User talk:Sweetsntreats

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- science4sail talk con  04:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Recent gaijin article revisions
I know you're itching to get in there and edit some articles, and I think some of the ideas you have for the gaijin article are good ones. But that article is currently the subject of an ongoing debate regarding citation. I know you don't want to spend a lot of time making an edit to an article to simply have your revisions reverted. So, you might want to consider looking over the talk page. And be sure to carefully cite any material you add to the article. -- Exitmoose 05:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I did look over the talk page and your profile. Nothing in that article is citable and that is why I deleted much of it. Sweetsntreats 07:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * It's true that not much of the article is "cited", but I'm not sure what you mean by "citable". After a deal of discussion, we came to the consensus to give the posters of that material time to find sources. I understand why you'd want to remove the material, but deleting it outright isn't fair to the individuals who contributed those sections.  You wouldn't want someone to delete material you contributed while you were still looking for sources, would you? -- Exitmoose 23:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

By "citable" I mean "able to be cited". The opinions of indivuduals about the feelings of other individuals is inherently uncitable, wouldn't you say? It therefore does not belong in an encyclopedia. "such phrasing is sometimes chosen for reasons of racism" is one such phrase. Also, the page for gaijin is entirely too long. It represents one of the main shortcomings of Wikipedia, mainly: the lack of balance and consistency between similar entries. If gaijin is to be compared to "foreigner" in the article (which is an apporpriate comparison) then why is the entry for foreigner (alien) only a few sentences while the one for gaijin is pages? The entry for gaijin should be a literal definition of the word, appropriate etymology and at most one sentence that states "there is some controversy as to whether this term is considered racially discriminatory". Sweetsntreats 01:28, 7 February 2007 (UTC)