User talk:Howdoesitflee

Edits to Archpoet
Hi, just noticed your comment on the Archpoet talk page. Is this the template you're looking for? katherine_a (talk) 10:52, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Archpoet
Hi Sadads. I just wanted to explain my using the expression "an obvious reference" in the Archpoet article to you who's responsible for going through Wikipedia and changing this for all articles. I take it you don't read the articles before editing them, but seeing the number of edits needed to be done, it's completely understandable.

Now, in the context of the article itself, the "obvious" takes its full meaning when you see it from the perspective of 12th century educated men and women who knew Latin very well and the Bible just as much, and who formed the intended audience of the Archpoet's compositions. Your correction and my explaining made me realize, as I'm writing, that maybe I should have mentioned this and made it clear in the article. So, instead of writing "an obvious reference to the Scripture", and if I really would have wanted to keep the "obvious" expression, "an obvious reference to the Scripture for the educated people of the time" would have been more precise. Could that have saved the "obvious"? I don't know, but I'll modify the article to include this small correction which sheds some needed light.

Also, it's good that you didn't put the OR template, because I would have removed it, since the article contains no "original research" per se: I went through everything myself, reading hundred of pages of various books and scholarly articles so as to make the Archpoet article as complete, neutral and referenced as possible. Using "obvious reference" in an article does not automatically warrant the judgment that the article contains original research; I think it's unfair to judge hundreds or thousands of words solely on two. That's just my two cents. Thanks for taking care. &bull; H☼&omega;d&Theta;esI&dagger;fl&notin;&isin;   {KLAT}  &bull; 18:47, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, obvious in and of itself forces the author's point of view, as pointed out in the conversation at this conversation at the Village pump, and in many cases it was used in the context of pop culture sections which tend to be stock full of OR. I was careful only  to add the OR templates if the line was unreferenced (which you article clearly was not). I only added inline OR templates not full article OR templates, sorry if that confused you. Their were only about 300 cases of this, and almost every one that I caught had POV or OR pushing, Sadads (talk) 19:58, 29 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, that significantly clarifies the picture! Please note that my comment was written after reading the said conversation, which is precisely why I took the trouble of justifying this specific use of "obvious" since it seemed to diverge from what the conversation was directly aiming at. Anyway, sorry for my confusion and thanks for the supplementary explanation. &bull; H☼&omega;d&Theta;esI&dagger;fl&notin;&isin;   {KLAT}  &bull; 20:25, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

/* Rajesh khanna filmography */
We need your help in filling up the column of directors - which you can get from http://www.citwf.com/person241842.htm in the article rajesh khanna filmography in wikipedia.As you seen to be interested in working in wikipedia articles we would be gald if you contribute in filling up the DIRECTORS cloumn and in the NOTES column fill up the awards won and nominations won by khanna against a particular film.Shrik88music (talk) 14:49, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

November 2010
Your addition to Ksenia Solo has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Logical Fuzz (talk) 00:57, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for letting me know. It was kinda dumb from my part, but I just went along with whatever was already there (that is, copyrighted content). The fact is, it's probably because I try to straighten up the text and its reference that I got "caught". The funny thing is that there are so many articles out there just full of content pumped directly from websites and they're not discovered simply because there are no references attached to them...! Anyway, I'll try to be more careful in the future. &bull; H☼&omega;d&Theta;esI&dagger;fl&notin;&isin;   {KLAT}  &bull; 04:16, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

my edits
I only removed items that can't be sourced due to being too trivial. or relevant, but aren't sourced. Mentining the scenery was removed because it only explained where they were in the plot. I removed alot from the story section.Bread Ninja (talk) 23:40, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Monster response
Why? Aren't most of the anime pages detailing the full biographies. I thought they did. Rtkat3 (talk) 9:38, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Gee! Thanks a bunch, for the barnstar but more importantly for your work on the Petrarch articles! &bull; H☼&omega;d&Theta;esI&dagger;fl&notin;&isin;   {KLAT}  &bull; 20:55, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Otium
This is my latest article. Feel free to make any improvements. --Doug Coldwell talk 19:00, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Expanded article. Any ideas for a DYK hook?--Doug Coldwell talk 11:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Goliards in cinema
I just discovered the Goliards, and their story is fantastic. Do you know if their is any stage or cinema work that incorporates the Goliards? I've looked but haven't found anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.162.133.199 (talk) 02:38, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Quite honestly, I've never investigated the spectacle (cinema and stage) angle because the Middle Ages has always been overlooked and, when they bother to use it, abused by contemporary creators, serving as a mere source of inspiration mostly for the "fantasy" genre—meaning that they don't care what really happened in the historical sense. It's always folklore, legends and similar stuff, almost never the actual medieval era we get to see (notwithstanding a few titles taken from a long list... So there's a dearth of authentic, truly medieval productions dealing with historical subjects, which is why I've never given much thought about media other than literature and music. (And besides, these works would have showed up while I researched the subject on Google and such.) But hey, despite all that, if you ever come across something good about the Goliards in any medium whatsoever, please let me know! Cheers. &bull; H☼&omega;d&Theta;esI&dagger;fl&notin;&isin;   {TALK}  &bull; 03:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)