Misplaced Pages

List of twins

What is the problem with having the list of conjoined twins in two places? Fred Bauder 15:04, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

The important ones are already listed in the article and if someone comes along and duplication can bring in inconcistency (as was shown by comparing the two lists). violet/riga (t) 15:06, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Baby transport

You're very welcome Violetriga, I would like to add more, would be nice to have some images of an old fashioned victorian pram maybe? Compared with a modern style one. AmyNelson. :)

I've had a little look at some online pictures but none of them are free from copyright - I'll try and email one of them soon and ask for permission to use one or two. violet/riga (t) 21:21, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Save

Hey, just wanted to let you know that when you move a page, you should check redirects and links (using "what links here"), changing save to a disambiguation page affected many pages, which you should probably modify to link to the proper page. I've changed some of the major redirects, but I don't have the time to update all the pages. —siroχo

Yeah I've been planning to but got distracted sorting another article. I'm gonna go through them now and sort them out, ta. violet/riga (t) 10:37, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Swanscombe

Thank you for your good idea, on the Swanscombe page but for the time being a few external links about modern events will have to do. History is my main interest, but I will look into it, cheers Faedra 13:47, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No problem - you've done a good job with that article so far. violet/riga (t) 13:49, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for TZ work!

Thanks for your work on the Twilight Zone eps. I was working on those, once upon a time, but never summoned up the will to actually finish them. So thank you for doing it first, doing a better job of it than be, and, of course, for actually getting around to it. grendel|khan 04:43, 2004 Sep 27 (UTC)

No problem - I'm going to do the same for season two as soon as I get the time. Nice to be appreciated, so thanks for the comment. violet/riga (t) 07:20, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wayne Rooney

Hi. I notice you were watching the United - Fenerbahce match...! :) One thing, I see you changed all the dates in Wayne Rooney to US format -- this is a no-no... see Misplaced Pages:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Dates, we had a big argument about this last year and the result was that users were given the ability to see all wikified dates in whichever format they prefer by making the appropriate setting in "Preferences". The compromise is that articles on US subjects are written with US format dates, articles with UK subjecs get UK format dates, other subjects we generally keep the format chosen by the original author and whatever we do, we don't mix formats in the same article! -- Arwel 21:20, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've always written dates the US way because that's what I thought I read the first time I looked at that MoS article. Having reread it it's still not 100% clear which to use, but it should be consistent within an article - it wasn't before I changed some of them. I'll try to use the different UK/US formats where appropriate, but I'm (unfortunately!) kinda stuck in US mode at the moment! violet/riga (t) 21:28, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Breastfeeding

Thanks for your comment. I'm sorry I missed your request for comments on WP:PR - I've been trying to reduce my wikitime recently, so I'm not monitoring everything like I did a while ago. I'll certainly add to breastfeeding if I have the time. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:53, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

About your Breastfeeding edit; As noted in the article, males can lactate to a lesser degree and breastfeed infants. So, I think the change from "human" to "woman" is less accurate, though far more common. I think "mammal" would actually be better, but that would require substantial revision to the article.—Daelin 00:05, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You have a point, though I think the incidence of males breastfeeding is so low as to relegate it to a minor detail as mentioned later in the article - it also has it's own article. Mammals breastfeed too, yes, but is that commonly known as breastfeeding? I think of a pig feeding it's offspring as simply "feeding", though it may technically be more accurate to call it "breastfeeding".

Thanks for your edits on the article - I'm very proud of what it's become now and you've helped it further. violet/riga (t) 00:16, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Official invitation

Hi!

This is a message to let you know that there is now a UK-specific Misplaced Pages community page at Misplaced Pages:UK wikipedians' notice board. It would be great if you could come and get involved! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 23:10, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

British toponymy

Hi, I noticed you've gone a bit quiet on Talk:British toponymy; I apologise if I've stepped on your toes with regard to my latest suggestion. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 13:21, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hey. Not at all - I was just waiting to see if anyone else came along with some bright ideas. I've nearly finished the Breastfeeding article I've spent most of my time on and will now turn my attention towards British toponymy. violet/riga (t) 14:11, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

License plate

(br clear=all) instead of multiple (br)s -- Thanks for that, Violetriga. I thought there must be a tidier way! -- Picapica 11:47, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

No problem - I'd never seen it until recently and it does work very well. violet/riga (t) 12:09, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Alternative political spellings

Actually, user:Shorne, however unencyclopedic his tone and some of his content, was correct to leave "signed posts", commented out, where he was debating inclusion/exclusion of items in a list. But I agree with you that the uncited laundry list is useless. -- Jmabel 17:11, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)

• Ahh - I just editted it and then noticed the signature - forgot to look at whether it was commented out or not. Thanks for letting me know. violet/riga (t) 17:14, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Beatles FAs

Thank you. That was EXACTLY what I meant. I was thinking that having them all on the front page was the goal, and that made me a bit uneasy. Apparently I was attacking the contributor in doing so...I'm a fairly direct person and I don't mince words. I guess people STILL don't know that after months of my being here. Mike H 06:29, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)

Download chart

You might be interesting in this page: List of Number 1 music downloads (UK) ] 17:23, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Excellent - thanks for letting me know. violet/riga (t) 17:26, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ashlee_Simpson

Please see Template_talk:In_the_news#Ashlee_Simpson, I'm interested in your opinion. Regards, ] 13:56, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

English

OK, this I do not understand. NPOV states that no POV is supposed to be advocated. Yet you specifically believe that omitting the words "murder is bad" (which is an opinion, widespread or not) is identical to saying "murder is good" according to how you've presented your argument. If that opinion were "fact", there should be some experiment or test to verify it, yet these is no factual data (it is a human value). Omitting words does not automatically imply the opposite of them, and NPOV is not about saying "X is good" and "Y is bad". It can say "people believe X" and maybe (or maybe not) there are people who do not believe X. Those are statements of fact, which can be verified by checking some data. But just asserting X as being true without qualfying who says so or how it can ever be known is pushing a person's POV. Is my understanding of NPOV accurate? DanP 18:53, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"People believe X" is a weaselly way of stating it, which is not allowed in Misplaced Pages. Asserting X as being true without qualification is also wrong. In relation to breastfeeding neither of these are true. violet/riga (t) 19:00, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)