User talk:Dajagr

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

Hello, Dajagr, 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! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -- Darwinek 09:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Woot, hey! Didn't see you there! Do you use Wikipedia much? --Pifactorial 07:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

You can use the "my watchlist" feature (in the upper right) to keep track of pages that you've edited in the past. This way, it's possible to have a conversation with somebody on their own talk page, without always having to check back. --Pifactorial 22:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Criticism Section[edit]

In the furry fandom article under the criticism section, you have placed several templates stating that the citations in the criticism section are inappropriate, and that it contains original research. I am wondering if you meant to include this in the top of the article, as the criticism section contains no inappropriate citations or original research. 68.69.194.125 04:22, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

No, I meant to put it in that particular section. On the talk page, I cited instances of inappropriate citations and mentioned that the first two paragraphs did not include any citations (thus, unverified claims). --Dajagr 04:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
The criticism section contains no inappropriate citations. All I did was link to the pages that it was talking about. 68.69.194.125 04:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
The citations you provide don't link to any substantive material; they simply show that the websites exist. Although you do demonstrate that ED mocks furry fandom and there is a LiveJournal group where people do so, the rest of your claims are unsubstantiated, and the links to the websites can't be considered proper citations. (Links to other sites that aren't citations can be differentiated by being encoded as embedded text links. For example, you can refer to Bogus Website like this: [http://www.bogus_web_site.com Bogus Website].) --Dajagr 05:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
As well neither livejournal postings nor ED can be used as a primary or secondary source. While you can say "this group exists" or "this site exists" the claim you're making about how and why they're created are not sourced.--Crossmr 06:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Cedric[edit]

I got the inference from the Harry Potter Lexicon. Here is the page making the comparison [1] and here is Rowling's most famous quote about CS Lewis. [2]. Here's the interview it came from: [3] In recent years, Rowling's opinion of CS Lewis appears to have soured somewhat [4]; here she seems to have been influenced by Phillip Pullman: [5]. Still, all of these newer articles are post-GoF, so who knows? Serendipodous 20:16, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Discussion at Furry fandom[edit]

I just want to note that your responses at Talk:Furry fandom#Furry subculture have been very well expressed, showing good judgment and consideration of Wikipedia policies, while still being respectful of suggestions. Thanks for your words. -kotra (talk) 19:17, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! It keeps my blood pressure down, too, by keeping things to discussions of policy and feasibility rather than getting upset about why something might not work. :) —Dajagr (talk) 22:33, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

General fixes and Wikipedia-Books in Furry Fandom[edit]

The "Wikipedia-Books" item wasn't removed; it was simply relocated from "Further Reading" to "See Also" (q.v.) We probably only need it in one location in that article. —Dajagr (talk) 18:50, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

So it was! Thanks for spotting that. GreenReaper (talk) 20:31, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Dajagr. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)