| Revision as of 17:09, 14 December 2005 editPitchka (talk | contribs)5,085 edits Zealot← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:05, 14 December 2005 edit undoPitchka (talk | contribs)5,085 editsm abortionNext edit → | ||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
| Hi zealot! I just love anonymous pro-abortion zealots! don't you? Well of course you do. Despite the facts you like to lie and pretend that every liberal or Democrat is also for the killing of unborn humans. Have fun zealot. ] 17:09, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | Hi zealot! I just love anonymous pro-abortion zealots! don't you? Well of course you do. Despite the facts you like to lie and pretend that every liberal or Democrat is also for the killing of unborn humans. Have fun zealot. ] 17:09, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| == abortion == | |||
| I simply looked at Category:Abortion and carelessly put the celebs in the wrong category. My mistake and I apoligize. I am sure that you can now see, however, that your new categoy, "Anti-Abortion" is already covered by the "Pro-Life" categories and that the "cfd" tag I added is justified. -- 69.181.82.102 21:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Well, I'm sorry for coming on so strong with you in my comments above, but I am honestly very perturbed with the situation. Both Sheen and Nicholson have stated publically that they are anti-abortion Sheen even belonging to a group called Consistent for Life or some such thing. But despite these two big named actors making their personal beliefs known they are continually being erased from the Pro-life category and put under Pro-choice because they have made statements where they say they cannot choose for others or put their beliefs on others. So these people who keep reverted the categories use this to say the are pro-choice! | |||
| :I was trying to come up with a compromise with anti-abortion since these people keep parsing words and meanings. | |||
| :But you are right pro-life fits their category better than pro-choice. I'm sorry I lashed out at you but I find it so frustrating. I don't try to label people who are pro-abortion as being anti-abortion so why should these editors? Again sorry. ] 23:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:05, 14 December 2005
Welcome!
Hello! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Misplaced Pages community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Misplaced Pages page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing!
lots of issues | leave me a message 01:16, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
disambiguation pages
Per MoS:DP, there are no wikilinks on disambiguation pages except the articles being disambiguated. I've reverted the change to link French kissing. Tedernst 22:31, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- Acknowledged. 69.181.82.102 23:58, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Four perfect minutes on Robert Dessaix
I admit 'found success in the English-speaking market' was a bit much (which is to say Britain, Australia and the US), and may have unfairly weighted the translations a teensy bit. Thank you very much for editing the article, and putting in the ISBN of the Turgenev book. Your edits were like a shot in the article's arm. --EuropracBHIT 07:24, 3 December 2005 (UTC).
Actors/Actresses
Hi, and thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages! I noticed that you've contributed several articles recently for actors/actresses, with links to IMDb.com. This is great, but I thought you might want to look at Misplaced Pages's Manual of Style which details how to add external links (i.e., under their own section heading) and other content to an article. Happy wiki-ing! --PeruvianLlama 04:43, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Nice work!
Not sure what angle you're going about it from, but you're doing great work cleaning up a bunch of articles starting with C. I'm going through the orphans list and you've beaten me to everything. There's usually no one but me working on articles that deep. Keep up the good work! --W.marsh 06:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, and get an account! Unless you're trying to become the next User:68.39.174.238... --W.marsh 06:45, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- That's cool, I try to go through the orphan pages (aka Special:Lonelypages) myself every week. If you hit any snags, feel free to talk to me. --W.marsh 19:53, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Sources for Time trial bicycle
Hello, good work on Time trial bicycle, and thanks for the contribution. However, you did not provide any references or sources in the article. Keeping Misplaced Pages accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. Can you list in the article any websites, books, or other sources that will allow people to verify the content in Time trial bicycle? You can simply add links, or see WP:CITET for different citation methods. Thanks! Lupin|talk|popups 13:49, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- I did not write the original Time trial bicycle, I just added a stub cat to it. I have now also added a "unsourced" tag to it. 69.181.82.102 19:20, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- Oops, my error. I've asked the original author for sources now. Thanks for getting back to me! Lupin|talk|popups 19:24, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Categories
Hi there, I noticed you did some work on categorization, thank you for that. But I'd like to request that you take care of two things: setting a stub on a page is not enough to categorize it. It's better to have one or two real categories, plus a stub if it's a short article. Also, if you set a stub, try to make it as specific as possible, as otherwise, you get huge lists of stubs hard to sort such as US-stub. Thanks. -- Ze miguel 23:23, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- That's grreat, thanks. And I agree with you on the neeed to have sorting options for articles in categories. Just a last point: a stub is just a temporary flag, and not a "real" category. As soon as enough content has been added, that will disappear. This is why I think we should always try to not only set up the stub, but also the real, final categories, when we deal with a page. -- Ze miguel 00:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
- Let me give you an example which might make some sense: you find an article about some obscure battle during the American Civil War. You could just tag it "US-stub" or "war-stub" and be done. But if you categorize it under "Battles of the American Civil War", some history buff will be looking at changes in that category, see the new article and start working on it, and the article will grow quickly. In fact, categorization is just that: we filter articles so that people interested in editing narrow topics have their jobs made easier. Makes sense ? -- Ze miguel 09:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
- PS: I don't categorize crappy garage bands either :) -- Ze miguel 09:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Zealot
Hi zealot! I just love anonymous pro-abortion zealots! don't you? Well of course you do. Despite the facts you like to lie and pretend that every liberal or Democrat is also for the killing of unborn humans. Have fun zealot. Dwain 17:09, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
abortion
I simply looked at Category:Abortion and carelessly put the celebs in the wrong category. My mistake and I apoligize. I am sure that you can now see, however, that your new categoy, "Anti-Abortion" is already covered by the "Pro-Life" categories and that the "cfd" tag I added is justified. -- 69.181.82.102 21:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I'm sorry for coming on so strong with you in my comments above, but I am honestly very perturbed with the situation. Both Sheen and Nicholson have stated publically that they are anti-abortion Sheen even belonging to a group called Consistent for Life or some such thing. But despite these two big named actors making their personal beliefs known they are continually being erased from the Pro-life category and put under Pro-choice because they have made statements where they say they cannot choose for others or put their beliefs on others. So these people who keep reverted the categories use this to say the are pro-choice!
- I was trying to come up with a compromise with anti-abortion since these people keep parsing words and meanings.
- But you are right pro-life fits their category better than pro-choice. I'm sorry I lashed out at you but I find it so frustrating. I don't try to label people who are pro-abortion as being anti-abortion so why should these editors? Again sorry. Dwain 23:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)