User talk:Bluejay Young

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Picture of the day
Rothschild's Giraffe

The head of a Rothschild's Giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis rothschildi), a subspecies of giraffe found in Uganda and north-central Kenya. It has deep brown, blotched or rectangular spots with poorly defined cream lines and its hocks may be spotted.

Photo credit: Fir0002
Archive - More featured pictures...

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

[edit]

Here are some tasks you can do:

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

  • You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
  • If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
  • You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
  • If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! Chris Roy 17:03, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi, please make sure your articles are more than just a collection of external links. Wikipedia:the perfect stub article will give you an idea about the minimum necessary for an article. Angela. 00:52, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)

Hi - I've a little query about your recent edit to Paul Wittgenstein. Could you take a look at the bottom of Talk:Paul Wittgenstein when you've got a minute. Ta--Camembert

Hi. We had an edit conflict on Talk:Spiritualism in the "Blatantly POV" section. I put my comments above yours, I was just wondering if you thought I was right on my specific points. --Vaergoth 08:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC) (UPDATE) I wouldn't mind working on the cleanup for Spirituality, but you weren't at all clear on which parts you thought needed clarifying. I could make it my pet project, but since you placed the tag I'd like to know what needs to be done. Do it here or on my talk page.

Hi, I think you're absolutely right. This'll teach me to read/respond to Wikipedia discussions when I'm that tired & can't properly form my thoughts into words. I assume you meant Talk:Spirituality? I wonder if Maprovonshal confused spirituality with spiritualism. Which says he didn't really read it carefully perhaps! I need to work on the Spiritualism article also, it needs more detail.
On Spirituality, sentences need to be tightened up and clearer definitions provided. What Maprovonshal was objecting to as "Fox News style" is actually the use of passive voice ("the car was owned by George W. Bush" as opposed to "the owner of the car was George W. Bush"), which is considered very bad style nowadays by journalists as well as people in the legal professions. But this is easily remedied. Spirituality has several definitions depending on context.
Spirituality vs. religion - Generally, the word "religion" refers to organized belief systems and outward expressions. It's when someone else tells you what to believe, or tells you what to do if you believe. The word "religion" comes from a Latin word for tie or binding. This would have more to do with reinforcing our ties to a particular set of belief systems, or a particular society (cf. Fundamentalist churches with their emphasis on the American flag and "patriotic" messages). Spirituality in this sense is related to personal feelings about spiritual matters such as "is there a God?", life after death, etc. rather than an outward practice.
But people also speak about spirituality where the word "religion" is too narrow a term to describe what a certain group is doing. I have seen a lot of references to "Native American spirituality", for instance, referring to cultures where there is no separation between the everyday and the spiritual. Every act, even the most mundane, has spiritual significance of some kind, but there are also specific ceremonies that can be seen as religious. Even in societies such as the Plains Indians' where one's personal relationship to the Great Spirit is given the highest value, there are many group ceremonies, and again these tend to reinforce cultural norms or values.
When the article says "Those given to speaking of "spirituality" rather than "religion"", or "'Being spiritual' is often discussed as goal-directed," a good idea is to cite examples and sources, usually from weblinks or quotations from books. (There are lots of links at the bottom, but putting citations right in the paragraph where they are talked about, or at least footnoted, is good practice.)
It should be brought out that spirituality has several meanings and the tone of the article should be elevated so as to eliminate the idea that spirituality is merely another piece of New Age drivel. One of the things that bugs me the most about so-called "skeptics" is that they keep citing New Age as "proof" that all religious and spiritual ideas are unworthy of belief. I'll have to think of more later. Thank you, we'll work this out! --Bluejay Young 20:36, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bad day?

Holy cow!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Autism&diff=20151523&oldid=20134451

That was pretty POV. Anyway, thanks for your help on Autism pages :). --RN 02:38, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

You're very welcome. See my response to you on your talk page -- I was trying to be journalistic and point out what "critics said" based on what I'd read on no-cure pages which are critical of the cure-autism movements. But of course if it's inappropriate I'll fix / take it out.

[edit] And the Children Shall Lead

To keep a standard format to the Trek pages, I removed your edits from this episode because I think its "poor taste" when people mix all the "behind the scenes" and "blooper stuff" to a synopsis which was written in a third person point of view without trivia tid bits written into it. Stuff like that should always go into the Trivia section at the bottom of the page (like all the others) and so I have moved your comments there. Cyberia23 06:15, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mary-Sue Parodies

Tamara Raymond's "Clara," and Tuulikki's "Mary Sue Invasion" come to mind first. On ff.net, I only personally know Yu-gi-oh parodies, and the best of those are found in Tamara Raymond's C2. So, please review them, and see if they're fit to include.--Chercher E. 12:55, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Glad to be of help! Are you gonna work them into the article?? Chercher E.

[edit] Walk-In

Hi; you have requested some information on Hindu walk-in legends of yore. Hindus acknowledge many bodies: a physical body, an astral body, a mental body, a refined body of the soul, and so on. The only essence that is not a body, and therefore not tranferrable, is the Atman. So, a walk-in, as described in the book Merging with Siva by Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, can take one or many of these bodies. This is a story turned legend of a yogi taking up to the mental body of a recently dead boy:

[1] Saint Tirumular's story is very interesting. He was an accomplished yogi, or siddha from the Himalayas in North India, and he was sent on mission from there by the rishis of the Himalayas to South India to spread the purest teachings of Saivism to the people there. Hinduism is a missionary religion. Everyone within it is on a mission or is purifying himself through sadhana enough so that he can be given a mission for the religion from some great soul or a God perhaps. This is the pattern within Hinduism, and Saint Tirumular's mission was to establish at one point in time the final conclusions of the Sanatana Dharma, the purest path of Hinduism, Saiva Siddhanta.

When Tirumular arrived in the south an extraordinary miracle occurred, a boon from Lord Siva to help him in his task. As Tirumular was walking through a forest he came upon a pitiful scene. A herd of milk cows were standing around their young cowherder who had just died for some reason, and it was evident from the lamenting of the herd that they had loved him very much. So touched was Tirumular by this scene that he was inspired to relieve the anguish of the gentle cows through his siddhas, or yogic powers, by bringing the dead cowherder back to life, if only for a short time. So he sat down in deep meditation, left his own body and entered the body of the cowherder, causing it to stand up again and carry on as usual. He comforted the cows and led them back to their village, leaving them there. He returned to the forest for his own body, but no matter how he searched he could not find it! It had simply vanished! Again he sat down in meditation to see what he could discover and by his spiritual insight he discerned that it was Lord Siva Himself who had taken his body, leaving him with the cowherder's body.

Tirumular accepted the will of Siva immediately and went on his way in his new physical form. This exchange had a real advantage, however, for he could now speak Tamil, the language of all of south India at that time, and he knew all the culture and customs of the South as a native Tamilian.


Best, Subramanian talk 14:38, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bernadette Soubirous

Hi. I'm afraid the only thing I've done to this article is make a small edit to the categorisation. I haven't had anything to do with writing the article. -- Necrothesp 17:36, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Laurel Rose Willson

Do you have a cite for the suspicion/allegation that Laurel/Lauren faked her own death? Given her past history of fraud and misrepresentation, it certainly seems plausible, but given my past history of mental and physical illness, it seems more than plausible that she died at the age of 61. I only ask because someone is bound to complain about a rumor in a Wikipedia article that lacks verification, especially considering that Willson/Stratford still has a very vocal (if only miniscule at this point) contingent that supports and believes her claims. - Chadbryant 23:10, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I saw what you said in my talk page about equating her faking her own death with Elvis' or Morrison's. The thing is she has a lot more motivation for it and I just wouldn't put it past her after all the stunts she's pulled. Again, until I get further proof, maybe that speculation should be taken out. -- Bluejay Young 08:42, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I also read the article regarding her death, and while I still agree that it is plausible she could have faked her death (as much as it's plausible for Elvis Presley or Jim Morrison to have done so), I personally would not have any reason to doubt her demise.
As an aside, I should also note that my grandparents (an ordained minister/teacher and his wife) knew her as Laurel, and a Google Maps search of one of her Bakersfield addresses listed in the original Cornerstone article revealed that she once lived less than a half-mile from the house where I grew up. - Chadbryant 17:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A friendly question.

I've always wanted to know this. Why do you disregard DID, and yet believe in Asperger's? It would seem that one in your position must disregard ALL psychiatric dogma, and yet you identify yourself as Asperger's? This is not a personal attack, I just want to know what your views on Asperger's is. Battrarules

Hi, I'm happy to answer your questions but I wasn't sure where to put it so I put it on your talk page. --Bluejay Young 05:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sadako Yamamura

On the Sadako page, you noted that she's referred to as "Japan's most popular psychic ghost". Do you have a citation or reference for that? I'm sure someone's going to ask about it. Thanks.--み使い Mitsukai 17:12, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Answer on your talk page. Unfortunately when I went to look for the reference the page had gone down. --Bluejay Young 17:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wa ha ha ha!

I am the Alphabetize! Do you know why they call me the Alphabetize? Because I love to alphabetize things! — Hm no, it doesn't scan. —Tamfang 17:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to have that put on a t-shirt. --Bluejay Young 07:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Send me a pic. —Tamfang 08:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Will do. ;) --Bluejay Young 22:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Georgia Tann

Well, I'm not completely guilty of wanting to delete the article ;-) ... The article was actually on the speedy deletion list, but I was not so sure that it applied, as a quick Google seemed to indicate that she had at least some notability. So I took the much less drastic step of rather putting it on proposed deletions, where "You may remove this message if you improve the article, or if you otherwise object to deletion of the article for any reason." So, if I were you, I'd remove the message and put an explanation on its talk page. :-) Kindest Regards, Elf-friend 12:35, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Multiplicity userbox

Heh, if you can call what I did "work"... Anyways, just make the userbox/category for it, and see where it goes from there... be sure to prefix the category with "User", as in "Category:User Healthy Multiplicity". —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 22:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] chinese music userbox

This user enjoys Chinese traditional music.

{{User chinese music}} as requested...Rosa 07:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Miracles at Lourdes

Hello, Bluejay Young! On the Miracles at Lourdes page we are having a problem with Barbara Shack reverting the page, a possible violation of the WP:3RR rule (you already know the situation). Do you have any suggestions? The dialogue is on both her user page and the Miracles at Lourdes talk page. JBogdan 10:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Would it be a good idea to have the page as "Lourdes (apparition)" rather than "Miracles at Lourdes," and to move the part on St. Bernadette Soubirious' incorruptibility back to her page (where it belongs), while leaving the part on miracles, but adding the information about the apparitions also (I already have some of the apparition info there--unless Barbara Shack reverted it again!). JBogdan 19:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

That is a great idea. Who do we need to contact to do the page change to "Our Lady of Lourdes"? I might not be available during the week, so I will put our reconstructed conversation on the "Miracles at Lourdes" talk page. JBogdan 22:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Aspergian Wikipedians

Category:Aspergian Wikipedians which you have included on your user page has been proposed for deletion you can comment at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#Category:Wikipedians by mental condition. The is also a proposal to create an association to meet the needs of users with mental health conditions. --Salix alba (talk) 18:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Fan Fiction page

Hi! A while back, I believe it was you who tagged the Fan fiction article for clean up (and rightly so - what a mess it was!).

I and a couple of other people have been working like mad on it, and I was wondering if you felt it was worthy of removing the clean up tag yet? I've got a vote on the bottom of the Talk page there. Regards, Runa27 20:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey! Me again! I rewrote the lead and have done some reorganization and tons of tweaks. What do you think of the improvements thus far? Runa27 05:05, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
In reply to what you wrote on my Talk page (reposted here so it'll ping ya, though I did add something to clarify a bit):
You're more than welcome. :) When I put the article up for Peer Review, somebody suggested reorganizaing the subgenres and terminology into sub-groups by theme, and, well, obviously it was a good idea so I went ahead and did it! ;) I'm glad you agree with my decision on the reorganization, and that you liked the way I went with it. I still think one or two things may need reorganizing there (by which I mean, one or two terms may not really fit where I put them... for instance, Hatefic - is it really a "format", per se? For that matter, I've actually never really heard of it used in that context, if at all, should it even be there if it's not all that common a term?), but it's MUCH better than it was, that's for sure! Runa27 07:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I zilched "hatefic" a few minutes before I was pinged with your latest. I just haven't seen enough evidence that it's that necessary. I plan to get my ace legal terminologist in-house to take a look at the Legal Issues section and see if he can do anything with it. (All our contributions go under my username -- I'm thinking of changing the username to something that reflects the number of people who have been contributing to wikipedia from this signature.) --Bluejay Young 07:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Wow. Great Wikipedians think alike? :P I'm thinking of zilching "Suethor", since it's really not all that necessary compared to "Mary Sue" and certain other terms, and besides of which, is mentioned briefly in Mary Sue's main article. Good idea on snagging a lawyer in to look at the Legal Issues section; I was considering seeking out a few lawyers here on Wiki myself to do it! 'Cause I mean... I'm pretty scared to touch it, other than mild tweaks here and there for phrasing, and correcting that silly thing about for-profit fanfic dôjinshi being "totally legal" in Japan, when they're really not (they just are tolerated, is all).
Forgot to sign my comment! Runa27 08:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, he isn't a lawyer, he's a paralegal. We do have a lawyer friend on Wikipedia, and we may ask him to examine it also, although copyright law isn't his specialty. Also, we have two online friends who are presently students in Japan, who can verify the thing about dojinshi being illegal. I'm going to zilch "Suethor". I've never liked that term anyway, particularly since the time I was accused (in the discussion section of the Mary Sue article) of being one. --Bluejay Young 08:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Hehe, he's still closer to being a lawyer than I am, though. ;) But yeah, get as many legally-knowledgeable people as you can; we need it rather desperately over there.
Oh yeah! I forgot that was you that got accused of being a "Suethor". I don't mind the term in and of itself; perhaps it's because I've recently been theorizing that EVERY creative mind, especially one that's aimed at storytelling, goes through a "Suethor" stage, like a coming of age, as it were - once you start realizing that genuine flaws and limitations are more fun to write ito a character than a mostly-perfect character who is never disliked by a sympathetic character, etc., then you've sort of had your writerly Bar or Bat Mitzvah(sp?) and are on your way to being a "full-grown" writer who can create some truly appealing and interesting characters that older audiences can relate to. By my theory "Suethor" would be no inherently worse a word than "child" or "prepubescent" would be, it would only be a bad thing to use it specifically as an insult (as it usually is, similarly to how generally, calling someone a "kid" or "child" is often insulting). However, that's just my theory, and again, the term is covered in the main Mary Sue article, and it's a very minor term that really, isn't half as important as its mother term is for understanding fan fiction. ^_^ I created the entry there, but I'm perfectly fine with it being deleted from the page. Runa27 09:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

(Consult this link for Runa's own words and my replies.)

I can't really comment on your Suethor phase theory. Don't know enough about it. When I attempted to write fiction as a teenager, most of my characters were slightly whimsical private investigators (I was somewhat influenced by The Persuaders), or reformed villains who sought to right the wrongs they'd done. I never wrote fan fiction. I read plenty, but never saw any Mary Sue type characters. I've written on the Mary Sue discussion page about what I think Paula Smith was thinking when she came up with that story.
As far as my system, yes, we do have individual names. We are very real presences to one another. You can find out more about healthy multiplicity at our website, and you are welcome to email us with any questions you may have. My problem was in thinking that I'd be the only one of the group doing Wikipedia, and then Andy and Chris got in on it. There are a handful of other healthy multiples on wikipedia. --Bluejay Young 11:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, my "Suethor phase" theory is primarily based on personal and anecdotal experience, combined with observing some of the personal evolution of amateur writers online. If you want to read more on my little pet theory, it's on my Talk page (I almost posted it all here, but then realized that would be kind of silly to really clutter up your Talk page with something available in full on mine). Runa27 19:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Well, I never saw any of that in the 60s and 70s; I didn't write that way, and neither did anyone I knew. There definitely were fanzines back then and the different stories were reviewed, commented upon and thrown back and forth, and I'll never forget the way so many people found Kraith so exquisitely fascinating that they wanted to write Kraith stories themselves and were actually provided a "Kraith Creators' Manual" by the original author, just for that purpose. It's all online now at http://www.simegen.com/fandom/startrek/kraith/ if you are interested... and, like I said in the talk page for the Mary Sue article, I think one of Paula Smith's sources for the idea might have been T'Rruel, while another might have been Sherrith McRaith. My problem is that I never saw the Sherrith story when it was first published, and that I did see "Spock's Affirmation", which is T'Rruel's story, and instantly fell in love with her.
What you were much more likely to see back then were stories about Spock getting in trouble in order to rescue Kirk, and I mean extreme trouble; powerful ladies in positions of authority, who did or did not have an affair with Kirk, Spock or whomever; followups to episodes (What happened in the mirror universe? Did McCoy ever get back together with Natira?) and stories like Ni Var, which was part of Quartet Plus Two. Those types of stories were the most common. The one teenage character I remember was a boy named Szrich, son of a Vulcan father and a Taman mother. This was in 1969 and '70 and the Tamans were not the ones who say Darmok and Jilad at Tenagra. They were much more like Gem's people. Szrich was apparently orphaned (it turned out later his mother was okay but in another dimension) and the Enterprise picked him up and he kind of gravitated to Spock in a mentor relationship for a time. He was not overly powerful, his problem was that he had abilities (both Vulcan and Taman) he had never been trained to use.
I wondered at first if the types of characters you describe tend to be more prevalent now because the age at which fans begin writing is younger, but I don't think this is true. The age spread -- from fifteen to about twenty-five -- seems to be just about the same then as now. In fact, the oldest writer was about fifty, and I couldn't stand her stuff. She had a tendency to confuse the ideas of "rape" and "ravish", and I shudder to think at her effect on young girls reading her stuff and learning that "all women feel a shudder of visceral pleasure at the thought." This was in the liberated 70s, no less. --Bluejay Young 23:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


  • NOTE: Some more extensive changes have been made to Fan fiction. Later today, I hope to seek out some sources to cite the theories and even terminology, perhaps, and possibly go on a "hey, would you please look at this for me?" spree amongst the Wikipedian Lawyers category. But right now, I was hoping you'd hop back on over and at least lemme know what you think of some of the tweaks I made today so far. For instance, I only today realized that in "Formats of", I didn't even mention regular, non-manga, textual-only, online-published (namely, webserial for serial works) as a format. If we're going to cover formats at all, we should cover all major ones, no? Although perhaps it would be more beneficial to cut down on the description for each format, since every one of them has its own main article, and they're formats, not genres or anything, right? For overview purposes, it might be just fine to delete all or most of the description for each. Runa27 11:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Side note - mind if I ask a personal question?

I had previously never heard of "healthy mulitiples", and 'til now had never met someone who was (or at least said they were) a multiple. So, if you'll excuse such a somewhat brazen-ish question - do the different "yous" go by different names, either in your head or outside of it? Just wondering. Also, I'm probably going to add my email to my User page, if/when I do, feel free to email me some time if you want to talk about psychology stuff, or anything else especially if it's not particularly Wiki-related, I'm always interested in that stuff (I just haven't found a little User button yet to denote an interest in psychology :P). Runa27 09:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

As far as my system, yes, we do have individual names. We are very real presences to one another. You can find out more about healthy multiplicity at our website, and you are welcome to email us with any questions you may have. My problem was in thinking that I'd be the only one of the group doing Wikipedia, and then Andy and Chris got in on it. There are a handful of other healthy multiples on wikipedia. --Bluejay Young 11:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Ah, that answers that question! I'm not surprised that more than one of you is interested in Wikipedia, though. It's surprisingly addictive. ;) Runa27 19:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)


Wow! I thought I was the only one who thought of multiple personalities in that way (well, my "other" and I). The S 02:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Not at all. See your talk page. --Bluejay Young 11:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Those websites were most useful. Thank you! By the way, I (the only one who is a Wikieditor - my other - you can call him "The X" - only reads Wikipedia), might be able to clean up the healthy multiplicity article so it's a bit more NPOV, but that might not be for some time. I've got a lot outside of Wikipedia to do as of now. I also see you're a fan of The Ring :D The S 18:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Take your time, the article doesn't seem to be going anywhere. As far as The Ring, I'm much more interested in Takahashi Sadako, the woman on whom the story was based. She was the subject of study by a parapsychologist in the early 1930s to see if it was really possible to project mental images on film. --Bluejay Young 23:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talking cats article

Somebody called Weregerbil tagged the talking cat article with 'notability' and 'unsourced' tags, sticking a great big box on the top of the whole thing. I'm a bit boggled, myself, as the source is the darned video itself! How are you supposed to report on a semi-influential internet meme if that's not proper? Not everything's going to be as obvious as All Your Base, but "Oh Don Piano" is hardly obscure.

Also, random cat butt.

--Flatlanders, 13:42, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Ask your question on the talk page of the article itself, please. I'm dying to see what he says. Also, the "loveyaloveya" kitty was being scritchied in the same spot that Leslie INSISTS, LOUDLY, YOU WILL SCRITCHY ME NOW EVERY DAMN MORNING AT 7 A.M. and various times throughout the day. She is very stiff and has trouble grooming herself back there. She wants you not just to scritchy her but to COMB her in that spot. She doesn't talk while we do it, but she clearly enjoys the hell out of it. She talks at other times; besides all the "raa", "quack" and "aaa" stuff, if I hold onto her food dish too long while I'm mixing her glucosamine pills in it, she yells "NOW!!!" --Bluejay Young 16:16, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] More changes to Fan fiction

Fan fiction has had even more changes, mostly to the history and introduction - not me, mostly (I went in and cleaned it up for readability and in some cases to remove unnecessary statements, is all), but it's still had significant changes. It's also had the Formats section revamped, though not necessarily in the best way possible, last I checked; I think someone added a whole new section that incorperated some of the previously-listed terminology for formats, but not all of them.

Also, in perhaps the most signficant change, (well, actually... the history would be the most signficant, in my opinion, because it's actually sourced this time, thank God, but, the most instantly noticeable is still that) the Legal Issues section has been seperated into its own unique article.

Thought I'd let you know. :) Runa27 22:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


Fan fiction terminology is now its own, seperate article. :) Thought you'd want to know, especially since I'm considering moving the subgenres from the original fan fiction article to either that article or their own article as well.
The Formats section also has apparently been revamped and become more integrated by another user, though I am still in the process of reading it and going over it as we speak to see how well it was done. I'm thinking (nay, proposing) that we should aim to have the main fan fiction article be about the history, formats, major theories about the genre and varied definitions of the term itself. I.e. it should be a jumping-off point of sorts, with the related major issues and terms being optional jumping-into points from the main article. Considerig how (to use my own words) "massive the concept is", this may be the only way to achieve a relatively concise, accurate article on fan fiction in general that technically covers everything without being so big as to be overwhelming for the reader. :)
Anyway, I'd really appreciate it if you'd help out over on Fan fiction terminology or join in on the discussion on Talk:Fan fiction, down at the bottom under the heading "Recent tweaks" where I detail what I've done today and plan to do in the next few days. Runa27 23:44, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fan Fiction nominated for an Article Improvement Drive

I figured you'd want to know that the fan fiction article has been nominated for an Article Improvement Drive. :) Runa27 22:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Axis of Evil

Hey, man it's Wi-king, sorry, I thought that it did not really fit into the article all that well, but if you feel it's justified, go for it and repost it, and I won't touch it ever again. I'm the man, spread the word. Wi-king 02:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Lily Sloane
D. C. Fontana
Steffani Brass
Cure Autism Now
Mozart and the Whale
Hyperactivity
Clive Revill
Spencer Daniels
United (Enterprise episode)
Joseph Pevney
Jasmine O'Neill
Daniel Travis
Michael Patrick Jann
Roger Holloway
Helena Cain
Tim Ahern
Sam Flagg
Legacy (TNG episode)
Tim Van Patten
Cleanup
Rett syndrome
Mark Geier
GIR (Invader Zim)
Merge
Biomedical intervention for autism
Rise of the Empire
White Trash (LEXX episode)
Add Sources
Autism Awareness Campaign UK
People speculated to have been autistic
Leonard McCoy
Wikify
Jean Little
Cimarron Strip
Julie of the Wolves
Expand
Karuk
Ideomotor effect
Galactic quadrants (Star Trek)

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Our Lady of Lourdes

Howdy! As for your recent edits, I understand the NPOV status you are trying to reach, but it needs to be in the proper format. When "reported" is used, who was it "reported" to? If Bernadette and everyone else was reporting their sightings to the local newspaper, we would write "Bernadette reported to the Lourdes Daily that..." If it was to the government or to the ecclesiastical committee, we might used "testified." Usually we use "reported" to mean that the person actively wanted at least one other person to know and usually it also means that it should be made public. According to the recources I used, Bernadette did not want to tell her friend and sister in the first place, but when they continued to pester her about the matter she finally told them, but told them to keep the matter a secret. When they got home, the secret was betrayed to Bernadette's mother, and when she found out...well, you probably know the rest. So, in at least one instance, I had used the word "admit" rather than "report."

Also, did you know that this article is on both answers.com and reference.com, along with virtually all the Wikipedia articles? And to top it off, although the articles are occasionally updated (I saw some of my more recent edits to the Moses article on the sites also), it cannot be edited like on Wikipedia and the article is listed with other articles from professional encyclopedias!JBogdan 22:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Night Flight (TV series)

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Bluejay Young! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, and try to reinsert the link again. If your link was genuine spam, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 22:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

HI I reverted your readdition of the link because I don't think a livejournal page is going to add anything to the article. If people want to find communities than they can use google. If it is any consolation, I also removed all the other links for advertising, copyvios and membership only groups and your link was the most appropriate of the lot. If you disagree with my decision please feel free to leave me a note on my talk page. In case you hadn't seen it, we have a policy on external links. Regards --Spartaz 06:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Every seven years?

I'm not sure if in Amok Time they said Vulcan males endure pon'far every seven years, but I know for a fact Lt. Saavik said they did in Search for Spock. I'll have to wait to see "Amok Time" again to make sure. What seems odd is in "Amok Time" McCoy said if a Vulcan doesn't mate, he'll die - but apparently that is not the case, since Spock at the end of the episode never mated and still lived, likewise in Search for Spock the young Spock underwent pon'far and lived although Saavik sort of eased his pain - doing the caressing fingers bit - which I think in a non-canon source said was similar to humans kissing. Cyberia23 22:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I tried to fix this somewhat. Thank you. --Bluejay Young 20:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Ascended master, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.

[edit] License tagging for Image:Elsie - lg.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Elsie - lg.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DreamGuy

I don't profess to know a great deal about User:DreamGuy. The only place our paths really cross semi-regularly is on WP:AFD. - Smerdis of Tlön 19:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Mobiuslweb sm.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mobiuslweb sm.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Mobiuslweb sm.jpg

About Image:Mobiuslweb sm.jpg, from what you tell me, probably the best template to use on it as far as I can figure would be Template:Attribution. - Smerdis of Tlön 20:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Frost King merger

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are in support of merging The Frost King article in with Helen Keller. If so, can you guide me through the process? So far, there has really only been one objection. --Umalee 18:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I decided to remove the merger tag on The Frost Kings. The merger tag on Helen Keller was already removed and frankly, I am tired of being worried and thinking about it. Maybe when everyone has calmed down, we can try again? I'm assuming a month is more than enough time to have a general consensus? I never knew this would be so controversial, but it was. --Umalee 02:52, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wounded Knee

I appreciate your work on the Wounded Knee Massacre. You made several improvements. Do you have an ISBN for the Flood book? Ideally you could use this if you have the book in your posession:{{cite book | last = | first = | authorlink = | coauthors = | title = | publisher = | date = | location = | pages = | url = | doi = | id = }} Thanks --Appraiser 23:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] multiplicity

Do you know what happened to the Healthy multiplicity page? (btw, are y'all celebrating New Year's Wednesday? :> ) --Renice 16:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Re voted to delete the article because it was considered to not have sufficient sources: I think the article should discuss it as a cultural phenomenon, at the very least. It is an accepted state of being in other cultures, and WP should at least document that, in addition to the growing 'rights' movement here. (Sorry I'm 'late to the party': I'm struggling with some health issues. I want to thank you for boldly pointing to multiplicity resources, btw -- your pointers/links have been a big help. :> )
Btw, there's a fascinating article in a recent Newsweek -- unfortunately I can't find it or the book it's discussing anywhere online yet (and I read the mag in a doc's waiting room so I don't even have that). The article has excerpts from a new book put together by Robert Faggan -- it is a publication of Carl Sandburg's notes to himself. The name of the article, and possibly the book, is "The man with two brains". Y'all might find the way Sandburg wrote in 'different voices' to work out his art as riveting as we did.
Now I understand that there are both science-types and religious-types, in Western culture, who try to explain the phenomenon in ways that exemplify both 'good and bad faith' (nice duality, eh?), so I think the article needs sections (I can't see what was there before, sorry) for each of their explanations: science, which sees it as a disconnect in translating btwn input/output areas of the brain in which healthy multiplicity can be a benign coping mechanism, or else a disruption; and some religions, which can blindly disregard their own guideline of 'judging them by their works/intentions' and literally demonize the state. And then there should be sections exploring other 'names' for the state in other cultures and other fields of study....
Actually, I wonder if 'Healthy multiplicity' couldn't simply be a section under Multiplicity (philosophy). That article could be expanded to include 'a multitude of sins', so to speak -- see google search. Healthy multiplicity could then redirect there... ?
Sorry if I'm just 'talking out loud' here. I hope to be able to do more than that in April or May. (By the way, do y'all use a lunisolar calendar? I just realized yesterday that we/I have been following one without knowing. It seems to me that today's astronomical phenomena, just before the vernal equinox on Wed, make it a pretty big new year's day... ? We're preparing for a trip to the Grand Canyon to celebrate [as well as see it before one of us is gone].)
--Renice 13:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I saw the discussion of this on LJ and came here to see what on earth had happened, but I can't find the AFD for Healthy multiplicity. Do you know where it is? If there wasn't an AFD, why was the page deleted? Vashti 16:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I guess what I really want to know is, technically speaking, did it go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, and if not, who deleted it and why? There are procedures for this kind of thing, and I can't imagine that it would have been prod deleted. Vashti 21:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! Looking at that, it does look as if the delete result is iffy, but without sources people will consider reliable a deletion review is unlikely to be successful. Oh well. Vashti 08:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blanking

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. King Lopez Contribs 09:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/l/u/User_talk%7EBluejay_Young_45ac.html"