User talk:HelenOnline

FAIR WARNING: Talk page posts are not private and are kept forever. I prefer to discuss articles on the relevant article talk pages and may move discussions started here.

Serious warning

Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humor. Best wishes. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder :) If "regulars" acted in accordance with Wikipedia policy (ie followed BRD vs edit warring in this case), I wouldn't have to bother. HelenOnline 07:07, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Gosh, I didn't see Barney's message here until just now. I wonder what he could be talking about? -Roxy the dog (resonate) 21:48, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikimeetup May 2014

Hi Helen, Wikimedia ZA would like to invite you to the 5th Cape Town Wiki-meetup for 11am, Sunday the 4th May 2014 at Truth Coffee on 36 Buitenkant Street, Cape Town. It would be great if you could join us. Please invite who ever you think might be interested.--Discott (talk) 15:40, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

List

Hi HelenOnline. The RfC finally expired, and an administrator erroneously closed it in favor of the page move when there was clearly no consensus for it (five votes for the proposal vs. five votes against it). Despite this, one of the accounts that supported the move has attempted to edit the list in that direction. I've left a detailed explanation of the situation here. Your input there would be appreciated. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 15:54, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Saw that, really surprised me. o.O HelenOnline 15:58, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Per your recommendation and that of another user, I've started a formal move review of the RfC. Your input there would be appreciated. Whatever the outcome, I'll start drafting a proposal for a long overdue, dedicated WP:RACES policy. The new policy will gather in one place all of the various existing policy clauses on "race", as well as several new clauses. I'll link you first to the draft sub-page so that you may edit it yourself as needed before I formally submit it for evaluation. Best, Middayexpress (talk) 15:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok, it's up. Cheers, Middayexpress (talk) 15:19, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Hello there voice of reason please be my mentor Linda?

WestrandCity (talk) 08:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

WP:NOTPROMOTION: It's all you need to know. Please stop wasting everybody's time including your own. HelenOnline 08:33, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Wicca edit

I have read everywhere that Samhain is celebrated on 1 November. Do Wiccans celebrate it on the 31 October and thus on a different day from everyone else? Sbrianhicks (talk) 17:42, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

For Neopagans, the main celebration is on the evening of 31 October, but the whole holiday lasts from sunset of 31 October to sunset of 1 November (in the Northern hemisphere). HelenOnline 19:36, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Though from my understanding, Pagans, like Jews, treat sundown as beginning a new day, correct? So the evening of the 31 is, for their purposes, the 1? Either way, shouldn't we at least add "October 31-November 1"? Thanks! Sbrianhicks (talk) 16:38, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Calendar dates are the same for everybody, regardless of religion. :) I agree with you re adding both dates and that is why I added that yesterday after reverting your edit. I thought you would have seen that. I apologise, my editing process and communication was not ideal in this case as I was multitasking. HelenOnline 16:51, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

OER inquiry

Hi HelenOnline, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB (talk) 20:41, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Trial of Oscar Pistorius

You recently contributed at Talk:Trial of Oscar Pistorius.

Can I ask you to look at this Talk:Trial_of_Oscar_Pistorius#Neutrality_.22Progress_of_trial.22_section querying the neutrality of the section "Progress of the Trial" and let me know 1 if you agree/disagree that it's biased and needs fixing 2 whether you propose to make any contributing edits to fix.

I've suggested May 5, when trial resumes, should be a target date to get things fixed. In my view two things at least are needed:

• A balancing edit to record that expert witness for the prosecution testified that Reeva Steenkamp would have had time to scream and that it would have been abnormal for her not to.

• A balancing edit for Pistorius' apology. Perhaps recording Reeva Steenkamp's mother's response in the press following?

An alternative (which I prefer) would be to strike the edit I originally reverted, so that the concluding paragraph would look like this:

On 28 March, the trial was postponed until 7 April as one of the assessors fell ill. On 7 April, Pistorius began testifying in his own defence at the trial. The cross examination of Pistorius lasted for five days, and ended on April 15th.

Please reply here (I've watchlisted your page).Coat of Many Colours (talk) 09:39, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I am not going to comment on that section and don't plan to ever edit it again as it is not worth the trouble (apart from tagging, offhand I only recall making one minor edit to it). Per WP:NOTNEWS, I would never have started such a section and believe it should go when we can summarize the final judgement. It irks me when people start such sections or articles and then ignore them when they have lost interest. HelenOnline 10:00, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

As you know I mostly support you on this, with the significant exception that I think it worth recording ongoing media coverage and my own editing in that section was confined to recording and archiving that.

However the reality is that people do make edits there and they do need to be overseen for standards. I shall copy my editing suggestions to the article Talk page. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 10:09, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with the notable media coverage section, which I don't consider news coverage per se. There is a lot wrong with Wikipedia but I can only do so much and choose to spend my time and energy more productively. HelenOnline 10:14, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neopaganism_in_South_Africa

Is the above your article? I am looking for the photographer, possibly Michelle Blackie, whose photos of the handfasting you used. I am the Marriage Officer there and am looking for more photos...

Thank You. Sharon Parkinson