User talk:Sally Anne

Hello, Sally Anne! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 20:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Wymondham College

No problem, I watch several school articles and this sort of mindless vandalism is, I am afraid, very common. Paste (talk) 20:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ICoC

Hi Sally! Thanks for the feedback; I've been meaning to do something about the ICoC article for a while, but haven't gotten around to it yet. TransylvanianKarl has a substantial advantage over me, in that he's obsessed with the issue whereas I don't care at all – I'd never even heard of the church before I stumbled across its Wikipedia article. My only concern was, and is, preventing the spread of false information; I tried to combat this by elucidating the comprehensive truth.

Anyways, you've inspired me to submit a request for arbitration. I've suggested that TransylfanianKarl be permanently banned from editing (only) that article, and that it be permanently semi-protected. You can read my request here. Once it goes through, I'll revive the article; shouldn't be hard without Karl's interference.

Cheers! --Xiaphias (talk) 08:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate it. I don't really know enough about Wikipedia to handle it myself. But if there's anything you think I can do to help, let me know. Sally Anne (talk) 13:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the case has been accepted by the Arbitration Committee, and they'll be reviewing it tomorrow. I'm not particularly familiar with the process myself, having never done this before, but I'm fairly confident that the outcome will be favorable. My case is self-evident; Karl's edits, I believe, speak for themselves.

But thanks for the support, and feel free to follow along here as the case progresses.

I'll keep you posted. --Xiaphias (talk) 01:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to the Meaning of Life

Your removal of "Life is Bad" under "Popular Opinions" is so uncool. It is a popular opinion, and it is properly cited. It was also referenced in popular culture in an amusing way lately, and your edit completely ruins the joke:

http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=2997

Some people do believe Life is Bad. Their belief is a fact, their opinion is not uncommon, and it is perfectly within the context of the heading of the section "Popular Opinions" in spite of your declaration that there is no context around that item. It made sense to me, and it was awesome.

Joshua Gadbois (talk) 15:44, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well I suppose if it ruined one person's joke to remove it, then Wikipedia needs it to remain. Sally Anne (talk) 16:54, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the edit and considered rewriting the section to make it flow better but when I saw the other entries in list form I saw it fits the rest of the section. I think it should stand.

Crywalt (talk) 16:38, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]