User talk:Daniel Olsen

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:Daniel Olsen/Archive0. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California

Thanks for creating the new California geo-stubs. The next step is going through and redistributing the existing Cali and SoCal geo stubs. I'll try to do some of that this weekend.

As for your congradulations at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California#Joshua A. Norton. A Featured article review means that someone has recommended de-featuring an article, so it's not really the sort of thing that usually gets a congradulations. ^BlankVerse 04:58, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• I've already started going through them, and I'll see if I can't get through the whole thing. Featured article candidate and featured article review shouldn't look so similar. --Daniel Olsen 05:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to thank you for your kind welcome

Hope you are happy, well, and in good health dear friend.

66.246.72.108 13:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

And the same for you. Happy editing! --Daniel Olsen 01:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Toothpaste for Dinner

Firstly, thank you for not taking offense at my edits, as they were not intended that way. Thanks for the note – I now see your point about changing the image (at first I thought it was an unnecessary change; not so much now). I think that possibly an even better comic to put up would be this one, since it has the comic title in the actual comic, but that's just me. As far as changing the "characters" heading to "recurring characters" heading, I see your point in making that edit as well, but I think that section should be re-worded so that the "characters" title would be more appropriate. Looking at the section again, it sucks, and that's probably why you tried writing an introduction paragraph to it. I didn't like it because you used the phrase "poorly drawn", which to me is not a neutral point of view. I think redoing that section (or removing it altogether) would be appropriate. As far as the image, the comic... well, I showed you the comic I would choose, but I think anyone is fine. Overall, your edits didn't seem to be an improvement in my opinion, but now I see your side of it. I'm sorry of any of this is incoherent, but I'm pressed for time right now. Look forward to a reply, and happy editing. —EdGl 00:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I know your intent when you wrote "poorly drawn", but it kinda comes across as being negative, even though it is technically truthful. Maybe we can rephrase it a little. Both of us agree that the article needs to be cleaned up, and I will work on it over the weekend if I can. (and I'm glad we agree on what comic should be displayed)—EdGl 01:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Please help

Hi! I got your username from the Association Inclusionist Wikipedians. I'm trying to work against a band of linkocrites (see en:User:cochese8). You look as if you're a valuable editor and I could really use some help [preserving] a great link. I would ask you to review the discussion and vote keep if you agree with the link's value. Thanks for your help! Cochese8 00:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)