User talk:Fenice

Personal attacks, xx-5, etc

As far as I can see, continuing this discussion would not lead to anything positive for either you or me. Before I take a much-needed vacation from this whole conflict, I want to point out that I have not lied about anything here or anywhere else, and I have not insulted or attacked you or anyone else. I regret to say that I lack the energy to deal with this conflict (although honestly I doubt it can be dealt with at the time of writing), and this is the last you will hear from me regarding this issue. (I'm cross-posting this to relevant pages.) EldKatt (Talk) 18:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kind welcome

I apologize if this is out of place, but I would like to thank you for the warm welcome here. I'm looking forward to contributing to the community, and I appreciated having someone offer a few links and some early help on how to do so. This is one of the many things that make this community so unique! --uberknarf 18:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Fenice

Thanks for your Welcome Message! I figured out that that's automatically generated as well, right? And thanks for the handy hints :) I realise that my contribution to the Andy Warhol page are not all Wiki-ed up, but that's because I've been a bit too lazy to learn new syntax. Here goes with the tildas slow motion, quick thinking 16:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Science COTW

Are you taking over the Science COTW? If so, I think you should select the next topic and start the collaboration immediately. The topic hasn't changed for many weeks. ike9898 22:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AID templates

He there, just wondering why you moved the templates back down? Now the sentence "Copy it (please, do not cut it from there, just copy it) and paste it to the bottom of this page and fill it out." in "How to nominate" section doesn't have the intendend meaning... I think the templates are much better off in the Introduction section. --Dijxtra 22:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but I tought it'd be nice if people added nominations to the very bottom of the page. So there's no way somebody could make a mistake... not that it's a common one but... you know... ah... nevermind :-D --Dijxtra 23:14, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:AID_candidates - See the problems and inconsistencies caused by your mass revert? I have relatively little problem with this tag being put on the main page of obscure articles, but it shouldn't brand the article (as opposed to Talk) pages of articles like frog and Cold War. If its nomination is successful, it'll get a big old template put on it for a week anyway indicating the colab, so why also put a tag on the main page that in most cases won't even have any real effect (except, in effect, to vandalize the article for weeks on end with a big pastel box). It's also somewhat unfair to put the template on the main page of some articles, like Roma people and button, and to arbitrarily not put it on other articles, like Iran and architecture of Africa. Keeping the same system for all candidates is not only more consistent, and thus less confusing, but is also fairer, giving all the nominees an equal shot. It's also more consistent with AID's sister project, Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week, which explicitly states "If the article you are nominating already exists, please add {{COTW}} to the top of its talk page." even though, if anything, CotW has more reason to put the templates on the main-page-instead-of-talk-page, since stubs and substubs are vastly more likely to be undervisited and have little or no Talk page to speak of, making it much harder to bring attention to the CotW, compared to the excessive over-advertisement that full-fledged articles get on AID. The whole system's backwards, I says. -Silence 10:53, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greek Lit

Hi, Fenice. Welcome back. Sorry, but I'm not here much lately, so I won't be able to help you. Take care. Maurreen [[User_talk:Maurreen|(talk)]] 01:59, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we've met.

I don't think we've met before, but thank you for the AID templates you are putting on my talk page. Link9er 13:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cold War

I do not know what is happening with the Cold War. The article has been on my watchlist for nearly three years. It has always attracted lots of sockpuppet vandalism. What is going on now is nothing new. Regarding my removal of the section on Korea, please see my recent comments on the talk page explaining my reverts of the recent edits. 172 08:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CineVoter

Templates

Oops - I honestly didn't mean to stir or be mischevious. My apologies, being new to WP I'm just stumbling around trying to learn the ropes and assumed I must not yet have found 'the' policy re which templates belong on articles and which on talk pages. Initially I posted a question on User:Silence's talk page (to which you replied), then when User:Violetriga took the AID template back off the Wilderness article I asked on his/her talk page what the policy was....Violetriga suggested I check out Wikipedia:Template_locations and so now I'm starting to realise that its an area of debate, not policy per se. If there's any other policy or reference pages you can suggest on this I'd appreciate it. Otherwise, I'll just keep my head down and keep learning :). Kind regards, Jtneill - Talk 10:52, 18 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Violetriga

It would appear that you are back to your old tricks of going against consensus and now want two templates - one on talk, one on the article. Sorry, but you are incorrect in doing this. If you continue to edit war and call other people vandals you will find yourself going through an RfC and have a block. violet/riga (t) 10:59, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]