User talk:Jc-S0CO/Archives/2007/12

Christianity by country
Please continue to contribute to the discussion in Christianity by country. The bizarre edits and more bizarre justifications continue! Thanks! --Anietor 04:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

IPCC
It was GR's silly claim William M. Connolley 21:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I fear you must be confused. That was not my claim, it originated here .  Do you admit your error?  Yes or no?  Either way, that text is not a claim of authorship, as User:Jc-S0CO correctly pointed out in response to your silly assertion that "reviewer != author" (your exact words).  Do you admit your error?  Yes or no?  :)


 * [ Aside for User:Jc-S0CO, see User talk:GoRight if you want to understand the silly pressing for yes/no answers here! :) ]  --GoRight 01:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * ...why does he get to strike your comments from your own talk page? I didn't see any policy violations in what you wrote. ~ S0CO ( talk 01:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * He does not strike my comments on my page. He removed them and later the entire discussion from his.  I simply reconstructed the events on my page for illustration purposes since I don't believe in all this censoring of commentary, especially when it is civil (although admittedly pointed at times).  Perhaps I need to make that more clear?  It basically says as much at the top of that section.


 * I later went back and tried to smooth things over a bit per the spirit of WP:CIV and WP:AGF but as you can see from that version a couple of sections down (also eventually removed from his talk page) he was more interested in giving me the run about on "do you admit you err'ed, yes or no" than discussing the larger point.


 * Anyway that is the source of my yes/no business above. Let's see if he'll be forthright and honest enough to answer.  :)  --GoRight 02:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

AIT
I have been accused of being too prolix, and when I try to include direct quotes to avoid WP:OR claims I am accused of violating WP:WEIGHT because the text is so large. The usual practice on Wikipedia seems to be to paraphrase the relevant sources in an honest manner to produce a more condensed text.

In this case, "planetary emergency" is actually a direct quote from the first reference. "biblical proportions" is a paraphrase of "a nature walk through the book of Revelations" which Gore actually stated in the movie when discussing recent years disasters. To me this seems a fair summarization of the two.

Note that the first reference if copyrighted by Paramount Classics, the film's distributor so it isn't just some synopsis dreamed up by Rotten Tomatoes. Also note that Rotten Tomatoes is linked to directly from the ClimateCrisis site as its reviews link.

Do you see any concerns here? --GoRight 02:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't. Thanks for clarifying it. ~ S0CO ( talk 04:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Source for the section in "Movement to impeach George W. Bush"
Oh I know it was, it's on a lot of websites, the information is freely distributed. I know of the nightweed website, I sent her a few messages regarding current issues. I won't be putting it back on the article for impeaching bush because another person made a good point why it shouldn't be there. It's because it is more like regular evidence, rather than a direct impeachable offense. It may be on a different wikipedia article, but one that it fits with better. Preservefreedom (talk) 20:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Welcome
 Welcome! Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films and film characters. If you haven't already, please add User WikiProject Films to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:
 * Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].


 * The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for November has been published.  December's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
 * Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
 * Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia.  Check it out!
 * Want to collaborate on articles? The Cinema Collaboration of the Week picks an article every week to work on together.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)