User talk:Lilac Soul/Archive 3

Speedy deletion notification of Ben Macleod

Hi Lilac Soul. You really only should put the speedy deletion warning on the page of the article's creator, not everyone else who's edited. Also, you will not that I am the admin who declined the speedy deletion. Thanks for your help, but just a friendly bit of advice! Pedro :  Chat  13:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply, I will make sure only to notify the original creator, as that certainly makes sense. Cheers! Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 15:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks from me, too. I'm the guy who tried to fix it after the speedy I'd put back on was reverted. I'd speedied it after it had been recreated. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

AIV

You reported 86.134.94.232 (talk · contribs) to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. This user has only one edit—about a half hour old—and had not been warned. See the instructions at WP:AIV for more information. —EncMstr 09:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, sorry about that - however, as a suspected sockpuppet, I figured the warnings could be dispensed with since the other IPs used had been warned already. But you are, of course, correct that the user wasn't active now, so my report was probably redundant after all. Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 09:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

No sweat. Perhaps you might open a case at WP:SSP? —EncMstr 09:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Not now, I think, since the vandal appears to no longer be active, but thanks for the pointer; now I know the proper place to direct these things. Cheers! Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 09:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Userpage

Yeah, absolutely! I love it when people copy me, it makes me feel special :D I even get a kick out of it when I see people use the same abbreviations in their edit summaries XD And your page looks very nice, if I do say so :-P delldot talk 18:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, whoops, now I see your notice at the top of the page. Don't see the point in taking it off now, though, so I'll just leave this here. Sorry. delldot talk 18:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Region Hovedstadens Psykiatri

On 25 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Region Hovedstadens Psykiatri, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 19:16, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

On February 28, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article church of Holmen, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Well done Lilac Soul. Keep it up, we don't get many Danish DYKs around here. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 06:10, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I cannot take too much credit for the church of Holmen article though. I translated it from the Danish Wikipedia, and shortened it heavily as the Danish article contained way too much irrelevant information. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count) • I'm watching this page so just reply to me right here!} 09:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Nice work with Church of Holmen, has been added to Portal:Norway. Cirt (talk) 00:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Attached?

Hi,

Thank you for the recent edit to the page on PSM Rutter.

If you are into 'attachment theory' I would appreciate you taking a look at the latest discussions on,

   Attachment measures

   Attachment in children

I have suggested the page called Human bonding should be scrapped and would welcome your opinion.

kip KingsleyMiller (talk) 18:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the heads-up. However, I only edited the article to introduce a wikilink to a recently created article - while attachment theory certainly sounds interesting (though I think I know relatively little of it), I don't think I'll have much constructive input to add to the discussions. But thanks! -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count) • I'm watching this page so just reply to me right here!} 18:32, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for this reply

KingsleyMiller (talk) 23:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Annual Reviews

Please see my comment there.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

suncoast

every thing i have edited is correct I worked for the company did you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.252.7.2 (talk) 15:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Completely irrelevant that you worked there. At best, your edits constitute original research, which is disallowed on Wikipedia. Your additions are also defamatory, with content like "they screw you over", which does not, as it should, adhere to neutral point of view. All in all, your edits constitute vandalism. While your first edits could be excused on grounds of you not knowing the rules, you continuing to post this after having been warned is a clear case of vandalism. If you disagree with me, please take it up with an administrator, but I recommend you read up on Wikipedia policy first. Assuming that you do have good faith, however, I wish you happy editing after you have familiarised yourself with the Wikipedia "house rules". -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count) • I'm watching this page so just reply to me right here!} 16:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Impact factors

Since this is a bit off topic for AR discussion, can you tell me how to check an impact factor of a specific journal? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

On the ISI Web of Knowledge website. However, it requires a log-on, which I doubt is free. I have access through my institution. However, most journals themselves state their impact factor on their website, usually on the main page or on the "for authors" or "about the journal" page. If you don't have access to ISI Web of Knowledge, and there's a specific journal's impact factor you cannot find on the journal's own website, feel free to ask me here and I'll look it up for you. Of course, asking me about too many of them might exhaust me :-) -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count) • I'm watching this page so just reply to me right here!} 07:24, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

quotes in footnotes

I restored the quotes you deleted from the footnotes to Meeker's Hardware because they make the article more verifiable. Not everyone will always be able to pull up the Times article in question; having quotes in notes preserves that verifiability and offers an additional guarantee against editors making up credible-looking sources or citing actual sources that contain none of the information (this has happened).

I was also planning to restore the geolinks on the grounds that information in an infobox is usually also linked when it is given in the article text; however it seems that the NRHP infobox has been revised again so as to put that information in the top as well. Daniel Case (talk) 14:43, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, personally, I disagree. Having the quotes does not add to verifiability. Those not accessing the article will just have to take your word that the quote is actually in the article. Since most editors will believe you anyway, it seems superfluous to me. I think the quote thing is more appropriate when you have to show that you're not taking things out of context, which is hardly relevant in this instance. But I don't feel strongly about it and there's certainly nothing wrong about having it in the article, so we'll just let it stay. Thanks for your work on the article, it looks like a good one. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count) • I'm watching this page so just reply to me right here!} 19:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

i.e. vs. e.g.

I am so bad about that (e.g., Tata Nano). Thanks for the reminder: i.e.: in other words. e.g.: for example.842U (talk) 13:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

In my experience, many native English speakers are, so don't feel bad at all. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)}

RfC

I've started drafting a user conduct RfC that you might be interested in here. There's a lot of evidence to locate, sift through and present, so I think it will take awhile to get it put together. If you'd like to participate, please feel free to do so. Cla68 (talk) 06:41, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but I think I'll pass. Looks mostly to me like its for people who have had some negative experiences with a certain user with administrative privileges, and not falling in that category myself, I think it's better if I stay out of it. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)}

Edit to article 'Pooka'

Heya! Recently contributed some information to the above article's 'popular culture' section - and was wondering why it counted as vandalism? This way I can avoid such problems in future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.158.183 (talk) 10:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I've looked at your edits again, and it would definitely seem that I was too quick reverting your contributions. I apologise very much and have reverted back to your version. I don't know why I originally reverted your edits - infact, I don't even recall doing so. Again, my deep apologies. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, no need to apologise. I'm glad to have had my contribution kept, and even more that I wasn't doing something silly. Thanks for the reversion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.161.185 (talk) 18:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Roberto Cavalli Biography

Hello, I edit the biography of Roberto Cavalli yesterday, in Italian and English, and i see that there is and advice on the head of the page.I found your name in the history...

• It does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve it by citing reliable sources. Tagged since April 2008.

now it does

• It reads like an advertisement and needs to be rewritten from a neutral point of view. Tagged since April 2008.

I don't think it would be rewritten.This is the exact traslantion of the italian version.

• It may need to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.Tagged since April 2008.
• It may require general cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.Tagged since April 2008.

this is the first article that I write, maybe i need some help in this...i did not understand exactly what i have to do (sorry)

the list of Boutiques is not complete like this, there's no address and there's no telephone number.I don't understand if it is really useful...

What i have to do?

Bye Marco

pisa_p

Reply: Well, I did not tag the article with any of those, so I won't take a stand on those. However, the use of a list with capital letters, and not in English, and with no description of what is meant, is odd. Wikipedia is not supposed to used as a directory for finding stores in a given brand. It would be better to have just a normal sentence with examples of where he has stores, and have those cities formatted properly, i.e. in lower case but capitalized. As for address and phone numbers, Wikipedia does not include these as they are not encyclopedic and would only serve the purpose of advertising the company. If a person, after reading the article, wishes to find or call a store, that person can look at the official website, which the article has (or at least should have). I hope this answers your questions satisfactorily. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 09:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not tag your reverts of content as minor

Lilac Soul, tagging an edit as [minor] is a privilege reserved for registered users so that it is less likely to be abused as you did [here]. Reverting an editor's correction to an article in not properly tagged as minor. I hope this is okay with you. Doright (talk) 21:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:TWINKLE apparently automatically marks those edits as minor. That is certainly not correct, I agree with you completely. I'll see if there's some setting I can tweak or something to fix this. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 21:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Danish Act of Succession referendum

I am not trying to get into an edit war. I swear that in English the subjunctive mood should be used for "if" situations. For example, "if wishes were horses, we would all eat steak" rather than "if wishes are horses, we all eat steak". For more on the subjunctive, see Subjunctive mood#the subjunctive in English. -Rrius (talk) 21:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Aye, he's right. —Nightstallion 13:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

My apologies. I wasn't trying to do edit warring. I thought that my second attempt was better, but I see that it still used wrong grammar. Well, it's nice to learn something new, and I always wondered what was up with sentences like "I demand that he go to..." -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 14:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Referendums

Hi! Short question: Are there any developments and/or details yet on the two referendums? Any news yet about what exactly will be on the ballot for the opt-out referendum? Thanks! —Nightstallion 13:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Nothing so far. All we have so far is speculation that it could happen this fall, and that it doesn't seem very likely to include a Euro referendum. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 15:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

nods Yeah, that's what I had heard -- that he'll want to get some success (like getting rid of the defence or citizenship opt-out, or reducing the immigration opt-out to the opt-in variant which the UK and Ireland gain under the Lisbon Treaty) and that asking for the euro right now would be too risky. Will the Succession Act referendum likely be held at the same time, to ensure the necessary turnout for it? —Nightstallion 16:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I would consider it very likely that the Succession Act referendum will be held along with some other referendum or election to ensure voter turnout. Could be the opt out referenda, could be the municipal elections or European Parliament elections coming up in 2009. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 14:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

nods Thanks! —Nightstallion 11:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I assume the discussions are still ongoing without any definite results so far? —Nightstallion 21:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely correct, still nothing official. One of the government parties' members of parliament started talking about this fall, but in the name of avoiding recentism and undue weight problems, we probably shouldn't update the articles until there's official word from the prime minister. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 10:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

nods Okay, thanks. BTW, you didn't reply in the discussion on what to do in case there will be more than one referendum...? —Nightstallion 11:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

So the referendum idea is dead now...? I've read that the referendum on changing the justice opt-out can't be held now, as that would require the Lisbon Treaty to come into effect as planned? What'll happen now? —Nightstallion 11:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, a couple of things. First of all, the future of the Lisbon Treaty has not been decided yet - last I heard, the intention is to make some sort of arrangement in which, if the treaty is still ratified by the remaining countries, it will come into effect. As to what will happen with the Danish referendum(s), there has still been no word. I'm guessing the government's strategy is still to reveal nothing until August (I think it was). -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 12:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, but I don't think the course of action will already be decided by August, so I don't know whether Rasmussen can announce a referendum then... —Nightstallion 14:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Lickig Riverside

I hope you didn't think I was being rude when I reverted your recent edit. The district was notable, as its on the National Register. I meant to explain that, but my computer hiccup and saved the edit before I was finished explaining.--Bedford 05:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't think you were rude at all, and good job on both of those articles! -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 06:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Offensive content

I have no idea how this works, but there is some offensive content on this page. It occurs right after the table of contents jump. i don't know how to edit yet, but I do know this should be taken down.

24.60.23.202 (talk) 04:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what offensive content (nor which page) you are talking about? -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 19:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

User page

Hey Lilac Soul.I love your user page,it is so cool!As I have joined Wikipedia only last week could you please tell me how to make it like yours?But dont worry I wont copy it and make it just like yours!!--Sitharasbabu (talk) 06:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Sitharasbabu/11:45--Sitharasbabu (talk) 06:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Feel very free to just click "Edit this page" on my user page, and then copy the source code from there and onto your own userpage. Then you can start editing away. It is fairly straight forward. Most places, you can probably keep my formatting and just substitute with your own links and text; in some places, you may wish to change the actual layout. As you'll notice, markup on Wikipedia is very similar (or even identical) to HTML, so if you have some familiarity with that, you should have no problems. Other than that, well, it's hard to give you any advice. I suggest you copy-paste my sourcecode and then start editing to your heart's desire. And then you are of course very free to ask me if you run into specific problems, and I'll try to help you. I, however, originally copied the layout from someone else, so I won't be taking credit for it. Oh, one final thing, you may want to do all the editing on a non-visible place, so that people coming to your talkpage don't see a lot of my stuff while you're editing. You can easily create subpages for this, e.g. a subpage to your userpage titled User:Sitharasbabu/Sandbox. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 10:53, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

CAP Wikipedia article

Hi Lilac Soul, I am working with the Cape Breton County CAP and have been asked to edit the article to reflect the names, addresses and telephones of the CAP locations. Is there a better way to structure the site list than the one I did previously? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.94.18 (talk) 14:42, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

There are a couple of points to address there. First of all, in the interest of neutrality, Wikipedia actually discourages you to start and contribute to articles about companies you work for. You cannot be neutral in your position, so you should probably steer clear of working on the article altogether. However, if you do continue to work on the article, try to be neutral and note that Wikipedia is not supposed to contain phone-numbers and addresses in the way you are putting them in the article.-Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 07:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Radio article

Hi Lilac,

I was making some minor adjustments to the article and suddenly it said that it was marked for deletion. We're currently working on the content of the article and it should be completed soon.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swindonmatt (talk • contribs) 20:24, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, in that case you may want to place the {{underconstruction}} template on the article. Just be sure to remove it if you stop working on the article, even for a few hours, so others can work on it as well. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:28, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lilac, Can I remove the {db-bio} and {hangon} tags? Thanks, Matt

I'll do it so you don't get into trouble for it. You should still explain how you think it is notable on the talkpage, as someone other than me may come by with the same objection. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lilac, What would you suggest I write? Just that I am working on the page etc.? Thanks a lot, Matt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swindonmatt (talk • contribs) 20:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, sure, but it would be great if you had a look at the WP:NOTABILITY and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) pages and then reflect, on the article's talk page, on whether or not the radio station in question fullfills the criteria. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Lilac, Just out of interest, what happens if the article isn't notable? Thanks, Matt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swindonmatt (talk • contribs) 20:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

If it isn't notable, it will eventually get deleted. If notability is possible, but not established, it will probably get tagged for a while. If notability is debatable, a discussion on whether or not the article should be deleted will probably get started. This is why I would recommend that you consider whether or not it is notable before you do a whole lot of work on it :-) Oh, and also, please remember to sign your posts by typing ~~~~ in the end of them. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lilac, I cant write anything in the discussion for the artice. Do you know why? Thanks Swindonmatt (talk) 20:54, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

You certainly should be able to. Try again. Don't you get the "edit" tab? -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 05:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Winchester Rifle

you said me that i don't have to put advertising on the page or some external link to my own web site. this is correct. but i've only put some information of a new factory that make this product like "rossi" or "norinco" that is already in the page. so i don't see the problem!!! and the external link is to the factory not to my own website!!!! sorry for my bad enghlish but i'm italian!

—Preceding unsigned comment added by VirginiaJappaWeat (talk • contribs) 09:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

IPs on AIV

I think you deleted the report before they (or you) got a chance to read my comment. The WHOIS information for the two IPs says that they are editing from the same location. See 1 and 2. I would recommend reverting yourself. Cheers, The Hybrid 12:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Did not see your reply there, I have reverted myself as you suggested. Thanks.-Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 13:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem :). Good catch, BTW. Cheers, The Hybrid 13:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

David Davis

Sorry Lilac Soul, but the Conservatives have not indicated that Davis will be their candidate. Until they do, I believe my revision should stand.--91.106.28.24 (talk) 12:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps not, but you continue to assign him to "Unofficial Monster Raving Loony Party", which is an obvious piece of vandalism. Please stop doing that, by the way!-Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 13:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Obvious - yes! Vandal - no!!! I think the subtle vandals cause far more trouble. Their the ones who forget to turn their brains on. --91.106.28.24 (talk) 13:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

You may feel that way, but Wikipedia defines vandalism as such: Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. The most common types of vandalism include the addition of obscenities or crude humor, page blanking, or the insertion of nonsense into articles. Your edit certainly falls into that category. While subtle vandals are certainly a bigger problem, that does not excuse your edits. Please also read the WP:POINT article.-Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 13:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Which do you believe I added? Why is adding obvious nonsense vandalism, but reverting to something you freely admit to not understanding, and which has no source, not vandalism? (BTW Davis hasn't even resigned yet.)--91.106.28.24 (talk) 00:40, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Your edit was to substitute something apparently unreferenced to something completely untrue. Since your edit is obvious vandalism, I have no way of knowing whether your claim that there is no official word on the Conservative Party is also vandalism. If you felt, which you may have had good reason to, that the article should state that there still was no official word, then you put that in there. All vandalism-fighting editors like myself can do is to revert obvious pieces of vandalism. And indeed, your vandalism is also what caused the potentially wrong information to be readded continuously, by me and others. If you knew what should be in there, e.g. that "the Conservative party has not yet confirmed...", then that is what you should have put in the article. My edits were good faith, and your certainly appear not to have been. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 04:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Trust

Hello--regarding your disambiguation of Trust -> Trust (social sciences) in Schools of economics. I'm thinking that Trust law is actually more appropriate. I don't know that there's an article existing which is fully appropriate, I'm surprised there's no breach of trust article (well, there is, but...). In any case, in the context of the economics article, it looks to me like a legal/contractual/agent kind of "trust" is more appropriate than a largely fuzzier state-of-mind/intimacy "trust" which is the focus of the Trust (social sciences) article. Whatcha think? Cretog8 (talk) 10:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

You're probably right, so I've changed it. I was not aware that "breach of trust" was an actual concept in trust law. There probably should be either the article you mention, or at least a section about it in the Trust law article. If you know anything about this subject, perhaps you could start this? -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 10:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm too timid to get into writing stuff on law. I know "breach of trust" is an expression I hear thrown around in legal talk, but I don't know nearly enough to fill it in. Thanks for the update. Cretog8 (talk) 10:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Delicacies

Why was my edit considered "vandalism"? I provided clear links to the items I listed, most of which are all widely known by observers and tourists to China to be consumed by the very rich as health tonics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.59.88.121 (talk) 09:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not even going to dignify this with an answer. For anyone else who might be interested, the above anonymous vandal is talking about reversion of these four pieces of vandalism. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 09:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

If you can't respond I think that it's obvious that you may have a hidden agenda. Are you ethnically Chinese by any chance?

Why is it that wikipedia editors are allowed to list "ant eggs" as a delicacy in Mexico, knowing that many white westerners might be revolted by it, yet not allowed to list similar ingredients eaten in China? Are we afraid of 'offending' the Chinese (or there goverment for that matter)? This is either racism in one form or another: either you see no problem with offending 'darker skinned' folk such as Cambodians or Mexicans, or you are implicitly covering up more gruesome aspects of the 'lighter skinned' Han Chinese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.59.88.121 (talk) 09:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, most of that list does already look like it should be deleted, so I'll grant you that. And if your edits actually were in good faith, I apologize for accusing you of vandalism. However, neither of the sources you provided were reliable, most of the stuff you added were unsourced, all of it (even the ones with unrealiable sources) seems highly unlikely to be generally considered a delicacy in Chinese culture, and your edit removed genuine, established content without any given reason. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 10:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Granted, my deletion of "Peking Duck" was probably in error and an accident, however, I do believe that monkey brain and dog meat are referenced in Wikipedia itself. Furthermore, Phayul it is a reputable news source primarily for ethnic Tibetans, which in itself does not make it unreliable (Do we disregard Israeli sources about Arabs, MSM news stories about neo-Nazis?). Anyhow, in all fairness, if items which are those in the West find disgusting are listed for other ethnic groups, it is only fair to include such things for the Chinese as well. One explanation states that they are not commonplace in China, but the definition of a 'delicacy' is something that is rare. I doubt "fried spiders" are common place in Cambodian cuisine.61.59.88.121 (talk) 10:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, on second thought, at least the dog meat, and perhaps also the monkey brain, could be included in the article. However, stuff like cannibalism, human featus, donkey penis, and such, should not be in the list without reliable sources. Phayul itself may be a reputable news source, but its forums are not a reliable source, since forums can, in their very nature, contain all sorts of information that is inaccurate, whether deliberately so or not. However, you have convinced me that you are not a vandal, and I apologize for referring to you as such, and I will go and remove the warning I gave you straight away. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 10:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Alén Diviš links

Hi, I noticed you spent some time "fixing" the links to redirects in the Alén Diviš article. Thanks for contributing, your good faith edits are appreciated - but while "fixing" links like this is something I've done in the past, I've learned that it can actually be unhelpful in the long run. Please see Wikipedia:R2D for further explanation. Thanks. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 15:04, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I've come here to say the same thing. Lilac Soul's user contributions show a lot of "Redirect bypass"es, so I wonder if he's aware of WP:R2D. Art LaPella (talk) 15:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah. Yes, I do see that point; I actually thought this was encouraged, but I guess I can totally see how this would more often than not be a bad idea. I was not aware of WP:R2D, so of course, I'll stop doing these edits right away. Thanks for the heads up! -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 17:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Script edits

Hi, is there a reason to insert spaced em dashes? I always thought (and I think WP:DASH agrees) that they should be unspaced. giggy _(:O) 07:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I was using a script by another user, but that of course is no excuse - still my responsibility! I have tweaked the script by that other user so that it no longer makes spaced em dashes. Thanks for the heads up! -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 14:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Harry Potter

Please be careful with formatting and edit summaries! In Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, why did you change "ancient forest–free" to "ancient forest – free"? In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, you made many more changes sometimes than were indicated in your edit summary. Both these changes (and the changes to four of the other books, which I don't have time to check now, so I don't know whether they are your changes) raise the question: why do we want articles on the books to be listed in the category under the heading "0" (e.g. [[Category:Harry Potter books| 06]] -> [Category:Harry Potter books|06]])? Brian Jason Drake 11:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. It would appear that I am using a script that does a lot of stuff I actually don't want it to be doing. I think I'll just stop using that script, as it has caused me problems before. As for making more changes than indicated in the summary, that is true, I just figured the formatting fixes were so minor that it didn't matter. but regardless of everything, I am still the only one who's responsible for changes made using userscripts, so that is no excuse. Sorry about the "bad" edits, it certainly wasn't my intention. And thanks for the heads-up! -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 16:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey dude

Your bot is hosing up my Blue Iguana article on mainpage day. You want to turn it off?--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 06:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Seems you must be refering to this? Certainly looks like an odd edit. It is not my bot, however; I simply asked it to process that page. I'll notify the bot operator, though, as this looks like a bug that may need to be fixed. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 06:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, looks like Sandy got them.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 06:10, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on getting the article to FA, by the way! -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 06:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Thanks and WP:CHIFTD notice

Thanks for your past contributions you may want to come help the current WP:CHIFTD drive.

This user helped promote Boeing Galleries to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:53, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Reasons?

If you are going to revert the changes I made to Local government in the United Kingdom, could you at least do me the courtesy of giving a reason why you disagree with the revision? --Russ (talk) 12:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Did not mean to revert, I simply added the {{dab}} without noticing that it had been previously deleted. I've undone my own edit to that article now. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 13:00, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Referendum

Any news on whether it's postponed or whether they'll take place this autumn? —Nightstallion 14:21, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, still haven't noticed anything in the news. The Irish referendum certainly made Danish media speculate that Danish referenda on the EU opt-outs could be postponed, but there haven't been any words from the people with any real knowledge. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 19:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

nods Thanks! —Nightstallion 14:46, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Apology Re:Schizophrenia Article

My apologies for any problems "LilacSoul". Won't do it again. It does strike me as odd that the "question neutrality" logo is allowed for some articles but not others.... I believe it to be justified here for the simple reason that people question the existence of "schizophrenia". Why "Irish Republicanism" - for example - has a "Question neutrality of article" logo and this one doesn't I cannot understand. Many people question the existence of schizophrenia. Will keep all debate to the discussion page then if that is OK. best wishes nickyfann Nickyfann (talk) 15:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)Nickyfann (talk) 15:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)Nickyfann (talk) 16:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, for starters, you did not explain on the talkpage why you had placed the template to begin with, which is plenty of reason to remove the template. However, the template you used is not for "questioning neutrality" - it is for voicing a concern that the article is highly inaccurate. You are correct, of course, that some people do question the existence of schizophrenia as a uniform diagnosis - but this is already covered in the article. But as you say, this discussion is better left for the article's talkpage, so let's continue talking there. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 19:29, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Sharapova - notable matches

Hi. As you are a regular editor at Maria Sharapova, your opinion as to whether you believe the "Notable matches" section is necessary to the article would be appreciated. Please join the discussion here. Thanks. Musiclover565 (talk) 19:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Useless/disruptive edit

I believe that this edit was really unnecessary and in fact somewhat disruptive. It was merely a cosmetic change that will not make any difference in the page that the user sees, and it is a big disruption in the edit history, because anyone who compares two dates on either side of that edit now will not be able to tell what was changed besides the additions of unnecessary spaces after each one of the thousands of items in the list. In fact, if possible, I would like to find a way to undo that particular edit and thereby make the edit history relevant once more. Esn (talk) 07:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you find the edit disruptive. While not directly mentioned in WP:MoS, all examples of lists in the manual of style uses spaces after bullets. IMO, it makes it easier on the eye in edit mode. I do, however, concede your point that it makes no difference to the person just reading the page, and will consider not doing that particular kind of edit in the future on pages where, as you say, it could be a major disruption. However, I also believe that your concern that the edit is "disruptive" is unwarranted. Most people won't look through the history in the manner you describe, so it still makes very little difference to regular users. But I am sorry that you find my edits disruptive, and will, as I say, consider not doing that particular type of edit again. If you actually do wish to remove my edit from the edit history, you can ask an administrator to help you with this. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 08:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion Morten Jørgensen

Hi, I'm Morten Jørgensen, a Norwegian author. I am trying to get this right, so please have a little patience with me :)

I have started with the new page "Big Bong". When doing this, I discovered that there also was a Danish Morten Jørgensen. I have made a disambiguition page, but got a double looåp, so I am on the case now.

Best MJ

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'm afraid that one of the corner-stones of Wikipedia is 1) notability (which the article at this point does not establish), and 2) that you shouldn't start articles about yourself. So, while I hope you take no offense, I am re-nominating the article for speedy deletion. If you want to contest it, please don't remove the deletion template but instead follow the instructions written inside the template. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 09:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, PLEASE - give me a coupla seconds, ok? can we like ... eh ... talk? MJ :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Litter13 (talk • contribs) 09:54, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Ad 1): See http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morten_J%C3%B8rgensen

The notablitity is there in Norwegian Wiki. For further reference, see http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cappelen - my publisher.

Ad 2): This page was NOT started by me.

I have only been trying to create a link to my Norwegian page, trying to avoid ppl getting the Danish rower.

The intention of the Big Bong page is to avoid some poor band in e.g. New Zealand take that name for their band and get sued in 2010. All kids use Wiki these days to check if a band name has been taken. I don't thin that collides with either 1) or 2).

MJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Litter13 (talk • contribs) 10:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

And right now you throw me rules, "break off conversations" etc that I only halfway understand or manage to read fast enough. :( i AM NOT THAT EXPERIENCED HERE, OK?? Please? Litter13 (talk) 10:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Could you maybe try to help me instead? Please? I have a loop. My stuff is reasonably right, but I get a loop on the Danish rower, and I don't want to push him out.

Litter13 (talk) 10:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello? Litter13 (talk) 10:33, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'll give it a bit of time to see if notability is established. And again, please remember WP:COI, as it clearly asks people not to start articles about themselves. You say on your talkpage that you did not start this article, however, a few lines up on my talkpage, you state that you are, in fact, Morten Jørgensen. But if you believe this person to be notable for English Wikipedia, I'll give you some time to establish this, and then we'll see. As for the other issues about loops etc., I have helped you and created and moved articles as appropriate, and in fact in disagreement with my belief that this article should probably be deleted. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 12:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC)