User talk:MissWizzy

Welcome

 * }

Talkback: SpikeToronto
—  Spike Toronto  22:11, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Assessment
So far, so good. Keep at it. DS (talk) 12:07, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi and thanks
Hi, thank you very much for all the helpful edits on the 2010 Copiapó mining accident article. It has grown very quickly to a fairly large one and has been in need of critical review of sources vs content...and of course fixing awkward sentences. Your work is appreciated. Veriss (talk) 23:46, 17 October 2010 (UT

Welcome, Miss Wizzy
I'm glad you're a WP contributor. You're doing excellent work, in my humble opinion. Bringing good info, and cleaning up things. Boldness as well as neutrality. Very nice...  Welcome... ResearchRave (talk) 02:33, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
I had already reverted that once, didn't want to get into an edit war. Sify is a internet provider so just regurgitates news off the wires. My Fox Philly is a small tv station that does the same for non-local news. Yahoo is another echo of news wires. His sources conflict on the suicide bit and I haven't seen those allegations in more reputable sources. Veriss (talk) 00:39, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Response
Well, that comment was not necessarily directed just to you, but also to CableHorn (and Veriss1)... And yes, I do agree that there should be a bit more serious academic material in the section. Though the book and movie stuff could arguably be put in a couple of different spots. It's flexible. There are no fixed rules on Wikipedia, just general policies. (As can be seen on WP:IGNORE). Also, I believe your exact words on Veriss1's talk page were "Let's argue now! :)", which I found adorable, I must say. ResearchRave (talk) 00:49, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi ResearchRave. That section has changed a bit since since we commented on it and I must say that I'm not keen on the new look. The first two paragraphs are very journalistic and very close to the source. I was going to edit them but got a bit stuck as to what to do with them. The style of those two paragraphs isn't in keeping with the rest of the article or any other articles that I've read. The opening paragraph is about strange behaviour in the UK press not about the social impact of the accident and the second is mostly given over to a rambling quote which doesn't really add to the understanding for the reader. (I'll copy this over to the discussion page and......."adorable"? [blushes and flutters eyelashes] :P) MissWizzy (talk) 02:41, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * PS. I have to go to bed now (beauty sleep, you know!), so don't think I'm being rude if I don't reply straight off. MissWizzy (talk) 02:46, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

2010 Copiapó mining accident
I took the plunge and nominated it for GA this evening. We'll see how it goes. --Veriss (talk) 03:56, 28 February 2011 (UTC)