User talk:Daisy Blue: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:34, 29 August 2016

ALF

Hello, Daisy Blue. You have new messages at SlimVirgin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 02:38, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Google Books

Hi Rose, you were saying you couldn't access certain Google Books links, perhaps because of where you're based. Firefox has an addon called Zenmate. [1] It does several things, including changing IPs so if you look at a US site, you have a US IP. I only used it briefly when I was doing some research for Wikipedia that meant I had to bypass company redirects to country-specific sites. I found it slowed things down, so I disabled it and haven't explored its effect on Google Books, but I thought you might like to try it. SarahSV ^(talk) 20:44, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'll see if there's a way around it for me, although as I said on the talk page for veganism, the subtitle on the cover of the book you pointed at was more than enough for me to agree with FourViolas' interpretation of how you've come to the wording that ended up being in the article. --Rose (talk) 22:30, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Daisy Blue. You have new messages at Walter Görlitz's talk page.
Message added 14:26, 29 February 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:26, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tia Blanco

Hi ! BloodyRose show me the rule (wiki.): "don't add people who aren't notable enough to have been the subject of a wikipedia aritcle)" - [2]

Thanks, --Siekański (talk) 16:59, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Siekański: I just used common sense when making that comment but our guidelines do say "Avoid red-linking list entries that are not likely to have their own article soon or ever.". Rose (talk) 18:42, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@BloodyRose:: Good advice (and wiki. source), very good. Thanks, --Siekański (talk) 18:59, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the DRN regarding the use of Harriet Hall's blog post in the Michael Greger article. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Michael Greger. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Sammy1339 (talk) 04:00, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've had enough trying to deal with Alexbrn who seems to think that because he is convinced that someone in the field of medicine has an unpopular view, he has to find a single article with criticism and put it in the lead, wording it like it's more than just one opinion; and I saw how Jytdog refuses to adjust their position as well, such as when they were given a quote from Greger's own book where he says he doesn't advocate for veganism and doesn't mind people eating animal products very rarely, yet Jytdog kept pushing the idea that Greger promotes veganism. --Rose (talk) 05:34, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 40: / Line 40: @@
 This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the [[DRN]] regarding the use of Harriet Hall's blog post in the [[Michael Greger]] article. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic [[Michael Greger]].
 Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!<!--Template:DRN-notice--> --[[User:Sammy1339|Sammy1339]] ([[User talk:Sammy1339|talk]]) 04:00, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
+* I've had enough trying to deal with Alexbrn who seems to think that because '''he''' is convinced that someone in the field of medicine has an unpopular view, he has to find a single article with criticism and put it in the lead, wording it like it's more than just '''one''' opinion; and I saw how Jytdog refuses to adjust their position as well, such as when they were given a quote from Greger's own book where he says he doesn't advocate for veganism and doesn't mind people eating animal products very rarely, yet Jytdog kept pushing the idea that Greger promotes veganism. --[[User:BloodyRose|Rose]] ([[User talk:BloodyRose#top|talk]]) 05:34, 29 August 2016 (UTC)