Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anber (talk | contribs) at 03:16, 15 August 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives
Archive 1

Smile

Tyrenius has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Milton Acorn

Thanks for the tweaking of the article. I am mostly a French speaker (from Montréal) so I can collaborate with advanced english though I may need to be corrected ;) Lincher 18:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

If only my French was as good as your English! Well, a girl can dream. Victoriagirl 21:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Famous Poets CD

Hello again, I had thought I had put the note of the CD in all the poets I had the Rights to republish, I was just catching up on stuff. In 1976 the CBC produced a series of 30 minute audio tapes of 8 Canadian Poets, When I was at the University of Toronto and became acquaintance/friends with several of the poets in question, one of them mentioned the Tapes and I approached the OISE education at U of T, taken over by U of T Press, and bought/obtained the reproduction Rights for the Tapes for the CPA, including with the help of Gwendolyn MacEwen, the Rights for Milton Acorn's More Poems for People just after he died. In or about the year 2001 I had the tapes Mastered and put on CD. There are two famous poets per CD doing 30 minutes each of their poetry and one hour for Milton. So as sales have been slow to minimal I no longer advertize them on the Bookstore for the Canadian Poetry Association. They are still available if you want a copy. SO how should they be listed, I was going to go back and put the ISBN of each CD this weekend to update it all, Should there be a separate article or part of the CPA site, mentioning them maybe. Please let me know the proper method that is best. WayneRay 20:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)WayneRay

I just updated and included more information and a list on the CPA article for reference, of all the CD poets, let me know if this is ok. WayneRay 21:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)WayneRay

I finished the Discography listsings and connections and it does look better, I also updated the CPA site with our book listings. WayneRay 18:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC)WayneRay

victoria victoria

Hi, Do you know a lot about victoria island? I am going to have a year out and my family and I would like to go somewhere unusual (for us!). We were thinking of Victoria Island but apart from a visit to the Burchardt gardens in 1976 I don't know a whole lot about it. Malcolm Lowry wrote a long short story about his sojourn in the area and that kind of inspired me. I like the wild; fishing, writing, etc. I have also been a professional artist in the past. Is there a book I could turn to? Would we have to get some sort of permit to stay? Cheers, Lgh 00:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

vancouver victoria!

Yes, of course, how dumb of me - I meant Vancouver Island! Thanks for the good info - we will follow up. Lgh 22:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

On AfD....

Hi. I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed your introduction on the AfD for Leona Czwartkowski. It was very informative, which makes life a lot easier for the voters, and is much more preferable to something like, "WP:BIO.", as an introduction. It's always great to see some one put time and effort into an AfD, and it isn't recognised nearly enough, so thanks! I hope to see you around there again soon. All the best, Thε Halo 00:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

In the Skin of a Lion

Hi, I do not have any problem with your edits. However, this was this editor's first attempt at an edit (second actually, but the first was interpretted as vandalism). The editor obviously spent a great deal of effort typing in the edit, and I wanted to soften the blow of the deletion somewhat. Take care. --BostonMA 02:07, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I feel bad too. But you are right about the edit. It is just one of those unfortunate experiences in life. --BostonMA 02:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, its me again. I originally WP:AGF and didn't want to WP:Bite, but I'm not so sure any more. There could be a sophisticated game going on here. --BostonMA 00:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

In the Skin of a Lion *2

Hi Victoria. This is Abhinav. The editing i have done is based on our school research. Most of my classmates wanted to have a reference page where all the notes could be found. This site was perfect for the information that i had added. Those notes took some time to type... i was sad at the outcome of my hardwork. As for the vocabulary. Our teacher had asked us to find out words we don't understand. I put the words there for my classmates and u deleted them too... dunno what to do next!

           Abhinav :-(

Can u plzz tell me what is wrong with the summary of the book??... all my info is not useless u know!! ... besides.. this is to help Wiki and i know that my info is valuable, not only to my class, but others. Ondaatje and how he uses 'surrealistic' thoughts is a valuable piece of information which i have posted!!...... i doubt u have posted "Great Edits" ... I don't mind repeating the same thing over and over again. U erase.. i will repaste!! I need proof lady!... Please rethink!

           Abhinav :-(

Hey Victoria! .. I don't need your sympathy, besides, there was never a consensus in this matter. U just erased my work saying it was 'irrelevant' with no proof or any communication. All my work is definately not irrelevant! I have sympathy and pity for you being so bad at editing!! Sorry...

           Abhinav :-(

Those who are interested (and it seems there are a couple) can find my response to the postings above on the In the Skin of a Lion discussion page. Victoriagirl 02:31, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Polish Cz... painters

_ _ Fine job you did, spearheading AfD of Czwartkowski, and you were conscientious enuf to follow up by killing her lk from the LoPbN-tree. Brava!
_ _ That makes me think you probably did similar research to justify killing the other three rd-lks on the same page, since they each appear (as their respective what-lks-here pages reveal) to have been copied in good faith from entries presumably made in good faith to, IIRC, List of painters or List of Polish painters, and i assume you realize that rd lks are a Good Thing until there's article-specific reason to presume n-n. If you did, could you say so (if not, e.g., describe Google test results) on talk:List of people by name: Cz (in lieu of having done so in the summary), saving collegial angst over seemingly reckless removals? Thanks!
--Jerzy•t 14:15, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

CCOTW

You showed support for the selection of a Canada Collaboration. This month Template:Collab-canadian was selected for improvement. We hope you can contribute.

BC!

Wow a wikipedian from BC now going to university in Montreal (Concordia I presume?) Thought I was alone! --Gregorof 00:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

One Dead Indian

Hi there Victoriagirl. Could you provide source for the fact that One Dead Indian was published by Stoddart in 2001? Can you provide an ISBN?

I can find this showing it was published by McClelland & Stewart in 2003. Could this refer to a revised or paperback version? Is Stoddart perhaps a subdivision of M&S, or something? Regards,--Saforrest 04:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Victoriagirl. Thanks for the explanation about Stoddart. I like the "References" -> "Editions" change; I agree that having a reference to book X on a page about book X is a bit strange. I'm happy as long as the complete information needed for a reference (title, publication date, etc.) and the ISBN is included somewhere on the page, in whatever form. --Saforrest 20:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Medcab case

Under the Copyright Convention this is true in canada.

If the content is copyrighted and does not have permission to use, Misplaced Pages can not use it. You would be justified in deleting these links then, get sysop assistance if necessary. The case is therefore Closed. Geo. 18:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Quebec bashing

I don't see how the changes you recently made to Quebec bashing are "as per the Mediation Cabal decision", as you wrote when making them. perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't see that anyone has shown that the articles were used without permission. If I am missing something, please let me know. I added a bit more on the case's page. John FitzGerald 17:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Mathieugp has clued me in on why the references should come out at least temporarily, but I hope someone is looking into whether the articles are used with permission or not. if no one is, I can try. John FitzGerald 19:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Our messages seem to be crossing. Thanks for the message on my talk page. At the very least this imbroglio shows the weakness of the mediation procedures – obviously you felt constrained from investigating. Anyway, as I noticed on the article talk page, I don't see how vigile.net could have carried on a program of barefaced piracy for so long without being caught. I will inquire further. I must say I'm surprised that you don't seem to feel any need to. John FitzGerald 19:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Here's your evidence. Took me like three minutes to find it. John FitzGerald 19:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, yeah – as I've noted elsewhere, I'm now happy with your last edit of the article, until the issue is settled, anyway. Couldn't be more appropriate. As I implied above, I think the problem was too many people trying to act in good faith when what constituted good faith wasn't very clear. John FitzGerald 20:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Mathieugp pointed out something I missed. That article I found is dated 1998. As he suggests, vigile.net has probably either established its right to reproduce or reached an accommodation. I haven't been able to find anything later. Anyway, it's about time someone contacted vigile.net. I suugested to Mathieugp that he's the obvious candidate. John FitzGerald 23:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Defence

Thanks for the note "in your defence." However, no need to defend yourself to me. I admit my original post could well have have left the impression I was expecting a defence, but if I'd thought you'd done something beyond the pale I would have reverted your edits. I work in a field where the modus operandi is essentially to question everything. My original comments on this issue were not fully informed, my contributions since have had certain, um, flaws, but I think we're all getting closer to a resolution as a result. As per Popper's The myth of the Framework.

You were right to raise this issue and I have been persuaded by Mathieugp your removal of the links was the right thing to do until the issue is settled. My big beef is with the mediation procedures. Again, I don't think they need to be defended, just examined. John FitzGerald 17:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Kravitz

Victoria, thanks for your help on the Kravitz entry. You have great taste in music.

s.

John Thompson

Hello,

I did quite a bit of searching regarding the death of the poet John Thompson. I could not find a source that stated his death was a suicide. From what I did find, it is clear it was drug related. As you can see I added both the text I found and its source to his article.

Regards,

Michael David 14:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Mordecai etc...

Thanks for the heads up, and thank you for the clear headed commentary. Hopefully we can move beyond the silliness soon. Peregrine981 02:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I couldn't do it without you. Your resourcefulness has been invaluable to moving that article along. You had mentioned that we should include a ref to how many articles he wrote on the subject, but I am having some trouble finding a reference for that. Any ideas? Peregrine981 18:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I found one source saying that he had written 7 major articles in the US media (out of 8 on the topic of Quebec!). However, the source for this is Guy Conlogue (Conlogue, Ray. "Facing up to both sides of Mordecai." Globe & Mail (Toronto, Canada) (July 25, 2001)). What do you think? Can the source be trusted on this? Peregrine981 00:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Checking the databases, I found 4 articles written on Quebec politics after 1991, giving a total of eight. Perhaps it depends on what one means by major. Perhaps we should just cite the articles in question? Peregrine981 20:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Kelley Armstrong

Hi, you put a wikify tag on that article. What would you suggest be wikified? It looks to me like almost everything that can be wikified is. (Not all, but most). Could you be more specific (maybe on the article tak page)? Aleta 05:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I have no argument with, and am actually in agreement with, your concerns. I just wouldn't classify them as wikification (which I think of as being markups and wikilinks, etc.). Maybe one of us could change the tag to something more representative of those concerns?  :) Aleta 22:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

First, I should have thanked you before for your reply, so thanks! I see you've already changed the tag to cleanup - no problem with that.  :) I've reposted your concerns to Talk:Kelley Armstrong, and I've been working some more on the page, adding references (though all so far are to subpages of her official page). Aleta 23:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Lisa B

Hey, I know you didn't realize I was still working on it. I just got frustrated (more than was warranted for the amount lost, but that is my own crap). I wondered about the citation noted thing. Actually I'm adding at least one. Part of what I found disagrees with the thing about her debut album, som I deleted that mention. Aleta 01:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I hope you don't think I was upset with you. It was just the situation. Anyway, it's funny we keep working on the same pages - for you it's presumably the Victoria connection, but this and the Armstrong article are totally unrelated things for me.  :) Aleta 01:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Your fixes to Runaway production

I just saw your changes to Runaway production. Thank you - I was trying very hard to synthesize everything, but it's exceedingly difficult to edit in the sea of references and notes. I agree there is still a lot of redundant redundant hyper-linking, among other things, so it's nice to have some fresh eyes. Agent 86 03:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I just realized I was talking about a completely different (but related) article. I guess I didn't screw up after all - until I made the above note, anyway! Agent 86 03:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

As I said over at Agent 86's talk page, thank you both for your participation at Runaway production and Hollywood North. This situation will really benefit from "new blood" sifting through the conflicting contributions and sorting out what is appropriate. At the same time, I'd also appreciate any advice you can provide me on how best to approach this matter as an editor. Constructive criticism is always welcome. Thank you. --Ckatz_spy 05:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

poet stat!

Hi Victoriagirl - I have watched from afar and with interest as you have bravely defended various poets. Time to reveal that I am a poet (gulp) with two books to my name. If you email me a mailing address I will send you my 2000 book Erosion which will give you some flavour or Australia or at least my small corner of it. Cheers, Lgh 23:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, if you are logged in you can go to my user page and email me direct using the 'email this user' in the 'toolbox' box in the left margin of your wikipedia window. I'd rather not post my direct email 'cause you never know who's watching! Cheers, Lgh 01:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Hollywood North

Thanks for the thanks. I did say "everyone" because I didn't want anyone to feel singled out and also because I wanted everyone to think about their actions. But I have to say that you were probably the only editor to remain completely civil the entire time. --JGGardiner 05:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Gradey Alexander

I also did a bit of Googling, and turned up about as much as you did. Not having personally heard of him doesn't really matter; if he were notable he'd be somehow verifiable on the web. Unfortunately, though, being a hoax isn't actually a speedy deletion criterion, so it'll have to go through AFD. I'll look after that right now. Bearcat 20:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

David Bromige

That was a bold edit, your removing the unsourced quotations from the Bromige article. Good work! I'm trying to get a photograph from David for the article. Sebastopudlian Dwalls 23:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Mary S. Sherman

Thanks for your edits to that article. I was dreading having to go root out conspiracy-pushing in yet another JFK-related article. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 23:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The Road Letters

No problem. You just had to replace "Related article 1" with the name of the related article you wanted to delete. Ten Pound Hammer •  17:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Canada

Hi Vicki, I've always admired your calm and collected sensibility on various Canadian related topics. It has generously reminded me about my own values when it comes to hot situations and the type of editor I want to be. Thanks for all. That in mind, have you thought about adminship for yourself? -hint hint- Mkdw 19:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Help!

I don't understand - I did indeed read all the guidelines about commercial and advertising posting before starting any edits. My understanding was that I was allowed to post factual non-advertising info - which I thought I was doing - adding references etc. and that the best way to do it was to be up front about who I was (hence the user name)as per the guidelines. Nowhere did I try to sell any books, or even post information that would lead to book sales (I added links to author bios - not book pages). I feel that I've been very careful and respectful of guidelines, and even tried to clean up the other info/formatting etc. on an entry wherever possible. Your edits seem harsh. Please help.

Help! Part Two, or, alternately, Thanks for the Help

Thank you for getting back to me so quickly. I appreciate your committment to maintaining the integrity of Misplaced Pages. Your clarification and advice does indeed help - I had not realized that mentioning wanting something posted on the talk pages was a possibility. I had obviously not realized the conflict of interest and was trying to combine what I had read on the guidelines as well as following the precedents I had seen on Misplaced Pages. (For example, on he Mole Sisters entry, the external link to Treehouse TV appears - I didn't realize that although it is promotional in nature ((as much so as is linking to author bios)) it met Misplaced Pages standards by being posted by a neutral party). Knowing this, I will continue to edit with transparency best intentions and hope that other editors are as helpful as you've been. Thank you also for letting me know the method for signing posts.--Annick Press Representative 18:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

An addendum to Help! Part 2

Upon closer inspection I'm finding that you have also edited out some links that I didn't add in the first place (citing COI). However, in these instances I merely fixed a broken link that was already there, and didn't add the external reference myself. At this point I am obviously hesitant to go and reverse any of your edits, so what happens now? Do I ask you to go back and look at what you've edited of my entries and reconsider those without COI? Is there another solution? Thanks. --Annick Press Representative 18:10, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for citation at Anti-Quebec sentiment

Hi, Victoriagirl. The citation for the entire Levine section is the citation of Potvin at the end. If you're asking for a confirmatory citation, though, that's probably a good idea.

I had hopes of getting more done with this article, but work has taken over my life. I'm also losing hope for Misplaced Pages. AQS needs a lot of work, but compared to the average article here it's a model of scholarship. John FitzGerald 15:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Larry Williams (trader)

Thanks for the cleanup. I've removed some additional uncited material. Pleclech 03:44, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Puppetfeast

Hey Victoria, I guess now it is correct. I put the kids to bed and did not come back to the computer until now, I apologize. Stellatomailing 15:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC) Looks like you are going to get another barnstar :-) Stellatomailing 16:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

100 New York Mysteries

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from 100 New York Mysteries, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Od Mishehu 08:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused by your post. In fact, I did not propose 100 New York Mysteries for deletion. The {{prod}} tag was placed by Hoary. It was then removed by 71.203.147.175 as one of over a dozen acts of vandalism committed by the account on that particular day (3 June 2007). The majority of these concerned the deletion of prod tags. Almost all were restored by another. Can the tag not be returned after what is clearly an act of vandalism? Please do let me know if I am wrong about this. Thanks. Victoriagirl 14:47, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

If it may be an attempt to prevent deletion, then the tag shouldn't be restored. According to WP:PROD:

however, if the edit is not obviously vandalism, do not restore it, even if the tag was apparently removed in bad faith

The removal of this tag from over a dozen pages, together with other tags, would seem to me like contesting all those tags; an anon has the right to contest the PROD. Od Mishehu 11:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't deny the right of any user to remove {{prod}} tags. That said, I remain steadfast in my belief that the edit in question was part of a series of vandalism. As stated above, only the majority of the sixteen edits in question - made within a 28 minute period - concerned the removal of {{prod}} tags. Amongst the other edits were more clear acts of vandalism, perhaps the most extreme being and . Victoriagirl 18:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

post-poet: the elliptical conjunctions

Hi, I wonder if you ever got my book Erosion? Note I'm not asking what you think of the work - but simply whether it arrived (post round here a bit erratic). I have just finished writing a trio of children's novels and waiting for publisher feedback. Yrs, Lgh 04:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

One Book, One Vancouver

A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article One Book, One Vancouver, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and Misplaced Pages's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Guy (Help!) 15:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Quote Farm at Brain Sex

Ah! So true! I was waiting for someone to do that. Guess I'm going to have to write up the rest of the review. ;) Good on you Victoria, I'd have left it as it is if you hadn't given me a prod. Cheers. Alastair Haines 22:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah! Thanks Victoria. I've written up two chapters and have some time today. As it happens I've got the book, but only on loan, and should deal with this sooner rather than later. By the way, it feels good to plead guilty and accept a prompt for improvement from you for a change. Keep Wiki-ing, and keep me honest. I promise I'll never call you the "v" word again. ;) Ouch, silly me. It's day time here in Australia, have a great whatever-it-is in Canada. :) Alastair Haines 22:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I've provided summaries for the first five chapters. If you agree, I'd appreciate moving the "quote farm" tag down to the end of chapter five. (That way it appears above the chapters that have no encyclopedic text.) It would be possible to: expand the summaries of the first five chapters, to remove the quotes or relegate them to footnotes. Removing doesn't seem quite right, footnoting doesn't seem right either, they are more authoritative than any text editors can provide at Wiki -- any book describes itself better than anything else can.

If you think the summaries need to be expanded to keep quotations in proportion, I can do that over the next 24 hours or so. If you think the quotes would stand more appropriately after the summaries than before them, please feel free to make that change, and I'll follow that convention in the remaining chapters. Cheers. Alastair Haines 04:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

PS: are you personally involved with Vancouver Library? Any chance you could borrow and contribute to Brain Sex yourself? ;) Alastair Haines 04:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

A. K. Feazul Huq

Why was the citation removed regarding 'Poetry Award' on A. K. Faezul Huq's page? Here is a link that pretty much sums it up what you may have wished to challenge: http://www.dhakacourier.net/issue48/report/doc3.html - besides, Dhaka Courier is a reputable weekly in Bangladesh. Ask anyone.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Minist3r (talk • contribs)

National Librray Page

I blanked the page for two reasons: (1) It strikes me as an invasion of privacy (outing) (2) It's a place that has public Internet access, so it's bound to be used by various trolls. That shouldn't mean everyone who uses it is suspect. Averythedog 20:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandalizing???

I would like to know what exactloy you think I am vandalizing. Averythedog

A. K. Faezul Huq's Page

Poetry dot com lol? See, that's where the actual misunderstanding is. Mr. Huq never submitted his poems online. Moreover, Dhaka Courier has inadvertently made that misprint on their page: if they have in fact implied Poetry dot com.

Can you be reached in email or Y!/MSN? I can get the hard copy (scanned) of the reception invitation / award certificate from Mr. Huq himself, and show you. May be, then you can help me correctly cite it. How about it? The Minister 18:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Minist3r (talk • contribs)

Dale K. Van Kley

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did to Dale K. Van Kley, you will be blocked from editing. Please discuss your concerns regarding the link on the page's talk page before continuing the revert war. --172.145.250.228 02:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I take issue with 172.145.250.228's charge and have addressed it at 172.145.250.228's discussion page and at the Dale K. Van Kley discussion page. Victoriagirl 08:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Good news of sorts! We have consensus. After reading some of the libelous, hurtful garbage that "people" post as ratings on that site, I now whole-heartedly agree that it is not reliable. Therefore, I will not restore that link to the article. Also, I'll do my best to remember adding edit summaries. Enjoy the summer; it's sizzlin where I'm at! --140.254.225.30 20:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

margaret laurence?

Hi, I am interested in the work of Margaret Laurence. Which definitive book on her would you recommend as a starting point for me? Cheers, Lgh 00:09, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

thanks, that's perfect. Lgh

Will Lang Jr. wikiarticle

I'm not sure if it's you that's been correcting the article I wrote regarding Will Lang Jr., but if it was, I wish to thank you for making the page look more neater.

However, I regret I cannot cite a reference for the quote from Yale Joel.

You see, I e-mailed Yale & his wife Shirley several months ago and asked them to share their memories of Will Lang Jr. and they evoked those kind words regarding Will Lang Jr. (Seen at the bottom of the Misplaced Pages article of Will Lang Jr.)

(I was putting together some information on my book, "The Epic of Will Lang Jr.")

If you wish to delete the quote from Yale Joel, go ahead.

John A. Lang - Author

(John1963)

Tom Reilly

I have revised the article, in which I have long been personally interested, to hopefully make it better. I am still kind of new at Misplaced Pages, so please be kind. Yours,216.194.3.211 22:32, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

No problems. I want to learn all I can. I did just made a very minor punctuation addition (period at end of sentence) and united the dismembered line with the rest of the related paragraph. I know it is trivial but it irked me. OCD?? Probably.

Oh, btw - a bit of advice. Do you recommend I register? I don't have an e-mail address at the moment but I do not want to be considered a mere gadfly. I just got a glimpse of your userpage. How lucky you are to live in beautiful British Columbia!! 216.194.3.121 00:01, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

3RR re: Douglas Kinsella

You've violated it. I've reported you. 209.217.93.166 21:51, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you haven't. But then my reverts deal with "simple vandalism". You have no case. Victoriagirl 22:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, she has. You can't own articles. She has reported you. 209.217.84.120 22:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Please note that the above anon editor has now been blocked for 3RR. Frankly, their edits are uncited WP:BLP violations and you are quite right in reverting them. I have semi-protected the article now as the editor is using many multiple IP addresses to push this particular point - Alison ☺ 22:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

C. Mulroney

V-Girl, I just saw your near-year old call for the Caroline Mulroney article to be deleted. Too bad you lost that one. What the heck is that article doing on wiki. Care to try again to have the article deleted?DDD DDD 13:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not around much these days either. This is the first article I've ever nominated for deletion. I think I got all the templates right.DDD DDD 11:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Good work! Arigatou.DDD DDD 08:54, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for checking the Canadian Index. I just wanted to double-check with you... I think the time period I was recalling was not from the time her father was Prime Minister, but around the time of her wedding. There is nothing from around then that is non-trivial, similar to the Chelsea Clinton article to which you referred? Much obliged, --Paul Erik 02:36, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Question

Why did you remove all of the reviews: ? You removed a lot of information. Those reviews are about the book and thus they are relevant. Did you want me to rewrite those sections so that there wouldn't be so many quotes? Also, I have just recently created and worked on that article. It was not yet finished, I was planning to rewrite some parts anyways.Hajji Piruz 03:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Discussion about me

There are some traces of articles about me which I did not want to be on wikipedia. I notice that the people I believe were responsible for it have been trying to remove these traces; I also have made an attempt or two. I would like to discuss this with you off wikipedia - perhaps email @ my username @ sympatico.ca. I just want to be reasonable, but it annoys me that all this junk is floating around with my name on it. Anber 04:26, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

• My response. Victoriagirl 22:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

My response to Victoriagirl's response :) : Yes it is true that I posted the photo and voted abstain in the vote for deletion, in fact I even expressed some amusement with the idea that there was a Misplaced Pages article about me. That's really all it was though, it was not my idea to post the article that was the centre of the dispute, and I never fought to keep it up, I just mused about it. Remember, while I dabble in Misplaced Pages I'm really not well versed on how to do stuff or what is or isn't proper conduct so I was just playing around when someone told me that they saw an article about me when they googled me. Bottom line is this whole thing has been such hassle and headache. Yes I also posted Dynamic Legal Solutions, mainly in the hope that it would supplant the current wikipedia result when my name is googled (also because I thought the article might be worthy of inclusion although I thought wrong). I just can't imagine why people appear to be so adamant to keep my name in circulation. Even if it is deleted, I believe that the "proof" of whatever was said in the debate will always remain so what's the big deal. Especially since the consensus was I am not notable, why does anybody care to have this exist in search engines. Anber 03:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)