User talk:Happyme22
/Archive 1 |
Awards
Golden Wiki
A few days overdue but a hearty well done for getting Nancy to FA. Its not often you see editors with the persevance to contribute so much to the wiki and in honour of that I award you the highest and most respected of wikiawards for getting both Nancy and RR to FA.
![]() |
The Golden Wiki Award | |
For getting both Nancy Reagan and Ronald Reagan to Wikipedia:Featured Article status. LordHarris 14:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC) |
Ronald Reagan Barnstar
![]() |
The Ronald Wilson Reagan Barnstar of Valor | |
for cleaning up the Ronald Wilson Reagan article, in keeping with WP:NPOV--ChaplineRVine(talk ¦ ✉) 22:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC) |
California Barnstar
Hi, just to great work on the Ronald Reagan article. I often check on it every few days and you've made loads of great edits. Please have a california barnstar for your great work.
![]() |
The California Star | |
For all your efforts on improving the Ronald Reagan article LordHarris 15:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC) |
Original Barnstar
Hello Happyme22. I've kept an eye on the Ronald Reagan article since commenting on the peer review and admire your resilient efforts to keep moving the article forward. There may be inevitable POV issues on an article as complex as this, and the job is a near impossible one, but the work to improve the readability and formatting on a major article is much appreciated.
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
Here is a barnstar in recognition of Happyme22's tireless efforts to improve the Ronald Reagan article. Zleitzen(talk) 14:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC) |
Patience is a virtue....
The Zen Garden Award
![]() |
Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience | |
Ronnie would be looking down and smiling. 10 points for persistence...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC) |
Finally. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
New Reagan White House entertaning book
Hi HappyMe22. You may already know about, or even have, this new book, but I wanted to send you a link in the event you do not:
The book is written and edited by two freinds of Nancy reagan, both interior decorators, one of who worked for Ted Graber. CApitol3 (talk) 11:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Admin
Hi. I just wondered if you'd consider letting me nominate you for adminship, as you seem experienced enough. Thanks. Epbr123 (talk) 01:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- You'd get my vote.--STX 00:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
SimWhiteHouse
Removed attack posts from IP 212.84.103.196. --Happyme22 (talk) 05:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Summarizing Reagan
Of course we all appreciate the work you have done on this article and making it what it is today. I do not mean to destroy your article. I agree that I may have gone too far in summarizing it the way I did, but since a summary was already available on the presidency page, I just used that. Currently, the way these two articles exist side by side just looks ugly to me. You say that the presidency article needs to be rewritten, and I am sure it could be improved, possibly by again copying the current presidency section in the Reagan article to that article. However, this does not change the fact that all this information should not be duplicated.
Again, your work is not being ruined here (at least not intentionally); material is only being moved, the detailed presidency article is still available. Who knows, perhaps it too can become a featured article someday (or maybe even today, since it is after all basically a part of a page that is already a featured article). --KarlFrei (talk) 09:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback
I made the changes you suggested at Tawfiq Canaan. I removed about 33 cites for Nashef (?!? - I didn't realize how many I had placed there. I've gotten used to having to footnote every sentence or risk deletion, working as I do on Middle East related topics. Even then, it sometimes doesn't help.) I also added the PDF link. The suggestion to do a separate article on his published works is a great idea, but will have to wait until I can find more sources. I've also added a couple of wikilinks and combined a couple of sentences for flow.
Thanks so much for your feedback and encouragement. Tiamut 01:58, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Yay! Thanks. Tiamut 04:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: Nancy Reagan
I have no clue how Today's Feature Article was chosen. It was chosen by User:Ral315 OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, OhanaUnited meant the similarly-named Raul654 -- he's the one who is responsible for choosing featured articles. You can ask him, but I do believe that's exactly what you need to do -- just add Ronald Reagan there sometime closer to February 6 (bearing in mind that only 5 requests can be up at any time). Ral315 (talk) 19:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem -- it's certainly not the first time it's happened :) Ral315 (talk) 20:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
== Re Nancy Reagan ==
- - I wasn't "showing my own bias", as you said in your undoing of my revision. The country was in economic decline, and she wasn't criticised that heavily for the China Patterns incident...it was only a minor issue. If anything, her extravagant wardrobe became more of an issue with the press and the public. - - I have rewritten the article as best possible to read as organized and to not reflect any bias.
This was not an "attack post". May I suggest you re-read the wikipedia NPOV standards? 74.73.106.239 (talk) 08:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests#Nancy_Reagan
December 2007
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Not to try and bite, but please be cautious! :) Jmlk17 08:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I am quoting from your edits to my talk page re: Nancy Reagan
"Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia to the Nancy Reagan page...It is considered vandalism...I am cleaning up the article from anons like yourself who have flooded it with poor info, POV, and vandalism!"
So I am politely asking: exactly what nonsense have I added? In what way are my edits vandalism? What poor info have I flooded the article with? Please don't talk about the "floods" of others you may have decided to address, but only the items I have done.
I have clearly explained my edits: to create better flow with the article, to show that the China Replenishing was only a minor item that was criticised in her actions, that bringing glamour back to the presidency was criticized during an established during a period of national economic recession.
I am also politely asking why you are insisting that your edit is somehow better? I am confident that we can find a satisfactory wording for both of us, however, not if you behave in a territorial manner over this article without justification. 74.73.106.239 (talk) 08:41, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
As politely as I can,
I am asking that you see the Nancy Reagan Discussion page for your response to my requested editorial changes. 74.73.106.239 (talk) 18:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)