Jump to content

User talk:Shanedidona

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ncsupimaster (talk | contribs) at 17:14, 28 November 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hi Shane

Welcome to Wikipedia. Can I ask you that, before creating new articles (say, 3DS Max primitive, Turbosquid), you consider contributing your knowledge to existing articles (say 3D Studio Max)?

Rgds, Rl 13:42, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Images for cleanup

Why did you remove the ((ifc)) template from Image:Caelsanderson.bmp?

image:NCZooRustCube.JPG

Could you edit the description page of this image and state the source of this image, then could you add a copyright tag such as {{gfdl}} if it is your own photograph. Thanks — Zeimusu | Talk 14:11, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Re: Donal Hord

Hello Shane: You posted {I think} a "marker" at Donal Hord suggesting that the piece needed "This biographical article" help. While the piece is less than perfect, I don't see the "biological" aspect unless you are =referreing to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... don't know what you are referring to? HELP  ?! ?! ? ! ? ! ? Carptrash 06:32, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Lew Sapieha

Sorry Shane but I am no computer buff. Could you pls edit for me or leave as is? Thks. Vic

Bugging people

Hi Shane. You do good work, and then people like me come to bug you. :) Seriously, would you mind putting an edit summary? I saw several of your changes on my watchlist, all without edit summary, and it made me worried of what is going on. :) Something like "Linkify year" if you do things like 1977, would be nice. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov 16:11, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:DCP 4259.JPG

Image deletion warning The image Image:DCP 4259.JPG has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it will be deleted. If you have any information on the source or licensing of this image, please go there to provide the necessary information.

Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 06:59, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

welcome

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

Thought this might be usefull, since I've seen you "forget to sign" three out of three :) --MarSch 14:35, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

a favor

Hi Shane, I was hoping you could do me a favor as I really need to get some perspective on what other people see when they read Scalar field. I would be especially interested in what you think about my recent additions (the section with the examples). --MarSch 19:14, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

GNumber

No, it's just meant to link to other articles with "G" and a number at the end, and this not only includes economic summits, but also other useful disambig articles. secfan 10:20, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

your categories

Hi shane, you haven't voted yet on Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Category:Foo_articles_that_need_to_be_wikified. --MarSch 13:09, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm confused by Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikification

I don't understand what you are trying to do with Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikification. The Scope talks about making a how-to article, but doesn't say what the subject would be(we already have instructions on how to Wikify pages...) and the Goals just says: wikify the pages that need it - which seems obvious. What is the project intended for? JesseW 30 June 2005 07:09 (UTC)

On the Catholic Church of Wikipedia

As you have described yourself as a Catholic, I thought I would alert you as a co-religionist to your opportunity to delete the particularly offensive article, Wikipedia:Catholic Church of Wikipedia.--Thomas Aquinas 21:57, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A Message to Pro-Life Wikipedians

The section "Foetal Pain" (Fetal Pain) has been deleted from the Abortion article. Could you help restore it? If you would like to see what was deleted, go to my talk page, scroll to "Fetal Pain," and click the provided link.--Thomas Aquinas 22:29, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-life Alliance

The article Pro-Life Alliance has been nominated for deletion. Chooserr

This type of censorship makes me sick

Vote to keep, show these hypocrites what's what, tolerance? ha, only when it's good for them--Diatrobica;l 23:15, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Catholic Alliance

I think it'd be a braw Idea, although recently I've begun to feel a bit disappointed with Catholics...not the firm ones but the ones that don't listen to the Pope and feel they can ignore the laws set down by the Church. Chooserr 06:10, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Braw is used commonly to mean fine, or good. Chooserr 22:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Possible schism?

If you look in Category:Christian Wikipedians you will see that there is now two Catholic groups. -- Fplay 20:42, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that it was just a silly lack of awareness of the other category. Since I assume that these cats exist so that users can associate based on their affinities, it might be good to unify on the larger, older category name. -- Fplay 20:59, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CAoW

I think it would be a good idea for you to join the Catholic Alliance of wikipedia, which is a pro-life group. --Shanedidona 21:13, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'll join if that's the case. Chooserr 22:06, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

==Hi== could you please explain to me what the CAoW is? I am pro-life person, but wiki should be neutral even though abortion is an evil. if an artical is on just what abortion is then theres nothing wrong with it even though it disgusts me but if it starts going on about how great abortion is after i vomit then thats just wrong and not neutral, so could you explain to me what exactly the CAoW is please? thank you and merry christmas


ok I think that even though pro life is fantastic and that I support it, wiki is supposed to be neutral like Canada, and even though abortion is disgusting we shouldn't try to pull others into voting a certain way I'm sorry I can't vote to save this.

I can see that now, but shouldn't we try to keep this as unbiased as possible? I want to save them too, but we do need to make things unbiased. and I don't know how to do that and still keep the articals prolife I mean this is an encyclopedia, I'm starting to become torn on this issue here. but I honestly don't know what to say right now.

Happy holidays!

File:CandyCane.JPG
A candy cane for you!

Deckiller 03:29, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CAoW

Sorry, I haven't been on Wikipedia for a couple of days so I didn't get your request for a vote on its deletion until it was too late - although since your message was only three days ago I presume it must have been speedied anyway Cynical 14:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes

You recently created the userbox {{User evol-0}}. To that, I've added {{User evol-1}}, {{User evol-2}}, {{User evol-3}} and {{User evol-4}}. Because of those new userboxes, {{User evol-0}} largely overlaps with {{User evol-1}}. Evol-0 says that "this user doubts one or more components of the theory of evolution", while Evol-1 says that "this user is not fully convinced of the theory of evolution." I personally think that it would be best if the wording of Evol-0 were edited to something like "this user does not believe in the theory of evolution." That way, the userbox would mirror the 0-category in the language userboxes ("this user does not speak [X]"). How do you feel about this? Aecis Mr. Mojo risin' 23:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have copypasted the original wording of {{User evol-0}} to {{User evol-1}}, because I believe that the wording is more appropriate in 1 (doubting) than in 0 (not believing). I also believe that it is more appropriate than what I had originally written in {{User evol-1}} (not fully convinced), which would probably belong in 2 or 3. Aecis Mr. Mojo risin' 16:18, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Penis

Because you list yourself as Catholic I thought I would inform you of a particularly offensive image on the Penis page, or the subject in question. It shouldn't belong here, and the diagram is enough for me. If you feel the same please remove it, or help fight the case on the talk page. Chooserr 05:42, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Euro

Well I guess hate might be overstating it. I just don't think it is right for the UK, and if I was in any other country I wouldn't support a "Global Currency", but I do like the fact that there is a Vatican Euro.

The other items on my "hate list" are BCE, because it means "before the Common Era" and is meant only to remove Christ from the dating system (It's more obvious in the switch from A.D. to C.E. <-- Common Era), the Metric System because of the way it's enforced, and the term happy holidays for the same reason as BCE. Chooserr 03:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I wanted to ask if you'd add the MAKEABORTIONHISTORY banner from my talk to your talk page....If you don't want to that's fine, but it promotes awareness, and helps promote Pro-life billboards and the option of adoption. It's a US charity as well, and you can put it in different sizes... Chooserr 03:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is also a vote for deletion on F.A.C.T.1, a pro-life organisation whose name stands for "Father's of Aborted Children Together as One", I just wanted to give you the option to vote. Chooserr 03:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

F.A.C.T.1

Shanedidona, hi. I noticed your comment on Chooserr's talk page, and thought I'd reply to you here. Do you really believe that F.A.C.T.1 was deleted for political reasons? I ask because I really don't see that, and maybe you can show me what I'm missing. It seems to me that it was a perfectly routine deletion of an article about an organization that, while "valid" and real, hasn't really aroused comment in the world at large. Many Wikipedians follow what it says at Wikipedia:Verifiability: "Subjects that have never been written about by third-party published sources, or that have only been written about in sources of dubious credibility should not be included in Wikipedia."

F.A.C.T.1, despite all the good work I'm sure they do, hasn't been written about by third-party published sources that anyone here has been able to find. Their contact info appears on a few lists out on the 'net; that's all. They haven't even been written about by themselves, as their website is "under construction". At that point, their politics don't really enter into the equation, most Wikipedians of AfD will support deletion of un-remarked on organizations, whether they're conservative, liberal, or neither.

I have seen articles nominated for deletion for political reasons, but I don't think this was one of them. If you really think it was, and can convince me, I'll support a deletion review on it. I'm against people using Wikipedia to advance their political views; I just don't see that going on here. Can you show me what I'm not seeing? -GTBacchus(talk) 20:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shanedidona,
I too noticed your comment on my talk page, and can start of by saying that I'd never mistake you for a person "who doesn't like conservative values" :). That said though I do want to add that while the article mostlikely was nominated because it didn't have too much content I believe that some of the voters were very liberal people who don't want it on wikipedia.
My best advice is that we work together to re-right the article in a place like User:Chooserr/F.A.C.T.1 or User:Shanedidona/F.A.C.T.1, and reinstate it to the position of a proper article once we've enough evidence to argue it's validity, and enough sources to show that quite a few third parties have written about it. Chooserr 07:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stalking?

Absolutely not. I've been subscribed to the article F.A.C.T.1 and to Chooserr's talk page for some time, and I take an interest in certain politically sensitive areas of Wikipedia. I have much better things to do than stalk anyone. You are welcome to reply to the content of what I said to you, or to ignore me completely, but no, I'm not stalking you. I'm not subscribed to any of your pages, and I don't follow your edits, nor have any interest in doing so. -GTBacchus(talk) 21:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replacement?

I made an article to replace the deleted F.A.C.T.1 one Chooserr 01:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you address something?

  • Could you address a question on the discussion page for the following Wikipedia article? David C. Geary

Hello CAoW

I was wondering if it would be alright for me to reword the CAoW bit, and add some other information to tempt wikipedians to join this noble organisation. Chooserr 00:47, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Safe Sex"

I don't want to violate the 3rvt rule, so I was wondering if you'd look over the safe sex article and determine whether or not it deserves to have quotes "" around the word as in "war on christmas". Chooserr 22:51, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Okay I'll get right on it, but could you help me out on the Casual sex page and the Safe sex page, because on both my reverts are up, and my contributions are important. Please look them over, Chooserr 01:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah LifeStyles is up for deletion if you want to weigh in. Chooserr 01:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CAoW

Saw your post on Chooserr's talk -- see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shanedidona/CAoW. There are other discussions linked at the top. --SarekOfVulcan 21:38, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boxes

I don't know what happend to them, and I don't know who created them, but there was no time for a vote to be drawn so some admin over stepped there power and deleted them. I'll go see if I can find anything more on it. Chooserr 19:32, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes

No, I just noticed a bunch of red links and decided to clean itup. You can always check who deleted them by going to Special:Log and typing in the name of the page. Dmcdevit·t 19:15, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

new Catholic Weekly Collaboration!

Just thought I would let you know that there is a new Catholic Collaboration of the Week! I hope you can contribute! --Hyphen5 16:52, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use of fair use images in user space

I removed Image:Vatican coa.png from your userpage because the image is tagged as a fair use image. According to Wikipedia policy, you may not use such images outside of the main article namespace. Thus, your use of it in userspace is against policy. My removal of it was not vandalism. For the relevant policy, please see Wikipedia:Fair_use#Policy item #9. Please revert your re-insertion of the image. I will not revert your revert because I have no desire to get into an edit war about this. I would much rather you understood why this is necessary and have you take the appropriate action. Thank you, --Durin 19:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


greetings

I'm new here so I thought I'd introduce myself to some of the people here--ChaplineRVine(talk ¦ ✉) 04:44, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Conservative_notice_board

Hello, I noticed that you identify as a conservative Wikipedian. So I would like to invite you to post any conservative issues you might have over at the new project page, Wikipedia:Conservative_notice_board. Thanks. --Facto 05:54, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iraq and the War on Terrorism

Wikipedia:WOT has opened its straw poll, and is open to discussion. Rangeley 00:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Donation link

Shanedidona, hi.

I thought I should let you know that the link on your talk page, under the words "Make abortion history" has recently been removed from another user's talk page, with pretty strong administrative support. Per WP:UP, our user pages are really for building the encyclopedia, and while we are generally happy for people to use their pages to tell us a little bit about themselves, soliciting donations crosses the line from simple information to advocacy. I think it would be best if you remove that link, and I can't guarantee that another admin, seeing it, won't just be bold and delete it. -GTBacchus(talk) 00:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually - now that I check, the link appears to be broken anyway... -GTBacchus(talk) 00:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Asheboro

not me! WillC 19:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question about [...]

I answered your question about the puncuation on the Talk:G20 developing nations. --chemica 22:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

coor dms template and AWB

How did you set AWB to apply the coor dms template? --Shanedidona 14:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

<datagridFAR find="(\d+)°(\d+)'(\d+)"\s*(N|S)o(u|r)th,\s*(\d+)°(\d+)'(\d+)"\s*(W|E)(est|ast)" replacewith="{{coor dms|$1|$2|$3|$4|$6|$7|$8|$9|city}}" />
However be careful it's not tested for the southern or eastern hemispheres. Rich Farmbrough 19:24 16 August 2006 (GMT).
You can paste it into the XML file, or put

(\d+)°(\d+)'(\d+)"\s*(N|S)o(u|r)th,\s*(\d+)°(\d+)'(\d+)"\s*(W|E)(est|ast)

in the left column and {{coor dms|$1|$2|$3|$4|$6|$7|$8|$9|city}}

in the right, tick the regex box. I did think of doing the radio masts with it. Rich Farmbrough 19:43 16 August 2006 (GMT).

Note you also want to change the "city" parameter to something more appropraite,, perhaps "landmark", I can't remember. Rich Farmbrough 19:44 16 August 2006 (GMT).

Do you need help...

...with Wikipedia:WikiProject Linkification? Reply on my talk page. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Talk) 22:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should fill in the project page first: what is the projects scope? Maybe you should explain linkification a bit. And list the project hierarchically in the the Wikipedia:List of WikiProjects.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 13:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject North Carolina

In an effort to expand this project, I've requested a bot tag most of the articles under the Category:North Carolina. If you could, please look over this list User:Betacommand/North Carolina and remove any that should not get tagged with the Wikiproject North Carolina Template. Thanks Morphh 01:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ISPE

I removed the link on what was supposed to be a disambiguation page to International Society of Pharmaceutical Engineering, since I had already speedily deleted that article (CSD A3). Do you think it should still be a disambiguation page? --- Deville (Talk) 02:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old Belltower Page

Sorry, but I think I FUBARed the old Belltower page. Ncsupimaster 17:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Shanedidona&oldid=90692071"