Anchoress is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon.
To allow other users to see and participate in conversations, if you are replying to something I left on your talk page, please reply on your talk page. It will be on my watchlist. Likewise, if you post something here, I will reply on this page.
Hi. Thanks for posting that link to the personal attacks noticeboard. My time here on WP has thus far been fairly sedate, so I didn't realize there was such a thing. (Oops)
(Just a bit of background: Juppiter and other parties have publicly apologized to Yrgh, but he has refused to accept them as sincere. It looks to be shaping up into something nasty in the end. Oh well...) --SandChigger02:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I can attempt to write an article on VCC 128 (which I will probably identify by its UGCA number), but it will take be time to understand the science behind the press release. Dr. Submillimeter02:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to take so long to reply to you. I read your note to me but for some reason I didn't respond. But that's cool, thanks for the helpful reply and action, and I'll look out for it! Anchoress17:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Before you tag something as a copyvio, make sure you have a look at the page history. It's very clear from the page history that that article is the work of various editors spanning at least 5 years. In addition, the page you said it was copied from clearly credited Wikipedia (although not enough for them not to be in violation of the GFDL). Please be more careful when tagging articles - almost all our articles are mirrored somewhere. Guettarda14:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly will continue to make every effort to be careful about copyvio tags, and I ask that you take a generous, open-minded approach to your communication. I did look at the page history, quite carefully actually, and I did not see what you saw. Furthermore, I looked carefully at the site I cited as the copyvio source and I did not see a credit to Wikipedia. I thank you to assume goodwill of your fellow editors, we are just doing our best. Anchoress14:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Pregnancy fetishism
Thank you very much, anchoress. I'm particularly a newbie on wikipedia and found the pregnancy fetishism article, which is shocking. To know an actual pregnancy experience (I had 3 children, 2 sons and a daughter) will tell them striaght forward. I hope they got disgusted and rather not obsess over her hypersexually, but I truly feel pregnancy has a beauty attached to it by the greatness of god or whatever you believe in, it's all the same in the mystique and sanctity of women giving birth to new babies to the world. For starters, Pregnancy isn't to look "sexually abnormal", a major obnoxious theme in prego fetish web sites and chat forums. All right have a good day. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.3.14.1 (talk • contribs) 00:09, 26 January 2007.
It was lots of fun! Thank you for asking. I have a particularly vivid memory of the start of Christmas Day. We had been for dinner and were outside trying to get a taxi-an impossible task. Anyway, no sooner did midnight arrive than people began to celebrate the arrival of Christmas by throwing fire-crackers from their balconies. And what crackers they were: it was as if the city had suddenly descended into a war! Talking of war, I managed to pick up basic tango steps with the help of some very nice Argentinian gentlemen. Sigh-it all seems so long ago now. Still, ever forward. I will be spending most of February in Mexico City, another new experience. Best wishes. Clio the Muse13:54, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've already been knocking out 30-40 entries a day at Cat:csd... in fact that and PROD have been pretty much all I've done here since I got my mop and bucket. Not much more I can do... they get added faster than I can clear them out.--Isotope2318:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, and congrats on your promotion! Per this discussion, I'm dropping a friendly note to some of the recently-promoted admins requesting help with speedy deletions. I am not an administrator, so if you don't feel comfortable diving into deletions - or if you need more info - please don't come to me, but I'm sure that Cyde Weys would be happy to guide you if you want to help. Any help is great, but I'm sure that Cyde and others would deeply appreciate it if you could put the page on your watchlist and do a bit of work there on a regular basis? Maybe weekly? Thanks in advance! Anchoress18:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also appreciated the template message. However, I've determined myself to be unqualified for the time being to do speedy deletions, and think its best if a more inclusionist-minded administrator takes a look at some of these pages before giving them the axe. Savidan18:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the other users above, I am very active in CSD and AfD. I have also added direct links to the template with pre-selected warning to speed up the Speedy Deletion progress. Although I am I currently busy in real life, I am helping. Cbrown1023talk21:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your message. CAT:CSD is definitely going to be my first sysop priority, because there is indeed a huge problem there.--Yannismarou08:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm typically fairly active in WP:UCFD, and though I have been distracted lately from WP:CFD work by other Wikipedia things, I intend to be more active there as my next priority. However, I'd be glad to help in the apparent current "crisis", though I tend to stay away from Images... - jc3710:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Anchoress. I stole your template from the top of this page and put it on my talk page, but left you an exact copy. I managed to make mine look less appealing by randomly assigning a color without hitting preview. It could have been worse, I guess. Take care. ---Sluzzelin17:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it is a Happy Friday, so back at you! I always get these terms mixed up: I meant the box(?) with the message "To allow other users...", not the template. ---Sluzzelin18:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Right... I think you used the right word; you mean my notice at the top of the page v/v keeping convos together? I just didn't get what you meant by taking it and leaving a copy? Sorry, I put that thing up almost a year ago I think, and I don't even remember where I got it. Is it your template, and you changed your version and subst'd the old one on my page so it wouldn't change? Colour me confused (radioactive lemon confused lol). Anchoress18:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear, this is my fault. I didn't wish to confuse ... In fact I merely copied it from here, but wanted to see myself as the original's owner leaving you the fake, but that was pure TGIF lightheadedry. I did want to notify you. I will waste your time no longer and look forward to reading more contributions at the desks!. ---Sluzzelin18:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that was a very good idea to write in a public place, FYI. This isn't a disagreement with the facts, per se, but an experienced user expecting backlash. You might want to consider not participating - I'm opting out myself. Hipocrite - «Talk»18:37, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so I removed it. Why exactly do you think it wasn't a good idea? I don't care about backlash in any way, shape or form, BTW. Anchoress18:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) I was gunna say something about it too. The problem with making guesses about the cause of someone's behavior is that it's just way too easy for things to get ugly. And, they are just guesses, be they correct or not. We can't know what's in someone's head. Best to focus purely on observable behavior and keep speculations to ourselves. I realize you're just giving your opinions and trying to help, and I hope nobody jumps down your throat about it, but I'd seriously consider ammending that remark if I were you. Friday(talk)18:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
PS- Oh, I see I was a bit late. Oh well, for what it's worth, I think your remarks were mostly fine, except for the speculation bits. Friday(talk)18:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
EC. Well if you read my response to Hipocrite, I already removed it so I don't need to amend it. FWIW I absolutely don't mind backlash for giving my opinion, and I did say at the bottom of my post that I realised I was stepping into uncharted waters. I gave my opinion about something, I am happy to defend it or apologise for it. And also FWIW I think there is ample evidence that Lc is OCD (his multiple minor adjustments of entries), paranoid (his reactions to criticism), narcissistic (his grandstanding, the way he talks 'to the masses' on his talkpage), and suffering from a persecution complex (see above). But... bottom line is I had already removed it when you posted, so I guess unless a bunch of other people don't notice that or comment anyways, the matter is closed. Anchoress18:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That comment was deleted by the author. I suggest you let it drop. Not every battle needs to be fought, and not every fight needs to be won - however, whoever walks away from this battle first will definetly win. Hipocrite - «Talk»19:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the cat is out of the bag, it's probably appropriate for you to apologize to LC for the comment that started this all - honestly, I would have been a little offended if it were about me. I was hopeful he wasn't going to see it and we could bygones the whole incident, but obviously we can't. Hipocrite - «Talk»20:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Of course. I wholeheartedly and unreservedly apologise if Light current or anyone was the least bit offended by the content or phrasing of the comment I removed. Anchoress20:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Only admins can technically delete (something which IMO needs fixed), but if you ever accidentally make a page, you can tag it with {{db-author}} and somebody will delete it. Friday(talk)19:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Sorry to rope you into a chat session there, just get so little opportunity to "talk" to ya! Since you are keeping your $0.02 to yourself (smile). --Justanother21:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm giving MYSELF this barnstar for reducing my watchlist from 700+ to 432. The hard way. By actually looking at each page to determine if it still needed to be there. Anchoress03:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup" etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, RichFarmbrough, 16:32 27 February2007 (GMT).
... vandalising Wikipedia during study hall. I rolled that one back; drop me a note if he does it again and you want me to protect the page. And you were right about database lag! Cheers ... :) Antandrus (talk)19:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When I make a mistake, and I'm called on it, I never hesitate to admit my guilt. Yes, lowering myself to the level of others was wrong, and I admit that mistake.
Yet there's a serious injustice going on here at Wikipedia. Certain users are pretty much getting away with murder when it comes to incivility, yet the admins seem to be oblivious about it all. I actually got blocked today for calling someone a coward, which, admittedly, was wrong. Yet take a look at the shockingly disgusting exchange of insults on the RefDesk talk page in the discussion entitled "Not a soapbox". Why are certain users allowed to attack others as being "intellectually impoverished wankers", among dozens of other equally disgusting insults, without even getting so much as a warning, while, at the same time, my referring to someone as a "coward" (which, though admittedly insulting, is not the least bit vulgar) gets me blocked?
I hope you can understand how frustrating it can be to be forced to play on such an uneven playing field. Yes it was a mistake to call hipocrite a coward, I just lost my cool.
I just only wish that everyone were subject to the same rules. I honestly believe that if that were the case, much of this nonsensical hostility would disappear. The admins just don't seem to realize, but in ignoring Clio's insulting remarks, and given her young age, they're creating a monster. They're basically telling her that she can insult others to her heart's content and not get the slightest warning about it, because, as we all know, she's always right, and everyone else is always wrong.
These are the worst possible of messages to be sending a obnoxious, arrogant 24 year old girl. She's obviously intelligent, and one would hope, for her sake at least, that her intelligence be tempered with discipline and humility. If only an admin would send her a warning: "Look, Clio, you've got to tone it down, your insults of others are just as innapropriate as those directed at you. If you're criticized, that doesn't invariably mean that the world is out to get you in some sort "witch-hunt". You've got to learn to show some respect for others if you expect them to show respect for you". That's all.
Like I said, she's a very intelligent girl with a great deal of potential. And I wish her the best in achieving that potential. Yet she's desperately lacking in social skills. If someone doesn't finally put their foot down, put her in her place, and tell her when she's acting inappropriately, she'll never achieve that potential, and that would be a shame.
But there's only so much I can do. After all, I've done quite well for myself and live a happy and successful life. It's her life and happiness that are at stake here. I can try here and there, but without any support, and on top of that getting blocked for a silly mistake really doesn't help.
Anyway, I've gone on too long. I'd be really interested in your feedback, though.
Thanks a lot for the reply, and your gracious actions. I know what you mean about 'taking the coaching'; it's been my operating philosophy at WP (and my compliance is pretty good, lol), and I think it's kept me sane.
As to your other concern, well, I don't have much to say because I haven't been following it closely enough for analysis. But since you've asked for my opinion, I'll at least say what is on my mind. To put it bluntly, I think you should drop it v/v Clio; as a wise person once told me, "There's no cheese down that hole." I'm not commenting on who's right, who's wrong, who started it, etc, but I implore you to be the one to finish it. Just drop it, file it under Written Off Debts, and continue editing constructively.
If Clio irritates you that much (and I have had similar experiences with editors), unless you are willing to pursue it formally, just, for your own sanity, gloss over her contributions, discipline yourself to ignore her talk page entries, and ignore her. I've done that with some editors and it saved my Wikilife. There are many editors whose intellect and experience are appropriate for WP but whose personalities are not. IMO I am not an appropriate judge of that distinction, and neither are you. If an editor can't hack the community, they will crash and burn in due time without your help. Don't be that person. (The one who crashes and burns). You are well on your way, IMO, to becoming the person other editors shake their heads about (as I did with two editors recently) and say to themselves, 'That editor is either going to flounce in a huff or be permablocked.' Stay frosty.
To put it another way, I think one of the first rules of functioning happily on WP is to accept that WP is grossly unfair, manifestly so. I'm not commenting on the unfairness or perceived unfairness of your particular situation, I want to be very clear on that. I'm just saying in general. And the abiliy of an editor to accept that fact is IMO the greatest indicator of whether or not they'll be able to function on WP and contribute constructively.
I wish you well in your RL and WL, and I hope we intersect in happier circumstances. IMO that depends on you. You cannot ever control another's behaviour, only your own. Ruminating over this issue can do nothing but strangle your WP contributions and poison your RL. Don't let it do that.
And finally, I feel that some of your comments regarding Clio are inappropriate; "obnoxious, arrogant", "desperately lacking in social skills". Whether they are accurate or not, they are unwelcome on my talkpage. Would you consider striking them? To comment on the general thrust, it's not WP's place to assist in social development; if you feel something is lacking, you will have to trust in life in general to deliver that message. But my personal advice to you is just to stop speculating, ruminating, drawing conclusions, etc, and move on. Best wishes. Anchoress16:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anchoress, I give you full credit for inspiring me to make a rather bold step. I'm sure if you check out Clio's talk page, you'll see what I'm talking about. I really don't care how she responds. Perhaps she'll accept my apologies with grace, or perhaps she'll do a little victory dance, believing that she "won" and I "lost" some sort of fictitious battle. The point is that I apologized. Her reaction to it will be irrelevant to me. All of this is not to say that I don't believe that she acted innapropriately in offending me, I've just come to realize that the two issue must be separated from each other. I'm only in control of my own words, not hers. As for her words, if she decides to apologize I'll certainly accept it with grace. If she doesn't, well, I guess there's nothing I can do about that.
Thanks for the inspiration, Anchoress. I suppose it's only fitting that the one to finally inspire me to eat crow and offer peace whatever the result, would be a fellow Canadian. I'm not sure what part of the country you're from, but I'll end this message with the following most profound of words: GO HABS!!!! :--)
Congrats Loomis51 on being the better man. IMO there's no downside to rising above. I wish both of you well in turning over your two, completely separate, never-to-intersect leaves. Good luck contributing, and I am very happy to have inspired you. Go Canucks! Habs are good too. And BTW I don't look at it as eating crow; we are well-known for both politeness and picking our battles. Cheers! Anchoress03:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well. Not the best possible of responses on her part, but certainly not the worst.
By the way, yes, you may have been my inspiration and you should of course feel great about that, but with it comes a down side. Now I'll naturally turn to you to bitch and moan every time I'm forced to bite my tongue and act polite! Just kidding, that's not your responsibility. Though I will likely have to get myself some sort of punching bag for every time I'm driven absolutely mad by yet another damned non-sequitur of a poem!
I hope you understand I'm just kidding around. I'm sure I'll eventually learn to find my happy-place all on my own. :--)
You choose to answer some of the slipperier questions at the desks, sometimes subtly in the background, yet steadily and gracefully, just like Macke's tightrope walker here. And you even manage to pull off a Wallendas act from time to time, balancing the other funambulists, while keeping the question balanced as well. Your stunts are greatly appreciated by this member of the audience. Happy spring to you. ---Sluzzelintalk00:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Thanks for the reply and links on the help desk. I got your reply yesterday about 2 hours after you left it I think. I think that's good advice you gave. --Rebroad15:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sluzzelîn, hereby awards you the barnstar for Good Humor for all that wonderful nonsense on sense. Please expect my bill for giggoliposuction (made necessary by your answer at the Miscellaneous Desk). --- Sluzzelin
Oh, OK. Yeah, it doesn't sound like it's going to fly. But if you want to chat with me about it it'll have to be the old-fashioned way, on-wiki, thru email, or yahoo if you have it. I'm on IM as anchoresse. Anchoress14:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
I was wondering why you feel the Laura Smith Haviland article needs to be copyedited.
Would you please explain so I can fix the problem? Thank you Epousesquecido16:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, ok. It also means to stay cool, unflappable and on task. lol I've been using it like that for so many years, I forgot it even had another meaning. Anchoress08:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Problems with hyperlinks and msft access
I saw your post on the computing help desk and I couldn't help but wonder why no one offered to just take a look at the file and do the conversion for you. Unless the file contents are private and you do not want that out, I'm happy to lend a hand (2000 or so links doesn't sound like much). Alternatively, if you have a few "example links" I can try to put together a script, post it for you and you can run it yourself.
I'm assuming you wouldn't mind having the hyperlinks represented in access as:
and so forth. If you haven't found an easy solution by the time you read this, let me know. I'll be happy to help. Regards. dr.ef.tymac01:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thank you for the offer, I would definitely love to take you up on it. The contents aren't private, but the sheet is such a god-awful mess that I cringe at the thought of anyone else seeing it lol. I am kicking myself 6 ways from Sunday for not just doing it in Access to start with, but it was so ad hoc at the beginning, I didn't and couldn't really have any idea what it would look like a ways down the road. But... I was given a good suggestion on the Access Developers yahoogroup, which I'd like to try first as it would be easier than an Excel conversion, so I'll get back to you. Anchoress02:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I tried the solution but it didn't work, so if I could send you a sample of my DB I'd be very appreciative. How can I get it to you? Anchoress02:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever's easiest. You can post it on any of my empty scratchpad pages, email, put it on your own scratchpad, whatever. 2000 links should not be too big for WP to handle if you want to just paste it into a page. BTW am I correct in assuming the format indicated above is acceptable? dr.ef.tymac02:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK... You gotta know that I have never ever uploaded a file to WP, so 'scratch pad' is a complete whoosh for me, lol. But i'll see if I can figure it out. I'm just uploading a sample with 100 records, that's easier I think. And as for the format, yeah... thanks a lot. Anchoress03:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ohh ... oops ... *hehe* yeah you can click on the scratchpad link above and then just do "edit this page" ... then just cut and paste directly from the text file into the edit window as usual, or you can click the email link. dr.ef.tymac03:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Right... I was wondering if that was what it was. See, I'm afraid that you've missed part of the discussion about this file; it's not a text file, and it can't be. If it were just a matter of separating the <a ref> URL from the anchor text, I could have easily done that myself; normalising data is kind of my area. But the URLs are embedded objects, and if I saved the sheet as .txt or if I try to upload it like you suggested, it uploads the anchor text alone (or, in the case of a few of the entries, the URL itself which I'd already copied and pasted in the course of my use of the sheet). So... I'd love to email it to you (I dropped you a line and am waiting for a reply), but I wonder if you can actually help me? It's perhaps more complicated than you realised. Anchoress03:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Follow-up: so despite my off-target "scratchpad" tangent, it sounds like we were both on the same page as what you were aiming for and an acceptable solution. Just in case, I'll put up another alternative on the RefDesk page and consider this issue resolved unless you indicate otherwise. Cheers. dr.ef.tymac15:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The XML solution
Thanks dr.ef.tymac, your many suggestions and the work you've put into helping me has been very helpful. Unfortunately I just checked and my version of Excel doesn't support the XML format, as you feared. I'll check some of the other solutions, I'm just feeling a bit discouraged for now and I think I'll take a break from this whole thing. ;-) Anchoress04:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Excel - Access problem
Request for clarification:
If you want me to come up with the VB code, please clearly explain what you want. Is this correct:
The cells in Excel contain hyperlinks and the raw code for each one reads
Well I'm not asking you or anyone else to do ANYTHING, so you can rest easy on that point. But no, you are misunderstanding, and I believe I have been very clear with what I need. The contents of the URL cells in excel are not the <a href> strings; if they were, I could have easily fixed it myself as I am familiar with using a variety of advanced solutions for data normalisation. The links show as plain anchor text in the cell contents, so there is no way to parse the anchor text from the URL and .html using simple solutions. Is that more clear? The question was asked on the computer desk in my thread, and my answer seemed sufficient for the other questioners. Anchoress09:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Username
No, I will not reconsider it, if I may be blunt. I don't know where you got the arbitrary 50-character standard from, but I do know that it is too long for practical purposes. —210physicq (c) 03:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well you're drawing a conclusion about my assessment to call it a 'standard' - I didn't call it that - but what I'm saying is that under 50 characters doesn't seem lengthy. Thank you for your reply. Anchoress03:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please pardon my jumping in, but I suggest that you ask Joseph... whether he wants the username block reviewed or just to start a new account. If he wants an unblock, I am sure that WP:RFCN will consider the matter. (The purpose of the "not blocked already" restriction is to avoid pointless debates about either blatantly inappropriate usernames where the outcome would be a foregone conclusion, or situations where the user has already changed to another account so again the discussion wouldn't have value. Where the blocked user is expressly requesting a review, and another contributor is defending the name, those rationales wouldn't apply.) Regards, Newyorkbrad03:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much for the reply. I left a comment on the editor's userpage; I'll keep an eye out to see if s/he responds in any way, but (other than the comment I left on the AIV talkpage), I'll leave it in the hands of the other editor for now. This issue is of particular concern to me, however, whether or not this particular editor ever gets unblocked. I wonder if perhaps the username policy should be amended to grant a maximum total number of allowed characters, combining the username with the signature. Anchoress04:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello
I was not trying to be "disruptive" here, I was simply trying to show the user in question how it can be fun to either create new articles, and/or edit in a constructive manner by adding and searching for new material from reputable secondary sources. Diff, I tried to explain this, Diff, but was rebuffed. No worries, but in any event certainly not "disruptive", as the user had stated diff. Oh well, guess I'll go back to what I enjoy most: finding more material from reputable secondary sources to add as citations in existing articles - and/or better yet, to add to a potential new article later... Smee13:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]
You can probably cancel that WP:ANI request. That request got both User:TREYWiki and I blocked for 48 hours. Because of that, TREY left Wikipedia altogether and I am not helping anyone, reverting anything, or really doing anything but editing. TREY and I tried to help, did what we thought was right, moved a request ro WP:ANI and were blocked for it. Oh well. Just don't want you to get in trouble too. Take care....SVRTVDude(VT)03:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Uh.... what request? Did I make a request there? Sorry, I only remember trying to fix the wiki markup, I don't remember doing anything else. Anyways, good luck editing. Anchoress07:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean that you had, I was just saying if you wanted to cancel the request that TREY and I had made. I am staying as far away from any board as possible. - SVRTVDude(VT)07:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, OK. Well I'm not an admin, and I don't know why I'd do that for you, but anyways after reading your post I went and checked, and it seems to have been removed already. Listen, I don't want to seem like I'm being rude or anything, but I'm really not sure why you've messaged me? Were you asking me to remove the entry for you? Because I'm not sure why I would do that? Anyways, it's a done deal now, the entry seems to have been archived. Best wishes again, and over and out. Anchoress08:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You had posted on my KDKA page (I made it for the KDKA problems) and I was just following up with you. I got 48hour blocked, so it was a little slow of a response. My apologizes for upsetting you. - SVRTVDude(VT)08:15, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Right... OK. Well, you didn't upset me, and glad we kinda got it figured out. I'm still not sure why you said what you said in your original message, but I guess that's fine. ;-)) Anchoress08:23, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tee hee. I think that's very plausible. But the people who talk about them on Anchoress's talk page, now THEY are NEVER dum. :D Anchoress14:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Overhauling suggestions
A few things I would do in over hauling your user page.
1. I would put your userboxes in a more orderly fashion.
2. Any thing vandalized on your page, I would either put it in a separate category on your user page or delete it all together.
3. Any tips or suggestions for other users I would keep that is non-vandalism related.
I hope this help and I look forward to your replay on my page if you like. Chris23:04, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Chris: Thanks a lot for the reply, I would be very grateful for any and all decorating help. I have to confess, though, that I wouldn't be able to do anything for you because I completely lack the markup skills and flair to do any userpage decorating. Did I use the wrong box on my page? I thought I'd placed the one that indicated an editor who was looking for decorating help but was unable to reciprocate. Anchoress23:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Magnus already fixed it, but didn't remove your help tag.. I guess I should have looked at edit history, just didn't anticipate someone would have helped that quickly. Here's a little something for you anyway. Peace. Lsi john03:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As sad, tragic, (and all other appropriate words) as it is, is the De Anza article/case really notable, beyond the local town? I thought that WP:NOT says we are not a news agency. Lsi john21:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good question, I don't know the answer. To me notability is a morass of grey areas and unpleasantness; first off, I am almost never interested in whether an article is notable, and secondly, I am concerned by the frequent use of non-notability as a criteria for deletion, despite the fact that it isn't a valid criteria on its own. ;-) Anchoress22:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To expand on that: IMO if we (Wikipedia) are serious about being a storehouse of all human knowledge, then notability should be the very last thing we are concerned about when considering an article. Sadly, IMO, we seem to be retreating from the 'comprehensive compendium' value in recent weeks. OTOH, I completely understand that 'NN' is at least the easiest, if not the only, brickbat available in the struggle against the abuse of WP's SEO potential by commercial interests. Furthermore, 'NN' is an easy tool for use by the 'WP:IDONTLIKEIT' crowd, particularly for use against fan- and list-cruft. Anchoress22:07, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Continuing on that line of thought (in a purely conversational way)... Is it our goal to be a storehouse of all human knowledge? Or, is it our goal to be an encyclopedia?
Encyclopedias are, specifically, 'not' a storehouse of all human knowledge, but, rather, are some minimal collection of information about items of significant interest to humanity. An encyclopedia article provides a window for the layman to look through and affords him an means to gain some basic understanding of the item in the article.
In contrast, if we are a storehouse of all human knowledge... well, to me, knowledge is fact, and fact is truth (or minimally, facts are accurate and truthful). And, there are numerous texts available on the full knowledge about the known facts of DNA strands, which cannot possibly be represented in a single article on DNA here at Wikipedia.
While I used the term 'notable' (above), I also connected it with 'not a news agency', which I believe is part of WP:NOT. I agree that notability may be overused, and that doesn't address the question of whether that particular article is notable or significant. I had intended it as a simple question. I have nothing in particular against the article, and it was clearly an unfortunate situation. Yet, it was simply an event, like 1000's of other events which occur daily, tragic though it was.
Meh. I'm really not interested in getting into a whole thing about this. Like I said, the topic doesn't interest me. As to your first point, are 'we' trying to be a storehouse of all human knowledge? According to THIS PRESS RELEASE, featuring a quote by Jimbo Wales, yes we are. Anyways, I really don't have an opinion regarding the article in question, and I'm really not interested in a discussion about the threshold of inclusion for information about DNA strands, so... ;-) Anchoress22:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't thought that I intended to get into it either. However, based on results, we both intended it. I actually thought I was asking a simple question. Sorry. Peace in God. Lsi john22:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, thanks for the link. I hadn't seen that.. and it contradicts what I had just read this morning by the same individual. Peace. Lsi john22:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anchoress, thank you for your response. As you specifically asked for a response from me on-wiki, here it is.
My feedback to you is this: To me, this is a subject that you have quite a bit of energy on. To wit, I asked a relatively simple question (or so I thought), and you expounded with an opinion on deletionism .vs. a statement made by Jimbo, and the current trend of wikipedia. I was a bit overwhelmed, as I had not anticipated such an opined (and positional) response. Then, when I attempted to follow your lead, and continued the discussion on the path you had chosen, you MEH'd me and said you were not interested in discussing the subject, citing my DNS stranding example as being uninteresting. Thus, closing the conversation as abruptly as it had begun.
If article deletion isn't a topic you are interested in discussing, then (rhetorically) why did you open that door with such elaboration? And, as it was a conversation between you and me, if your response wasn't directed at me, then (rhetorically) to whom was it directed? We were the only two in the conversation.
Anchoress, I saw you make an edit in the article, I assumed you were somewhat familiar with the article, I recalled your previous offer to help with wiki questions, and I asked for your opinion. Though I was aware of your position on deleting articles, it did not occur to me when I asked your opinion. In hindsight, it was not one of my better choices, and I apologize.
You asked me where I perceived judgment in your response. To me, there is both judgment and conclusion in your comment about the current trend of wikipedia. And, based on results, I would submit that article deletion is a subject about which you are very interested.
Respectfully, I would prefer not to address this further on-wiki. Without sufficient background (our conversations) to understand it, I feel the conversation could easily appear confrontational to the casual reader, and I have neither the desire to be, nor to appear to be, confrontational with you.
Best regards,
Peace in God. Lsi john 13:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
OK, no probs, thanks for your reply! I feel that you've misunderstood in several ways, but as I'd said, I don't want to discuss WP stuff off-wiki, and if you don't want to discuss it further here, I'm perfectly happy having this be the end! Cheers, over and out (again lol). Anchoress15:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I came across an offer from you on the Reward Board that you're looking for a Vulcan themed barnstar. Before replying, know that a) I've currently got no decent editor for SVG images, b) I use typically low-tech methods for design, and c) I am fascinated ( ;) ) with the challenge, think the reward is ample, and think it would be something I'd try my hand at. So, I'd like to know: a) That the reward offer is genuine, b) Would you: prefer a green standard barnstar with Vulcan ears at 11:00 and 1:00 'points' added or replacing the 10:00 and 2:00 points with ears, and c) Would you like the addition of a circular "THE NEEDS OF THE MANY..." around the perimeter of the Star. Or do you have some other concept in mind? (Also, I wouldn't want you working on the reward, or taking down the notice, until I deliver the image to your satisfaction.) I now have your talk on my watchlist for a reply. Thanks. LaughingVulcan03:02, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to take so long to reply - I forgot you'd posted. First, yes, the reward offer is VERY genuine, I'm looking forward to it actually. ;-) I am not sure about the points replacement, I would have to see it. I love the 'the needs of the many' quote, and what you said about the graphics etc I don't understand either, sorry... (If I knew anything about editing graphics I guess I wouldnn't have been looking for help lol). So I guess... Only you know if you have the skills and tools to do a good job of it - I am not picky but I'd want it to look good enough that people would actually want to award it - but if you want to give it a try, I'm all thumbs up!! Anchoress00:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. But thinking about it, I may have been too hasty. Attempting to satisfy an inflatable replica could make a lot of things sore... particularly for someone who doesn't know when to quit. Anchoress00:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are being recruited by the Environmental Record Task Force, a collaborative project committed to accurately and consistently representing the environmental impact of policymakers, corporations, and institutions throughout the encyclopedia. Join us!
Hi Anchoress, looking at your edits I'm not sure this is in your line, but thought I'd invite you to come have a look--could sure use someone w/ your wp experience! Best, Cyrusc23:31, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, fantastic, I'll definitely look it over. It was such a piece of crap before, I look forward to seeing the improvements with my own eyes. Anchoress13:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
VanTucky has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! ...for letting me know about the thread and for providing a more civil voice than mine to the toupee discussion. Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I looked and didn't find the incorrect reference in the Giant squid article. I guess someone removed it already. Nice catch, and of course that gem of an answer is untoppable - I love that scene! Any further reply would have ruined the the thread. Completely irrelevant, but the kind of thing I notice: Cosmic synchronicity expressed itself on Wikipedia on July 11, 2007. ---Sluzzelintalk11:31, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking the time to participate at the discussion in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project. I listened carefully to all concerns, and will do my best to incorporate all of the constructive advice that I received, into my future actions on Wikipedia. If you can think of any other ways that I can further improve, please let me know. Best wishes, Elonka05:22, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted your entry as it was malformed. Please try it again, using the provided template at the bottom of the page. You need to cite diffs for each user you believe violated 3RR.
If you believe that 3RR was violated by a user abusing multiple accounts or IP's to bypass 3RR, you need to post at WP:RFCU for a checkuser case (there is a special code letter for 3RR vios), including diffs there. If the result comes back positive, they block will be done there, with no need to post on the 3RR.⇒SWATJesterDenny Crane.02:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, sorry for doing it wrong. I looked for a template, but I didn't see one. Don't know how I missed it, lol. Thanks very much for the notice! Anchoress03:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lighten up
Lighten up. Give Cliff some credit; he has a sense of humour. If you can't have a totally inoffensive chuckle at the complexity of template syntax, you may need a wikibreak. AdrianM. H.07:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. I was just trying to be respectful towards the original questioner, and I did say in my post to you that I was sorry in advance if I mischaracterised your response. I am really surprised at your take on this, I would never have expected such a harsh response to my good faith and polite comment to you. Anchoress07:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I noticed that, so I posted it under her request for input on WP:EA. Thanks for the heads up, though. While I think it's interesting (and telling), I won't be taking any further action because I really support editor talkpage autonomy. Cheers, and happy Friday! Anchoress08:01, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
your comments
I apologize if I offended you by deleting your comments. I did not want people to take your comment about my "neglecting my child" out of context. I noticed that other editors were already commenting on it. The last thing that I want is for CPS to show up at my door. All I meant when I said that was I was spending time on the computer when could have been paying attention to her - not that I was neglecting to feed her or anything. There appears to be quite the campaign against me and I don't want to add fuel to it -- don't you find it odd that Dyanega would "tattle" on me above? I'm just trying to create a less biased article. That's it. 11:43, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, Pez1103. You don't need to apologise for removing my comment, because as I stated above I believe strongly in user talkpage autonomy. I only mentioned it because of your subsequent actions and how they could seem in toto. I don't look upon Dyanega's notification to me as 'tattling', it would have been extremely helpful and courteous if I hadn't in fact already noticed it. Consider me a supporter and well-wisher in your goal to collaborate on an unbiased article, and a supporter of your continued development as a WP editor and of your constructive edits. I have noticed that some editors have been short with you; you have to stay frosty, be cool like Fonzie, don't take actions that will make editors overlook others' callousness towards you because you seem to be such a contentious and contrary editor. Civility, restraint and humility are three things you need to demonstrate in your on-Wiki actions. Never mind what other people are doing. You need to work on your credibility here, it's (pardon me for saying so) in the toilet right now. Anchoress11:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your feedback. Please read my user page -- the mix up with dyanga's comment was completely inadvertant, if this is what you are referring to by my subsequent actions.Pez110312:31, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Anchoress - I'm an editor who often helps out at WP:WQA. I responded to an alert regarding the Morgellons situation and had some communications with Durova and Thatcher and EdJohnston about it, as well as trying to help Pez1103 find an adopter. As a result of all that I saw the incident with the deleting of your comment from her talk page and the various discussion that followed.
I thought that was over, but then today I saw this comment at WP:EAR. I'm not involved with the Morgellons debate any more, but I saw Pez1103 feels really bad about that comment, so thought I should contact you about this. I've not mentioned it to her.
Now that you have had a personal resolution with her about the deleting of your comment from her talk page, would you be willing to delete that same comment from WP:EAR? To be clear, I have no direct knowledge of Pez1103 as a person. So, no pressure, it's totally up to you, but that's my request, based on just basic compassion I guess. (By the way, an aside, I concur with your reply to her in the section just above here). Best Wishes --ParsifalHello10:02, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well thanks, but it's not my place to remove your words. And she won't, I don't think she even knows it's there. Thanks for the reply. --ParsifalHello10:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, no probs. :-)) And BTW there wasn't ever really a 'personal resolution' with her over the removal of my comment, because as I said, I never had an issue with it. I was just using that as one example in my comment advising her to be more cautious about what seemed (to me, at the time) to be selective deletions on her talkpage. Anchoress10:51, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the fix. I think the instructions on the main article RfC page aren't quite explicit enough. But after the growing pains are worked out, this method will undoubtedly be much better. Anchoress20:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to take so long to reply. I don't think I'll be doing that, because I have no understanding of RfC (it's one of the areas of WP that I'm completely ignorant of), but I do know that I can go ahead and improve things when I feel I have both the capability and inclination. Anchoress22:08, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I had not read the full discussion. I agree with your points about not being convicted yet. I only added the tag because he "admitted he was a serial killer", of course until proven in a court of law this is just the state's (or is it crown in Canadian law) word against his. Anyway I agree with your removal of the tag. If there is anything I can do to help out on this article please feel free to drop me a line on my userpage. Thanks, Jmm6f48804:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. Re; Pickton's confession, REALLY??? Don't forget there's a publication ban in Canada. I was aware of an ambiguous statement he'd made to an undercover officer while in custody (about wanting to 'do an even 50'), and a couple of vague apologetic statements he'd made to police interrogators (how he was 'bad' and 'had done it' and 'deserved to die'), but I did not know he'd confessed. Not that it changes the official WP position, but ... WOW! Do you have a link to the information? Anchoress22:07, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At that rewards/bounty thing you requested a Vulcan barnstar, I thought I would chuck in this attempt. Hope you find it useful! —Preceding unsigned comment added by SGGH (talk • contribs) 22:39, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
Wow, that is really, really cool!!!!! I love it! Listen, someone else already said s/he was going to make a Vulcan Barnstar, so I want to check and see if it's still on the burner before officially going with this one, but either way I'll write you a sonnet! Could you tell me what you want the topic to be? Anchoress19:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Clay Tyson, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD a7.
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 article 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.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)02:29, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I nominated Clay Tyson for deletion, but I forgot to notify you of it. I apologize; it simply slipped my mind. (By the way, it was also I who removed the speedy tag from the article.) I'd like to see the article get a fair hearing, and I further apologize if my "lazy" comment offended you. Deor17:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your name on the Adopt a user page and thought I would ask. I am having trouble with the Talk:Lord Nicholas Hervey page. There are issues of substance that I am trying to resolve with another (anonymous) editor, and I will continue with that attempt and request help if I need it. What I want to fix now, before too many edits intervene in the "I said/you said" dispute, is simply the format. Ages ago there was a RfD, and a name change debate, and for reasons I can't understand, the whole of the talk page has a dotted blue background as if it is contained in the box that tries to delimit the debate. The text ("The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.") appears correctly, but the visual boundaries are not correct. I have looked at the code, and can't see how to fix this. I did create a pollbottom template, because it appeared to be missing. I don't think this added to the problem, but I might be wrong.
Can you help me, by completing the separation, so that the previous debates are not mixed up with the current ones? Or, if not, could you point me towards someone who can help. Thank you. BrainyBabe09:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I checked it and I see the problem. I tried fiddling with it a bit, but I'm not sure why it's not working. Formatting isn't my strong suit (I thought I said that at my entry on EA but maybe not), so I'd suggest either WP:HELP, Template_talk:Polltop, adding {{helpme}} to the talkpage of the article (or your own talkpage), or the talkpage of the creator of the polltop/bottom template (User_talk:Locke_Cole). Good luck!! Anchoress23:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. For what it's worth, the problem was some table code in the middle I think, which messed up the DIV tag and kept it from being closed. The poll templates were fine, otherwise. =) —Locke Cole • t • c01:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No probs about checking - I can be counted upon to be a buttinski. I will enjoy reading the whole saga, I'm sure. But it does raise the issue (totally not chastising here) of how important it is to double-check before jumping in with the delete-bats, because a less-experienced editor might have just slunk away. It is extremely confusing, though. IMDb doesn't have a page for 'Zeitgeist the Movie', and so most of the comments, reviews, postings and plot summaries on the 'American Zeitgeist' movie are actually for ZtM. Slightly odd that two films with almost identical topics and titles came out within a year of each other. Maybe it's a conspiracy??!!??!!1! My wikibreak has refreshed me so much, I'm putting all the extra energy into creative wikilinking. Anchoress04:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize too and totally agree on the issue. To be honest I had later checked and the forums were confusing; I couldn't really tell if it had been the actually movie or not. And by that point, Cambridge deleted after finding that other AfD, so I thought no harm had been done. Once again my apologies. Happy editing. :) -WarthogDemon04:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Totally no problem, and thank you for being so gracious. I agree that it is exceedingly confusing; the only panacea I suggest that you could have employed was to have checked with me. But totally no harm, no foul, and it truly is an unusual case, with two such eerily similar movies. Anchoress04:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Gigantoraptor DYK nom credit
Did you know? was updated. On 17 June, 2007, a fact from the article Gigantoraptor, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Sorry that I didn't notice the reply reply. After making an explicit request to respond to my talk page I was not watching you page. I hope you understand. Well, I guess in your reply we could try replacing "should" with a "could", as waiting for a consensus is not applied to most merges as the custom goes. If there is reason, it is alright to use one's brain and be bold. Every process has a reason behind, the process itself can't be the end-all reason. While you undid the merge, you could/should have shown some other reason apart from "out of process" thing. The page that describes the process (WP:MERGE) says explicitly - it makes little sense to object to a merge purely on procedural grounds, e.g. "you cannot do that without discussion" is not a good argument. But, well, I guess, on the second time I did follow the process and there's nothing left to complain about. Cheers. Aditya(talk • contribs)03:51, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just because you disagree with it, doesn't make it "trolling".
If you have legitimate criticism to offer, by all means post it--but don't just dismiss it as a complete troll and advocate elimination of the discussion. Kurt Weber (GoColts!) 04:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, my criticism is with your complete post. The concept isn't necessarily trolling, but IMO, the way you've framed it, is. Editors can say just about anything on WP in a constructive way, but even the most constructive concept can be presented in such a way as to be trolling. I stand by my statement - I think your post is trolling and can't be framed as good faith, the way it's worded. Write constructively and I'll respond constructively. Anchoress·Weigh Anchor·Catacomb05:06, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
McCartney
A state school is a school run by the state (or at least a local authority) from general taxation where any pupil is accepted and where no fees are paid. The vast majority of schools are of this character. A public school is a school run privately usually with a selective entrance exam and very high (10-25000 USD per annum per pupil) fees. See the relevant wikipedia articles for more details. Badgerpatrol (talk) 17:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, I'm afraid in the best American fashion I'm not sure if you're being ironic or not! ;-) Of course I was converting the amount from sterling, although I dare say you can pay in rupees if you so desire, so long as it's the full amount, promptly discharged.... Badgerpatrol (talk) 18:22, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, my British friends assure me, we folks on this side of The Water are prone not to recognize irony-mongery when it is committed in our presence. Our national tradition of simple, blundering bluntness militates against the subtleties; and of course, online discourse, with the lack of visual and auditory clues, makes it all the worse. (Would you believe me, o ancrene wisse, if I were to say that I didn't know that there was a feminine form of the noun "anchor"?) --Orange Mike | Talk18:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC) (actually Southron, not a Yank, by birthright)[reply]
Now I don't know who's yanking who's chain. I thought the link to the Ancrene Wisse was a pretty broad hint that I knew what your name meant, anchor puns or no. --Orange Mike | Talk19:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC) B.A. Hist. magna cum laude '04, UWM[reply]
And I feel like you're both fucking with me. I just take everything I read and write on Wikipedia completely literally. If you guys are going to be sarcastic or ironic or faux naif it's going to fly waaaaaaay over my head. OK? BadgerPatrol, I thought you said you were American, because you said "In the best American fashion I don't know if you're being ironic or not". To me that means that, as an American, you don't understand irony. Plus, you quoted school fees in US dollars. So, what am I supposed to think? Orange Mike, you said you didn't know that Anchoress was the feminine of Anchor. I thought you were being literal. So I guess I'm just a fucking chump. Anchoress·Weigh Anchor·Catacomb20:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, perhaps I have inadvertently opened a can of worms, if so I apologise. I meant "after the fashion of an American..." who are, stereotypically, jocularly, and no doubt unfairly, sometimes thought of as having little appreciation of irony or deprecated meaning. I quoted the fees in USD because I thought you may have less appreciation of figures quoted in UK pounds (in fact I slightly underestimated the amounts anyway) and because I'm not too sure how much a Canadian dollar is worth either these days. I can certainly see why you may have been quite legitimately confused however. As for the other point...I'm not sure if "anchor" can have a feminine form (in English). Slightly confused by that one...Badgerpatrol (talk) 22:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Korean FirI would like to thank you for your participation in my recent RfA, was unsuccessful with 61 support, 25 oppose, and 4 neutral. I've been taking the advice of the Opposes into practice and hopefully I can improve myself. Once again, thank you. ^_^
Hi, I saw you listed on the editor assistance page for questions about formatting references. I'm currently working on making some updates to the lipoma article and am having a small dispute with another editor about how best to reference one of the articles. He's been getting somewhat upset with me for not understanding the use of a "Sources" heading in wiki articles, but I can't seem to find much information on Sources vs. References vs. Notes that explains his argument. If you have a chance and could look at the article, or if you could point me to more information on the section headings, it would be most appreciated. Thanks! Schu1321 (talk) 21:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't have a problem with the heading. I had a problem with you moving its contents (the AFP article).
You first moved the AFP article to the "External Links" section because you claimed that none of the content of the AFP article was used in the wiki article. I countered your claim by quoting nine facts from the first couple of paragraph alone (and there were many more) but for some reason you could not even find one.
Yet another reason you gave for removing the AFP article as a source was that you claimed that it contained information that contradicted the wiki article. Even if that was true, it would not invalidate it as a source. In any case, your assertion wasn't even true as a result of another two cases of miscomprehension on your part: Firstly, you claimed "the wiki article says soft and small, while the AFP article says small or large)", but that's simply not true... the wiki article actually said "soft and has a small connective tissue component", not "soft and small". Secondly, you claimed that the wiki article included a fact that was not included in the AFP article... well, that is not a contradiction - that is merely a separate (unsourced) claim - every source used does not have to back up every claim in the article!! Think about it: as soon as someone added a new unsourced claim into any article, your approach would therefore mean that every source should then be moved to the "External links" section. Even worse, by your reasoning, two sources could not be included even if all facts in the wiki article was covered unless both sources each covered all the facts!!
Then you decided to turn the AFP artcile (the major source for that wiki article) into a mere inline citation by arbitrarily selecting for special treatment only one out of dozens of the pieces of information used from the APF article.
If you don't like the heading "Sources" then change it to "References" or whatever is more appropriate like I suggested, or you could have simply deleted the heading "Sources" and the article would have had more integrity than what you did with it. But stop treating the source itself inappropriately and claiming that it not a valid source.
I'm sick of all this voluminous debate which has gone on for far too long because of the numerous issues of miscomprehension on your part. I'm now going to override your edits and fix it according to what I believe is correct. --David from Downunder (talk) 15:29, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Re this: I'm tired and stressed and under a lot of deadlines right now; occasionally, this results in me using the wrong word, and in this case that was the situation, where I should have used "known" instead of "used." even so, any sort of consumer item that is asserted to be widely known but only gets 700 Google hits is quite likely not notable enough for a standalone article in this "buy everything online" era. While I recognize that your comment is valid, please consider the tone of your comment next time; the "really?" struck me as being snarky, which I don't think was really deserved for my misspeaking. Thanks. Tony Fox(arf!)16:00, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Satori help
Hi! You are the unlucky person I found on the 'editor assisstance' page to ask for help in what to do about this matter.
If you look at the page for Satori (album), a user (whose page I can't link to because it's Japanese text and I'm not sure how to do that) has been consistently removing almost the entire text of the page - including some very well referenced sections. The first time he did it, I thought it was vandalism, undid it, and said "please discuss on the talk page". He then came and undid my edit - without discussing on the talk page. I undid _this_ (maybe I was in the wrong here?), and mentioned in that edit comment, as well as on his talk page, that he should discuss on the Satori page why he wants to remove it all. He instead undid it AGAIN, saying it's all subjective (despite the fact that it is NOT subjective, and it is also referenced). He also posted on my talk page telling me not to touch his talk page again, and he actually deleted my comment off of his talk page. I am at a loss for what to do at this point, thanks for any suggestions you can offer. (you can reply here, i'm watching) Luminifer (talk) 16:01, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Anchoress! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondarysources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 15 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
Hello. I wonder if you, or someone else could help with the section in this article to do with Verbal irony and sarcasm? The discussion is getting very long, and I don't feel we are getting anywhere. I added some dictionary definitions and suchlike, in an attempt to set out the way authorities have sought to differentiate the terms. The editor responsible for the original text (which I have hardly touched) objects to this on the grounds that all these definitions are wrong in some way. His original text dealt only with the way psychologists have studied the way people understand irony and sarcasm. He wants to remove my definitions and replace them with more psychology citations. I do not understand what is going on here. I hope you can help. Myrvin (talk) 14:11, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
