User talk:Turlington

Welcome to the Wikipedia!
Welcome to the Wikipedia, Turlington! And thanks for weighing in over on the Human evolution article discussion. Hope you enjoy editing here and becoming a Wikipedian! Here are a few perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Wikipedia experience:


 * Take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial and Manual of Style.
 * When you have time, you can peruse The five pillars of Wikipedia, and assume good faith, but keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
 * Always keep the notion of NPOV in mind, be respectful of others' POV, and remember your perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
 * If you need any help, post your question at the Help Desk.
 * Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!

And some odds and ends: Boilerplate text, Brilliant prose, Cite your sources, Civility, Conflict resolution, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Pages needing attention, Peer review, Policy Library, Utilities, Verifiability, Village pump, Wikiquette, and you can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes: &#x7e;&#x7e;&#x7e;&#x7e;.

Best of luck, Turlington, and most importantly, have fun! Ombudsman 01:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Human awakening
It is 1am here in Edinburgh. ;) Well, I sort of agree with you that it would be nice to have a general intro page, although not necessarily from that particular redirect. It seems that the page you are wishing for does not yet exist. First man is a sort of disambiguation page that could be useful for this, except that it sidesteps scientific theories altogether. - Samsara contrib talk 01:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * If I created an appropriate page between Origin belief and First man, would you buy into changing the redirect? God I feel like such a pervert for splitting such a hair as this.  also sorry for not signing my comment on your page! Turly-burly 01:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would be happy to go along with that - with the caveat that I can only speak for myself! - Samsara contrib talk 01:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Juba dance
Good job on Juba dance. Do you know about redirects? These are pages that simply redirect the user to another article when they are clicked on. This allows people to find an article that may have several possible names. For example, I just created the redirects patting Juba and patting juba so that anyone who clicks on those links will end up at Juba dance. Whenever someone creates an article, it's always a good idea to try to think of any possible alternate spellings or alternate names for the subject and put the redirects in place. Let me know if I need to explain this any better. :) And keep up the good work! — BrianSmithson 12:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Duh. I see that you've already created Hambone to redirect to Juba dance. Forgive the above, then. :) — BrianSmithson 12:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that! I didn't have time yesterday to finish the redirects.  Thanks for doing the patting juba redirect.  This was my first article, and I feel like it doesn't look too shabby!Turly-burly 23:48, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem! I just went through Juba dance and "wikified" it a bit. Basically, everything was fine. But because this is a wiki, some of the HTML codes aren't necessary. To bold, for example, you only need to type three ' sybols on each side of the bolded term. So, Juba dance yields Juba dance. Likewise, italics are created with two ' marks. E.g., Hambone gives Hambone. Also,  designators aren't needed; a simple carriage return will do. Finally, no need to double space after sentences. The Wiki and browsers should take care of sentence spacing. As for non-technical wikiness, our house style says that the title of the article should be the first term used in the article and bolded. So, "The Juba dance is . . . " but not "In the world of dance, Juba dance refers to . . . ."


 * Apologies if this sounds like I'm harping on your article. I'm not! On the contrary, it is very refreshing to see a newcomer do a well-researched and well-written piece like this, especially on a first article! And good job on the references; there are many seasoned contributors here who still don't understand the importance of our source citation policy. Let me know if you need any more help! — BrianSmithson 02:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Your comments are so helpful! Don't apologize at all.  I basically only know how to write a paper and link it up; guidance concerning wiki-conventions are extremely welcome.  Thanks to you, the article appears to fit in seamlessly with other articles of quality!  I hope when I finish my other projects they look just as good! Turly-burly 23:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, one more tip: If you want a newly created article to get some attention, you can suggest if for the "Did you know" section of the front page. Suggestions go to Template talk:Did you know. You might consider adding Juba dance to the suggestions, provided it isn't too old already (I think things are only eligible for two or three days). — BrianSmithson 00:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Ryukyuan Religion
Mind if I add some more into this page on the "futuki" and "Nirai Kanai"?

These subjects would be fitting on this article. Not to mention great reference material for another anime article that is dire need for explanation. -- 02:49, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


 * According to several other online sources, Nirai Kanai is basically a vast world that is the origin of everything because it is where the gods live and its also where ones who were special in life go when they die. However, you're at the source of it all now, so it probably won't be hard to get all the info. I'll start adding something of it in sooner or later. Until then, have a great time in Okinawa! -- Makaio 03:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

My sources just popped up in several discussions with both avid fans of Samurai Champloo (anime) and several good friends of mine studying polynesian and asian history/culture in college. My curiosity on the subject stemmed from the anime, which made me want to understand what exactly the masked beings were that resurrected one of the main characters of the anime from time to time. I found out from that website you went to that they were called futuki, but because I didn't completely trust an anime site to get my info so I asked my friends who are both studying asian history and polynesian history respectively. Audra told me that the actual spelling should be Fafuji and not futuki, so I figured I'd change it sometime.

I can't really give you any online source proof, especially in regards to Nirai Kanai, because I still have no idea what that is. In my conversations with Audra, they simply refer to it as a place spirits go... but when you google search it, Nirai Kanai is called the origin of all things... that's as much as I know about that, it's still a mystery but worth mentioning.


 * I also don't know how credible the information could be as both Baylor and Fresno State aren't really known for their history courses, but i'm assuming they know what they're talking about since it is a college course after all. -- Makaio 03:13, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

The anime was fairly close to what my understanding of the futuki actually are. Individual spirits that look indistinguishable because of their appearance in the afterlife. However the anime did put their own spin on things, thus the reason why I could never completely trust it as being completely correct. And I changed the general spelling to Fafuji on account of being told that I was pronouncing it incorrectly. I get what you're saying about being close to what its called, but I was literally about to get chewed apart over the phone if I called them futuki one more time... friends, shish. -- Makaio 04:25, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I addressed this on the article discussion page, but this needs to be said here as well.

I have been deceived by one of my so-called sources, which has caused me alot of greif in the knowledge that now it's going to reflect poorly on me for writing that bunch of bullshit she fed me. I cannot put into words how low of a feeling I got when someone I know has passed themself off as actually knowing what they're talking about, with the full knowledge that I intend to actually put it into writing and actually do something with it and make it fucking public so other people can see it. SHe knew I was going to be adding this onto somebody elses work, I even asked her, "This is all legit, right?" and then my buddy Matt calls me up after reading his e-mails I sent him and what do I get from him, a nice little spiel on how much i've screwed up. He asked me where the hell I got this from, and why the fuck I would consider it credible.

What my alleged friend did to ME... and YOU, because you've put alot of time and effort into this article, it was malicious and un-called for what she did, and if I could sue... I have to say I'm sorry for this. I will help you as much as I can in the future, with actual well document sources and not with the simple word of a crazy bitch, because that is what she is, a crazy shitheaded bitch that doesn't even realize how important that this was for me. That little subject would have been the first actuall thing I've written for WIkipedia, and here it is screwed all to hell because I didn't bother to get actual info and I relied on the word of that fuck...

So i'm sorry for any trouble caused, I'd still like to help out, but I'm not qualified to add anything anymore, I'll simply be editing gramatical things. Again, I'm fucking pissed, sorry this happened, and most of all I hope that i'll eventually be able to forgive this of her. -- Makaio 03:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Rockefeller and the Robber Barons
Just wanted to let you know that I intend to tag Rockefeller and the Robber Barons for speedy deletion, since there is no claim to notability whatsoever. If you feel that this should be debated, feel free to remove the speedy tag and nominate for AfD. Cheers! --Bugwit grunt / scribbles 17:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * As far as The Robber Barons (band) goes, the article has already been ed by another user.  The article does state they have have one album out, with one in the works, but I don't think that their record label (Homewreckords) would be considered as "one of the more important indie labels".  That being said, you can buy their first album on Tower Records, so it could be a case of a borderline-notable band having a non-notable article written about them.  Given that, I would likely vote weak keep if the article were to go to AfD, but I'm also content to let the proposed deletion ride if it isn't contested. How's that for wishy-washy? --Bugwit grunt / scribbles 23:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Ending statement for Opus Dei
I saw your move to erase the ending statement at Opus Dei. I agree with you that the statement sounded awkward. I've been doing some work yesterday to ensure that each section which is controverted ends with a neutral statement. I checked out the former neutral ending statement of early January 2006 (see ) and I've been thinking of a new one. What do you think of: Due to Opus Dei's controversial nature, any approach to it, whether it is taken from a stand that it is God's revolutionary Work, a conservative political force, or something else, will have to contend with many opposing issues. What do you think? Rabadur 06:13, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Turly Burly. You may be right about this type of ending statement which says the obvious. It is just that it is difficult to find a neutral statement which I think is really needed by this article which has both a majority pov and minority pov. People who take the minority stand usually tend to think that the article is pro-majority. Well thanks for your "good luck", I'll need all the luck I can get. Rabadur 01:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Neil Patrick Harris Edit Summary
You said, "rv vandalism AGAIN (WHY is this page so popular for it?)"

I don't have an answer, but other pages on my watchlist like Calvin Coolidge and Watermelon get hit every day for the same strange reason. Check out the Most vandalised pages. T e  k e  17:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Rudolf von Sebottendorf‎
You said: Later life - "citation needed" tag added to statement that is vague enough to sound like speculation.

I'm the person who added the statement. OK, technically it's not allowed on Wikipedia as it hasn't yet been published. But I got the info from a French academic I know and trust who had been working in the Turkish archives, so it's reliable. If I had heard it a year earlier, I'd have put it in a book that I published, in which case it would be published--with a citation of "Thierry Zarcone, email to the author, date." But I can hardly use a citation like that on Wikipedia. What do you suggest? Perhaps you could email me at sedgwick@aucegypt.edu as I'm not checking Wikipedia that often this month. Mark Sedgwick

Talk:The Real World: San Francisco
Hi. It seems we have a possible edit war on the The Real World: San Francisco article. If you could respond to the post I made on its talk page, it would be appreciated. Nightscream Nightscream 04:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Stepin fetchit.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Stepin fetchit.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

 ミーラー強斗武  (talk) 03:55, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Utakiinfo.jpg


The file File:Utakiinfo.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "orphaned image, no encyclopedic use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:03, 14 April 2020 (UTC)