User talk:Anna Frodesiak

If I started a thread on your talk page, I am watching. Please reply there.

To leave me a message, click here.

For my availability, image uploads, admin actions, access issues, and disclosure notice, click here.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60

From Datrufth

Yes, I am offended by your deleting what I had started to write, IT IS AN Encyclopedia - My page was still being edited, I don't have a lot of time to spend writing, if anything I write can be deleted without inquiry as to what the subject matter is about, based upon one individual's limited perspective - then perhaps that is the problem with wikipedia being filled with inaccurate information on many topics. I was giving basic information about myself, beginning with my user name 'datrufth' which is connected to my facebook business page "DUHH - The Department for Understanding Human History" - however because you "jumped-the-gun" and deleted what I had started without inquiry or directive regarding the information - now I don't have a copy of what was on the page. Thanks for nothing - I will probably not use or contribute nor donate to wikipedia anymore because your "judgmental approach to editing" without first making some type of inquiry is (for lack of time and better terminology) totalitarian, prejudicial in perspective, unwarranted without some type of precursor. My personal business information was going to be represented in actuality on the encyclopedia. To my my recollection, an encyclopedia is "a book, set of books, and/or an established media-oriented conduit that enables the free access to information utilized in various formats pertaining to (yet not necessarily limited to) historic, scientific, culture, economic, religious, and social context. My page was not being designed to function in anyway that would violate or interfere with the statement: "Although a lot of leeway is allowed in personalizing your user page, it is not a personal website, blog, or social networking medium, nor should it be used to promote yourself, or host a fake article, CV, or lengthy biography. My statements, that you deleted, on my page began with the historical context of using the term "datrufth" both as an actual word and as a psuedo-name tool to identify myself as the author/source/editor of future postings, articles, including historical fact, and biographic information on actual people; Not to create a blog, or to a "fake-alias" - if all my content can be deleted before I finish then that should have been stated when I signed-on, if I cannot utilize an anonymous user name that also should be stated in plain site without having to waste time either reading pages of rules, or having material deleted by someone who just assumes the page is somehow not valid based on personal prejudice and/or incomplete comprehension of what and how something is being presented. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Datrufth (talk • contribs) 17:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Datrufth. Please do not be offended. I am sorry I had to delete it. I deleted it because it was basically a mini-article about a made-up thing. You wrote "Datrufth - a stylized urban phonetic-slang language-use representing..." That could never be an article in the main part of the encyclopedia. And, it has no place at a userpage. If you wish to write about something that can make it into the encyclopedia, try one of these: Wikipedia:Requested articles/Images. The images are there. The subjects are notable. There are good sources out there. I'll even help. Again, I am sorry about your userpage. Please do not be upset. You are very welcome here. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your edit to Warren G. Harding

Yeah, that subject has come up quite a bit in recent talk page discussions, see Talk:Warren G. Harding#The Daily Show & Talk:Warren G. Harding#Media portrayals. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 14:16, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Shearonink. I saw that 5-second bit in the episode, so started to watch the Harding page. I never saw the talk discussion. It is long, and I'd like stay out of it. Because I'm not involved in the talk, I'll also stay away from reverting at the article. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:21, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It sure was a whirlwind of edits/reverts... I just wanted to mention the editorial discussion came up with the solution of Cultural depictions of Warren G. Harding and since the mention of Harding's ghost was just that - a passing 5-second mention in a comedy skit - the present consensus is that a mention does not merit being described as a "cultural depiction". The onslaught of ohwe'reSOfunny edits to Harding's article and to the article about his dog was dispiriting, am glad it has died down. Shearonink (talk) 23:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I'm glad it has died down too. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:48, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Transport in China may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

to shortcut from [[Liaoning]] to [[Shandong]], while the Guangdong–Hainan Ferry (part of the [[Guangdong–Hainan Railway) connects [[Hainan]] Island with China's mainland. There are also

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

King Cake

I was just reading about Bal du moulin de la Galette, a painting I really like, which led me to an article on galettes ("In the late 19th century, working class Parisians would dress up and spend time there dancing, drinking, and eating galettes into the evening"), which in turn linked to galette des Roi (King Cake). The article says King Cake is a popular Christmas food item in certain areas. Have you ever had one? The image of the traditional king cake baby is somewhat nightmarish. Viriditas (talk) 01:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They do not let me eat cake. :) And, I would never eat that creepy baby cake anyhow. As that big guy from Curb says, that's a "whole bowl full of wrong". :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. I get it. The baby is teeny and plastic and you don't eat it. For me, a gingerbread man would be the limit. Any more realistic and it would be odd biting off legs and arms. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:37, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

You can delete anything you wish on my contributions as you feel necessary. my only intention of putting information is to give much information in a given subject, but if you feel that everything I have done was wrong I don't care if you delete it all. And if you think you are smarter than all contributors here, so be it. It seems to me that you have a habit of deleting people's contribution like what you have done to Datrufth that angered him... Thank you AnnAphrodesiac. Jan2366 (talk) 01:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jan2366.

I am stunned and a bit annoyed (and I do not stun or annoy easily). My "habit" is not a habit, it is a "duty" of being an administrator.

I and others have explained that copyright violations are not allowed, not wanted, and not appreciated. In fact, it is against the law. How can you be an editor here, have had that explained to you, and still not understand? Honestly, I question whether or not you are competent enough to edit here.

In case you do not remember:

You uploaded 10 images that you do not own.
You created 2 articles, one of which was an advertisement, and at least one of which was simply copy pasted from a copyrighted source.
At 5 other articles, you just added large amounts of copy pasted content from news sources. There are probably more out there.

I asked you for help cleaning up your copyvios. You ignored me and responded with more copyvios. I asked again. You were silent for 3 days so I did the work myself. Two hours later you spoke up here. So, you were watching and ignoring me, right? Again: Please understand that copyright violations are not helpful and not allowed. Do not copy paste content. Do you understand that now? Have I been clear? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]