre 16:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Abortion articles

Hi, Joie de Vivre. I've seen you around abortion-related articles a lot recently, so, I just thought I'd take a moment to inform you about the WikiProject Abortion Watchlist and Noticeboard (if you weren't already aware of them!). You might find them useful in keeping up-to-date on articles related to this topic. Regards. -Severa (!!!) 16:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you explain what you mean by "Wikipedia experience?" I'm a little confused about how you're confused. Thanks! -Severa (!!!) 16:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Hee hee. I looked at the links you gave me, is there a way to put them on my watchlist, for instance? Is the Wikiproject: Abortion a pit of barking pro-choice and pro-life snakes, or would you recommend joining? Joie de Vivre 16:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

If it is a pit of barking snakes, all the more reason you should join, if you feel you can add calmness and reasonableness to the mix! KillerChihuahua^?!? 16:23, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The noticeboard can be placed on a watchlist. However, because the "watchlist" operates off the "Related changes" function (see the left sidebar of any Wikipedia page), it cannot be placed on your personal watchlist. The page the WPAbortion watchlist draws from is Wikipedia:WikiProject_Abortion/Watchlist, to which I manually add articles, images, and templates. Then, using the "Related changes" function, a sort of specialized Watchlist of recent changes to articles listed on that page is automatically built.

Contentiousness comes with the territory on abortion-related articles. Definitely second KC on the WP:COOL bit. However, although we have very few members, WPAbortion has had participants on boths sides of the fence — and all of them have been quite reasonable, in my opinion. We've had some disputes, mainly over the image to be used on a stub tag, and some trolling. But most of the really heated debates that I've seen within the project have been limited to article talk. Also, you don't need to be a join to take advantage of the watchlist or noticeboard. They can still be really useful to you if you're just planning on monitoring related articles. -Severa (!!!) 16:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Joie de Vivre,

I am the author of the D&C tutorial (posted at www.kuro5hin.org) that you de-linked here and I see your explanation as to why you made that edit, but that explanation doesn't appear to be listed in the External Links guidelines.

Bear in mind, I wasn't the person who added my tutorial to the Wikipedia D&C topic, but I am curious as to why you believe my topical and accurate explanation of the procedure (with multiple safety disclaimers therein) isn't germane to this topic.

I would appreciate a salient rationalisation of your motive to my e-mail address; ti.dave[AT]gmail.com

Thanks, Dave

Sorry, I don't email off-wiki without my own reason to do so. To answer as to why I deleted the description: it shouldn't be there for the same reason that there shouldn't be instructions on how to build a bomb linked to the Bomb article. Draw your own conclusions. Cheers, Joie de Vivre 17:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Template:Abuse

Why, thank you, Joie de Vivre! I had seen it and didn't relate the 'commerical' to 'child sexual abuse', although I considered changing it to look like (Commercial) child sexual abuse. Any thoughts on that version too? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 02:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

It would make the template too wide. That's why I used the ellipsis. Joie de Vivre 18:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply for 3O

At this point, they don't want to be a part. I would suggest full protection for disputes, warning templates on the user's talk, or bring this up at WP:ANI. Don't aggravate the situation by starting a revert war. bibliomaniac15 23:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Homosexuals and gays

It doesn't really matter whether one's a noun and another's an adjective or whatever. Why do we have a biological term (homosexual) redirecting to a social term (gay)? – Steel 18:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Abortion clinic Life Chain Natural birth control Psychological abuse Leroy Carhart Barrier contraception March for Life Levirate marriage Vaginal ring Fetal protection Physical abuse Heartbeat International Conscience Clause (medical) Barbara Dare Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 1995 Sexual penetration TRAP law National Right to Life Committee Abortion Law Reform Association

Cleanup Hodgson v. Minnesota Post-abortion syndrome Obstetrics Merge St John's wort Same-sex marriage in South Africa Half-Blood Prince (character) Add Sources Nuremberg Files Pro-life feminism Casey James Wikify Transvestic fetishism Flowers in the Attic One People's Project Expand Relational aggression Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York Oriel Chambers

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 02:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)