User talk:AllyUnion

I quit. Good bye. -- AllyUnion (talk) 03:43, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Star Trek

I'm not sure whether you're going to read this reply if you have indeed quit, but I thought I'd reply anyway to your points regarding the Star Trek article:
1. Comprehensiveness issues. Unfortunately this level of detail simply cannot be accommodated in Wikipedia's 32K limit. That's why issues like Star Trek vs. Star Wars need to have their own articles. This was a bone of contention for me regarding the failed feature nomination for James Bond. Once we included everything that people wanted, the article was more than 50K and that was before images were added; we had to cut it back to 32K and the nomination failed. This is a failing of Wikipedia, I'm afraid. I personally would like to see entire sets of articles nominated as feature articles. The Star Trek articles - of which there are probably hundreds - and the dozens of James Bond articles I have personally worked on add up to far more than the single overview article. Maybe this is why most feature articles are on simple, single-subject topics. In terms of other matters in this section, no Wikipedia article is stable, especially one dealing with a current issue. Star Trek, IMO, comes to an end as a viable franchise on May 13, 2005 when Enterprise ends. So the article should stabilize in due course after that date; the only alternative is locking the article. As far as the well-written issue, there is always room for improvement, but you'll always end up with newbies and those whose English skills are lacking wanting to contribute.
2. Uncontroversial. I hardly call the Voyager POV issue controversial. And if you check the recent edit, it has been resolved to my satisfaction anyway.
3. Images. Cutting down the Enterprise section added quite a bit of free K. I'm sure image tags don't take up much space and the images themselves don't add to the amount of K on a page, so I can't see any reason why you can't. I did note, however, some concern noted regarding copyright. But if the images fit the Wikipedia policy, go for it.
4. Heading reorganization. There can be some subheads added, certainly. Feel free.
5. Reference. Again, feel free to add. But Wikipedia is not a book - we don't need bibliographies with every article. In the case of Star Trek, it would need an article on its own and I bet there is one.

Anyway, hopefully your stress meter isn't an indication that you're gone for good, as you do have good ideas for the main Trek article. Cheers! 23skidoo 03:58, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Stressed

Wow, you must be really stressed lately. I'd like to point you to the new stressbusters association which was formed recently. I hope you'll consider returning. I hate to lose another good admin. Feel free to contact me if you need to talk.

The block log seems to indicate you've taken a wikiholiday. Enjoy it! Mgm|^(talk) 12:05, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

I too hope you're not gone indefinitely, but are merely on a Wikibreak. You've done a lot of great work here. Jayjg ^(talk) 14:40, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think your presence here is valuable, and I hope you'll be able to lose your stress and find that wiki'ing is fun once more. Hope to see you soon! Radiant! 19:14, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

I agree with the others - take a wikiholiday, and come back refreshed. →Raul654 20:24, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

I am sad to see that you've joined the ranks of the missing. gK ¿? 20:27, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)