Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
:And to think this is from someone who was a strong advocate of sanctions for the use of that terrible un] phrase, a "homeopathy promoter". Oh the shame and horror! What is the world coming to! I think I smell something... Could it be from Denmark? --] (]) 07:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
:And to think this is from someone who was a strong advocate of sanctions for the use of that terrible un] phrase, a "homeopathy promoter". Oh the shame and horror! What is the world coming to! I think I smell something... Could it be from Denmark? --] (]) 07:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
::Shut the fuck up. I don't advocate the overuse of that stupid policy. As the originator of FUNCIVIL, I'm actually on the opposite end of all that. And I don't think I'm on any Wikilove patrol. I got tagged with that heart and added my name to some list of people tagged, but I don't even keep that heart on my page anymore, because I'm too much of a bitch. I'm no fucking Phaedriel. And you're always up in controversial shit. As far as what you're quoting there, you're just as ignorant as SWAT if you think that's acceptable. It would appear both of you have issues with making false claims without any diffs to support them.... sort of like Moulton's RFC. lolwut? When's my RFC for saying FUCK? ''']''']''']''' 12:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
If you leave a message here, I'll reply here. If I've left you a message, you can reply there or here. If you chose to reply here, I will respond here.
If there is a conversation taking place somewhere, keep it there. It doesn't need to also take place on my talk page. Such discussions will be removed.
If you are pissed off at something I've done, assume good faith. Most likely, whatever I did was with the best of intentions. If you decide to pitch a fit on my talk page anyway, note that I endorse WP:DGAF.
As much as I like to smile, please do not post generic smile or wikilove templates here. If you want to personalize them, by all means, I appreciate those. Otherwise, give them to someone else.
This is me! :)
Archives
2007: 2008:
My editor review
Could you please take a look at this (also could you paste your reply on my talk page - otherwise I will never find it.) // Finns19:11, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Haha, that's awesome. Got to love The Simpsons. Got to love Misplaced Pages references in popular culture. hmwithτ08:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Tease. Hahaha. Boo. I'm going to go close some more AFDs. It's not nearly as time-consuming, controversial or annoying as I had assumed it would be. Too bad it took me 8 months from your invitation to show up. O, hai, hmwith! :) Lara❤Love11:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Clinton or Obama
Hello Lara! How are you? Let me ask you a question: Are you supporting Clinton or Obama? I am not an American. However, I am interested in this election. You are from North Carolina and Obama scored a win in NC. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Lara. I've been reading this discussion and your comment there sounds to me more like a delete vote rationale than a close rationale. Could you please explain how you determined consensus in this AfD? I'm a little confused as the situation seemed to have reached an impasse rather than a consensus for deletion. Thanks. :) --PeaceNT (talk) 14:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Sure. Let me first say that I see what you mean about my rationale. I attempted to summarize my reasoning and, in the process, I see now that it does come off as more of a vote. It was, however, all pulled from the discussion and not my personal thoughts. I'll explain in detail how I reached my decision here.
Going by numbers, it was split. 11 on each side with varied strength in vote (strong vs weak). But we all know it's not a numbers game. The issue, as stated in the nomination, is notability. Specifically the requirements detailed in WP:BIO. On of those requirements is that If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be needed to prove notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability. That clearly applies to this article. The coverage in The Hindu article is not substantial. It is trivial coverage of her taste in fashion and has nothing to do with her career, which is the focus of the article. The two additional sources are also trivial coverage, and minimal at that, thus do not prove notability.
Specifically relating to entertainers, WP:BIO reads:
1. Has had significant roles or been featured multiple times in notable films, television, stage performances, and other productions.
2. Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
3. Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.
There is no evidence in the provided sources that she holds a significant role. Conversely, the lack of reliable sources indicates that she does not hold a significant roll.
The discussion eroded into a debate about the reliability of The Hindu, but that is all irrelevant. Regardless of the reliability of the source, the fact remains that the coverage is trivial and it is still only one RS, which falls short of the requirements for inclusion on Misplaced Pages.
For the above reasons, I did not find that discussion had reached an impasse, at least not for the matter of consensus. Again, while the votes themselves were split, when determining weight of arguments, delete prevailed. Many of the keep votes were weak as they expressed opinions of "barely" or "borderline" notability. Some of the keep arguments focused on the length of time since the last nomination. Those arguments carry no weight, as there is no set amount of time one must wait to renominate an article, and two months is ample time to make improvements. Others stated that while she may be a borderline case, there's no harm in keeping. While WP:NOHARM may not be the most reliable of our internal sources, the point is valid. We don't ignore our standards of inclusion solely because there may be no harm in keeping. The delete arguments are backed by policy and therefore carry more weight.
With all the above taken into consideration, the article clearly failed to meet Misplaced Pages's standards for inclusion, and the arguments presented were attributed due weight and the result was delete. Regards, Lara❤Love15:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay, group hugz everybody!!! Btw, by chance I found this image which you might like to use on your page here. -Dave1185 (talk) 04:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank god I'm not epileptic. I removed the image. Why does everyone think I should have one of those on my page. I think I had three of those posted here by someone last month. Just assume it's always bursting out the top at epic levels of stress. Lara❤Love08:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
And you know, making a Tool/tool joke is something I've been waiting ages to do - I can't wait for the day that all user/user talk pages are moveable by only sysops or the person who owns it :/ Sceptre12:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
But then what would our favorite page move vandal have to do with his time? It should be a badge of honor to have been "grawped"... It means you matter. --Jayron32.talk.contribs16:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Man... and I thought I had it rough at work today, you got slammed by a spade! And why oh why doesn't this guy ever "grawp up"? Sheeesh! --Dave1185 (talk) 16:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I have posted Sitakunda Upazila for a copyedit at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject League of Copyeditors, but due to the backlog or something, it's been lying there for quite some time. If possible, would you give it a run through? I promise to be good and be there with you at every step. Any clarification any elaboration... I'll be there. I really have high hopes for the article, apart from my atrocious copywriting skills. Please?Probably you haven't noticed that I am posting this while keeping on my knees with tears running down my face! Aditya14:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
User:Malleus Fatuarum and User:Keeper76 has done a lot of work on the copy earlier, and Keeper suggested that I should go someone fresh to take a look. I don't know many copyeditors I believe I can go to. I know you are busy and all, but... please... pleeeease... . Aditya14:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Rfb participation thanks
Hello, Lara.
I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know, except for pic requests of me in a bathrobe. Unfortunately, due to my need to lose weight, a large-format panorama shot would be required, which doesn't fit with the svelte pictures you are listing in the BRC now :) Once again, thank you for your support. -- Avi (talk) 18:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
DfrgOnBillboard
Whoa! What's that business there? That's hilarious - was it your internet or the site? Most random/funny thing of the week. :)
Spiral out! Dfrg_msc12:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Please help!
I posted this on the Talk:Homeopathy Page:- TenOfAllTrades, Shoemaker......How can Homeopathy be the 'Fringe view' on the Homeopathy article? If that was the case, the article on 'Islam' should also be considered 'Fringe view' and the Criticism of Islam should be on the article on Islam rather than on the 'Criticism of Islam' Page. At WP:FRINGE, there is a section, titled, "Sufficiently notable for devoted articles", which mentions, 'Creation science', 'Apollo moon landing hoax', 'Time Cube' and 'Paul is dead' which are false allegations/rumours, so the allegations made by references 16 to 19 are not acceptable and so the whole of Para 2 must be removed from the 'Lead'. In fact, Para 1 is more than enough for an introduction.
The lead should touch on every point made in the article. I usually do sort of a rough attempt at one sentence per paragraph of the body. As far as Homeopathy being a fringe view in the article, we can't write the article as if it's not a fringe topic. It's not encyclopedic if we give the wrong impression to the reader. Lara❤Love03:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I commented on the stupid ArbCase, I've enable a js block script on his account that may or may not work. I'm out to dinner, and I'll be back in a couple hours to do whatever I can. I can't make people trust me on this one, but I can certainly try to make people understand. Lara❤Love22:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but that may be compounding the problem. Hover over the heart + arrow icon in the top right corner of your user page. Interesting that it points to User:The undertow with an alt text display of "A simple love with a complex touch." That's endearing, but what is the community supposed to think of your intervention on his behalf before the Arbcom? I'm concerned about the appropriateness of your action and the fact that it may only prolong what is obviously a problem. You might want to apologize for him to those he's been swearing at next. FeloniousMonk (talk) 23:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
She is not responsible for what undertow does. She shouldn't be responsible for mending whatever wrongs, if any. She is doing what she can to make things better for everyone. Don't put undue weight onto her shoulders for the actions of another, no matter how much I like Chip, this is just uncalled for. :( <3TinkleheimerTALK!!23:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
The fact that I know him better than anyone else should tell the community that I know what I'm talking about. There is no one better suited to defend him than me because I know the situation in its entirety and no one else here can say that. Me putting the script in his monobook was best. It was recommended to me by other admins that he be forced on a break. It needed to be done, it makes no different to Misplaced Pages who put it there, but it's better for Chip that I be me, because he'll respect it (I hope) as his best friend trying to help him rather than someone else trying to attack him or whatever. It needed to be done for Misplaced Pages's sake, I needed to do it for Chip's sake. Lara❤Love00:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
As the closer of this AfD, I thought you should know that among the measures taken since your merge closing, the various actions performed here have been to blank the article, to move its content to the talk page of the Nudity article, and to redirect the article to Nudity. Not once was the content actually merged there. I just wanted to bring this to your attention, in case the edit war should continue, your intervention might be helpful. In my experience, merges don't involve copying article content to talk pages. Content should be merged to the article, and that needs to be done prior to redirecting. Thanks in advance for your attention to this. Equazcion•✗/C •00:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello LaraLove, I'm also concerned about this situation. The one thing that was clear from the AfD is that consensus is against keeping the article separate. However, none of the people who voted to merge have done anything to merge the article. I've redirected it once, but I have no interest in edit warring, so I am not going to redirect it again. Other editors have redirected; Equazcion has reverted the redirect three times, and others have also both redirected and reverted.
Regarding those who have reverted the redirect while demanding that a merge be done first -- why did they not simply do the merge that they say they want?
I suggest there are two best options here: (a) redirect the page now, and leave the history intact so it can be merged, or (b) re-file the AfD and find out if the community actually wants the article deleted.
The third option - leaving the article in place, un-merged, does not appear appropriate, because it is contrary to the consensus of the AfD.
I've never seen this kind of situation resulting from an AfD before and would be interested in your views on it. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 01:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Apparently, this has now arrived at AN/I, posted there by someone else, so by the time you read this it might be resolved. Thanks for your work in closing the AfD. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 01:28, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I posted on AN/I about it "post AfD weirdness," and have posted twice to Equazcion's talkpage. I don't get why this is a hassle, but it does seem strange that any good faith attempts to effect any part of the merge are met with immediate reversions/stonewalling. I would appreciate your help in resolving it if no one else resolves it. -PetraSchelm (talk) 01:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
It's not that surprising that those who voted merge want the article kept until the merge is completed, and those who voted delete are redirecting the article prior to the actual content merge. So I won't pretend to be unbiased here. However like I said, generally the way a merge decision works is that the content needs to be merged first, rather than just placing a redirect first. It's too easy to forget about the merge decision otherwise. You're right that no one who voted merge has done anything to merge the content yet, but that doesn't mean the people redirecting the page couldn't be doing it too. If you want to honor the merge decision, you should actually be merging the content, not just doing the easy part, blanking the page and replacing it with a redirect. Equazcion•✗/C •01:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, as I've pointed out three times now, my attempt to clean up the article for pre-merge by deleting OR was met with immediate reversion, therfore those who want to keep content should probably do the merge, or, if they intend to stonewall forever, an admin should step in and do it. -PetraSchelm (talk) 01:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I never reverted anything but redirects and blanking. The only thing anyone is "stonewalling" is the removal of the article. I guarantee you, if you actually placed the content into Nudity, no one would "stonewall" that. Equazcion•✗/C •01:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
If I had experience with merging, I'd do it myself. Someone who knows the articles and knows how to merge articles should get it done. I'll see what I can arrange. Lara❤Love01:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Adoption
Hello. You seem to be very experienced here at wikipedia. I have been having many criticisms here at wikipedia and was looking for someone who can help. You can probably look through my talk page and archives for some. Can you adopt me please? It would be an honor. -- RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 01:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I can't keep up with my current adoptees. I've got too much going on, especially after today's events. I'm sorry. Lara❤Love01:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, I guess I could hold up. But if you ever have room for one more, I hope you can consider adding me, as I probably need a lot of help even with my current experience. I don't think I will join your classroom though, it's really more on asking questions if you adopt me. I already joined User:Steve Crossin/Adoption and that's pretty tiring. Comments? -- RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 01:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Maybe if you people took the time to fucking read the link and the summary, you'd get it. What he said is that White pride and White supremacy are not the same. Something he'd been debating at the time with another user. The link, that you, SWAT, have ignorantly used as "evidence" of his alleged "supremacy" is actually detailing the fucking death of one of his good friends, a MEXICAN. That, FYI, is him letting everyone know that he's not a fucking white supremacist. Maybe you can go correct your libelous statement. Lara❤Love06:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
And to think this is from someone who was a strong advocate of sanctions for the use of that terrible unCIVIL phrase, a "homeopathy promoter". Oh the shame and horror! What is the world coming to! I think I smell something... Could it be from Denmark? --Filll (talk) 07:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Shut the fuck up. I don't advocate the overuse of that stupid policy. As the originator of FUNCIVIL, I'm actually on the opposite end of all that. And I don't think I'm on any Wikilove patrol. I got tagged with that heart and added my name to some list of people tagged, but I don't even keep that heart on my page anymore, because I'm too much of a bitch. I'm no fucking Phaedriel. And you're always up in controversial shit. As far as what you're quoting there, you're just as ignorant as SWAT if you think that's acceptable. It would appear both of you have issues with making false claims without any diffs to support them.... sort of like Moulton's RFC. lolwut? When's my RFC for saying FUCK? Lara❤Love12:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
