Misplaced Pages

User talk:Jack Merridew: Difference between revisions

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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:03, 31 March 2008 editJack Merridew (talk | contribs)34,837 edits →Discussion at WT:FICT← Previous edit Revision as of 15:18, 31 March 2008 edit undoJack Merridew (talk | contribs)34,837 edits →Davenbelle et al: new sectionNext edit →
Line 31: Line 31:


Nice picture - it really helps the article. :) I don't subscribe to the "obligatory picture" argument, but they can certainly help. - ] (]) 13:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC) Nice picture - it really helps the article. :) I don't subscribe to the "obligatory picture" argument, but they can certainly help. - ] (]) 13:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

== Davenbelle et al ==

For the record, I'll now admit that I was user ], ], ] and ]. I have informed the ] and several others of this. I sincerely apologize to friends for having concealed this. Cheers, ] 15:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:18, 31 March 2008

Thanks to all who defend this page against vandals

Discussion at WP:AN

Just a note to let you know that I've started a discussion concerning your editing patterns at WP:AN - your input and insights would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance. Nick (talk) 03:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Discussion at WT:FICT

Have you been following the discussion at Misplaced Pages:Notability (fiction)? Am I going mad or what? There seems to be a move to water down WP:FICT to allow "Aggregate" and "Spin Off" articles in which synthesis and plot summaries are permissible. Once the flood gates are open, I believe there will be no end to the creation of articles about non-notable fictional characters. What a disaster! --Gavin Collins (talk) 00:06, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

ya, but have not been over there in a few weeks; a Camel's nose, for sure. The operative word in the argument is that this is necessary… and I question it; necessary for what? other than obsessive fandom. My view is that not enough people understand scalability issues. Look at the D&D stuff; some there wiki-link every noun with the full intent of an article for them all. Misplaced Pages has become fantastically popular with too many people that fit the current box at the top of my user page. Got $20? Go get yourself a copy of Amused to Death and give it an attentive listen. Pick up Radio K.A.O.S., too. Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I was about to post this on the talk page mentioned above, but figured it would be more appropriate here (and more off topic there). If you haven't read it already, try to locate a copy of Harlan Ellison's The Glass Teat and/or The Other Glass Teat for similar commentary. (And, yes, obviously that article has it's own issues too.  :) Ciao --Craw-daddy | T | 14:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Might be tough to find for me; I take a 737 to get to the book store. I have read Ellison. You might also read The Assault on Reason which lays a lot of blame on television. Cheers, Jack Merridew 15:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Senang Hati Foundation

Nice picture - it really helps the article. :) I don't subscribe to the "obligatory picture" argument, but they can certainly help. - Bilby (talk) 13:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Davenbelle et al

For the record, I'll now admit that I was user User:Davenbelle, User:Moby Dick, User:Diyarbakir and User:Note to Cool Cat. I have informed the WP:AC and several others of this. I sincerely apologize to friends for having concealed this. Cheers, Jack Merridew 15:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)