CatherS

Oops, my bad, I just thought "yeah, wolverine is iconic enough to have a stand alone page"... don't get many wolverines in coastal australia :) I also have a love of alternate continuities (I am in the process of selling all my comics except for mc2, what if, and mutant x) so i look forward to editing with (or against) you (muhahahahaha) WookMuff 09:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I don't think I own any elseworlds... oh, tell a lie, I own red son issue 2. I mostly only bought marvel, back in the days when I could afford it. Even when it got crap, I kept on buying. Thank god for a dockworkers strike/lower print runs that managed to stop marvel comics getting to my area. Oh, exiles, silly me. Not selling exiles either, it is the only comic I still buy. WookMuff 10:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

CatherS, at the urging of Clarityfiend, I've reedited the "purchased" clause to read: He is purchased by an old beggar, Baslim the Cripple, for a trivial amount of money with the assistance of a wealthy nobleman. In the original I was endeavoring to provide the derisive flavor of the Syndonian's assistance. Perhaps there is yet a better wording but in the meantime I hope this will achieve consensus on the issue. -- Rydra Wong 02:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Since Clarityfiend started the discussion on your talk page, I will go there for conversational continuity. CatherS 06:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

{{helpme}}

Trying to decide if removing a category link is being thuggish, or if not-so-humble judgment is justification enough. See article Kaspar Hauser. He is categorised with "feral children", but to my eye he does not meet the criteria of such. Posted a note to that effect in Talk:Kaspar Hauser and only response has been one agreement. However, it should be noted that feralchildren.com also lists him as a feral... CatherS (talk) 10:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

CatherS, my advice here would be to be bold. You have followed procedure in that you have mooted the change on the article's talk page and no-one has opposed the suggestion so go right ahead and do it - but remember to put an explanation in the edit summary. Kind regards, nancy 13:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. I have reverted your recent edit to Running gag. There was a time when most of the article was comprised of examples of running gags. A consensus was reached to remove these examples, as the list was becoming unmanageable, and there was no set criteria for what should be included. Please see the archived discussion here. Many thanks. -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 09:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

There are some very itchy trigger fingers when it comes to AfDs. To be fair, I've been accused of that before, but it's not that I've been looking for new articles to nominate; it's just been a case of me wandering around Wikipedia and stumbling across articles that don't appear to meet the guidelines for inclusion. Having said that, your Very Hard Choices article isn't subject to an AfD... it's just been proposed for deletion (slightly different). Your best bet is to find some reputable sites that are talking about the book, and add them in (don't forget to cite sources) then you can remove the notice! -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 10:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, Amazon isn't a great site to use as a source, as it's a commercial site - they're not generally accepted as sources. I think the Simon & Schuster site would work as a source, but there really needs to be more third-party ones to be safe. This Fantastic Fiction one might help. -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 10:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Can I make a few suggestions regarding the Very Hard Choices article?

1. The first section has no sources. Where did you get the text describing the story from? It really needs to be linked as a reference.
2. The Critical Reception header needs to be either Critical reception (no capitalisation of the second word) or just Reception.
3. The quote on its own looks a bit odd. I usually add quotes in the format "Anne On said that "this is really cool"." or some-such. Have a peep at this reception section.
4. I've not seen Listen to in many articles. I'd consider removing that, as single-line sections don't go down too well on here! Maybe add it to the External links section?

I'm not trying to be difficult - these are just a few things that jumped out at me as it were. -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 11:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm glad I could be of help. I've tweaked the article a little - the {{cite}} template is very useful for ensuring all references appear in the same format, and I added a {{Fact}} tag, as you don't identify a source for the header section. The one thing I've found about creating Wikipedia articles is that you can never have too many sources! It's looking good, though. Oh... and if you ever use a date, use the UTC format YYYY-MM-DD and enclose it in double square brackets (so today would be [[2008-04-22]]). That way it will always display the way the user has it set in their Preferences! -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 14:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ah... now this is where it gets tricky. You can't use the book itself as a source, because that's a primary source. Most of the sources I've seen used are secondary sources, to be honest. Have a look at WP:PSTS for descriptions of types of sources, and WP:RS for the types of sources that are preferred. When the book comes out, you should be able to find some reviews which you can use as sources. I know you say you've not created many articles, but citing sources is something that one should do whenever any contribution is made. -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 16:13, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have nominated Very Hard Choices, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Very Hard Choices. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 15:01, 24 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Dude. Irrelevant? Probably. Inaccurate? Hardly. I've read the issue multiple times. Lots42 (talk) 01:27, 16 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply