User talk:Cuvtixo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Cuvtixo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
--ArmadniGeneral 21:00, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Please note that I reverted your edit to the page Longshoreman, because, as the information is already present at the page it reverts to, Wikipedia seeks to avoid duplicate pages. This can lead to two pages on the same subject containing different but still encyclopedic information. Redirects are used to maintain consistency. --ArmadniGeneral 21:00, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of Cite Needed in Little Bunny Foo Foo
Regarding this edit to Little Bunny Foo Foo, it doesn't really matter to me whether it "is a satire" or "can be interpreted as a satire", it still needs a citation. Who said it? Where? When? We need Verifiability to avoid original research. ~ BigrTex 15:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted some vandalism on Little Bunny Foo Foo last month and it ended up on my watchlist. I saw your original edit as an end run around the {{uncited}} tag that was there. I didn't take the time to review the article or even read the entire paragraph.
- I wasn't offended by your first message, but I had no response for it. I've taken the time now to go back and look at the paragraph and the article. It doesn't look good to me. It seems like there would be scholarly papers that would discuss Little Bunny Foo Foo. The one citation in the article isn't even a real citation, but to a page with the text of Bad Sir Brian Botany that doesn't even support the statement it is attached to (that LBFF is based on BSBB).
- I had no intent or interest in removing any information from the article before I reviewed it today. Now that I've read it, I see a number of improvements that need to be made:
- The information about Bad Sir Brian Botany should be on its own page, and if LBFF is a derivative work, it should be cited.
- We should find a source of the words that can be quoted/cited and mention that variations exist
- Create a trivia or media section for all of that stuff that's crufting up the article.
- Are you interested in helping improve the article? ~ BigrTex 22:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rex Germanus and German Christmas traditions
I could use your help with Rex Germanus. Please take a look at both German Christmas traditions and Talk:German Christmas traditions. He also posted the neutrality tag. Thanks. --The Argonaut 17:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: German Christmas traditions
I thank you for your offer of help with the German Christmas traditions article. Please feel free to contribute in any way you deem fit. One thing specifically I would like to request is that you help monitor the piece. Rex Germanus, aka Rex, has a history of removing text from German related sites. He has been put on parole for these types of actions in the past. He also will install Dutch information that has little or no relevance to the article and will attack legitimate German material as irrelevant. He has done the same on the American Christmas traditions page in relation to German references. He will also ignore Wiki votes. His anti-German bias appears to be an obsession. I'm American, not German, but his bigotry toward things German is a real problem for people who are trying to legitimately improve and add to Wikipedia. I travel a great deal and I'm not always able to watch these articles, so if you would help in that regard it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again. --The Argonaut 04:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)