Jump to content

User talk:LittleOldMe/Archive2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:LittleOldMe

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 09:16, 25 February 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Notifications

Ugh that would be my laziness rearing it's ugly head again, sorry! Have a question that I dont' know if you can answer. What is Wikipedia's policy of making a user's talk page a blog or an archive of a blog? There's a user that seems to be intent on doing just that. Wildthing61476 19:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

How dare you!

Your tone is paternalistic and insulting. Did the possibility that my grievance was legitimate even cross your puny mind? Vile hypocrite!

Paranoiacally yours, CML —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.157.202.79 (talk • contribs) .

Spam NOT

I do not understand why links I have posted specified within External Links categories that are directly within the theme of the page, ie links to specific ski lodging alternatives for SPECIFIC ski resorts have caused me to be banned and have the links removed. There are MANY other sites on exactly the same pages that are linking to SPEFIFIC SKI RESORT Lodging that are allowed to post those links. In RESPONSE to YOUR FIRST COMMENT: THE LINKS I PROVIDED ARE NOT INAPPROPRIATE to the Topic, if you actually had taken the time to review them before just halfhazardly deleting them all.

for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vail_Ski_Resort#External_links

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Creek#External_links

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okemo_Mountain#External_links


among many others


This is going above and beyond in editing to keep the integrity of this directory by selectively discriminating against users that are doing nothing more than offering additional information on "EXTERNAL LINKS" of use to USERS of WIKIPEDIA


Thank you--Donnyflyboy 15:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, this is no personal vendetta. Your edit pattern rang alarm bells and your edits were reverted according to Wikipedia convention. All messages were standard Wikipedia warnings.
I repeatedly left these warning messages on the talk page of the IP you were editing from giving you adequate information that you were in contravention of Wikipedia spam rules. The reason the IP was blocked was because, despite the warnings, you persisted with adding spam. I don't know that I can add anything that you will not be able to glean from the links I provided.
If you see instances of spam in other articles then you are fully entitled as a registered or anonymous user to delete them.
Regards
LittleOldMe 15:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
OK, I have removed the spam from the articles that you pointed out. Please feel free to help out wherever you see a need. As you pointed out, why should others get away with advertising when you have been prevented from placing adverts for your organisation? Unfortunately, since there are so many editors and so many articles it is not easy to spot the commercialism creeping in.
I am sure you will appreciate that there are numerous opportunities for people and companies to advertise their presence on the the internet, so Wikipedia is justly entitled to maintain a no-advertising policy.
Regards
LittleOldMe 16:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey there, Great job on keeping up with the commercial links. I just had a quick question for you. On the Okemo Mountain page, you removed the link to Okemo's website. Should that one be there? Thanks, Searles2sels (PJ) 17:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Corey is a deadringer for Denzil, why do you dispute that?

BBB FC

Most definitely a case of cyber-diarrhoea! Good call. Bubba hotep 11:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

help with my first article please

Hi there

I thought I'd get in touch as you were kind enough to send me a nice message.

I'm having trouble compiling my article. I think I've followed the protocols but I'm still being told to "Wikify". I thought I'd done that but obviously my tech no-how isn't as good as my language skills. What am I missing please? Also my article seems to be target by someone who wants to brand it "unreferenced". I'm not sure what that means. I posted the article on the chap concerned because there is very little published material on him which I think wrong considering the influence he had - albeit briefly - on theatre and education in England. He tried to change alot that's wrong with a bad system and picked some big fights. I'm working on a biography now with a former student of mine who was also influenced heavily by the subject of my article.

I've provided links in the article to what is available on the net, the remnants of the Phoenix theatre website and the vestiges of the Trust website, neither of which have been edited for some time now.

What more can I do to resolve the outstanding problems please? I want to make this as strong as I can. I know the fellow is a little obscure, but he changed alot of young lives and influenced many for the better. I think it deserves a mention somewhere.

Please email me at JerichoHayes@aol.com

Thanks for your time Jeri --JeriHayes 18:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

help me please

I noticed you are on the kindness campaign, so I thought you wouldn't mind helping me with my account since I am new to this

--Rob Scrivener 12:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello LittleOldMe

Thank you for your kind intervention. This is my first time editing here and did not realise that edits should be commented on. I will follow this protocol in future. No65560 15:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. I wasn't trying to push a point, most of your contributions have got comments. It is a good habit to develop though. I say that from experience since I had to break the habit of not commenting after months of editing. It wasn't easy.
Thanks for the enthusiasm
Regards
LittleOldMe 15:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandal Welcoming

Just to let you know, you welcomed 147.226.218.32 who has done nothing but vandalize pages. Sorry. (If it makes you feel any better, I did that once too. --Farquaadhnchmn(Dungeon) 00:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't see read that far down on your welcome message. I apologize.--Farquaadhnchmn(Dungeon) 16:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I have another question...

How do I do bullet points? I want to do them as a neater way of listing my interests on my user page, since the way they are currently listed isn't very neat

Rob Scrivener 16:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Oops

Sorry about the article on Kyle Larrow.. I didn't realize that wikipedia doesn't allow stub articles.. I will keep this in mind in the future and thank you for your time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hmshiau (talk • contribs) .

...And Subjects, Belatedly.

Thanks very much for the note! I had no idea there was a welcoming committee. I wasn't expecting any notice, but it's good to know Wikipedians are looking out for each other, and I'm sure I'll find the table you pointed out to me very helpful. I tried to get a feel for the rules of style before contributing, but I'll feel better editing once I have a degree of familiarity with the guidelines. I'm reading even now.

The help is much appreciated. Look, I've even learned to use signatures! Cheers!

--Defordj 19:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Why are you restoring all the spammy links to chessworld.net? These links were all inserted by the one user (User:No65560), whose only contributions (as far as I can see) have been to insert links to chessworld.net, which to me is always suspicious behaviour. Most of the chess players' pages already have links to the players' chess games. The chessworld.net links are redundant. Rocksong 10:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. If you read Eagle 101's talk page, you will see that User:No65560 is the (or "a") webmaster at chessworld.net. So User:No65560 has a conflict of interest. If it turns out that his/her webpage is useful, then the users of that page can add it. It is not No65560's job to enter his page at Wikipedia. That is self-promotion. No65560 says s/he provides a "deeper level of analysis". IMHO the extra information, while tangible, is marginal. I'm not going to fight to the death over this, that's just my opinion. Rocksong 11:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw those further comments at Eagle's Talk page after my last post. Sorry for not reading that first :). I'll let them stay in for now but I must say I'm not convinced of their usefulness. Rocksong 12:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Newbridge, County Kildare

I'd love to know what facet of my excising the phrase "The most famous band to come from the town are $chmackey and the Salads.They are better than you." from this article violates NPOV conventions in your eyes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DublinDilettante (talk • contribs)

Hi LittleOldMe! I see that you are adding links to chessworld.net back. Please consider it again. You should know that

  • chessworld.net needs registration if you wish to replay commented games etc.
  • we usually use chessgames.com for the purpose of linking statistics and games of chess (there is already a template for it)
  • The article about the server (ChessWorld.net) has been deleted

I think that massive and problematic changes like yours should be better discussed at chess project before you start. Thank you and happy editing, --Ioannes Pragensis 14:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, I talked about this problem with previous incarnations of No65560, that is with Juicy Plums, Son of Zeus and Tryfon. I talked about it in length, as you can see on my talk page under External Links to chessplayers. So I do not think that in this case more discussion is needed. I have no time to repeat myself and I do not wish to go into conflicts about such an unimportant thing. But why to help the spammers?--Ioannes Pragensis 15:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I do not think that this is a case of the sockpuppetry (multiple voting under different accounts etc.); I only think that one user uses different accounts at different times, which is not a crime. And I am almost sure in this assesment, because of the identical modus operandi and even the identical wording. Regarding the chess project, I am not its speaker, I only think that huge changes should be discussed before you change fifty articles or so. If there were a consensus about the question, I would be the last person to complain. I will start discussion there (Wikipedia_talk:Wikiproject_Chess) about this now. Please, wait a while before the case settles. Thank you. --Ioannes Pragensis 16:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chess#Links to chessworld.net - you are welcomed to contribute. Greetings, --Ioannes Pragensis 16:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandal

User:212.104.156.115 needs to be blocked. Whoever it is keeps vandalizing pages. See the the user's talk page. You said you would block them with one more act of vandalism. If you agree, there's no need to reply. Thanks! – Chris53516 (Talk) 15:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Fidonews Wiki

Please quit vandalizing our fidonews wiki! I've tried to keep it up and keep it clean, but you keep deleting EVERYTHING in it! Please stop it!!! WackerWhippet

This user is not vandalizing that page. You are not supposed to use that page as a publication format. See Talk:FidoNews for more. – Chris53516 (Talk) 18:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

NP Patrol =)

Hey fellow NP Patroller! No problem, I was just about to {{db-advert}} the page too =P - SpLoT (*T* C+u+g+v) 11:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

SpLoT (*T* C+u+g+v) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Thanks

Hi littleOldMe, thanks the guide you given in mytalk page, however i am still very new and trying to learn them. However, it would be quite some time before i can really seat down and add more content into it. Hope before then a lot of helpful people had already provide additional information for it.

Thanks

Zuff has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

(Zuff 07:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC))

Alan Brazier

Please reconsider your vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Brazier. I have uncovered some sources. He is a notable inventor, with many sources from the 1980's. The article just needs clean up etc.Obina 09:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


Hey

Can you stop vandalising my talk page? I trying to start a clean slate. --Baconmonger123 16:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Stop the auto vandalizing of mine and so many others' as well please. Your useless bot edits are not welcome. Swatpig 09:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't need a drone's help. I am not interested in you, your opinions, your career, or your "introduction." Go do your own thing and I won't bother you. Swatpig 10:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

unsigned vandalism reporting

Yeah, I forgot. That's why, on my page now, I have a big bold note reminding me to do just such a thing. Thanks for your concern. Scoutersig

Help me im a newbie

Hello,im the one who created the Kolej Teknologi Pulau.Can you please tell me what do you mean by advertising.Please help me.And please dont delete my article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nabelon (talk • contribs) .

Certainly

Glad to be of service! May you continue the good fight. Cheers, Dar-Ape 23:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ata Demirer

In case you didn't come back to read UncleG's response to your vote: the English in "English Wikipedia" only refers to the language the articles are written in. It does not place any restrictions on the subject of the articles (see WP:BIAS). - Mgm|(talk) 09:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

New Topics

Do you check all the topics? If so can you check my Alex Mathie topic please. --Celticfan383 15:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you sooooo much for formatting my topic. I will do as you suggested! Thanks again --Celticfan383 16:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Shnafflehund pup.jpg

I tagged this image as a speedy which you removed. I can accept that I may have categorised it incorrectly. I still believe that it should be deleted. What do you suggest? Regards LittleOldMe 17:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

You could list it on WP:PUI if you think the license is fraudulent, or list on WP:IFD if you think it is of no use in an encyclopedia. Stifle (talk) 18:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Block vandal request

Hello. This vandal (User:205.155.234.130) needs to be blocked indefinitely. He/She has vandalized far too often to be given any more chances. Would you be able to do that? — Chris53516 (Talk) 19:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Chris, thanks for the note. I'm afraid that I am unable to do as you ask for a number of reasons:
  • Because I am not an administrator I do not have the authority to block anyone.
  • The IP address is part of the California State University network and is used by multiple users. It is against policy to issue long blocks on these IP addresses.
  • I don't believe that I have ever seen an IP address with an indefinite block, leading me to believe that it is against policy to do so, but I may be mistaken.
In my opinion (shared by many Wikipedians), anonymous edits from unregistered users should not be allowed. The registration process is quick and simple enough for it not to be an issue to anyone who wishes to contribute positively, but it will make the casual vandal think twice. I have seen registered users who do vandalise, but they seem to be closed down very quickly with indefinite blocks.
Regards LittleOldMe 11:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Interreality

please look again to your comments and judging at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/interreality.

i am not familiar with the Wikipedia habits and procedures, so i seem to have made mistakes in my text and comments, but at the moment i have screened the text and summitted all requested sources and attributes. i try to learn the procedures as fast and much as possible

if you like, you can contact me by email or MSN. thanks!--81.207.182.13 10:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

please look again to your comments and judging at the new article 'interreality', as now i have contributed also the requested sources and attributes. i am new here and did not understand the procedures well. sorry. thanks, allthebest, --[User:81.207.182.13|81.207.182.13]] 10:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I think that you're missing the principle of no original research. The fact that you have referenced the thesis does not change it from being original research. If Wikipedia had been in existence when Albert Einstein defined his theory of relativity or when Charles Darwin invented his theory of evolution, if they had created articles for their theories before the theories were famous, their articles too would have been rejected under the same principle. Since these theories have become mainstream hundreds of individuals have been actively participating in the creation of these articles. Perhaps, in the future, the theory or phenomenon that you describe as interreality will be mainstream, and others will cooperate to create an article for it.
There are a number of other criteria by which your article fails to merit inclusion:
  • Autobiographical or self-published material is not accepted.
  • Neologisms are not included because of the speed at which new words lose favour.
  • The neutrality of the article is called into question because you are the originator of the theory. As the originator you would be less critical than outsiders and would be inclined to show the theory in the most favourable light.
  • The notability of the theory is unproven. A published thesis is too specialist to be accepted as proof of notability.
I'm sorry if we seem to be ganging up against you, but it is not personal.
Regards LittleOldMe 11:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Unity (game engine)

Regarding Unity (game_engine) - you recently marked it as blatant advertising article. I'd be happy to correct it; the problem is I can't see which portions of the web site look like blatant advertising. Can you be more specific? NeARAZ 11:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Wikipedia notifications sometimes lack nuance, "resembles promotional material" would be a more accurate description. Also, be aware that other Wikipedians will edit articles with this tag. Tags are placed on articles in order to invite editors to collaborate, they are not designed to be critical or judgemental.
My impression when reading the article is that it is overtly positive and full of jargon, as if it is aimed at a game developer audience. Also, there are no criticisms, problems or shortfalls mentioned. I'm sure that this product is not all things to all men. Perhaps you can add something to explore this facet. Regards LittleOldMe 11:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Please look at my posts

yeah please look at my posts and check them some time and comment about anything i am doing wrong or could improve on. thanx --Rainbow Warrior 12:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I have never been asked to do this before, usually I would comment on a single edit or an article. It is far more difficult to offer critique on an individual editor. Well, here goes!
I've had a quick look at your posts, and the first thing I thought, when I saw the subjects you've tackled, is "this user is brave". Religion and politics are minefields, so prepare yourself for some conflict.
A few things to note:
  • Keep it neutral. I thought that some of your edits seem to have a slight bias.
  • Slow down and use the preview button. You've allowed too many easy-to-spot typos to creep into your edits. When you're editing a contentious subject, the quality of your edits needs to be superior. There are other editors who will grab an opportunity to change your edit, don't allow them the opportunity.
  • Familiarise yourself with the five pillars and keep them in mind whenever you edit. Be prepared to quote official policy in disputes or disagreements but be prepared to ignore the rules when it is sensible to do so.
  • Talk! This is perhaps the most important advice I can give. Often you will feel frustrated that you spend hours typing in article and user talk pages in order to add or change one sentence in an article. But remember that, since Wikipedia is built on consensus, you can use that to protect what you've added when others attempt to modify it.
  • An addendum to the above is be specific. Your request to me is a case in point. It would have been easier for me to respond to your request had you limited its scope to a single edit or a specific article. I have no doubt that there are some edits that you are insecure about yourself, relying on me to find these and comment on them is an unrealistic expectation.
  • Be prepared to compromise. There are things that you believe, that you will have to set aside while editing on Wikipedia. If consensus has been reached on something, even if you believe it to be incorrect, you are not at liberty to change it. This can be frustrating, but you'll have to learn to live with it.
I know that the above advice is not what you were hoping for, but if you have some specific edits that you wish to bring to my attention then I'll be happy to comment on them.
It is only fair to state that I am quite new to Wikipedia myself, I only started editing on the 19th of September 2006, so any advice I offer is based on limited experience. Regards LittleOldMe 13:52, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Help me

{{helpme}}
I have checked the box "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" in my preferences, yet for my last two edits, here and here, I left the edit summary blank and I was not prompted. I logged out and back in between the last two edits.

Instead of offering me a prompt, an edit summary was created automatically.

Is this a bug?

If it is a bug is there somewhere to report it?

Thanks LittleOldMe 18:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

That's odd, but I think that's how the auto edit summary is meant to work. If no summary is entered, it creates one for you. Since you had one created for you, prompting wasn't triggered. You can read more about the Auto summary at WP:AES. ---J.S (T/C) 18:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
My point is that I wish to be prompted on the odd occasion when I forget to complete the edit summary. I'm happy to have an automatic summary if I override the prompt, but I expect to be prompted first.
Is the way I describe it the way it should operate? LittleOldMe 18:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I didn't program WP:AES so I'm not sure... you might be better off bringing this up on that talk page. Us random helpers likely won't be able to help:( ---J.S (T/C) 18:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I didn't realize the automated edit summaries had superseded this preference, but you might try adding Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Force edit summary to your monobook.js page (assuming you're using the Monobook skin, of course). I'll drop a line over at WP:AES' talk page to see if they know about this. -- nae'blis 18:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I'd also say this is a bug in Werdna's AES, you can put in a bug report at the MediaZilla, or, if you don't have an account there, I can do so for you. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 22:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Nope, seems like they're already aware of the problem. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 22:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

interreality

hi mr/mrs, thanks for reply. i have decided to leave it and quit before the discussion die by deleting the article. sorry, it is not my way of discussing with anonymous strangers behind a nickname.
indeed, i perhaps miss the principle of WP. does not matter. it is not that i need to push my theory. i already defined that 3 years ago. and the word 'interreality' is already popping up. the reason of contributing a new article is that my students were asking me why the word 'interreality' was mentioned in a Secondlife report, without finding it in WP.
i am a newbee here, and for me open source and wiki is collaborating and helping eachother to get the best final result. but as i discovered now, the idea in WP is not that you and others are helping with improving and tuning the article, but only giving single-view and cut down comments. none of the comments are contributing nor cooperate in how to create an truth article for it.
so. i quit WP, i have better things to do.
thanks for reply, best, bye, --81.207.182.13 23:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Alan B. Gaylor

Thanks for your welcome note. I've tried to keep my contribution from sounding 'like advertising" but, frankly, I am not sure where it errs. Wikipedia is a great resource and I am only trying to do my little part. Cheers,--bradb 17:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Brad, sorry it's taken me a while to reply, I did not notice the note that you'd tagged onto the end of my talk page. I recommend that messages on talk pages are preceded by a section heading so that they are easy to spot.
Since I never tagged the article you refer to it is difficult to comment on another editor's reasoning. There is no doubt that the article needs some work, but the beauty of Wikipedia is that it does not have to be your problem. You have sowed the seed and other editors will, over time, collaborate to grow the article.
If you feel the need to improve the article further, then I would suggest that the lack of references is the biggest problem. There is a slight sense of the article being a promotion for the business, leading to confusion as to whether the article is about the man, or his business. I would also recommend moving all external links to the External links section, and removing those from the main body of the article which exist in the External links section already. Be careful that they are not commercial links that will be identified as spam.
The article needs:
  • a References section with a mix of both web and printed sources. Some of the current external links may be better utilised as references.
  • more detail on the man - his education, his impact on society, etc. This will take some research which will also add to your list of references.
  • a separate section for his business interests, in order to make a clear distiction between the man and his businesses.
  • some internal links - to his state, for instance, which should be referred to as Oklahoma, not OK.
Doing the above will go a long way to improving the quality of the article.
Regards LittleOldMe 11:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

respect my privacy!!!

i wrote you that i quit Wikipedia, but i was reported by students that you are passing again all respects to my personal privacy!
keep your actions and comments out of my privacy matters, like real name et cetera. i have nothing to do with your crusade. i am not interested at all.
i do not want any reply, just keep of my privacy!!! otherwise i have to escalate against you.--81.207.182.13 19:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

See here for a discusssion on the subject. LittleOldMe 10:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism/Personal Attack

Thanks for your input, even though I myself wouldn’t change the wording, I appreciate your PC approach. Shoessss 20:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Question

Hi, can you tell me how I make a new article >.< ? I did it before.. but now I can't find it. If it is possible, please put a URL onto my Talk Page. Thank You for your Time!! =D

Hubert Shiau 15:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome.

bsd

And for the intro too. You probably noticed that my edits are occasional, i mostly do them on the fly. That's probably why I "slipped under the radar". --Benstown 08:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Help with URL

{{help me}} Why does the URL in the template on this page not show up?

The page is gone now but the template was like this:

{{db-copyvio|http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=18081607}}

And the page has just been re-created. If you paste the template onto the page you should see my problem. Thanks LittleOldMe 17:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

You needed to add url= before the url :) {{db-copyvio|url=http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=18081607}}. Happy Editing! -- lucasbfr talk 17:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Somerset High School (Massachusetts)

Actually, I deleted it because it was essentially empty (one very general sentence and what looks to be an attempt at making an infobox). The other article was sent to AFD because it was more than that, and CSD A7 doesn't apply to schools (at least, I'm fairly sure it doesn't). There's a link to the deletion log on the "this article doesn't exist" page that's there now.

As for minimum requirements for a school, I'm afraid there isn't any particular guideline that says what they are (although for-profit private schools fall under WP:CORP, as they are businesses). You could try WP:SCHOOL, but it's only a proposed guideline and appears to be stalled. --Coredesat 15:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

Mystify85JEC has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I just wanted to say thanks for the welcome! I am a poet, myself and I love to edit and write so that is why I joined wikipedia. Feel free to leave me a message anytime you feel like it. Of course I will respond as always.

Your friend Mystify85JEC 21:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

PS, I just recently joined the Wikipedia Welcoming Committee as well!

I need help again

Someone keeps deleting my pics which I have on my user page, how do I set it so only I can edit my user page? --Rob Scrivener 15:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok thanks for letting me know, I didnt know about thar fair use policy (or whatever it's called) before--Rob Scrivener 15:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Rob Scrivener has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

My Page

Why does your page say fuck? Check out my page, thanks for all your help! Celticfan383 15:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Celticfan383 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Lol me yet again......well at least you get somethin to do when you get bored

Yep I must be gettin pretty annoyin lol

O well

I have a pic of me on my computer, which I took on my webcam, can I put that on my user page?--Rob Scrivener 19:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Rob Scrivener has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Rolling out the welcome wagon

Hi LittleOldMe, just a quick message to thank you for your kind welcome. Bamboo marimba 11:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't think of a title but oh well

No, you're not giving the impression that I am annoying you, I just tend to ask lots of questions irl as well which tends to annoy people

Thanks for all your help so far--Rob Scrivener 01:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Rob Scrivener has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you for the welcome message

Thank you for your welcome message. Best regards for 2007. --Winterstein 16:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

WelcomeBot

I noticed you welcome allot of noobs. I am doing research in prep for the welcomebot trail in order to establish some facts on new user trends. Please can you have a look at Category:WelcomeBotResearch. I would appreciate your involvement. Also so as to assist, please can you sub your welcome template with {{welcome123}} which includes that category. Thanks! frummer 04:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually....

that wasn't vandalism. It is an informative article, similar to the article on TPing or egging. There is no need for testing out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jalad.azadi (talk • contribs) 13:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC).


Question For LittleOldMe

LittleOldMe

Thanks for the kind welcome and advise. Although I condsider myself an accomplished writer and researcher from years of experience as a senior federal investigator, I am finding Wikipedia an excellerating challenge. Most specifically, I have the following questions about referencing specific materials.

I am currently participating in two articles--Fly Fishing and Prometheus Process. The Fly Fishing article is pretty straight forward and I've encountered no problems referencing existing publications. On the other hand, the Prometheus Process article is proving a bit more difficult. Although the origins and basics of the process are well referenced in published books (ISBN#), much of the process detail which I intend to include in the article is only available in copyrighted literature that is only obtainable directly from the authoring company. This literature has been available for online purchase from the publishers website and is routinely distributed to the publisher's clients. Use of the copyrighted material is not the issue, permission is freely available. My real question how to reference it. For example: One publication I would choose to reference is called" "Prometheus Process Planning and Execution Guide". Would the following cite be appropriate: Warden, John A. III, Prometheus Process Planning and Execution Guide, Venturist, Inc., Montgomery, AL, page x, 2005.

Thanks --Mike Cline 01:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes it's me again

How do I get a picture to actually appear on my user page? all I get is a link but I want the picture of me to actually appear there

Thanks in advance

--Rob Scrivener 13:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Rob Scrivener has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

thank you :)

Thanks for your welcome message. Ruggiero 17:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for welcoming me

Thank you for the kind message and the heaps of useful links. Have a nice day !Rosenknospe 14:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello again

Hi there.

You probably don't recall as I'm sure you are busy with many pages and sites, but you were kind enough to help me out when I first started working on my page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Robert_Saxon) and I was rather hoping you might be able to offer some advice again.

After some adjustments you told me that I'd done the right thing and the page fit with ethos of Wikipedia, but I returned to it this evening to find some changes, a very poor message - which I deleted because it published names and addresses unrelated to my subject, something I thought unfair to those people - and a tag on the page about it being a fansite. I don't think it reads like a fan site at all. I have tried hard not to make it so. While I agree Saxon was/is a marginal player in the British Arts movement, he was no less so than several who have pages on wikipedia (something I checked before embarking on this page). I have given links to the company production and trust pages I have been able to find, which give more biographical detail and show his productions and efforts, have not made any unfounded claims, and continue to search for what information I can find in what time I have. So I'm a bit confused now as to the tagging and status of the page. Are you now saying that it's wrong? If so what is it that I should do to rectify this?

I'd be grateful if you could spare a little time to go through this with me as I am very confused now and i don't know who else to ask. For convenience you can just email me on jerichohayes@aol.com

Thanks very much for your time

Jeri JeriHayes 22:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC) 

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by JeriHayes (talk • contribs) 22:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

My article

Hi there again

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

I appreciate your point and will look again, but I don't think I have been less than balanced in my approach and have reported as many of the negatives I have heard as the positives. The real problem I have (and am having with my research too) is that very little that isn't TV based or West End is widely reported and there are few archives. Just getting the details I have was hard and I have to admit part of the reasoning behind this page was the notion that others might log in and contribute or the man himself might become aware and get in touch.A long shot but there you go. The fact that most of the details are on the Charitable Trust biography site for my subject I would have thought stood for a fair bit however. Would it help for me to scan in some program notes from actual productions and add those to the page do you think? I also have some posters which I could photograph or find some other way of imaging them (they are much larger than my a4 scanner and I'm not very good with this sort of thing).I have been wary of doing such things because of copyright issues on the site. Would this be a problem?

I don't mind comments and discussions and salient points are welcome especially from someone who actually knows, has seen or has worked with my subject. The notion that I might have written something without trying to at least locate my subject is frankly moronic however. What's really bugging me at the moment is the "fansite" tag on the page, which I have been told makes it look less than worthy of attention. I'd like to remove it but I don't know how. It destroys the integrity of the piece completely and I feel will deter any possible contributors from chippping in. It's hard enough to find sources as it is (I am now in contact with the lady who added the picture which is great) without being hamstung further. As an English teacher I'm pretty sure that I have been quite openly biographical with such information as I have at my disposal. I took your point of reading through other such pages on performers and feel I've made a fair start with what I have. I don't mean to be possessive, but rather than barracking, I feel that comment and criticism should have a positive slant. It's not enough to say "that's crap". Explain what would improve it and offer assistance. The tagging I feel is thoroughly unfair. there are some pages on british theatre and television people which have far less information than I have provided.

If you can point me to examples of what you feel would be an ideal (looking at the major stars' pages was lovely, but it's easy to construct something phenomenal when you have somuch material to work with!) then I'll happily attempt to re-edit, but I would appreciate it if you could explain how to get rid of the fansite thing. It looks horrible and cheapens something I'd like to get right.

Thanks very much again for your time.

Best regards JeriJeriHayes 02:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

PS: if you could reply to my email (JerichoHayes@aol.com) I'd really appreciate it. I have to check my mail several times a day, but my workload is such that I don't get time to check web pages too often. JHJeriHayes 02:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LittleOldMe/Archive2&oldid=1141488954"