User talk:All Hallow's Wraith

Archives

		The Minor Barnstar
		For doing it the way it's supposed to be done. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 22:41, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(RE:)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template for deletion

Friendly heads-up {{Imagemap}} is deprecated and nominated for deletion. It has been superceded by changes to the File namespace and I wanted to let you know, since you have a transclusion on your userpage or user talk. If you need to respond to this message, please do so on my talk. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:41, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments invited

As an occasional or frequent editor of the Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2012 article, your participation in this discussion would be welcome and appreciated. Thanks.--JayJasper (talk) 18:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{imdb}} question

Hi there. I really have no idea where to ask this, so I have come to you. I have noticed you shortening the {{imdb}} code, something that I have also done in the past. Recently, though, I had a series of pages show up in my watch where the editor was "updating" to the reverse. [1], [2], [3], [4], and this one, which you changed one of the 2 links on the page again: [5] --> [6]. When working on various pages, I haven't touched the {{imdb}} since then because I was just confused. Am I missing something here as to why some use {{imdb name}} instead? Sorry to bother you, but I was hoping you could help. Thanks. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 11:12, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Preferred styling for musician articles

It is not specified in the WP:WikiProject Musicians that articles shall have a life and career section. However, looking at three featured articles on musicians, I noted the following:

Celine Dion

First heading is "Life and music career", with subheadings

Mariah Carey

First heading is "Life and music career", with subheadings

Aaliyah

First heading is "Life and career", with subheadings

Even the article on The Beatles starts with a history section with subheadings. In that case, the subheadings go two layers down, not one!

So, it is not codified that the articles be arranged that way, but featured articles on musicians are, and featured articles are good templates to use for other related articles. Accordingly, it's the de facto preferred style for musician biographies. —C.Fred (talk) 16:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tagline

Thanks for notifying. Am not too concerned, but have commented on the RFC page. --Der yck C. 22:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why remove "empty" reference sections from articles that will require them?

Is there a reason why you are removing "empty" reference sections? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nick_Swardson&diff=prev&oldid=361836200] WP:V requires that the section will need to exist. Active Banana (talk) 22:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest that the fact that "they look bad and/or strange (i.e. a section named "References" with nothing in it) " is an entirely appropriate look for an article that doesnt have any references? If it causes the reader to pause and think "something's wrong" - is that not a good thing when we have content that we cannot with any degree of assurance show is valid? I think its better to have a reader have concerns about the content they have gotten than to go away with a mistaken belief that everything within Wikipedia is true. No?Active Banana (talk) 22:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Avril Lavigne

Saw you tried starting a discussion on her religious background a while ago. If you'd like to throw in a word, I've opened up a similar discussion here: Talk:Avril_Lavigne#Religion. Thanks. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 23:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Selena

If we could figure out what her mother's other half is that would probably be a better fit. ★Dasani★ 19:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

California and Texas have more Hispanics and Asians than English so I think you could put that. ★Dasani★ 19:55, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. –xeno^talk 20:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Helena Bonham Carter's maternal grandfatherHi, I am a bit confused as to why you reverted my edit on this. Is it really more notable to be an ambassador than to save thousands of people from the Holocaust? I am not sure what you meant when you said the previous edit was more accurate. Jewish is not a nationality, it is a religion. I can't see that it is accurate to describe someone as being of "half Spanish and half Jewish" ancestry. Does this mean that no Jews in Spain are to be taken as fully Spanish? Similarly, would this mean that Tiger Woods is best described as being of "half American and half Buddhist" ancestry? It was this error in the original version that motivated my edit. Boxter1977 (talk) 13:03, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]I appreciate your conciliatory approach, Wraith. I do think it would be salient to mention that he is of Jewish extraction, particularly in light of what he did for the French Jews. To me, it's relatively insignificant that he was a Minister-Counsellor in DC, but I have no argument with leaving that in. I am a little uncomfortable with "half Jewish ancestry" as I would argue that Judaism is a religion and only a quasi ethnicity. But that is another story. I can't think of a better phrasing than your suggestion, so if you are happy, let's go with that. Would you like to do the change, or shall I? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boxter1977 (talk • contribs) 02:49, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply] I have thought about this further, and discussed it with others. What do you think of "Jewish ancestry" or "Jewish extraction"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boxter1977 (talk • contribs) 09:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]I cited the category in the discussionHey, I give you the brown muddy barnstar for not reading the discussions. If you had in the case of judge feldman, you would have seen that not only did I cite the wsj article which says he converted to christianity from judaism, I asked, what is the proper way to cite that? Since you removed it, but since I assume good behavior on your part as all wikipedians do, I am asking you to restore it ASAP. Perhaps you could better the article up, by taking the cite I placed in the discussion and properly placing it in the article. Best wishes, and try to keep up with the discussions in the future