User talk:EMsmile

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

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure![edit]

TWA guide left bottom.png
Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.


Get Help
About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Rule of Three[edit]

As to why we don't list every single synonym for feces, it'd be too many. These are almost certainly the top three, covering the spectrum of social usage, from quite polite ("excrement") to less polite ("poop") to not polite ("shit"). I assume every reader typically calls it one of those. "Droppings", "dookie" or (worst) "mung" are, while common enough, for niche audiences, I think. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:36, May 11, 2015 (UTC)

If you'd like to replace "poop" with "poo", that seems the more common term to me (and has an extra 5 million alleged Google results). But it's such a small preference that I don't want to if you don't want to. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:39, May 11, 2015 (UTC)
I've reverted your parentheticals, left the "poo". Not standard, and if it's based on the last message, you've misunderstood it. The levels of politeness don't translate to scientists, children and the vulgus. Those three groups use all three words in different circumstances. The Wikilinks make it clear enough which ones. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:35, May 12, 2015 (UTC)

Glad to see you're still around![edit]

Frohes Neues!

I just noticed your username on my watchlist, so I'm really glad to see that you're still around and editing. Best wishes for 2017!


Although we seem to be bogged down over "global warming" vs "climate change" I do appreciate the clean up work you are doing on the body of the article, and exporting low import text to to sub articles NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 10:54, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll gently continue along those lines, bit by bit (to allow others to intervene if they object). I think people sometimes lose sight of the principle of "overview article" and "tree of articles". Having too many details in an overview article is not good, where suitable sub-articles already exist.EMsmile (talk) 14:39, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, maybe I was napping[edit]

See my changes at Climate change, sorry. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 23:42, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, a long nap indeed, as I made that change already in June, after asking you on the talk page. :-) Anyhow, I have replied on the talk page there. It would be good if more of the other editors also spoke up so that we can collect several opinions on this subject, not just yours and mine. EMsmile (talk) 01:33, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Agreed NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 10:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)