User talk:DearPrudence/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archives
Archive 2.

Contents 1 Atlantis Paradise Island 2 You were actually right the first time 3 Your NPWatcher Application 4 Timeline of the War in Afghanistan (October 2002) 5 Eddie Campos 6 Gina Marie May 7 Sure 8 Your CSD to 09-f9-11-02-9d-74-e3-5b-d8-41-56-c5-63-56-88-c0 9 Server appliance 10 Thank You 11 Excuse me?

Atlantis Paradise Island

Was attracted to your user name, having followed the former Pru to her new incarnation as "Dear Margo" ..

Was glancing over your contributions, and was quite certain I would thoroughly enjoy your take on this Resort-run WP topic - Atlantis Paradise Island. I used to try, but after I pretty much left, it has just continued to slide right out of the encyclopedia category and more into pricey high-quality, thick glossy paper, full-sized promotional booklet. --Kiwi 04:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! And wow, just looking at the page, I can see what you mean. I'll start watching it and will definitely try to clean it up! --DearPrudence 20:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

You were actually right the first time

User:Greergarsony blanked a talk page only one minute after I gave him/her a 4im warning ... I went ahead and reported the guy.Blueboy96 03:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, kay - thanks for letting me know! --DearPrudence 03:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Your NPWatcher Application

Dear DearPrudence,

Thank you for applying for NPWatcher! You've been approved to use it. Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if there is a newer release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Report any bugs or feature suggestion here. If you need help, feel free to contact me or join NPWatcher.

«Snowolf ^{How can I help?}» 15:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Timeline of the War in Afghanistan (October 2002)

I declined your speedy as it seems to be part of a series. Best to take in bulk to WP:AFD --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 23:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! --DearPrudence 23:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Eddie Campos

I removed the {{db-bio}} tag from this article as there is a claim of notability in the article. There are multiple sources on Google, so I'm inclined to keep the article. Feel free to nominate for AfD if you wish. Cheers! Flyguy649^talk_contribs 04:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! --DearPrudence 04:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Gina Marie May

Hi. I think there's the makings of notability claims in the article, so I've untagged it. However, I recommend you take it AfD, because I make no comment about the merit of those claims! Cheers. --Dweller 15:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I've added stub and notability templates instead, and I might take it to AfD as well. --DearPrudence 19:57, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Sure

I will add. Wikipedia is a colborative effort and I am sure other would add as well.

here are soemplaces to start: http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=RNWE,RNWE:2005-06,RNWE:en&q=pigs+apes+jews Best, Zeq 06:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. --DearPrudence 06:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Can you restore the page ? it was deleted w/o any discussion I can not see it. Zeq 17:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Really? I had no idea it was deleted. It says that it was deleted by Zero0000, the reason given being "Speedy deletion of disgusting islamophobic article." If you want to have it restored, you should take it up with him, or at least ask him what he found offensive about the article (the last draft I saw of it didn't appear to be islamophobic, but some of the wording may have come across that way). --DearPrudence 20:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Your CSD to 09-f9-11-02-9d-74-e3-5b-d8-41-56-c5-63-56-88-c0

Did you even read the talk page? Leave me a message there. W1k13rh3nry 01:29, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I've posted an explanation on the talk page. --DearPrudence 03:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Server appliance

What are you talking about? What did I delete? I just created Server Appliance could you explain what you are talking about?

--Akc9000 22:53, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that you keep on deleting the speedy deletion tag (the pink box at the top of the article). The tag lets administrators know that the article is being considered for deletion, and removing it goes against Wikipedia's policies.

When I tagged the article for a copyright violation, its text was copied directly from the two references the article mentioned. However, as the text now seems to be sufficiently different enough now to not count as a copy-vio, I will remove the speedy deletion tag myself. --DearPrudence 23:01, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I now understand and I also now know not to paste the data from the cites while I am writing an article. I corrected the spelling and the grammer but I am not sure how to wiki it. I ususally write an article and then clean up the mess but you scan faster than I type. Is it better now?

--Akc9000 23:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem! The article looks just about cleaned up now - the only thing left, really (aside from expansion, if you had anything else to include in the article) is to add inline citations. I have gone through the article and added two or three citation tags to indicate statements that should probably be verified; in the article, they are square-bracketed "citation needed" links beside each of the statements. On the edit page, they will look like this: {{Fact|June 2007}}. Just replace each of these with a reference that verifies the information. (I'm sorry if you knew all of this already - I thought I'd explain it in case you were unfamiliar with inline citation.)

Here's a definition of Wikification, but I think it's pretty much done for this article - I've just added a bunch of internal links. --DearPrudence 05:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for helping. I appeciate your help. I fixed some terrible grammer on my part, and fixed some style issues. I also added the cites you wanted as well as moved the old references section to further reading unless you think it should all be in references.

Please let me know if there are any other issues with this article.

This article could be expanded quite a bit but I was told in the past it is not good to be the only editor so I created it as a stub and was hoping someone else would add to it.

--Akc9000 15:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank You

For capitalizing the Leroy Hurd Page, i didn't know how User:Leroyhurdfan

You're welcome! For future reference, any article that has an incorrect title can be fixed by clicking the "move" tab at the top of the article and typing in the correct title. --DearPrudence 23:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me?

What are you talking about? I deleted a poorly written and poorly referenced edit. How about checking your facts before throwing accusations about. --Michael Johnson 23:13, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, on my watchpage it appeared as though you had done the edit. It was a simple misunderstanding; please be civil. --DearPrudence 03:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Well anyone can make a mistake. But it would have been nice to see a withdrawal on my user talk. And I thought I was being civil, given what you were accusing me of. --Michael Johnson 04:59, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't realise it was a mistake until you mentioned it here, and I presumed that you would take it off yourself. In any case, it wasn't meant as a personal attack, especially considering I added the warning using Twinkle - I chose the warning from a drop-down list, so I think "accusation" is a bit of a strong word. Anyway, I've removed the warning now. --DearPrudence 05:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The more I think about this, there are a couple of things that concern me here. The first is your response to my concern. If you had simply said "sorry" and quickly removed the warning you would have earned my respect and appreciation. Instead you seemed to regard it as a nothing, and seemed to be more concerned about my apparent "uncivil" attitude. It is quite confronting to receive a warning, that is partly the intent, to make a vandal stop and consider their actions. It is probably more confronting to editors like myself, who take some pride in trying to make constructive edits and improve Wikipedia. Warnings are always personal, there is no way you can avoid that. That you chose to use a template doesn't absolve you from association with the contents of the template. As for my language, you said I "add content without citing reliable sources". clearly an accusation as defined by my dictionary. And you should know it is regarded as bad form for an user to remove a warning from their own user page. But of more concern to me is your policy in issuing warnings, as you appear to issue a lot of them. Going back to the watch list, it is apparent you issued your warning after misreading the edit note by Graham87, and apparently did not read my edit note. It would also appear that you did not bother reading the actual edits. I am a big boy, with some experience on Wikipedia, and stand up for myself both on Wikipedia and in real life. Unjustified warnings could well put the neophyte editor right off editing Wikipedia altogether. Personally I never issue warnings without first reading the actual edits. Often I will also check the users contributions and talk page, to see if the edit is part of a pattern, or just a mistake by an otherwise good editor. I don't know if there is a warning template for irresponsible issuing of warning templates, but maybe you deserved one. --Michael Johnson 01:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

It is not always considered bad policy to remove warnings (see this section); in retrospect, I should have removed it right off, but I assumed you would. I did apologise for it, and I will apologise again, especially as you seem to think I am being brusque. It was not my intent.

I did read the edit summaries, as well as the summaries themselves, but at some point in reading I must have accidentally clicked the wrong username (yours, instead of the vandaliser's). I'm not sure how it happened, but I assure you that I did read the edits. As you do, I also check a user's other contributions etc., but if a user adds unsourced statements, I still feel it is important to let the user know (I would have used a General Note instead of the Caution warning I gave you - level one, instead of level two - but as the first one says "Welcome to Wikipedia," and you had clearly been on the site for a long time, I thought it might be insulting).

Again, I am sorry for the mistake. --DearPrudence 02:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.