User talk:Bellahdoll

Hello Bellahdoll! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I think its very important for you to browse through some of the links below so as to become familiar with how Wikipedia works. If you need any help you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and another Wikipedian will show up shortly. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you're already loving Wikipedia and plan on becoming a Wikipedian you might consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor, just paste {{Adoptme}} into your userpage and you will gladly be adopted! You might also consider joining a WikiProject so as to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! Just H 08:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Spelling amendments

There's no need to go round unilaterally changing spellings from British English to American English. You may find it useful to read Wikipedia's guidance on such matters. Matthew 23:48, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I already read said guidelines. I feel that I haven't broken them, but if you really think it is that big a bother with all the real vandalism going on, I will stop. Foreign English just annoys me, since I am not used to it. If you and other people native to the United Kingdom will not edit American English, especially in explicitly American, articles, I will do the same in every article [unless the word is explicitly misspelled in every variation I know]. Thank you for your help. Bellahdoll 18:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Bellahdoll[reply]

Much as I'd like to stop people changing American spellings in articles of American focus, I can't control what other people do. But a tit-for-tat, multi-article edit war helps nobody. Why not do what I do - keep an eye on articles of your chosen focus, and guard against unwarranted changes to the variety of English in them? Matthew 21:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NB interesting to see you use the phrase 'foreign English'! :-) Matthew 21:16, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to sound naive, but what does NB mean? I would have used British English, but I know there are more than the two dialects and possibly more than two spellings. I use foreign to include all variations of English besides the one that is not foreign to me. Also, what articles do you feel are vandalized most often and need someone to watch for unnecessary, and sometimes factually false, edits? Bellahdoll 22:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Bellahdoll[reply]

For 'NB', see Noto Bene, though I should probably have used 'PS' instead! I don't keep an eye on specific articles for the spelling amendments - it's more something I do on the articles I keep an eye on for general editing, as well as anything I come across when I'm browsing Wikipedia in general. Matthew 12:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help. Hope you have a good day. Bellahdoll 02:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC)Bellahdoll[reply]

Removal of talk page comments

I noticed that you removed several comments from the page Talk:Martin Luther King, Jr.. I have restored them. For reasons of continuity and etiquette, we should avoid editing the comments of others, even if they aren't very helpful. There are exceptions, some of which may apply, but they should be exercised with care. For more information, see WP:TALK, and especially WP:TALK#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable. Thanks. --Dystopos 01:29, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I won't anymore, some of those comments just aggravate me. If I made any other changes to talk pages, you may revert them. I would, but I'm new and I'm not certain how to find the exact words to add them again. Thanks for the message. Bellahdoll 01:32, 6 February 2007 (UTC)Bellahdoll[reply]

No worries. The beauty of a wiki is that all those busybodies out there can fix anything you do if they feel the need. As long as you're not being malicious, nobody should bite you. I can't say I would have really missed the rude comments, but I felt like the record should stand for itself. Have fun. --Dystopos 01:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. Also, I looked at your user page. Good luck with the automated bots. Bellahdoll 01:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)Bellahdoll[reply]

Royal Knights

You wrote on my talk page: "So, basically, Yaksha, you are saying the Royal Knights are not knights? Also, what is a 'cat'? By the way, I understand both your reasoning, and will not take a side or cause trouble. I'm just curious."

"cat" is short for "category". The discussion me and User:Unknown Dragon had was regarding the addition of digimon articles into "fictional x" categories. So for example, User:Unknown Dragon wished to add the article "Royal Knights" into the category Category:Fictional knights. I removed the article from this category because i said that the Royal Knights actually being knights was not a verfiable fact. So what i'm saying is that just because the group is called "Royal Knights", we shouldn't assume it's a fact that they are knights (in the meaning of the word as described in our article knights).

Basically, i'm not very comfortable with adding Digimon articles into all these "fictional x" categories when they are mostly speculation. Because it's speculation, and because it's so hard to draw the line. For example, Agumon could be a "fictional reptile", and a "fictional animal", and a "fictional dinosaur", and probably a "fictional characters who have the power to manipulate fire". Some of these classifications seem more reasonable than others, but at the end - it's all of our own speculation. And i really don't think having lots of "fictional x" categories on the articles really help them, or help reader navigation, or help the categories...we do have a lot of "fictional x" categories.

I hope that makes things more clear. --`/aksha 12:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks that does make sense. Also, on the Royal Knights talk page, I posted a comment on having links to the Agumon and Veemon articles in the Omnimon and Magnamon sections. I think adding those, even in small form, would be useful. Bellahdoll 18:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Bellahdoll[reply]