User talk:Deetdeet

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

Welcome!

Hello, Deetdeet, 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! 


dont know where to reply[edit]

thanx for the accolade. i can show it to my grandkids when they show up on monday. what do i know about writing articles. not a whole lot, mostly common sense. i am just a farmer at heart. joe 03:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Status of religious freedom in Canada[edit]

Hi Deet, thanks for your message on my talk page. My comments on the AfD yesterday were based on a quick perusal of the page, and I am by no means an expert on Canada, LBGT rights, religious freedom, or any combinations of those items. I mainly felt that while LBGT rights in a country are subject to the status of religious freedom in the country, the topic of religious freedom should include a broader array of subjects. My lumping together of the U.S. and Canada and other democratic countries was meant to distinguish them from other countries with drastically different policies, though like you say, there are notable differences between the two. I'm from the U.S., and though I don't think the Peter and Murray Corren case could happen with public schools, I attended private religious primary and secondary schools for many years and felt that the curriculum was heavily dependent upon the decisions of local religious leaders (see Bob Jones University for an extreme example). (I began to identify myself as an agnostic in my mid-teens while attending religious school, and I still do.) Anyway, I recently looked at the article again, and I think it's looking a lot better :) . Fabricationary 06:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Ref[edit]

Is this the passage you were referring to:

Independent schools that receive government funding insisted they wouldn't be affected by the deal, even though they are required by law to teach the same curriculum as public schools. "As far as we're concerned, this agreement applies to public schools only," said Doug Lauson, president of the Federation of Independent School Associations and associate superintendent of Catholic schools in Vancouver. Most independent schools in B.C. are faith based. The ministry wouldn't confirm that directly. Spokeswoman Corinna Filion said in an e-mail that the ministry can't speculate on what curriculum revisions will result but "it's not anticipated that any change would impact the ability of an independent school to continue teaching courses from a faith-based perspective."

If so, it would seem to indicate that the issue is not one of religious freedom. CJCurrie 00:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

The message to rel-freedom is only mentioned in passing, and even then it's just to refute concerns. I don't think this should be returned. CJCurrie 00:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Just read your comments. Read the National Post article and you will see that the Government has been full of it all along and they refuse even now to confirm it officially. The law today doesn't permit it.

This sounds like an extrapolation to me.

In any event, I'm willing to meet you halfway on this one -- I'll allow the article to reference the concerns of independent schools concerning the legislation, but I won't permit a full-paragraph discussion of the legislation itself (since it doesn't directly involve religious freedom). CJCurrie 00:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Correns[edit]

I think you may be over the 3RR on the "religious freedom" page. Anyway, here's the version that I was going to include:

Some religious school leaders have expressed concern that laws designed to promote LGBT-friendly educational material will interfere with their activities. In 2006, the British Columbia government indicated that changes to the public education system were not intended to prevent religious schools from teaching their ethical codes of behaviour.[1]

If you're okay with this, could you post it to the page (I don't want to run the risk of violating 3RR myself.) CJCurrie 01:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Condi Rice article[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. As a member of the Wikipedia community, I would like to remind you of Wikipedia's neutral-point-of-view policy for editors. You may also be interested in reading The five pillars of Wikipedia, our Help pages, the Tutorial, the policy on citing sources, and our Manual of Style.

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

--Getaway 16:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw that you placed the information back in the Stem Cell Controversy article that has nothing to do with why some groups disagree with eSC research. Please do not add commentary and your personal analysis of an article into Wikipedia articles, as you did to Stem Cell Controversy; you can view your personal commentary here: [1]. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --BballJones 22:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Personal Attacks[edit]

I have removed the warning that was previously here as I feel that it was unmerited. Deetdeet, you are handling the case through the appropriate venues, and it is my opinion that the editor that placed this warning on your page did so for the purposes of getting back at you for opening a Sockpuppet case against him. --Kuzaar-T-C- 16:25, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

SSP: BballJones[edit]

Hello. I feel that there is not enough firm technical evidence to support your claim. Yes, the editing behavior is odd, but I feel that it is slightly week; however, I am urging you to take the matter to request for check user for additional support. This will determine if they are coming from the same person. Just slightly copy and paste the text you added to the SSP case to the RFCU case. The instructions are on the page. Apologies and regards, Iolakana|T 18:39, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Your userpage information[edit]

Hello, Deetdeet. I noticed on your userpage that you had some commentary about Wikipedia's POV regarding right/left wing politics. I just felt the need to observe that (and take this with a grain of salt, as I don't know how the political climate of America compares to that of Canada) in U.S. politics and the debate of pundits, as well as in U.S. culture at large, "liberal" or "left wing" has become almost a pejorative term, even to the point where Candidates who very clearly practice left-wing politics are reluctant at best to label themselves as such. Right-wing, however, at least in my experience, has gained little to no pejorative meaning. It might be just speculation, but I felt you might be interested in a second perspective. Thanks, and happy editing :) --Kuzaar-T-C- 19:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

To any interested readers here, I would note that few conservatives would want to be categorized as "far-right", even if they don't mind "right-wing". My userpage refers to the use of "far-right". Deet 20:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Chris Kempling[edit]

Unfortunately, redirects don't show up in normal categories, so I wouldn't suggest that approach. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 03:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Why not Category:Religion in Canada? If anyone is navigating by means of the category, they'll probably see him there; if they're looking for a case, and don't find one, the worst that happens is that they know we don't have an article about the case; in the best case scenario, they create the article about the case. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 03:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

ref fixed[edit]

Thanks for noticing that: I've now fixed that. The article still needs a lot of work, I think. I don't understand the timing and point of the three-month suspension, e.g.. Bucketsofg 12:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Sure[edit]

Let's give it a try. Bucketsofg 01:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Correns[edit]

I was away for a few hours, but it looks like the situation was at least temporarily resolved. In the meantime, I'm going to review their edits in more depth, and if there is any new information that's worth reinserting into the article I'll take a stab at NPOVing it. Bearcat 08:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Canadian Accounting[edit]

Deet; i will track the article down. i am traveling for a few days, so it will be next week. i would like to read it. joe 02:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Ages of consent in North America[edit]

Hi, regarding this edit. Are you sure that WP:NOT applies in this case. It's a fairly solid statement in Common Law that any ruling in a higher court (even if not binding) is used as a precedent by magistrates of lower courts. Also the obiter dictum is often taken in to account. I think it's worth mentioning the effect of precedent here, although perhaps not in the words used previously. What do you think? --Monotonehell 04:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Failed GA nomination for Chris Kempling[edit]

My major concern for this article when I was reviewing for GA status is the style, per WP:MOS, lack of good logical structure, lack of a descent lead section and it is not broad enough. As the article is explaining about a person, then it should also conform with WP:BLP. Reading the article, it really misses information about the person background, history, etc. So it is not WP:NPOV, although that I see the article has a strong POV from the subject. Please try to compare with other GA articles about biography. Cheers. — Indon (reply) — 12:18, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

"Controversial"[edit]

Please read Wikipedia:POINT. The word doesn't belong in the first paragraph of the Robinson article, but this doesn't mean that any and all instances of its use in other articles should be removed. CJCurrie 03:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Perhaps ironically, I agree (to a point). I have no problem with the changes you made to the Day and Wayne pages, and I only reverted two adjustments to the Harper page. CJCurrie 03:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Lebanese-Canadian[edit]

I'm not sure of the numbers myself, but the about half figure comes from the CBC source you linked to. - SimonP 05:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Immigration to Canada and its History[edit]

Thank you for the change, it makes more sense this way! It is much smoother, and keeps your initial momentum going on the Immigration page with relation to current events, and economics, and you did an awesome job encompassing Canada in regards to history, I am more familiar with Saskatchewan/west. Cool. Immigration to Canada History of immigration to Canada

SriMeshSriMesh

Move Request of The Harper cabinet[edit]

I have split the survey into two options: 28th Canadian Ministry, and 28th Canadian Cabinet, just to make the survey easier to read, and make sure everyones being understood. It would be appreciated if you would continue to participate. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 04:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

CanGov template[edit]

I only use the Canada template with the cangov parameter. I figure that anything that belongs in WP Government of Canada should also be listed in the general WP Canada, and that the classification and importience stats will be close enough between the two. --Arctic Gnome 22:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I would treat agreements like bills and tag it with canlaw rather than cangov. --Arctic Gnome 16:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Canada/immigration[edit]

No apologies needed... I was irked by the fact you reverted solely on the basis of it being marked as a minor edit, but as you said, "life's too short". (By the same token, I was probably too sarcastic in my subsequent edit summary, for which I'm sorry. I, along with several other editors, have been dealing with a problem on some Canada-related articles over the past few days and it's been a bit frustrating.)

Now, as for the "Immigration" article, despite the coincidental timing, please accept that there is no connection between the two, other than the fact that your revert drew my attention to the article. Given how the revert occurred. I checked your contribution history first to see if there was any sort of pattern to it. Obviously, one look was enough to immediately establish that was not the case at all. Anyway, I then went on the immigration article because it was related to Canada, and I hadn't seen it yet. The article did strike me as having POV issues, and so I added the tag and the subsequent comment. (I noticed the "peer review" tag, but there didn't seem to have been any discussion on the talk page.) In retrospect, of course, the timing could have been better, and what I probably should have done was to wait a few days and then raise the issue, so as to avoid any misunderstandings.

I have taken the liberty of commenting out your note about "getting back" at you, in the interests of keeping the discussion focused on the article. While it is a perfectly natural conclusion, and I certainly can't fault you for considering it, I hope that I have convinced you that such is not the case. My edit history will back that up and demonstrate that I don't act in that manner. Thanks very much, and I apologize for any discomfort this might have inadvertently caused. --Ckatzchatspy 05:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Quebec-bashing[edit]

Hi, Deet,

I think you may have succeeded in pushing the discussion of a new title for Quebec-bashing in a successful direction. I'll try to contribute comething constructive once my turkey hangover is over. John FitzGerald 23:09, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Canadian immigrants[edit]

You were right to flag that one for attention; that's got to be one of the weakest attempts at an article that I've ever seen. (Not to mention the references to "Donovan Baily" and "Stanford Fleming"...somebody needs spellcheck!) I'd probably just redirect it to Immigration to Canada and be done with it, personally; considering that we already have a large number of Hyphenated-Canadian lists, this one's more or less an unnecessary duplication. Bearcat 03:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Block request[edit]

He's been blocked. Thanks for pointing this out. CJCurrie 01:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

And again. CJCurrie 22:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Canadian identity[edit]

Would you mind explaining exactly what you suppose a person's political party affiliation has to do with whether or not they're defensive about Canada's distinctiveness or non-distinctiveness from the United States? The notion that it's not worth maintaining some sort of distinctive aspect to Canadian culture isn't exactly within the mainstream of Tory ideology, either. Bearcat 00:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

With all due respect, the idea that the Liberals or the NDP are fundamentally anti-American parties is an ideological assumption, not an objective statement of fact that has any business being reflected in an encyclopedia. Bearcat 23:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Saskatchewan WikiProject[edit]

Smiley.svg

Hello. A new WikiProject about Saskatchewan has been started as an attempt to better organize information in articles related to the province of Saskatchewan, Canada. If you would like to participate, you can edit Saskatchewan articles, add Saskatchewan content, add Saskatchewan or visit the project page, where you can join / edit the project and/or contribute to the discussion. WikiProject Saskatchewan

What there isn't---is an Economy of Saskatchewan main article created, and you are so awesome with articles about economics!!! There's only an intro at Saskatchewan#Economy SriMesh|talk Julia 03:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Burglars Tools Found in the Bank.gif[edit]

I don't understand the reference in Image:Burglars Tools Found in the Bank.gif; where is it from? I ask also because it would be great to find the numerical legend -- some of those objects are fascinating. ←BenB4 00:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

wwww.NotCanada.com[edit]

I do not understand why one should delete links for www.NotCanada.com. First of all this is to provide information from both side of the story. And this necessarily does not mean that NotCanada.com is right but at least it gives an idea from the people who have gone through it. Second, why do you feel so insecure? Wikipedia is to provide free information for all so let us not forget the purpose and project the phenomenon truly as it is. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.170.133.90 (talk) 05:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Poverty in Canada[edit]

Good work. Stifle (talk) 20:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree - excellent article. Thanks. --Dawn bard (talk) 23:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Blueprint Barnstar 2.PNG The Template Barnstar
For Making some Useful recent Changes Coolmoose (talk) 21:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

River "tree"[edit]

WRT this edit, a "family tree" for river systems would be very cool and a completely natural way to navigate Wikipedia. I think that's a great idea and I'm not aware of any existing tool, please let me know if you have found one.

I like playing around with software and systems - can you tell me what your basic ideas would be for how such a tree would work? Going from simplest to most complicated preferably ... maybe there is a way.

What a great way to explore Wikipedia - paddling a canoe around! Franamax (talk) 06:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Paulson financial rescue plan[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on Paulson financial rescue plan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

the article seems to be an unnecessary rewrite of information included elsewhere on WP

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez Get to know me! / Talk to me!←at≈:→ 10:14, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how I managed to do that. Sry. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez Get to know me! / Talk to me!←at≈:→ 10:14, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


Heya, I've noticed you've been contributing to articles similar to mine, i.e. related to activist/anarchist people. My article on Bruno Masse is threatened of deletion, could you please vote to keep it? You can vote [| here]. In solidarity! Lkeryl (talk) 18:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Senior debt[edit]

Hi Deetdeet

I considerably modified the section you added at Senior debt. Please see Talk:Senior debt#Bank seizures. If you know more on this topic, please add it (note that I'd asked anyone who knows to provide the basic facts related to this topic at Talk:Washington Mutual#Missing / incomplete information a month ago.

Rgds

Bongomatic (talk) 16:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Deetdeet
There are two separate issues that should be treated separately. First, is the statement that even senior secured lenders to a holding company lenders are in fact subordinated to any lenderrs at the subsidiary. I would be surprised if you disagreed with this proposition.
Second is the idea--which may be true, but which you have failed to provide evidence of and I don't know indpendently--that senior, non-depositor lenders to a bank are subordinated to the depositors, or (in the event of seizure) the FDIC (or whatever regulator disposes of the assets).
Please do not delete the first proposition again (as it is true), and please identify references for the second (if true). I won't delete it now, but if it's true, it should be references, and if it's not referenced soon, I will remove it again as it is dangerously misinformative if it is not true.
Rgds, Bongomatic (talk) 02:31, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I have not seen any reference that clearly states that senior lenders to the bank (not the bank holding company) received less than the depositors. The FDIC was happy that a more creditworthy bank took on the deposit liabilities, to be sure. However, you haven't provided any reference to support the notion that other senior lenders (other than depositors, that is) to the bank entity itself have been screwed. I'm not saying it isn't true--one of the articles hints that is the case. But for such an incredibly salient point to be demonstrated only by innuendo is insufficient.Bongomatic 02:58, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
"What more do we need here?" How about a quote and a reference to the citation, which is not currently in the article? As I mentioned, I wasn't claiming that your assertion wasn't true, just that it hadn't been referenced. Bongomatic 03:09, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Not terribly gracious. What I meant to say is, "thanks for locating that extremely useful reference, which I have incorporated into the article, which I think is much better for the information you provided." Bongomatic 03:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Sternwheeler Inlander.jpg[edit]

File:Sternwheeler Inlander.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Sternwheeler Inlander.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Sternwheeler Inlander.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tristan Emmanuel[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Tristan Emmanuel. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tristan Emmanuel. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:13, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Better late than never[edit]

In 2006 you requested creation of a page about Jean-Marie-Raphaël Le Jeune. It took a while, but it's done! Pburka (talk) 01:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Toronto-Dominion Bank[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Toronto-Dominion Bank has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. NSH002 (talk) 10:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation[edit]

Your upload of File:Aston Ingham.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:20, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


File:Aston Ingham.jpg missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 04:26, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Td[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Td has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.  Gadget850 talk 22:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

  1. ^ "Gay couple gets input in school curriculum", National Post, 16 June 2006, URL accessed 16 June 2006