User talk:Popsup

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Samw 15:02, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

February 2008
Hi, the recent edit you made to Suzanne Elder has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. —αἰτίας •'discussion'• 00:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008
Hello, αἰτίας, I undid the reversion of Suzanne Elder because the edits consisted mainly of wikilinks, purposefully provided to add context important to those unfamiliar with the terms or seeking more information on them, but a full discussion of which was unnecessary in the main article. I.e., "LGBT" is an acronym familiar to any activist in the Uptown area but might not be familiar to all readers especially older readers, and it is unnecessary to sepll out the full source word. -- popsup

re: Maine South High School
Heya Popsup!

I just noted that you put a fact tag on the introduction to this article, and was hoping that I could have you reconsider that.

There is a claim that the school is known for its athletic and academic successes. The sections of the article set aside for academics and athletics contain referenced claims that back up this assertion. There is also a claim that the school is also well known as Hillary Clinton's alma mater. This is also referenced in the section on notable alumni.

I also saw that you noted that the school received some press coverage with the recent election. This is true, but that press coverage was also substantial going back to her time as First Lady. It had perhaps waned some since her election as senator, but there is substantial news coverage dating back to the start of the Bill Clinton campaign for president.

I'm not going to remove the claim, but I rewrote that intro with some help from other editors, and it was approved back when. That isn't to say that it can't be improved, but I think there is ample referencing and citing to support those assertions. LonelyBeacon (talk) 06:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
I appreciate you contributions to that article, too. Had I the the time I would have contributed to the Katrina article ... --Paulscrawl (talk) 07:09, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks; this is a challenge but, I think, important. And important to ID and grab source material before it all gets lost in din and spin.Popsup (talk) 11:31, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Deepwater Horizon edits
Hey there - I know you put a lot of work into the article in the early stages - so welcome back! I haven't had time yet to look over your latest edits in detail, but I was on the whole favorably impressed by your recent effort to bring more coherency to the overall arrangment & presentation of info in what remains a rather sprawling article. I also appreciate your efforts to leave intelligible edit summaries (this was for a time a sore point with one of our colleagues' edits). But there is one item I'd like to bring to your attention: it looks like you've got your editing preferences set to a default that marks all of your edits as "minor", which is far from the case. So please be sure to change that setting ASAP. Regards, Cgingold (talk) 15:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, that may be the case. Didn't know the default was settable. I'll check.Popsup (talk) 13:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fender Jaguar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Wave (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:37, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill
Hi, Popsup. According to the page editing statistics you have been among the most active editors of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill article. There is a request for comments if the Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill was split correctly from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and if it should be merged back there. Related sections for this discussion are also this and this. Your comments are appreciated. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 16:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Popsup, just to let you know I just posted a comment similar to yours (many points in common) but suggesting a somewhat different angle (not just for you but all of us) from which to approach this which I hope may facilitate a consensus and perspective with which to move forward Harel (talk) 03:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Popsup, we could really use you
Popsup, I think if you were to take a look at the recent changes and the talk page, you would get a clue as to why some editors there are road-weary and a bit jumpy. I am aware we may have scared you off, and for that I am very sorry. Your edits were most helpful, and the section you made on recurrent leakage was erased and one single line (a BP PR statement) replaced it. Please understand how editors could end up behaving the way we did, after putting up with quite a lot on this page and at the BP article as well. We could really use your balanced approach and help at the spill page. I hope you will consider it.  petrarchan47  t  c   21:48, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Deepwater Horizon oil spill
Hi, Popsup. You have been an active editor on Deepwater Horizon oil spill and/or its related articles. During some last months there has been an active development of cleaning up that article by splitting off large sections into separate articles. A Deepwater Horizon series were created (all the articles accessible by Template:Deepwater Horizon oil spill series. You are invited to assist by cleaning-up and copy-editing these articles. There are also ongoing discussion concerning additional split-offs. You could see split-off templates at the article's page and find discussions at the talk page. Your input would be useful for building consensus on these issues. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 23:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Suggested merger of Sensory integration dysfunction and Sensory Processing disorder
I have been working on the editing of Sensory Processing Disorder and I think it is ready to merge, so SID can be deleted. However, I am new and I think merging is way out of my editing skills. I need help! There is much to save from SID's talk page. (All important content on the actual article is already copied and integrated into SPD) Could you please help merging? Thanks! Chibs007 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:45, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of B'Ginnings


The article B'Ginnings has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Does not appear to be notable. No reliable sources that discuss the subject.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Drmies (talk) 05:46, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of B'Ginnings for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article B'Ginnings is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/B'Ginnings until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Drmies (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)