User talk:Recurring dreams/Archives/2007/August

Andrew Hansen
Please refrain from making anally retentive reversions to Wikipedia, as you did to Andrew Hansen. Your reversions appear to be the work of a c*ckjock and have been undone. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Someone who thinks you're a humorless c*nt 23:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Bangladesh portal
Hi, I'd like to draw your attention to Bangladesh portal. I have tried to address the concerns in earlier peer review and checked the portal against Featured portal criteria. Based on this I think it is proper time to push for Featured Portal status for Bangladesh Portal, which will be an important milestone for WikiProject Bangladesh. But to achieve this I need help from you. Please participate in the on-going discussion on the talk page and give me your valuable inputs.-Arman Aziz 03:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Walkley Awards
Hi Recurring Dreams,

I seek your advice.

Where did I go wrong with the Glenn Milne / Walkley Awards material?

Why was the material I posted a copyright problem? The text was sourced by something like 7 well known newspaper and broadcast organisations in Australia. I don't see how the image violates copyright. Yes it is copyright, but Wikipedia has guidelines on that. I understood the image was within Wiki's guidelines.

The version you reverted to has only 1 citation.

Can I request your comment and guidance?

thanks, Pigmypossum 01:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Recurring dreams, for your advice re Glenn Milne article. I found out the image was not a problem regarding copyright, so I added it back in.


 * The text... there was only one sentence verbatim ("Mayne jumped off stage as Milne, slurring his words, continued to abuse him"), plus the quotation. Maybe, for the quote, I should have said something like "Stephen Mayne told ABC Radio..." (the WP:MOS guidelines you directed me to seem to indicate it's better to cite the quote in the article text).


 * Writing such an article, there are 2 difficult issues, I find are like walking a tightrope:


 * 1. I'd taken most of the adjectives from the newspaper articles. If I use my own adjectives, I worried that other editors might say it's my POV. I thought that taking the same adjectives as the newspapers used would avoid that. eg, words like "lunged at" and "drunken rage" were taken from the newspaper stories of the event. That's why I carefully added a citation for just about every sentence, so people could see where each adjective came from.


 * 2. You mentioned WP:UNDUE. If the Milne article was a hugely long article, would it then not be WP:UNDUE? Nobody has bothered to write much about Glenn Milne's glory and achievements. Only 2 small paragraphs. I wish there was more content in there. Would more glory in the article have allowed the full-length description of the fight incident to stay, as far as WP:UNDUE goes?


 * thanks, R.C.
 * Pigmypossum 08:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

JH
thankyou. Timeshift 11:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Crowded House
Hi! A discussion has begun at WikiProject Crowded House's talk page regarding the future and goals of the WikiProject. Please feel free to contribute to this discussion in any way you see as being positive. -- linca linca  10:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Photos
How do you get photos into the articles? --Pezzar 06:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:Caringbah High School
Recurring Dreams, I think you should mind your own business. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabbymc333 (talk • contribs) on 18:45, 7 August 2007


 * Having been here less than a day, I can already tell you without a doubt that it is his/her business. This is the encyclopedia that "anyone can edit" that makes whatever you're talking about anyone's business :) --Lancastria 11:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Hicks
Hi, can't we say that there is some controversy over gitmo. Obviously Hicks was probably tortured or otherwise interrogated - rightly or wrongly - but we must let people draw their own conclusions about the "confession". What do you think? --Lancastria 11:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, mind if you add it? Only because it seems to be a hotly disputed subject and you seem to know what's acceptable --Lancastria 12:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Take a look at Donald Spitz, there's a guy adding anti-abortionist poetry and then labelling the article for speedy deletion. So abortion might not be pleasant but please, this is meant to be an encyclopedia. --Lancastria 14:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

RfD
I noticed that you voted to keep the Wp:an/i and Wp:afd redirects at the Redirects for deletion page. I also voted to keep these redirect pages. I thought that if they were removed, then I would not automatically get to the pages I was looking for if I happened to type all lowercase letters, which would be pretty inconvenient. However, it turns out I was wrong. The software will automatically send someone to the appropriate page, even if they type all lowercase, and even if the redirect pages are deleted. It's just like a redirect, but without the redirect page. Deleting them will remove needless clutter in mainspace searches. With this knowledge, I wonder if you might consider changing your vote to delete. Thanks, and have a good day. Nick Graves 18:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ironically... works because of the redirect, not in spite of it. Orderinchaos 07:57, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

10% Steak
McDonalds, maybe? LOL Orderinchaos 07:49, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ha! I hope that's all she gets out of the election this year, and not another few hundred thousand tax-payer dollars. Recurring dreams

Advice on John Howard
Hi Recurring Dreams. I come for advice, as I'm relatively new to Wikipedia. The Request For Comment has resulted in a comment. That lots of FACT tags are deplorable. I won't use them again on that article!

The other issue, about quick deletion of new content received no response. Is that beyond the scope of RfC? One example I really hoped would get resolved was the Bob Hawke motion that one editor continually deletes, even though numerous other editors found it useful and notable. What should I do about that? How do I get someone to arbitrate on it? Are the options exhausted?

As you saw on the Discussion page, even quotes get deleted, such as the famous "We will decide" slogan. There were edit wars with people who thought it should not be there. Then it got deleted because someone didn't like the word "slogan". Only when you stepped in did the "deleters" step back.

It seems like a lost cause trying to add info to this article. What do you think? Am I wrong? Are the people who hit the delete button without prior discussion right? Thanks for considering this article. Cheers, Lester2 10:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Interesting...
The authenticity appears to be verified by clicking WHOIS on the contribs page. Orderinchaos 08:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Admin
Hey. I saw your request over at Admin_coaching/Requests and was wondering if you were still interested in either an admin coach or running at WP:RFA. I'd coach/nom you if you were still interested, just let me know which one. Wizardman 05:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

David Marr
I don't think it's a great idea to label journalists other than the extremists, but just for your info this might help. Alec  ✉  ﹌ 0000۞ 12:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Progressive ;) Alec  ✉  ﹌ 0000۞ 12:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)