User talk:Nancy/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Hi (and an added thank you!)

As another anti-vandalism editor, I have a favor to ask. I'm having some trouble with an editor who keeps reverting an article to a version which has major factual errors, a sentence of blatant POV inserted, some typos, and blanks some very extensive parts of the article. He has also violated 3RR pretty severely in the process. To make a long story short, I was wondering if you'd be willing to take a look at the article. I, myself, can't revert the article again for quite a few hours, since I've done it 3 times today and it's not pure & simple vandalism. If you don't see good reason to revert it, by all means leave it alone, but if you see sufficient problems to warrant reverting it, by all means, be my guest.

If you're willing to do me this favor, you may find the article at IQ and the Wealth of Nations, and the revert type in question here.[1]. If you're busy and can't so it, no problem! Thanks for taking the time to read this, whatever your decision. Poindexter Propellerhead 08:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Yeah, based on the content changes, I'd say that pushing the idea that Iranians and Germans are the smartest people in the world due to their natural genetic superiority is the agenda. An anonymous IP seems to be acting as a sock puppet, making identical reverts and comments, and is coming from an Iranian address, so I guess that accounts for the variation from the traditional Nazi sort of perspective. Anyway, thanks very much! And sorry for screwing up on the subject of your name earlier, I'm not at my best when highly distracted in the small hours of the morning.  :-P Poindexter Propellerhead 21:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

My Reply to Your Message

Hi! Thanks for you reply.

The thing is the page I created does NOT conflict with the original Veer Zaara page, because almost everything is identical. The only diffference between my page and that is a slightly different synopsis. Everything else was taken exactly as it was on the other page, so that there is no conflict.

Like I said, the only reason I created this page is that so readers/visitors have a chance to contribute to the page with freedom from constantly being censored based on the editors opinions and whims.

I hope that this separate Veer Zara page won't be taken down

(Luvlahser 21:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC))

Rainbow Spirit Enlightenment Fayre Music and Arts Festival

Regarding your speedy delete tagging of this article, G4 only applies if the article's deletion has been discussed at WP:AFD, it does not apply to content previously speedy deleted as it appears in this case. However, the reason it was deleted previously may still apply so I would invite you to tag it for speedy deletion again if you determine it to be appropriate. Regards. Adambro 18:27, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice/info, I am still somewhat of a novice and hadn't realised that speedy deletes do not qualify in respect of a G4. Much appreciated. Cheers. • nancy • 21:23, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:HolyTrinityWeb.jpg

Minor technical query, Is this image ever so slightly out of focus? Sfan00 IMG 16:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Your free images

Thank you for uploading images/media to Wikipedia! There is however another Wikimedia foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In the future, please consider creating an account and uploading media there instead. That way, all the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons. Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!

Sfan00 IMG 16:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandal Reversion

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page MarkSutton 21:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Warning of user:Maddymythical

Just so you know, I removed the warning you just gave,[2] as I had already warned the user for the creation of that page,[3] and there was no further recreation of the material after I had warned. Cheers! Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 18:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

No worries - I think we were both editing the page at the same time. • nancy • 18:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Your VandalProof Application

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, KirkEnd. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. ^∆ 22:51, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For helping to fight the horde of vandals! themcman1 talk 10:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello from Jstrong83

Hello, KirkEnd: I recently posted a law firm description in line with other descriptions on Wikipedia's List of law firms, however my post was deleted and cited as promotional material. I am just wondering why other law firm descriptions are not cited as promotional as well (McDermott Will & Emery, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom)?

Thank you

(Jstrong83 14:59, 25 July 2007 (UTC))

Hi there Jstong83. Looking at the other articles you have cited the main difference between these and your own article is that yours was written in the style and tone of an advertisement and included for example a long list of office locations with contact details and telephone numbers. If you can make sure that you do not transgress the advertising and promotional guidelines and of course satisfy the notability criteria there may well be a place for an article on Katten Muchin Rosenman. Don't be put off! Hope this helps, yours, • nancy • talk to me • 15:36, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Emma Bentley

An article that you have been involved in editing, Emma Bentley, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emma Bentley. Thank you. -- Whpq 13:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Lee

Why not? It has a zillion sources and is world famous. Look again? Fromage911 07:03, 28 July 2007 (UTC) I put it here, sorry, please let me know: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Mr._Lee_.28cat.29 Fromage911 07:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

?

Why did you pull my term? The outline of the article specifically refers to slang associated with paintball. This is a commonly used term as I am from MI and I've heard the term as far as CA. Please reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris6120311 (talk • contribs)

The easiest way to explain is to point you towards the WP:Verify which explains the criteria you need to meet in order to have a 'fact' accepted on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, that you have 'heard' this term does not qualify, you need to provide a reliable source to prove your case. Hope this helps. P.S. You might have to explain to me what MI and CA are??? • nancy • talk to me • 17:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

For reverting vandalism on my user page - 11 days ago, but I just noticed it now - and didn't want it to pass without a hearty "THANK YOU!". Carlossuarez46 04:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Full House

DO U LIKE FULL HOUSE OR SOMETHING —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PAULDABOMB13 (talk • contribs) 07:51:08, August 2, 2007 (UTC).

I am guessing you are talking about Full House the US TV show which as I live in England I have never seen so I can't really answer your question. Sorry! • nancy • 08:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: User name showing up...

I thought you were supposed to sign each entry ( Ms. Stephenson ) and when you do automatically shows your name unless not logged in. I thought I wasn't suppose to delete and just whoever edited deleted. Times when no name I forgot to log in first before editing. I just learned that everyone could edit in past week or so so thought just regular people were deleting not official wikipedia staff. I'm guessing you are official wikipedia staff. I'd have to edit again and delete name and then when I put ( Ms. Stephenson 02:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)) at end would automatically show my name again or has been. I have a MAC that's over ten years old so maybe that doesn't happen with newer versions because I've noticed lots of websites my MAC is too old to completely mesh. Model is one model too old to download lots of things. So maybe I should know at this point yet I'm not certain if I'm supposed to put ( Ms. Stephenson 02:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)) at end of entry and, when logged in, name automatically shows up since my user name. Perhaps, I made a mistake making my user login name my real name. Any and all help doing things correctly on Wikipedia appreciated. Thank you. Ms. Stephenson P.S. I'm previewing and actually just automatically showed my name again when I typed four tides between two parenthesis. Oh, I just noticed says, "On talk pages, please sign your comment by typing four tildes (Ms. Stephenson 02:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC))." My apologies...I'm just now learning what talk page is. Okay so I'm only supposed to sign four tides between two parenthesis on talk pages. I see now.

Signing articles is an easy mistake to make - lots of people do it to begin with but it looks like now you've discovered talk pages you can see what should be signed and what shouldn't. Even though you don't sign articles a record of your name/date and the contribution you have made is kept for ever in the page history tab so everyone can always see who added/deleted what and when. I'd also like to take this opportunity to thank you for the kind comments you made about the editing I did on Ethel Maude Proffitt Stephenson - you must be very proud to be descended from her. Kind regards. • nancy • 08:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Alan Kippax

I don't understand what you are talking about. The article is written NPOV. It is fully referenced and accurate.Phanto282 10:04, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Phanto282, it was not the article that was POV it was the edits - specifically the insertion in three different places of the word 'great'. I was not the only person to revert them but I notice you have replaced them for a second time & I am not going to be dragged in to an edit war over it so I will happily back down. Kind regards, • nancy • 19:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Prod. on I Have Another Wank And I Have Another Cry

Hi, I transferred the prod to an AfD as I felt if we're going to go through AfD on the band itself and its other album, let's do it for all 3 and not go through different deletion process for different parts of them. KTC 18:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem - seems a perfectly sensible way to deal with it. • nancy • 19:11, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

All remodel

Hey there Nancy,

I'm a bit confused about these policies can you please explain? Allremodel is a source for remodeling tips and ideas, for contractors and people looking to do any type of remodeling or improvement. I really think our remarks about remodeling should be included so others can learn. A little about me: I have been a part of the construction industry for over nineteen years and I am tired of having a similar reputation to lawyers, advertising people and politicians. There are a lot of terrific contractors in our industry and we deserve better. Thats why I was compelled to start a new web site called Allremodel.com. When you match the right information about remodeling and hard working and responsible contractors with the right home owner, everyone wins! It is simple. Allremodel has been online since 2004 and Incorporeded since 1999. allremodel has many publications online, in print and radio. please please help me understand Allremodel com Tips 21:51, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Nancy please explain this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erenovate.com http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ServiceMagic I like to be included also. Hope there no monopoly going on here Thanks again Allremodel com Tips 22:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Allremodel. Your site looks very interesting and I am sure that a lot of people find it extremely useful however Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a directory nor can it be used for advertising or self-promotion. Can I point you towards the page WP:NOT and in particular the section WP:NOT#DIR which explains that "wikipedia is not the yellow pages" and WP:NOT#SOAP which is the section about advertising. You might also take a look at WP:NOTE which explains what an article has to do to meet the notability requirement - your original article was deleted as advertising but even if the promotion within it had been less overt it would still have probably failed on notability.

With regards to the other to articles you cite, the Erenovate.com article is currently up for deletion on the grounds that it does not meet the notability requirement and now you have raised it to my attention I am minded to propose ServiceMagic for deletion on the same grounds. As I said, your website looks like a useful resource and I wish you all the best with developing it & when it meets the notability requirement I am sure someone (best if it is not you or someone else directly involved with it) will create an article on Wikipedia about it. Hope this helps. Kind regards, • nancy • 07:00, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Tmaxsoft

The article Tmaxsoft is about an IT company in Asia, which is influencing technology in the region. Its notability is about trying to setup a centre in India and failing to do so. This can be information to other users trying to conduct similiar strategies in China, Japan and Korea. You can check the site "Tmaxsoft.com". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudeb23 (talk • contribs) 05:54, 5 August 2007

Dube23 - I think the easiest way to explain this is to point you towards the Wikipedia page about notability - this can be found at WP:NOTE which explains the criteria that an article needs in order to pass the notability test. I think it is unlikely that the failure of an initiative by a small company could be considered notable and the point you make about it being used to help others avoid the same mistakes is very altruistic in a general sense but is not valid in the context of an encyclopedia; take a look also at WP:NOT which explains all the things that Wikipedia is not. Hope this helps. Kind regards, • nancy • 07:00, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Integrated Keyboard Scanner

Hi Nancy I have read your remarks and according to them posted a revised paragraph which does not contain commercial hints or phrases. Hope you agree, if not can you please recommend changes? Thanks, Li — Preceding unsigned comment added by Livingston Li (talk • contribs) 09:23, 5 August 2007

(08:58, 5 August 2007 (UTC)) Keyboard-scanner Hi Nancy I have read your remarks and according to them posted a revised paragraph which does not contain commercial hints or phrases. Hope you agree, if not can you please recommend changes? Thanks, Li Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nancy"— Preceding unsigned comment added by Livingston Li (talk • contribs) 09:58, 5 August 2007

Livingston Li - I would be happy to recommend changes however I cannot find the edits or the page that you have changed; this may well be because it has been deleted since you recreated/modified it or perhaps you were not logged in as yourself?? Before you try again maybe you should check out the page WP:SPAM which will help you with the difference between an encyclopedic article and an advertisement. Kind regards, • nancy • 09:16, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Nancy. The below is the modified text that disappeared "Keyboard Scanner Typical Keyboard-ScannerKeyboard Scanner, a new generation of scanners, wherein a color document high speed USB2 scanner is seamlessly built in & integrated in a PC keyboard. The keyboard scanner takes up effectively zero desk space, compared to any other desktop or hand scanner, enabling the increase of the personal productivity of individual interactive scanning. Keyboard Scanner has a "No Touch" mode of operation which scans directly to the user's application (no buttons or software command required, usually a KeyScan. Patents US5477238 and US5623285 on "Method of and station for integrated typed data and optically scanned data capture for computer interfacing and the like". Your hel is appreciated. Li — Preceding unsigned comment added by Livingston Li (talk • contribs) 20:02, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Li - I can see from your history that you have been trying to add this text to Image scanner. My opinion is that this is the best way forward and definitely preferable to trying to have an Integrated Keyboard Scanner page in its own right. Looking at the talk page of Image scanner there has been some discussion about the inclusion of keyboard scanner already and the proper thing for you to do now is to enter it to a dialogue with the other editors on the talk page. You have already made some posts on that page but I would suggest that you need to offer more context around the changes you want to make and work towards arriving at a consensus with the other editors. I don't know enough about the topic to join in this discussion I'm afraid.

With regard to the modified text above, apart from copy editing for style and grammar the key things you still need to address are

• Unsubstantiated claims - eg that the keyboard scanner will increase personal productivity - can you justify this? I have a flatbed scanner on my desk, how would swapping it for a keyboard scanner increase my productivity? Have you got any independent reliable sources to back up this claim? If not then remove it as someone is bound to challenge you on it.
• Spam - you mention Keyscan, this would appear to be a brand name? If you don't want this text to look like advertising for a particular product then remove this reference. Similarly I notice "No-Touch" is a trade mark so the above will apply and if you want to leave it in then you should mark it as being a trademark.

Good luck, and remember don't take anything personally. Kind regards, • nancy • 20:28, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate all your comments. Quick note: Increase of productivity is a direct consequence of reduced production times and streamlined workflow; examples: reduced need for shuttling back and force to a workgroup scanner (like in banks, insurance companies, hospitals), fewer production line steps by the automatic scan directly to your current application. Thanks & Best regards, Ophira — Preceding unsigned comment added by Livingston Li (talk • contribs) 08:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Lights has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Cheers, Lights 12:27, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

for reverting the Vandalism on my Userpage!Saturn star 19:02, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I am sure you would do the same for me. Kind regards. • nancy • 21:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Nancy! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Daniel→♦ 05:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

how are gay pride issues related to "Truro History"?

I couldn't believe it when someone called me to tell me that there was this entry made in the Truro Nova Scotia page of wikipedia. Having followed the the issue locally, and personally knowing Bill Mills, the mayor, it has been rather pathetic watching this blatant misreporting going on in the media. To start using Wikipedia as another form of continued misinformation is shameful, giving the desire of wikipedia.org to have a trustworthy resource of relevant current information. This current affairs issue is NOT history. And if there are those interested in making this an entry on the page, do it somewhere where it is more relevant, and then have the consistency to add to it all other current affairs in Truro's history. The fact that this will not happen demonstrates the purpose behind why someone put it there in the first place.

Keep it factual, for fact's sake not as a platform for misinformed opinions and political opinions. Put it on their favorite "rainbow" wikipedia pages.Obi123 17:18, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Obi123, the issue here is not your personal opinion on the topic but rather whether it is appropriate for you to remove wholesale an established part of the article. My role in this is that I saw you remove a section of the article which has, by consensus been agreed as a valid section and so I reverted your edit. If you disagree with the section the proper way to deal with it is to discuss your views on the article's talk page and reach a consensus with the other editors. It is not right for you to impose your singular view without discussion. Also the removal of content in this way is considered vandalism and if you continue to do it you run the risk of being blocked from editing and therefore you losing your chance to debate this issue in the correct forum. Hope this is helpful and hope you resolve your issues with the article amicably. Kind regards, • nancy • 17:27, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I notice you deleted the information again so have just reverted your edit, but, in order to address you concerns about the validity of it in 'History' I have moved it in to a new section called 'Current affairs'. • nancy • 17:32, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

To my knowledge, I deleted it, but once. Thankyou for the protocol lesson, which, if needed, will be used in the future.Obi123 02:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I do apologise, my mistake entirely, you have only made one reversion - I got you confused with Fignewtons as you have a very similar writing style & very similar views on the article. So sorry. • nancy • 08:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, having followed these issues with interest for a number of years, I have looked at wikipedia entries for other such municipalities in the area where these issues have come up and politicians hauled in before human rights comissions. None of these municipalities have such similar entries in them regarding these well-publicized events. There were those rallying against the mayor who called on people to hoist the rainbow flag in their front yards. I drove around town for the better part of the afternoon looking for the evidence of this so-called "majority" doing the complaining. Apart from our Rainbow Motel, on Prince St., there is no evidence of rainbows anywhere. It would not have mattered to me one way or the other about the decision, but the request was decided by town council, (6-1 against...) not the mayor, who everyone targeted because of his well-known opinion, which has won him the last number of elections (10 years as mayor and the previous 10 as councilor). That someone can arbitrarily add such an irrelevant entry to Truro (based on other entries for cities, towns and villages), is just an attempt to draw attention to something that means more to people outside of this municipality, than it does to those of us here. iow, there are no "current affairs" entries, nor history entries covering these issues. Obi123 02:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

This is exactly the type of discussion which you should be having on the article's talk page - this is where other editors would expect to discuss the removal of the section and it will give all interested parties a chance to thrash it out and hopefully arrive at a consensus. Whilst I am of course interested in what you have to say, that you are saying it on my talk page rather limits the audience! • nancy • 08:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Milesgood

How do I sign things in the first place? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milesgood (talk • contribs)

When ever you make a comment on a talk page you should always end it with four tildes like this ~~~~, which will sign and timestamp what you have typed. You shouldn't sign things in articles though, only on talk pages. If you want to make your signature more fancy you can change it by clicking on 'My preferences' which you will find at the top right of each page - you should have a go, some people have made really cool ones. • nancy • 20:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Now I get it. Looking at your sig, I was able to come up with this sig: Milesgood • Harass Me! • Atrocious things I've been doing

It wouldn't let me save saying the HTML tags were invalid. How do I fix that? --Milesgood 21:37, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, that's neat! You could try checking the box that says Raw signature on your preferences page, if that doesn't work then maybe taking a look this page will help. • nancy • 21:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I fixed it. I looked at this, than I double checked my sig, and I found out I forgot to close a tag. Thanks • Milesgood • Harass Me! • Atrocious things I've been doing 22:32, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Connell66 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Mortlake

Hi there, the Mortlake changes i made were correct and can be validated, ( how do i do this though ? ) ..... Also i didn't delete info for malicious/vandalism reasons, but to set the record straight ..... Many thanks :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by blowtorch77 (talk • contribs)

Altering content

Hi,

I just got what was going on and have amended the Fractional Sailing article to a more scholarly level which should be appropriate.

Can you advise please.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldrascal (talk • contribs)

bus from belfast

Hi Nancy. I just thought it would be helpful if people from Belfast could have information about getting to Marlay park. What am I doing wrong?

cheers John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnmquigley (talk • contribs)

Problem with Copyright

Hello,

I am attempting to add content to a WikiPedia article describing the Jornada Basin LTER project which is one site within the U.S. Long-Term Ecological Research Network. The content of this article is made freely available for use as permitted under the WikiPedia GFDL by the Jornada Basin LTER research project, New Mexico State University, and the U.S. Long-Term Ecological Research Network. I am the creator of the content and web master for the Jornada Basin LTER project at New Mexico State University. While I copied text from several web pages that I administer and maintain, this is not violating any copyrights held by the Jornada Basin LTER, New Mexico State University, or the U.S. LTER Network.

I am new to WikiPedia. How to I add content from the web pages I maintain to WikiPedia without getting the automated messages pertaining to possible copyright infringement? Thanks.

Ken Ramsey Data Manager Jornada Basin LTER Project New Mexico State University — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keramsey (talk • contribs)

Hi Ken. If you look at the notice posted on your talk page entitled "Copyright status of Jornada Basin LTER you will see the various options for showing that the material is available under GFDL or that other permission has been granted. I see that you have already made a statement on the article's talk page - this is a really sensible thing to do and should be enough to delay it being deleted but unfortunately is not enough for the deletion tag to be moved completely - for this to happen you will have to complete one of the options mentioned above. Hope this helps. Kind regards • nancy • 19:59, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Fractional sailing

Hi Nancy,

The BBC article about the boneheads at Cowes is just staggering - where do they park their brain cells? The ruling that PWC are not classified as boats and are therefore exempt from the 'no alchohol/ColRegs laws is just bizarre. But back to Fractional Sailing and my need to understand what Wikipedia is about.

I have seen that a great chunk of what I wrote has been removed. Unless it is you (why?), I suspect that the culprit is an aggrieved company in the fractional sailing world as the article 'spills the beans' as it were and tilts the deal in favour of the consumer.

I now see that one of the companies has been removed with the accusation of spamming Wikipedia by the same address that cut out most of the article. What is to be done?

The information in the article is factual and important in protecting the public against misrepresentation. It mentions no names nor does it need to as the info is generalised and applicable globally.

Can anyone do what they want on Wikipedia? If I systematically erased every page I came across, is this acceptable? (er..........just a philosophical question, by the way).

Questions, questions.

Kindest etc.

Oldrascal. In answer to your question, Wikipedia does have policies about removal of content; aside from obvious things like removing copyrighted material which has been posted without permission and so on, in many cases content removal would be considered Vandalism but in other it might be looked at as bold editing (which is positively encouraged). Really depends on individual circumstances, whether it improves the article (sometimes less is more), what has been put in the edit summary etc. I am at work right now so no time to look through the changes but will happily check it out this evening and se if it was justified or simply agenda driven. Kind regards. • nancy • 10:26, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

As promised I have had a look at the edits made by 63.215.77.122. The removal of the external links I am puzzled by as they ALL seem to be of the same ilk - i.e. links to fractional sailing providers; in fact there is probably an argument to say that they are ALL spam (see here for wikipedia's definition of spam with regard to external links) but to selectively remove only two of them is very strange.

The question of whether it was valid to delete the content is a little more difficult; I would say that quite a lot of what was deleted was unencyclopedic in tone and was very near to being a 'how to guide' which is one of the things that Wikipedia is not - see here (sorry to keep pointing you at policy, you must be sick of it, but it is the easiest way to explain). I would advise going though the deleted content, making it less colloquial in tone and changing the phrasing so that it is more factual, and, most importantly providing citations - this is going to be quite a big task. Having a browse through this page might be helpful. I would venture that had the content remained as was it would not have been long before someone else either removed it or tagged it as needing some serious clean-up. Personally I would have done the latter in this case but I can't in all fairness criticise another editors decision to delete, it is quite borderline.

Finally, on a more personal note I heard on the news this evening that over half the crews entered in the Fastnet race have had to retire already due to the severe weather and I must admit I thought of you - having been confined to port because of Cowes you now have the most appalling storms to keep you from getting out there. Some summer we are having. • nancy • 19:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Fractional clean-up

Nancy,

That's quite clear and thanks for the explanation of style modification required. I will spend some time later this week on it as I think that it is an important topic (to we sailores, at least).

Thank goodness that there is a much higher level of safety training imposed for the Fastnet boats as it seems to be quite a party in the West country. This weather makes me quite happy to be on dry land...............it's a different matter when making passage as foul conditions and the handling thereof are part of the fun (yikes, the man's mad).

Do you sail?

Old rascal,

Glad the wiki-lecture wasn't too deadly!

I saw that Matthew Pinsent was on one of the retired boats, must have been a world away from sculling up the Thames. I don't sail but I wish I did and I do think it is in my genes as I am fascinated by the sea and by boats - my wikiname 'Nancy' is an homage to my literary heroine - Arthur Ransome's Nancy Blackett, skipper of the Amazon. My parents were both keen sailors in their youth but the combination of having a young family and living in Gloucestershire meant that they had both sold their boats before I was old enough to appreciate them. Actually you might be interested in looking at http://www.kirkend.com where I have published a 'ships log' that my father kept of a sailing holiday on the broads in 1963. Kind regards, • nancy • 15:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

hi

no I did leave the deletion remark in there just got stuck between edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delvian (talk • contribs)

Delvian, apologies if I was a little hasty - the AfD notice had already been removed and replaced a couple of times on the same day that you made your edits. It's back there now so no harm done and I see you have also been contributing to the AfD debate. Kind regards, • nancy • 15:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Throbbing Gristle

Hi Nancy,

just for the record, I am in no way related to the company publishing the TG book. So saying I am posting adverts is incorrect. I do think that this news should be added onto the TG item though? Feel free contacting me directly.

Thanks,

Leolapinos 12:28, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Bernard/Leolapinos; I reverted the edit because it appeared to be blatent promotion of a particular title. I note your comment about that you think the news of this upcoming publication should be added to the article but I think this just adds weight to the argument that it is an advert. Whether you are connected to the publishers or not is largely irrelevent. Hope this clarifies my position for you. Kind regards, • nancy • 12:28, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, but should you not instead better add a literature section with links to articles on books on TG ? Other pages have this, so...?

Leolapinos 12:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

A 'Further reading' section might have some value, you are right to say that some other articles have them BUT when adding this book you should cite it formally with author, title, etc and if possible an ISBN - just linking to a news page about its publication is not really acceptable; to make the section of value you could also research other books available on TG; I'm sure there are loads! Also just a style point, when you are adding external links to articles it is usual to add them in the 'External links' section rather than in the body text. The exception to this rule would be things that would more properly be a citation and therefore listed under 'References'. Kind regards, • nancy • 12:40, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

You got a point there... Leolapinos 12:42, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Geminineil

No problem, apologies I realised it was no follow but I thought it was useful content — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geminineil (talk • contribs)

I would ask how it is that some external links are allowed? For example in "Apollo Victoria Theatre" the external link to www.thisistheatre.co.uk is displayed, which is a commercial site with arguably no better content.

Thanks for your considered response.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Geminineil (talk • contribs)

Geminineil - there is no difference, I have removed the link you mention on Apollo Victoria Theatre as well - I show no favouritism... if you find any others you should take them out; just make sure you say what you are doing in the edit summary. Check out wp:spam for the official policy. By the way when you write comments on talk pages it is customary to end them with four tildes like this ~~~~ which will mark the comment with your username and the date and time so everyone can see who has said what and where one comment ends and another begins (don't do it in articles though). Cheers, • nancy • 19:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

David Tonks

And I supose you are an expert in British Authors

David Tonks is a real person with 2 published books. I should know, he lives in the next village and uses to go to the same school. His book was published by a local company in Ashby De La Zouch and is offered forsale in a wide local area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unknown2409 (talk • contribs)

If he was born in 1991 as you say then I should hope he is STILL at school. Unfortunately Google doesn't seem to have any record of him which, even if he really does exist would mean that he is not notable enough to be on wikipedia. • nancy • 20:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

It is also a rather large coincidence that you are adding David to 24th September and your username just happens to end 2409 - are you by any chance David Tonks, or perhaps you are his twin?? ;) • nancy • 20:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

how dare you!!

omg, look at the article I supposibly "vandalised". Its about a bacteria that destroys peoples teeth. I have all right as a dentist and toothpaste salesman to have my revenge on this imfamously negative bacterium that decays peoples teeth! Shame on you, you have brought Wikipedia and yourself down. I expect an apology NOW! You here me? or I shall report you. Good Riddens! --Toothpaste Salesman 20:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Toothpaste salesman (are you really btw?). I am very sorry that you have been having dental problems but I don't think that it is a particularly controversial action to have reverted this edit which under even the most lenient of definitions would be classed as unconstructive and thus categorised as vandalism. P.S. I think that should have been 'How VERY dare you' which won't mean anything to you unless you are English and/or familiar with The Catherine Tate Show Kind regards, • nancy • 20:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

67.109.245.35

how can I talk about articles/websites that can help students ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.109.245.35 (talk • contribs)

Quite a random question as your edit history has only one mainspace edit and that was in 2006 to The World Is Flat anyway..... I actually think I know who you really are so I am going firstly to point you to a page describing what wikipedia is not WP:NOT which should give you a good grounding in what is and is not acceptable, a scan through WP:SPAM, particularly the section WP:LINKSPAM might also be instructive if you have time. It is helpful if you sign in when you are making talk page comments, and, whether you sign in or not you should always sign your comments with four of these ~~~~ which sign and date your contribution. Cheers, • nancy • 21:23, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I'm awarding you this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your great contributions to protecting and reverting attacks of vandalism on Wikipedia. Wikidudeman (talk) 22:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

HELP!

As a joke I made a fake article about my siste, Catherine, entitled "Catherine Joyce" and it has now backfired against me! I made a false link between her and another person, Senator Barnaby Joyce, and someone from his offices rang my mum up yesterday complaining about the fake article! The article appears to have been deleted, but people can still view it, so I was wondering if you could COMPLETELY delete the article, "Catherine Joyce, since it can still be viewed in the "Deletion Logs" section of Wikipedia

Thanks for your time —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 211.30.68.244 (talk) 10:26:00, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. If a page has been deleted then it is gone, there is no revision history and the deletion log should only show that a page of that name once existed & apart from the first few words the content is splatted (well almost, I think admins may be able to see the deleted content under special circumstances). I am not an admin so I cannot delete articles at all, not even undeleted ones if you see what I mean. If you really are having a problem with the information that is left - from the deletion log I can see the first few words of the article which do unfortunately contain your sisters name and date of birth (but not anything about the Senator) - then I think you should get in touch with an admin; how about trying Theresa who originally deleted the page? Sorry I can't be more help. Kind regards, • nancy • 17:06, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Nouvelle cuisine

Nancy

I was not attempting to create marketing. My contribution was factual and attempted to address the true origins of nouvelle cuisine.

The web address chefsworld is a resource site for chefs and like wikipedia points people to more information.

regards Tim —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chefsworld (talk • contribs) 18:45, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

Tim, I was not questioning your contribution to the article - which has not been removed - but I am afraid that the addition of a link to the homepage of a website which appears to be a chefs networking/recuitment/job-search site and adds nothing to the article in question either as additional information or as a citation does violate wikipedia's policy on external links and this is why it was removed. If you have a moment you might like to familiarise yourself with what is and is not acceptable by looking at this page. Also looking at your username it may also be that you have a personal link with the site which perhaps makes it difficult for you to be neutral about it. Finally, just a small housekeeping point; it is customary to sign talk page comments with four tildes (like this ~~~~) so that everyone can see who has said what - don't sign article edits though. Kind regards, • nancy • 18:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Innovations 2008 Page

Hi Nancy, I have following reasons for why the page is not an advertising page. -> "Innovations" is a theme based platform which will focus on innovations from the developing nations. Presently this is targeted at India. We want to bring in topics and innovators which have done something on a platform. So this page in near future can trigger lot of discussions and be the trunk of the tree. -> Going ahead, we see that this platform will also be used to edit and discuss about several innovations and the ones which should be showcased. -> The platform is created by alumni of IIT Bombay, one of the most reputed institute. I am the alumnus of this institute which is commited to technology. I dont think we have any intentions of using Wikipedia as advertising / promoting medium. -> This entire initiative is not for profit. No intentions of really advertising this.

I am not very familiar in using Wikipedia and I am learning. It is just today that I realised this page was marked for deletion.

If you think that my arguments are valid, I request you to restore this page.

Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhirajkhot (talk • contribs) 17:15, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

Dhirajkhot. The page was tagged such a long time ago (nearly a month) that I am afraid I can't recall its content. I can see that from my edit history I tagged it for deletion and that an administrator subsequently agreed that it was advertising and deleted it but beyond that I can't really reply properly to you as I can't remember the specifics. I note your comments and would say to you that because an article might trigger discussion is not (necessarily) a reason for it to be included. For any future article to not be deleted you must firstly make sure that it is not blatent advertising and secondly you must show notability. Kind regards, --• nancy • 17:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding my new article

Why Most of the IT Projects fails(Scoope Creep) This is mark for deleteion, Actually i am very new to Wikepedia and its a first time i am posting my article. before i have posted my article on other side like the same article i have posted in http://www.a1articles.com/article_208296_15.html. and i am the author to this article. Please help me and guide me how can i post it successfully

Thanking you Mohammed Abdul Baseer —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdbaseer (talk • contribs) 12:28, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

The reason it has been marked for deletion is because it is a copyright violation of the text at the website you mention and for legal reasons Wikipedia cannot accept text copied from elsewhere unless the copyright has been released to GFDL. If you are the author of the original article then the notice on your talk page explains the steps you need to go through to release the copyright however you should also make sure that you are not in breach of our policies on conflict of interest and original research too. Hope this helps, kind regards, • nancy • 13:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I apologise for violating your policies. I think I need help submitting information.

Trinity9000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trinity9000 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Down Town Association edits

My last major edit to the Down Town Association was completely removed by a URL identified user with comment 'sounds like an ad or pamphlet'. It was an attempt to describe the interior of the Clubhouse, which is not open to the public and is not published anywhere. I don't mind editing out some of the more descriptive bits but fail to see why a description of the interior wouldn't be warranted. There is a request for more info for almost all the listed private clubs and it is adding information to describe how these buildings are actually designed and used. As a member of several I could do this but won't if interior descriptions are taken as advertising. Please advise as I don't want to resubmit to have it removed again. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snbfarmer1 (talk • contribs) 14:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, nice to hear from you again. I just took a look at the deleted edit and I can see why it was deleted although I think it would have been better if that editor had cleaned it up intead of getting rid of it wholesale. I would advise you to drop the words which are opinions e.g. 'attractive', 'welcome' (fire) etc and also I would be inclined to severely edit down the sections to only include the major rooms which have notable decor/architectural features. Doing these things will help the section to read more like an encyclopaedia. Hope this helps. Kind regards, • nancy • 14:13, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

william osler

since when has there been a problem with adding facts to wikipedia like those on william osler — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosler11 (talk • contribs)

HELP!

As a joke I made a fake article about my siste, Catherine, entitled "Catherine Joyce" and it has now backfired against me! I made a false link between her and another person, Senator Barnaby Joyce, and someone from his offices rang my mum up yesterday complaining about the fake article! The article appears to have been deleted, but people can still view it, so I was wondering if you could COMPLETELY delete the article, "Catherine Joyce, since it can still be viewed in the "Deletion Logs" section of Wikipedia

Thanks for your time —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 211.30.68.244 (talk) 10:23:28, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

look at my page

that is all —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amb975 (talk • contribs) 20:33, August 22, 2007 (UTC).

The laws of the lost era

Could I ask something? why do you remove the references in the page titled "the laws of the lost era", Xlibris is the unique reference existed for it and it has to be there,..

thanks for your collaboration (Featherofwriter )

Peter litwin biography submission

Hi Nancy,

I woul dlike to talk wit you and add support for my input to the biography/commentary provided. It is factually based on actual Seattle music scene events and can be substantiated upon request. Please` reply back with information on how to resolve this.

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Righteousbabe2000 (talk • contribs) 08:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Down Town Association

Nancy,

The Down Town Association description was heavily deleted again after I took your advice and made this less descriptive. The interiors of these clubs are as important as the exteriors and can't be separated from their history. Present and former usage is certainly of interest to any historian of clubs, which are not open to the public. The architects did not just design the exteriors. I fail to see how the interior of Versailles for example is not relevant to Versailles itself. I have noted descriptions in any number of other architectural articles. What can I do about this, if anything, or can anybody just delete huge portions of entries they don't like? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snbfarmer1 (talk • contribs) 14:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Snbfarmer1, Sorry it has taken so long for me to get back to you - I have been away from Wikipedia for a couple of months (longer than I planned!). The answer to your question is that yes, anyone can add or delete from Wikipedia so long as they keep within the Wikipedia policies. It would appear that the deletions to Down Town Association are all being made by one anonymous person - I haven't quite worked out what their agenda is but I have gone in and replaced the deleted text as well as the references section which they also seemed to have an issue with - in my opinion the Yearbook is a perfectly valid reference. What you are doing in explaining your edits on the talk page is exactly the correct thing to do, it is a shame that the anonymous IP who has been removing content has not yet been willing to enter in to a dialogue with you - after all consensus is what Wikipedia is all about. Don't lose heart! Kind regards, • nancy • 11:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

new info

Dear Nancy, We have personally gone to the expense of doing a search for Rotai by other means, in hope of finding a Master of this ancient and secret art. We did a Business search and there is "Rotai Australia" in existance. The owner is James L Bronson. He is in the Penrith area. We have posted him a letter requesting more information, and asking if he is the Master Jimi that was renowned for healing in the 70's. This man would be in his late 60's or early 70's now. Just because you have not heard of this word Rotai before, does not mean that it has never been in existence. I thought you would be interested in learning new things. There are now seven people looking for this healer and I have found 6 people who know of him and that Rotai is factual. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kestrel07 (talk • contribs) 09:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Kestrel07. Thanks for the message. The article was deleted by an Admin not because I had not heard of the word Rotai (a fact which is utterly irrelevant to this or any other discussion) but because it was a cut and paste of another website and therefore a copyright violation. However even were it not a copyvio I have doubts that it would have lasted very long on a number of counts:

• it failed Wikipedia's standards for verification
• as you suggest above it was original research
• looking at the deletion log it was considered to be advertising, commonly referred to on Wikipedia as spam

There may well be a place of Wikipedia for an article on Rotai but only if it conforms to the Wikipedia policies and article standards. The links above might be a good starting point for understanding why there was a problem with Rotai and help you yo ensure that any future contributions you make are not deleted/reverted. Kind regards, • nancy • 10:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Why?

Why I cannot make head or tail wrote it's Schalke04 it very weak club? Therefore is true? I'm waiting on Your Answer.PaulBird 22:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

PaulBird, you comments on FC Schalke 04 were your personal opinion rather than a neutral, verifiable statement. The fact that you 'hate' Schalke and think they ae 'weak ' is made very apparent on your userpage; there is no place for these type of opinions within articles. Hope this helps to make things clearer for you. Kind regards, nancy 06:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Why do you answer in its discussion?PaulBird 13:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

PaulBird, I'm so sorry but I have no idea what you mean. nancy 15:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I mean: why did you answer in your discussion, not in main?PaulBird 18:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Nancy

...sorry about that.

Hands up.

Guilty as charged.

The Front Seat Passanger 19:13, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I promise to be good from now on.

The Front Seat Passanger 19:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Glad to hear it! You obviously have a talent for writing which Wikipedia could benefit from if you made some more constructive edits. Kind regards nancy 19:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC) p.s. I have reverted all your additions from this afternoon as well.

You are kind. OK, firm purpose of amendment. I will reform and be constructive.The Front Seat Passanger 19:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

PROD

Just for your information, a PROD tag should never be restored after it has been removed, per the policy at WP:PROD#Conflicts. If you object to the removal of such a tag, you should take the article in question to AfD. Please let me know if you have any questions. -Chunky Rice 21:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I have raised this issue with User:Polaron on his talk page. Whilst User:Chunky Rice may be technically correct, I believe you reverted the edits of User:Trainunion in good faith and with good reason. I think perhaps Chunky and Polaron should provide some explaination as to why they hold the edits of Trainunion in such high regard, as he has not given a reasonable account for his actions. Basically, I think an established editor such as yourself should be treated with more courtesy. --Gavin Collins 23:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

In what way do you think I've been discourteous? I merely pointed out a policy of which it appeared this editor was unaware. In no way did I make an accusation of bad faith. As far as Trainunion's edits, it makes no difference what I think of them. If you'll read the PROD policy, it clearly states that a PROD tag should not be reinstated even if it appears to have been removed in bad faith. The entire point of the PROD system is that it is for uncontested deletions. If someone contests the deletion in any way, a PROD can no longer proceed. -Chunky Rice 23:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Since when was reverting vandalism wrong? I think Nancy made this purpoose clear in the edit summaries. Please explain why you think she did not act appropriately. --Gavin Collins 00:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I've already explained above, why one should not restore PROD tags, even when they appear to have been removed in bad faith. I'm certain that Nancy was acting in good faith and is a fine editor. I only posted here to inform her of a policy that she may not have been aware of. If you wish to continue this discussion, I'll suggest that the existing AN/I thread is a more appropriate forum. -Chunky Rice 00:39, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for the guidance; I had been leaving his PROD removals alone until I realised that he was removing two a minute with no proper explanation and when Gavin Collins very civily tried to open a dialogue with him about it he was rewarded with abuse - I deduced from this that the PROD removals were being made in bad faith & reverted them; I was not aware at the time that even vandalism is not grounds to replace a PROD - I am now! Thanks again everyone. Kind regards nancy 07:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Nancy

read your facts i'm a coach it's not way to treat me at all i demand you to stop deleting my edits or else my girlfriends on th softball will beat you up !!!! if you don't revert back to my edit s thank you nacy coach daily t.v production teacher —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehell1212 (talk • contribs) 22:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Ehell1212, thank you for your comment. Might I be so bold as to suggest that rather than resorting to threats of physical violence a tactic of providing reliable sources for your contributions may enhance their chances of remaining unreverted. Just a thought. If you need any help please don't hesitate to ask. Kind regards, nancy 07:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Edits on McAffee SiteAdvisor

I don't get it. Why should a criticism of the product not be allowed? Are you just shilling for McAffee? The controversy over this product should be allowed. I am not commenting on the "article". I am commenting on SiteAdvisor and thus the comments have a valid place in the article. I at first inadvertantly posted material from the Talk pages, but removed those at the request of the first editor. It seems completely out of context for Wikipedia editors to remove legitimate commentary from an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbe2004 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I have replied to the same post you left for me on your own talk page. nancy 20:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Handling Rbe2004

Good job with Rbe2004, Nancy! We'll see how long that criticism stays in the article... Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 22:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I don't rate its chances of survival very highly at all. Thank you for your kind words, it's nice to know that ones efforts don't go entirely unnoticed. nancy 09:25, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't mention it. Encouraging comments are something we at Wikipedia should never run out of. WikiLove is what keeps us going on those days of heavy vandalism. :) See you around the 'pedia, Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 10:31, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

User talk:ThatsmewiththePHD

I noticed your good faith attempts at the above page to try and encourage the editor. However by constantly re-creating rubbish they have exhausted the communities patience and I have indef. blocked. Thanks very much for your efforts not to WP:BITE and your work here. Best ! Pedro :  Chat  15:15, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Pedro - I think you are right and that a block is probably best for all concerned. nancy 15:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Your contributions here so far seem to be very, very impressive. Where you thinking of going down this route in the future..... ? Pedro :  Chat  15:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

It is something that I have thought about quite a lot lately and it is definitely an aspiration, just not sure about when I might have the courage to go for it. I really do appreciate your comments about my contributions, you are the second person in two days and I am now feeling super-good about myself. Thanks again. nancy 15:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

They are excllent contributions. You're probably a bit light on experience for the "RfA crowd" at the moment, but if you keep doing what you're doing I'd be delighted to offer a nomination, probaby in the new year (edit count is a bad thing but RfA's with sub 3k edits don't tend to pass - RfA can be pretty brutal so it's best to go in with a strong hand). Pedro :  Chat  11:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you once again for the advice and your generous offer - I may well come knocking to take you up on that one. I agree entirely about my relative lack of experience & having read comments on other editors RfAs I would be surprised to succeed until I had at least 6 months editing under my belt both for gaining a breadth and depth of experience across the project but also for demonstrating a consistency of approach and attitude enough to gain the trust of the community. nancy 17:05, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

RE: Thank you from Nancy

No problem!! Rjd0060 (talk) 16:04, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply

It was not vandalism, it was a name they actually used, please see the talk and click on their official website! They used that name before chaging to a more PC one. - Cult Fan (talk) 09:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Cult Fan. My strong advice would be that if you are going to make contraversial changes like that you shoudl provide an in-lin citation to show that the change is verifiable otherwise it will get reverted. Kind regards, nancy 09:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I have also just checked http://www.quireboys.com and can find no mention of them ever been called The Queerboys as you assert. Perhaps I have missed the page - can you provide a link? nancy 09:39, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

"'The Queerboys’ started building up a following, playing the old Marquee, regularly selling it out. Unfortunately for the guys their name was causing a real stir, forcing some gigs on a ‘Cherry Bombs’ tour to be cancelled."[4][5]

Somebody else just gave me a warning about it too, which is ridiculous, as it was their actual name. - Cult Fan (talk) 11:13, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I see the page now. Thanks & apologies too. If you make sure you provide an in-line reference to that page then people won't revert as vandalism; trouble is that changing Quireboys to Queerboys on the face of it looks a bit dodgy so even more reason to make sure you cite it properly. nancy 13:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I have added the citation to the page for you. Kind regards, nancy 13:22, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

thanks

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Red34255 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

RE: editing "Synaptotgmin" article

Hello Nancy,

I completely replaced the text in "Synaptotagmin" article because the current version is (I am sorry to say) totally ridiculous. Of course the article contains some correct information but, comparing to multiple wrong statements and inaccuracies the relative amount of this correct information is rather minimum.

I am a faculty member at Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas and I work on synaptotagmins. You can verify this by going to www.ncbi.nih.gov and running a PubMed search with key words "maximov a" and "synaptotagmin"

The text that tried to post was taken from my recent review written for encyclopedia of neuroscience.

Best, Anton —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonmaximov (talk • contribs) 07:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply [6] nancy 10:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Winter Quadrathlon

Nancy,

I can see why you would re-direct the 'Winter Quadrathlon" to "Quadrathlon", as the Winter Quad is a not as widely known, but I can assure you they are two completely different competitions and that every statement in the post is true.

What validation do you require to leave the post as is? - I can provide it. I am certain that you have to weed through a lot of mess each day, but in this case we are dealing with a lack of prominence, not a lack of accuracy.

Thank you for your time.

Respectfully,

JBS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsistrunk (talk • contribs) 26 November 2007 21:44

JBS, I would say that there are two main problems with the article. Firstly it has no reliable sources and secondly it does rather look like something which has just been made up one day! This leads to the answer to your question regarding validation - you need to ensure that the article needs to be cited with independent secondary sources which show not only that this event exists but also that it is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. If you can show me where to find the sources I will happily help you with putting the references and citations in to the article. Good luck with your editing. Kind regards, nancy 09:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

HELP

About New pages & images if you read this respond pleaseAlpha32414 (talk) 23:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply is here [7] nancy 09:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Shadowmoon Article

That article is about me. I am a member of the Team 17 forum. And that article was written by someone who does not like me. I request that it is deleted. It is about me, and it should be deleted quickly. Reply on my talk page. (Clawsofmidnight (talk) 21:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC))

Reply [8] nancy 21:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Its gone now

Well somebodys deleted it, and i have left a warning on the users talk page. (Clawsofmidnight (talk) 21:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC))

HI How do ya leave messages

Alpha32414 (talk) 22:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC) File:Phage1jpg

Well by the fact that you left a message here I think you have got that one sussed already. ;) nancy 09:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

HELP

How do i insert picsAlpha32414 (talk) 22:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

• Before you do anything you must make sure that you are not contravening any copyrights by publishing the picture, this is really important as any image which is a copyright violation (or even a potential copyright violation) will be deleted pretty swiftly. You should read the pages Image copyright tags and Copyrights and work out which copyright tag applies. As general rule if the image is a photo you have taken yourself or a picture drawn by you then it is OK, anything else you will need to check out carefully.
• Next step is to upload the image - you do this by clicking on the 'Upload file' link in the toolbar to the left or by using the keyboard shortcut [alt-shift-u]. This will take you through a sequence of pages which will help you to upload the image. As well as the all important copyright info you should also remember to give it an informative description and it is helpful to make the filename meaningful as well. nancy 09:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

HELP

How do ya leave picsAlpha32414 (talk) 22:52, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

• Once your image is uploaded you can then post it into an article or your userpage etc. The way to do this is to edit the article and link to the image. like this [[Image:nameoftheimage.jpg]]. If you have forgotten the name of the image the easiest way to check is to click on 'My Contributions' at the top of the page and look back through the list to see the entry for where you uploaded. How easy is that??? Good luck & do let me know how you get on. Kind regards, nancy 09:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Mic Wright

Hi Nancy,

Your recent reply to my comments don't really justify any wiki reservations, in my opinion.

Because I am related to Mic does not mean that I cannot be objective - this is a rather narrow point of view. Would it also be viewed as wrong for the daughter of Elvis to write about him? Rather silly.

I agree that two wrongs do not make a right - it still means, however, that similar articles are being allowed. Who is to confirm - who exactly wrote them?

So much for honesty.

Again if you feel the warning are warranted - just remove the article - I won't bother you or Wiki again.

Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmike (talk • contribs) 14:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Just as a side note, Nancy, the article on Jann Haworth was written by her husband, and it's quite objective from where I sit. Being related doesn't mean biased necessarily. Meanwhile, I'll go see if I can find the edits this conversation is concerning. :P Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 15:23, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

It's a difficult one. Jann Haworth looks fine but can we overlook the fact that it was written by her husband? Could that result in a subtle spin being put on things which might not be obvious to a casual observer? I find this really hard as my natural instinct is to assume the best of people but if you are writing about a subject who you are intimately related is it really possible to be completely impartial even with the best of intentions? nancy 15:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I've copied your comment to my own talk page, as this is a different issue. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 16:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Mike,

Thanks for your reply. I'll deal with the points one by one if I may.

1. Firstly and most importantly, please, please, please don't take any of this personally. The tags on the article are not an attack on either you or your son - we are all here for the same reason and that is to make sure that all the articles on Wikipedia are of the highest possible quality and in order to do that the shortcomings need to be highlighted so that they can be addressed. It also will speed up the process of making the article better.
2. The notability tag is there because at the moment it is unclear whether Mic meets the notability requirements for biographies. This will easily be remedied by the addition of reliable secondary sources. I see you have made a start on this however it is not absolutely clear how some of them relate back to the body text. I can help you sort this out - I'll take a look later this evening and see if I can find any other ones and/or tie back the ones you have to the statements made in the article.
3. The COI issue is more vague and also more complex. I don't see any particular bias in the article however whilst the only person who has edited is the subject's father and until there are some better sources it does no harm for it to stay tagged. As above - please don't take it personally.
4. Finally, the other articles. They also have some issues and are tagged and are as likely or unlikely to be proposed for deletion as anything else. I don't think you should get hung up on them. How about we concentrate on getting Mic Wright up to scratch? As I said above I am more than happy to help you out.

Please don't let all this put you off editing, Wikipedia can be a daunting place at first - I know it was for me - but you will soon get the hang of it and once you have a better knowledge of the policies you will see how they are only there to make Wikipedia a better place. Kind regards, nancy 16:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC

Hmm? Daunting - I don't think so - I am a Falklands veteran and don't get daunted too easily! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmike (talk) 08:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)Wmike (talk • contribs) 07:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Gosh, well yes, I guess Agentinian conscripts at Goose Green would be a little more challenging than getting to grips with the Wiki! Were you land, air or sea? nancy 08:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Royal Navy, in fact, my son was born during a second 5 month deployment over Xmas 1984/85.

As far as notability goes, again, this is a purely subjective area - is Mic any more or less notable than Jason Bradbury or Tom Dunmore - in my opinion, I don't think so. In fact, you could argue that, to date his acheivements stand up well to scrutiny. Mike Wmike (talk) 08:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The thing with notability is that as far as Wikipedia goes it is not subjective at all - there are very clear guidelines and it is not a case of whether Mic is any more or less notable than anyone else, it is simply "does he meet the criteria set by Wikipedia for judging the notability of journalists?". Mik has done very well in the couple of years since he graduated and you are understandably and justifiably very proud of him but my honest opinion at the moment is that the article as it stands at the moment is exceedingly borderline veering on the side of failing to reach the bar. nancy 16:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Somewhat patronising - I will not waste anymore of my time with Wiki - feel free to remove the article at your leisure. Wmike (talk) 18:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry that you feel that way and I assure you that my intention was not to patronise; written communication is often problematic as it has a tendency towards not being read in the same tone as it was written. I do hope that you reconsider your position with regard to leaving. With regard to deleting the article this is not something I can do and I don't think it is necessarily the right way to go at this moment however if you do feel that strongly about it then you can tag it with an author requests deletion tag - just copy and paste the following {{db-author}} in to the top. This applies when the person who created the article is the only one to have made substantial edits to it, you might just qualify. Again, sorry that you are going and doubly sorry if my efforts to help you have contributed towards this decision. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 19:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the help with She Who Photographs (talk · contribs). I appreciate it. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't mention it - all in a day's work! nancy ^(talk) 21:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Mathieu Crepel

Hi, thank you to check my article about Mathieu Crépel. But could you tell me why the major part of my article has been deleted? I can't belive that the career of Mathieu must be reinvented to make you happy. His career in necessary the same in every profiles and websites you will find. Would you like that I invent another life for Mathieu Crepel? But the most surprising for me is that you think I'm not neutral! I don't know if you know that mathieu is realy the most famous snowboarder in France, for the major part of the french population, he is the only snowboarder they know! I don't know where do you come from but I can insist on the fact that if you are not french, you can't understand the popularity of Mathieu Crépel in France. And I would like also to know why you deleted the like at the end which allowed to link the others articles about Mathieu Crepel and to find this article when you clic on a link "Mathieu Crepel" on the english part of wikipédia? This link was very usefull! So it will be very kind from you if you can check another time this article, taking into consideration my observations. Kind regardsSnowfun (talk) 20:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello Snowfun,

The reason that text was deleted from the article was that it was cut and pasted from a copyrighted source - on Wikipedia this is called a copyright violation and has to be removed immediately. You can use websites as a source of information but you can't just copy whole sentences, it must be re-written in your own words. The article is tagged for possibly not being neutral because its main source appears to be Mathieu's own website and also it makes claims about Mathieu's fame, popularity and success without citing reliable secondary sources. Finally with regard to the link to Wikiquote -it was removed because if you followed it it returned no matches for quotes on Mathieu Crepel. Hope this clears things up.

I do agree with you that Mathieu is notable enough to have a page on Wikipedia so if you would like any help developing it (but not by copying from other websites!) do drop me a line. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 21:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Nancy, Thanks for your answer, I had obtained the agrement to use the various sentences you had cut, so for me it was not a copyright violation, but i can understand your point of view: you can guess it. And I'm not sure that to delete all results of the mathieu's childwood is a good thing to make a good article, now, when you read this article, you can note that Mathieu started snowboarding at the age of 6, and that he became world champion this year. We can suppose that he had done nothing in snowboard during 6 and 23 years. I'm also surprised to notice that it is for you necessary to have a secondary source, to know mathieu's fame. But to make you happy, i add two "secondary sources". I hope it will convince you to delete the sentences: "does not cite any references or sources": there are 4 links which are used to illustrate this article. But also:"Its neutrality is disputed." because you have deleted everything which could be considered as not neutral. Moreover, I'm convinced that it was not being biased to tell that Mathieu was considered as the best snowboarder now in France. It is just the truth, and you can check the results of others french snowboarder to notice that it is true. Never before a french snowboarder had been as much famous and successful. To finish, i'd like you to help me to make the necessary to improve the "grammar, style, cohesion, tone and/or spelling", I'm not expert about wikipedia and your help will be very usefull. So I think you understand that my target was to make you to remove the various sentences which criticize my article (at the top), because this article could'nt be credible with these sentences at the top. I hope I can rely on you. Kind Regards Snowfun 14:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Good work so far - a great improvement in the sources already. I would be delighted to help out with the grammar, style etc, I'm busy right now but I will have a look at the article tonight and also see if I can get the info back in about his childhood by re-writing the information from the website in my own words. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 15:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Congratulation Nancy, it is a very good work, this article is now very interesting thanks to you! The new links are also very usefull! It was a plasure to rely on your help to make this article. However, I belive that it would be important to deal with the "MC invitational", which is the new event organized by Mathieu. Moreover the environnemental implication of Mathieu in the two foundations he supports is also important. To finish, I think that this article would be excellent if we talk about "the little monkey" and his ability in skating and snowboarding (Mathieu is wellknown to be also an excellent surfer). Thank you for your help! Kind regards Snowfun 22:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. I have done some more work on the article this morning - mainly adding references but also I added the MC Invitational (with references of course!). I looked for sources that mentioned the 'little monkey' nickname but I couldn't find any - this might be because I was only searching in English, can you provide a link? You have to be extra careful about adding information about living people and something like that couldn't go in to the article unless there was a reliable source for it. Likewise can you give links for Mathieu's support of the foundations etc. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 07:46, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Good work! I have only found this source on the Nokia FISE website(but it is in french). The "little monkey" is mentionned also in the book published by Rival editions. This nickname was mainly used when Mathieu was child, now, it is not very used. You can trust me, I will be careful with the informations about "living people". However, the environmental implication of Mathieu is well known. I looked for sources; but I haven't find interesting informations for the moment. But to convice you about the environmental implication of Mathieu, you can check his website, in the part "video" you can select "december 06", and you will saw a video about that. It will be also a good idea to mention that Mathieu was also a good surfer. The Quik cup are competitions which mixed both surf and snowboard, so people initiated know that, whereas others believe that Mathieu is only snowboarder. Kind Regards Snowfun 16:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I will find some time tomorrow to check out the links and see what can be done. Also remember me helping out doesn't mean YOU can't edit the article as well - I think you have learned a lot about Wikipedia's guidelines in the last few days so you should not be afraid to be bold; I am guessing that English is not your first language but that is not so important, there will always be plenty of other editors to tidy up the grammar if it's needed. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 19:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I would like to congratulate you, this article is very good and very interesting. I'm not afraid to edit this article but I did'nt want to spoil your work! Now I can say that with your work, this article is complete, to improve it, we have only to wait another good result of Mathieu! I will manage to have the right to use a photo, to illustrate this article (don't panic, the copyright will be respected!). I hope to have this right in the next weeks. Another time, tkanks for your help, it was a plasure to rely on you. Kind Regards. Snowfun 01:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Quo Vadis (movie theater)

Nancy. Sorry about the confusion on the Quo Vadis (movie theater). I didn't realize about the cutting and pasting. It was my first Wiki article that I created.--User:1337platypus 16:29, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

No need to apologise - it's an easy mistake to make and fortunately easily remedied. This is a tiny glitch at the beginning of what I hope will be a long and productive history of contributing Wikipedia for you. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 19:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Amy O'Malley

Hi Nancy, I am writing about the article I have started (Amy O'Malley)and which you have flagged for deletion. I am a new member here and still trying to figure everything out. I do have verifiable references for the article in question, namely the actress's bio and stats under her agent/managment's website, however I am not sure if using this reference violates the privacy guidelines set out by Wikipedia, as it also includes contact information. Could you please advise? Many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theatrebuff2 (talk • contribs) 01:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Theatrebuff2. Because her agent, by definition, is closely personally associated with Amy then referencing the website would not help towards establishing Amy's notability as one of the main criteria for establishing notability is that Amy should have been the subject of published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent and independent of Amy herself. Providing notability has been established then primary sources can be used to add content. I spent some time yesterday trying to find sources for the article but failed miserably. The article for example states that she played the title role in Evita for which she 'received much critical acclaim' however a google search on "Amy O'Malley" Evita produced only 2 hits[9], the first being Amy's myspace page and the second about an altogether different Amy. Searches for verification of her roles in Chicago etc produce equally barren results.

I am also concerned by the sentence about the alleged shooting as adding unsourced controversial information about living people is not allowed; I have therefore removed the sentence. I have also removed the references to Erika Allegra and Allegra Wynn as whilst I can find sources indicating that there are models of these names, they are not the right age, were not born in Scotland and do not live in Canada and so I must conclude that they are not Amy. Can you help me out here and show me where I can find the independent sources which back up the statements you have made in the article? nancy ^(talk) 07:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Chantal Claret

Thanks for your contribution to the Chantal Claret article. I have been having a battle with 'Neon white' over the validity of the engagement references. He will probably delete your reference section. I stuck in a warning entry at the top of the page a couple of days ago (that somebody already removed) to explain that the page isn't totally referenced and that it didn't meet the strictest interpretation of Wikipedia 'quality'. That seemed to have shut him up for a couple of days, so you might try that if he starts whining about your references section. This engagement thing has really been a pain in the neck. If you go back through the talk pages you'll see how hard it has been for people to accept it. Chantal asked me to keep trying to keep it straight on her and James' pages and it is more work than I had counted on. I moderate her message board so I'm online almost all my waking hours. The IMDB doesn't have an engagement category, so it lists them as spouses and so I can't use that reference. It is too bad because almost everybody will accept that as a valid source. Oh well. DrDelos 15:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

template

I have been looking for this template. Where do I find it? --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

You can find it on Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (shortcut WP:SPA). Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 18:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

thanks. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC) (copy and pasted the conversation to my talk to have the template handy--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC))

Help With An Editing Bully

Hi again Nancy. This is again in regard to the Wikipedia article on Chantal Claret. The editing bully is back and attempting to raise the stakes. He has put a request for deletion on the article and keeps threating me with banishment for trying to protect the article from his vandalism.

Got any suggestions? I answered him on my talk page and there is a good summary as to why he is dead wrong about the deletion due to lack of meeting the Wikipedia requirements for a musician to be notable on the request for deletion page. This guy is seriously disturbed and the deeper his ego gets involved, the worse it gets.

Thanks in advance, DrDelos DrDelos (talk) 01:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

DrDelos, that the article has gone to AfD is probably a good thing as it means that a formal discussion will take place, hopefully involving some editors who are not so close to the subject and the fate of the article will be an informed decision based on the consensus arrived at in the discussion; I think that in the long run this is better than an on-going edit-war between you and Neon. You need to make sure you have stated your case clearly in the AfD discussion and back it up with links to verifiable sources. Also remember that you can continue to improve the article during the course of the AfD discussion - but again make sure that the references are of the highest quality as I do agree with Neon that myspace is not a reliable source; you need to be looking for independent secondary sources such as newspapers, the music press etc. Good luck! Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 09:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Nancy,

The validity of the engagement references was settled by consensus in June. The notability question was also settled some time ago. The merger with Morningwood question was also settled by consensus several months ago. Neon is just a bully and he thinks he found an article that he can roll over and cause trouble while he hides behind the skirts of Wikipedia rules. I have plenty of valid sources, but Neon will do everything he can to invalidate any I post. I might post some if I have time. I do have a life. Second - Neon seems to think I have a sock puppet. I do NOT. I am 99% certain that I know who the person you think is me, but I would rather tell you in private. You can use my myspace account if you care to know. I can assure you that the account is not a sock puppet and most certainly not me. If you have any suggestions as to how I can prove a negative, please let me know. I apologize for the waste of your time this trivial matter has consumed. Sincerely, DrDelos (talk) 15:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Proving a negative - - I just looked it up and the physical address of the anonymous IP that neon thinks is a sock puppet created by me is in NY. I live in Albuquerque. DrDelos (talk) 15:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

With regard to the sockpuppet allegation the best course of action & the way to get the notice removed from User talk:24.45.67.161 would be to take it to the administrator's noticeboard - they should be able to organise a check of IP addresses etc to verify that the anon account is not being operated from the same IP range that you use. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 16:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Vegni page

Dear Nancy, I have added the copyright sentence to the website www.vegni.org which was the source for part of the content. I am the author of it. Thanks Ferdinando —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nandovegni (talk • contribs) 17:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

That's great Fernando. I have removed the tags from the page and noted the reason in the edit summary. I thought you might be connected to the website! Good luck with the article - it looks very interesting so far. nancy ^(talk) 17:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Help me present facts

I read your caution on my Edit War and appreciate it. Thanks.

However, the current biography of Narendra Modi is totally mis-representing a large understanding of the person accompanied with facts. I am trying to quote the facts but am continuously getting blocked out. The past discussions have not resulted in any benefits.

Hoping to learn.

Recordfreenow —Preceding unsigned comment added by Recordfreenow (talk • contribs) 18:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Replied to duplicate question on Recordfreenow's talk page [10] nancy ^(talk) 18:30, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Understanding Apples

An article that you have been involved in editing, Understanding Apples, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Understanding Apples. Thank you. David Eppstein (talk) 16:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Webb Middle School

I notice the copyright issues on the talk page. Could you please look at the article and see if it is acceptable? Thanks! Joedaddy09 (talk) 02:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello Joedaddy09, yes that is much better - the basic rule is that you can use books and web-pages as sources of information but not as sources of whole sentences. From what I can see someone has rewritten the history section in their own words so there are now no copyright problems. I will leave a comment on the articles talk page as well. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 11:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Chandigarh College of Engineering and Technology

Okay so let us put it STRAIGHT. We mean to cause no harm but just to use WIKI to the right, IFF(this means if and only if) wiki's purpose is to provide actual knowlwdge to it's users and NOT bluff them with falsehood, let us do what we are doing.

Wiki always emphasizes : "Interference is subject to awareness". This means, since you know nothing about what is happening, you have no right to interfere and You are not the one who can define what is vandalism and what is not. Your using captain Nancy's name can itself be termed Vandalism in it's own meaning. Remember, language is vast. Vandalism is if something not true has been stated, but truth cannot be a part of Vandalism. Rethink.

We hope we have made our point clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nullfame (talk • contribs) 14:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Reverting my Torres edit for being "Unhelpful"

I don't understand why you did that, the article is biased to a ridiculous extent in favour of Torres, it needed to have balance added. Small matches against teams like Reading in the Carling Cup are included, why shouldn't a massive match like United-Liverpool be included? 88.107.12.118 (talk) 19:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I do not think that the issue here is the notability of the matches so much as the tone of the edits. Reviewing your contribution I was first struck by the similarity to another recent edit [11] regarding the references to Rio and secondly it seemed somewhat gratuitous to mention the FIFA nomination merely as a vehicle to state the Torres did not make three the final. I have no axe to grind here; I have a personal and professional interest in the Premier League but my allegiances are not in the North West and in this context I only have the best interests of Wikipedia at heart. I suspect that you are slightly closer to the subject than I, but perhaps in this direction? (do forgive me if I am wrong). With kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 19:31, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The FIFA nomination was already mentioned, I only extended it. Regarding the Rio bit, I did read that edit, I'll admit, but I was hardly as biased as it. Ferdinand's performance was highly commended in match reports, I thought it should be mentioned. I don't think I was at all unfair in my edit. And I am a United fan, but I don't think it's relevant. 88.107.12.118 (talk) 20:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

May be I was a little hasty on the FIFA award for which I apologise however I see that another editor has since removed the Rio comments & I think it would be sensible if you didn't revert again. With regard to being a United fan I would say that if it was so obvious from your edits that I was able to correctly identify you then it is relevant as it indicates that a non-neutral point of view may be being expressed. Perhaps it would be better if you steered clear of editing articles about rival team's players? Good luck against Everton on Sunday & a Merry Christmas. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 09:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello there...

Why...hello

Ya Boy Killa J —Preceding comment was added at 21:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Was there anything in particular that you wanted or were you just being friendly?. If the latter then hello back and a Merry Christmas. nancy ^(talk) 09:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

hi

hi im new to wikipedia how do these discussions work — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Fawnzy101 (talk • contribs) 14:29, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. talk pages are for discussing changes to articles, user talk pages like this one are also used for discussing the workings of Wikipedia and for when another editor wants to tell you something. When you write something on a talk page you should always try to remember to sign it using four tildes - just like this ~~~~ which will sign your username and add the date and time. Kind regards nancy ^(talk) 15:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

wikipedia

hey I'm new here I was wondering if you could give me a lift,thank you nancy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luis cruzz (talk • contribs) 14:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Where did yo want to go? nancy ^(talk) 15:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Spunga

Please be advised the spunga is NOT the same as mop - not even close. If you are going to fiddle with the page, please contact the author first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poodwahr (talk • contribs) 16:55, 23 December 2007

I think you have missed the point of Wikipedia - if you don't wish your work to be mercilessly edited then you should not post it in the first place; even more so when it is unencyclopaedic, unverified, non-notable and most likely made-up. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 18:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Nancy

Spunga is valid. I would encourage you to take a trip to Israel and visit any home you choose. You will see a spunga and you will observe how it is used.

Others will come to our support. Open your mind to the possibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Poodwahr (talk • contribs) 14:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Poodwahr. Now that a deletion discussion has been opened the best place for this type of comment is on the deletion discussion page so that your views can be included when assessing the consensus of opinion. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 21:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

PIC

can i upload a picture that has top rope photography but no url? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunstar978 (talk • contribs) 08:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Reply nancy ^(talk) 08:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

I actually stopped and looked for blocked quotes on that one cause it looked odd, but figured AWB was right and clicked save. Thanks again. Mbisanz (talk) 08:25, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Cannons (house)

Thanks for that article! I'm from just down the road from there, it's nice to see it get written up :) Pseudomonas_(talk) 17:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Gosh - you found that quickly! Thanks for your kind words, much appreciated. Best regards & a Happy New Year nancy ^(talk) 17:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I was somewhat startled to see it on the New Pages feed (where I hang out too much). Happy New Year to you too! Pseudomonas_(talk) 18:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)