User talk:AdelaMae/Archive3

This archive contains messages from October 9, 2006 to January 31, 2007.

Olympianism
"If there are some insights particular to the Olympian strain of Hellenic polytheism that need to be incorporated into Wikipedia's account of Hellenic polytheism, please add them to the main article so that people will be able to find them."

I'll have to get back to you on this, I'm currently working on an article. Yes Olympianism is more or less what people mean by Hellenic Polytheism/Paganism Hellenismos etc But also includes the Roman manifestation, which Hellenismos excludes. It is also deity centric rather than culturally specific.

To be precise Olympianism is what people mean when they refer to Greco-Roman or Classical Paganism.

Therefore I would say a completly new entry is needed.

Regards Meic

Re:Selena Fox & Phyllis Curott
In the case of Selena Fox I copied that edit summary from one of the edit summaries of User:Ekajati because she is thought to be an expert. But maybe I was wrong in doing so, as looking through WP:EL right now, I don't see it. So maybe she is wrong. In any case, the article has been reverted by User:Hanuman Das and the link is restored. I will check into it more, but I apologize if I was wrong. In the case of Phyllis Curott there are no reference citations per WP:V and WP:CITE. Ralph Bass is an example of a referenced article. There are better examples and I will find more if you want. In any case, that article also has been reverted by User:Hanuman Das and what was there before my edit is now restored. Hope this helps  Mattisse(talk) 22:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Mattisse, Ekajati was removing personal external links that were NOT RELATED to the article in question. E.G. links to a site containing amateur original research about a topic, not sites BELONGING to the subject of the article. Your "copycat" campaign seems to be part of your ongoing harassment of certain users such as Rosencomet, Hanuman Das and Ekajati. But don't worry, you will have a chance to defend your behaviour soon. -999 (Talk) 22:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation & for taking it seriously!
I'm very appreciative of your reply and glad that you seek to improve the article as all work in that direction helps us all at Wikipedia. Thanks! Mattisse(talk) 04:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Hypothyroidism
Thank you for correcting the sexist language in Hypothyroidism. I can't believe I missed that! Rosemary Amey 19:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Queerspawn
Because it's a definition of word. Leinad pl 17:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thank you. I mostly just Wikignome around here, and did not think anyone was really paying attention to the work. :)

→ ''' P . Mac Uidhir''' (t) (c)  03:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your Editor Review Comments
Thanks for taking the time to give me feedback on my editing. I truly appreciate it!

Re: commenting on the Article for Deletion page of an article I nominated: I suspected that I shouldn't leave a comment about keeping or deleting it but I wanted to add the additional info. Obviously I should have just added it as a "comment" not a vote. Live and learn.

I had been using speedy deletion for the most part until I came across this whole Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-03 Starwood Festival mess. With the amount of conflict involved, I thought it more politic to allow comments on these specific deletions rather than go straight to speedy deletion. This is not being bold about editing but it seemed best to avoid being accused of some vendetta against Starwood Festival or User:Rosencomet. However, I'm sort of over that trepidation. I view 80-90% of the Starwood links to be obvious linkspam and/or superfluous to the entry they are in and I am removing them accordingly. I think this is the right thing to do based on my understanding of the policies and guidelines. I might be wrong but it's in good faith and that's the best I can do. (what is this, a confessional?)

I know about the Prod deletion process but haven't used it because I feel less familiar with the reasons and process. I'll try to use it in appropriate cases. Thanks for the tip.

Yeah, I just made my talk page archive and I think I messed up. My impulse was to leave a couple of things on the main talk page but I just got carried away. I'll move a couple back.

Re: Using Notability as a reason for deletion. I guess I thought, after reading through the guidelines (and yes, I know they are guidelines, not policy, and contended guidelines as well) that there were some rather clear standards (or at least rules of thumb) to apply to people and their notability. I'll try to use a clearer standard like verifiability in my future evaluations concerning deletion.

Yes, I can certainly change my mind based on new information. I've been a print editor outside of Wikipedia for a looong time. Writing isn't like mathematics and there isn't always one right answer. I view Wikipedia as a collaborative project which I feel requires an interesting combination of certainty, fallibility, cooperation, and a willingness to find balance between differing views. A lot more as well but I've already rambled too long here.

Again, thank you for your comments. Oh, and if it wasn't clear when I asked for comments: I'm not running for Admin or anything (too few edits anyway), just interested in improving my work on Wikipedia. I don't think I'm temperamentally suited for that kind of Wikipedia responsibility. --Pigman (talk &bull; contribs) 23:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


 * WP:BIO is exactly what I think about in terms of a person's notability. However, I haven't always been clear or explicit about why I think a particular person doesn't meet the criteria in WP:BIO when putting them up for deletion. I've just said "not notable." I can certainly correct this. Thanks again. --Pigman (talk &bull; contribs) 18:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies
Hello! I noticed that your userpage mentions that you are interested in LGBT issues. Would you be interested in joining WikiProject LGBT studies? The WikiProject's been a bit inactive recently and some of us are trying to get it going again. We'd love to have you on board! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better – thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. – SuggestBot 07:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment moved from userpage
Sarah! Do your homework instead of playing on Wikipedia!

With love Zach. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Plantman223 (talk • contribs) 00:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC).

Lerab Ling, etc.
Thanks for bringing that up. A lot of religious articles tend to be pretty fuzzy, especially in the more guru-oriented religions. Still, these are probably particularly bad, and definitely need remediation. Are you sure they're not copyright violations?&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!) 01:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, that was nice and easy to deal with! It would be great if you could follow this up and see if other articles are affected. What you want to do is look in the history, see which editor added the copyrighted material, and then check his or her contributions to see what other articles may have been edited. If the editor is anonymous, there might be more than one IP in question.&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!) 02:11, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Žydrūnas Ilgauskas
Hi. While going through and rating some basketball players on the biography wikiproject, I noticed your ratin on Žydrūnas Ilgauskas. Honestly, I'm surprised you gave it a B rating, as there is virtually no personal information on him. I'm going to downgrade it to start, just to let you know, unless oyu have a real problem with that. -- Wizardman 04:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

disambig
Do you think there should be a disambig page for APA? I assumed that you meant American Psychological Association which it has meant to me for the last thiry years. I didn't even know about the American Philosophical Association. Sorry for being professionally parochial. (Your analogy still worked though.) Sincerely, Mattisse 02:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Tamara Siuda
Dear AdelaMae: Left you a note in the entry of my name to contact me directly if I must be listed in Wikipedia. :) (I'm not so sure I like the idea, but what's written there about me is positively awful (not your fault) and I'd love to help you verify the sources.)  - Tamara

WP:MOTTO
About #20 ("Wikipedia: as big as you think") I have one teeny quibble. My original suggestion used a comma, not a colon, since the Kansas slogan officially uses a comma. Do with that information what you will; it's just punctuation, right? - AdelaMae (t - c - wpn) 00:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It was suggested in the original discussion that a colon would make more sense, as the comma doesn't really feel right, to be honest. And exactly how many people are going to notice, eh? —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 11:17, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Step
Template:Step has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 07:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Diane Stein
Please look into this page as I nominated for delete/merger. ForrestLane42 20:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)ForrestLane42

Editor review
Thanks for having requested an editor review. A month has passed since it has been posted there, and it has been archived. You can find it at Editor review/, where you may read last minute additions. We would really appreciate your help in reviewing a random editor. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 00:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Gay icon
The image was in an info box because every time I added it without one it ended up taking over the entire page. Thank you for correcting it--it was driving me nuts! Jeffpw 19:07, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Mattisse
Thank you. Your comments and links were very helpful. SilkTork 00:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)