Revision as of 17:48, 11 February 2010 editTheForrest (talk | contribs)56 edits →Patrick Moore← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:26, 2 April 2010 edit undo207.69.137.15 (talk) →Copyright images: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
Sincerely | Sincerely | ||
] (]) 17:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC) | ] (]) 17:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC) | ||
== Copyright images == | |||
Hello, you recently added a number of ] images to ] without providing proper ] rationale. They have been removed. Please note that Misplaced Pages only allows copyright images to be used only if very strict conditions are met. Please be certain when adding images to articles that the proper guidelines are followed. MM] (]) 03:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:26, 2 April 2010
Welcome!
Hello, Anna Roy, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome! Hyacinth (talk) 01:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Maya Angelou
Spanglej, I support boldness as much as anyone, but I think that you might have gone a little overboard with Dr. Angelou's bio. I certainly wouldn't characterize some of your large deletions as "trivia". It's customary to discuss any major edits on the article's talk page. As a result, since you removed some important content with your edits, I'm reverting you. If you'd like to discuss any wholesale changes, please do so on the article's talk page. This article is in great need of some major copyediting, I realize, but not the removal of huge chunks of content as you did. I welcome any copyediting and additions to the article, of course. --Christine (talk) 00:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
To twit
Greetings Spanglej - thought you might be interested in the following:OED. Cheers!--Technopat (talk) 23:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
re: Keats and refs
Hi, Spanglej, you're quite welcome. I tend to have an eye for detail, something that has been drilled into me after half a dozen or so trips to FAC, so I'm glad to help out. As for the addition of the "Retrieved on/Accessed on" perimeter, I believe that you're correct in that it's meant as a safeguard against deadlinks. A source with a recent "Retrieved on" date will of course be considered a safer bet than one that was accessed several years ago. I sometimes go through the links in articles I've worked on in the past, just to make sure that they're still working; if they are, I update the access date. This may seem anal and unnecessary, but I find it strangely calming. :)
As for Keats' article itself, I'm not sure I'm confident enough in my abilities (even with two degrees in English lit!) to contribute much to the article other than tiny fixes here and there. An author's works section is the most difficult to write, as I discovered with both Emily Dickinson and Stephen Crane, so I definitely know where you're coming from. I would gladly help with copy-editing, and any other source-related issues in the article, so just let me know. Take care and good luck, María (habla conmigo) 20:51, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Patrick Moore
Please keep your edits to substantive information and relevant facts. Unless you have information which clearly disputes the well sourced and cited additions I have made, it is inappropriate to promulgate falsehood. I openly wear and admit my environmental bias and at the same time strive to report the facts plainly and fully.
Your previous edits are appreciated, but wholesale removal of carefully worded and painstakingly researched facts is not appreciated. If you have suggestions or edits for specific wording of the facts, I am very open to that and look forward to it and welcome it.
Please, though, do not engage in wholesale censorship because of hastily perceived opinion. The facts ARE the facts.
The facts ARE: 1. Moore claims he is a co-founder of Greenpeace. 2. Moore uses those claims to garner more media attention and income for himself. 3. The claim is utterly false, as shown by numerous sources.
The clear delineation of this is as critical as Bill Clinton's "I did not have sex with that woman" and John Edwards "That is not my baby". The falsehoods and the delineation of the falsehoods are made intensely more relevant by Moore's own intentional promulgation of these falsehoods, to the extent that Moore's intentional and vociferous promulgation of falsehood is a story in and of itself.
The are more Moore facts which fall into the line of Moore attempting to promulgate well-substantiated myths as truth, and that, in and of itself, is a legitimate part of his biography.
As much as a biography gets to be fair to the subject, it also gets to be fair to the truth, and not a "fluff" piece for the subject. Moore has his own website and can fluff it up all he wants. Misplaced Pages is dedicated to the truth, which is not always pleasurable to the subject of the truth. TheForrest (talk) 17:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply.
Based on your comments, I changed the lead to make it more objectively current. I disagree about removing the entire "co-founder" thing to the Controversy section. It is relevant as Moore trades on it, and ANY mention of him being a co-founder needs to be framed accordingly. And I reassert that the facts are very, very clear. The cites I refernence are PRIMARILY from third party media outlets, published books, legal records in Vancouver, and Moore's own biographical timeline. (If the organization was founded in January of 1970, and Moore lists the beginning of his involvement as 1971, how can he possibly be a "co-founder" unless he's somehow cracked the whole time-space continuum thing?) I find it ironic that you say "Citing an essay and Greenpeace's own website as sources are not very useful as they opponents in the dispute." when that is ALL the evidence (and a corrected Greenpeace website archived somewhere else at that) there is to support Moore's claim to co-founding.
I agree that this is not a propaganda or counter-propoganda leaflet, and at the same time, the facts do need to be clearly laid out.
I have no interest in an edit war either. I look forward to working with you further to achieve the commendable balance I am convinced you are equally committed to. It is more certainly in the best interest of promulgating truths that whatever biased tone I may present be adequately objectified.
Sincerely TheForrest (talk) 17:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Copyright images
Hello, you recently added a number of copyrighted images to Terry Pratchett without providing proper fairuse rationale. They have been removed. Please note that Misplaced Pages only allows copyright images to be used only if very strict conditions are met. Please be certain when adding images to articles that the proper guidelines are followed. MM207.69.137.15 (talk) 03:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)