User talk:Jessicapierce

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Hello Jessicapierce! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that 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. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting your info out there
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting Help
Getting along
Getting technical

Contents

[edit] Biscuit

Hi, I noticed your changes on Biscuit. I understand that you are changing the spellings for consistency within the article but please tread lightly with this, especially on the biscuit & cookie articles because they have been a bit controversial and difficult to tease out anyway. The biscuit article is basically two articles on the same page: one about the British meaning and one about the American meaning. Then there's the issue of scones, crackers, and it looks like shortbread is getting dragged into it as well. It's all very interesting. See: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English - THB 18:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Minor Barnstar
For your fight against typos and bad grammar via minor edits. Cheers, Max - You were saying? 16:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

thank you! Jessicapierce 03:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyedit

Hello, thank you for your copy edit of Colegio San José, would you mind checking this one as well? Colegio Catlico Notre Dame --Charleenmerced Talk 20:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Sure thing! I've just given it a quick copy edit - I can't do a thing about the section in Spanish, but the English stuff should be all sorted now. Jessicapierce 21:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

  • THank you! The Spanish section is ok because it is a mission statement copied directly from the school's website. Thanks a lot. Charleenmerced Talk 21:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

[edit] Great work

Thanks for your great work on Framnæs shipyard. Nordby73 22:48, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] help yo

I'm very green in all areas of Wiki except copy editing, so I don't know the procedure, if there is one, for reporting a vandal. User B-Mon was created yesterday and has some pretty dubious additions to his credit already. What should I do about this? Thanks very much, whoever can clue me in. Jessicapierce 03:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Be Bold in editing and in Reverting vandalism.
the Frequently Asked Question link up near the top of this page has a lot of useful answers. As well you may find Wikipedia:Cleaning_up_vandalism useful as well also. exit2dos2000 03:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
If the vandal in question has been making many obtrusive edits, and has continued to do so after receiving a level 4 or level 4im warning template (a "final warning"), then you can report them at WP:AIV using the procedures there. For more information about warning templates, see WP:UTM. Thanks for your help! Protecting against vandalism is an ongoing process. I'm going to remove the {{helpme}} tag from your talk page now, but if you need anything else, please let me or Exit know, or slap the template back up again. See you around! Hersfold (talk/work) 03:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello. There is some good information at Wikipedia:Vandalism which should get you started. P.S. I have gone ahead and issued a warning after taking a look at User:B-mon's edits. --After Midnight 0001 03:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


Right, sorry, I should have said the vandalism was all taken care of, by me and others. Looks like none of it stuck around for very long. I'll definitely look over the vandalism document. Thanks for your help, both of you! And thanks for issuing that warning. Jessicapierce 04:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Asheville High

Thank you for looking over the Asheville High article! I can't use correct grammar to save my life, so having a helping hand to clean up my mess is always appreciated! It's people like you who are making Wikipedia truly respectable! WZ Lawrence 05:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh it's no problem at all! Grammar is the one thing I get stupidly obsessive about. It's really satisfying to fix stuff, and I'm home sick so it's a welcome distraction from that too. If you ever have anything you'd like me to look over, just say the word. Cheers! Jessicapierce 05:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please elaborate

I can work a comma like it's going out of style.

Can you elaborate? Brainmuncher 12:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

yep Jessicapierce 23:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] please dont play with notability tags

jessica please dont play with the notability tags. like on Eurovision Song Contest 2007 where you have taged some of my articles. but if you look at the majority of them they all are written in the same way is mine. so i am begging you dont play with the notability tags. people fill articles out after time.. like the eurovision that is coming up soon. so please try to not be so fast on interfearing with other peoples articles. especially not the one on Björn Kjellman who is very notable and if you took the time to read the external links you would see that.try to help instead by filling in external links or more info on one articl at the time. you do the same mistake as many others.Im not saying tha tyou cant put notability tags where its needed but please dont do it just because it is a short article, that is not what notability tags are for.--Matrix17 16:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I offended you. I was not using the notability tag to mean "this person is not notable." I am American, and I am not very familiar with the Eurovision contest, so I really don't know if they are notable enough for Wikipedia.
I was using the notability tag to mean "if these people ARE notable, please prove it by including more information." To me, the fact that a person has participated in one contest (even if it is a big, famous contest) is simply not enough for a Wiki article.
Instead of removing my notability tags, why not expand your articles, and prove to all readers that these people really are notable? Surely there are more facts to share about these people. Readers should not have to visit external links to find them out. Jessicapierce 17:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Hehe sorry if i gave you an impression of being mad. im not. you seem like a reasonable person. yes if you dont now anythin about ESC thats ok.. Im not stopping you from putting on notability tags. just try to find out first what is and what is not notable.and yes i will try to expand some of the articles soon my friend.if you find any sites that are good let me know. have a nice day!--Matrix17 13:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much! Instead of the notability tag, then, ould you mind if I marked them as stubs? (or would you mark them as stubs, as you create them?) It might be a good way to attract attention to these articles, so other authors could help add info to them.
Cheers! Jessicapierce 16:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for not answering back fast, but yes you can put on stubs,that would be very helpfull..;) Cheers;)--Matrix17 16:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] help on the above "notability" dispute

{{helpme}}

Please see the above exchange for details of a problem I'm having with another Wiki user. He has submitted many extremely brief articles on Eurovision participants. The full text of Gerli Padar, for example, reads, "Gerli Padar is a estonian singer that will represent Estonia in Eurovision Song Contest 2007 with the song "Partners in Crime". Gerli is sister to Tanel Padar who won Eurovision Song Contest 2001 for Estonia."

This seems like not nearly enough to warrant an article. I have been copy editing these articles and adding notability tags. However, the original author has apparently removed them all. I really feel that the notability tags are necessary until the articles have been fleshed out. What should I do about this? I'm in the process of looking through the documentation, but I'm rather new here and I'm a little lost when it comes to resolving disputes.

Thanks very much. Jessicapierce 17:26, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, a notability tag isn't really worth a dispute, IMHO. The author now knows you think the notability of the artist remains to be shown. The next step would be to nominate the article for deletion if you thinks it fails the notability guideline of WP:BAND. But that's probably unlikely in the case of an Eurovision paricipant, who is bound to have enough media coverage. Sandstein 17:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
So it's all right for this user to continue creating extremely low-content articles and removing my notability tags? If these people truly are notable and deserve their own articles here, that is fine with me. But is there nothing else I can do to draw attention to the very low content of these articles? Jessicapierce 17:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps using the {{expand}} tag would be less threatening to others, while still asking for more content. --After Midnight 0001 18:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, yes, it's perfectly all right to create "extremely low-content articles", as long as they are sourced and their subject is notable. We call such articles "stubs", and they are a good thing - eventually someone will expand them. A notability tag won't draw any attention, anyway, because there are innumerable articles in that category, and people will see at a glance that it's a very short article, anyway. Sandstein 18:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Scops owl

I reverted, although your changes were in good faith, because they removed the info about typical owls, and introduced errors (mispelt and miscapitalised scops owl, s' instead of 's for a singular subject). Perhaps I should have been more selective, my apologies. jimfbleak 07:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, and thank you for getting back to me on this! I sure picked a fine time to get up on my high horse. I see now that I not only managed to introduce a few small errors into the piece, but also failed to notice them when I went back to look at your (later) edit! I guess that's what comes of trying to fix errors when you can't sleep at 4 am. That singular / plural thing was, as you said on the Scops owl talk page, the result of my reading the sentence differently than it was intended. Anyway, I'm glad we worked this out - thanks very much. Jessicapierce 23:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] E2

You're not this Jessicapierce, are you? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


I am all kinds of a jessicapierce. Here, I will prove it.
um.
...cookies? Jessicapierce 23:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
What a cryptic answer. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, a true conundrum. The underpants gnomes can tell, but their price will always be too high. --Kizor 03:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Boho-chic

Not needless "bolding". I should stick to commas, if I were you. IXIA 23:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


Damn, dude. There is absolutely no need to be nasty. Jessicapierce 23:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tag for translation

Hey. I just saw that you used the "incoherent" tag on an article written in French. There's a tag for articles in other languages; it's at Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup#Translations and pronunciations. Just wanted to let you know. --Galaxiaad 19:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh thanks! That's exactly what I needed. Jessicapierce 16:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nice

Nice copyedit on black pepper. It's appreciated. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem - cheers! Jessicapierce 16:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nancy Ajram

Hi Jessica, how's it going? Thank you so much for the much-needed copyedit to Nancy Ajram. I appreciate all your tireless efforts! :-) - Anas talk? 18:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jay Love Japan

Thanks for copyediting Jay Love Japan! Your work is much appreciated--NPswimdude500 20:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great Barrier Reef

Thanks for the copyedit on Great Barrier Reef - I always get a bit nervous about clarity when I feel an article is getting a bit long. I hope you'll participate in the FAC, even if only to say what you'd like to see in the article. -Malkinann 06:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your copyedit to Wormwood Scrubs

Hi there Jessica

I do not think that your copy edit to Wormwood Scrubs adds anything. In fact, the use of the same word twice in one sentence is bad stylistically, and adding 'some' in front of 'bushes' adds nothing either. These are minor irritations from what seems to be an unnecissary edit.

However, I do take issue with your changing of single quotation marks to double. In the UK it is standard form to reference passages taken from written texts in single quotation marks, as I did when referring to the Wormwood Scrubs Act in that article. Changing details because of differences in national style is explicitly discouraged in the Wikipedia Manual of Style. The MoS, while admittedly encouraging use of " rather than ', makes it clear that the national style which obviously relates to the article or the style the first major contributor used should be respected.

Obviously I assume good faith and don't really expect you to know how Brits reference written texts! I do ask though that in future you remember this convention.

Thanks

Chrisfow 23:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/e/s/User_talk%7EJessicapierce_f342.html"