User talk:Nateland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Nateland, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Xiner (talk, email) 00:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Archives

[edit] Pulp fiction

It's hard to answer in general terms, but I'll try.

Be bold and go for it. If they are similar, you can always start an article about a more general topic and include summaries of each. When a section gets too big, split it into a separate article. You may also want to consider this. Xiner (talk, email) 22:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, it seems like Illuminato is dead set on placing the quotes as facts. He's also way past the 3RR rule. Frankly I'm amazed he hasn't been reported yet for such no-faith reverts. Xiner (talk, email) 01:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Adolescent sexuality today

Hi Nateland. Sorry I don't quite understand what you were trying to do with the Effects section of the article today. It seems like the version Illuminato reverted to - which is also the version I made - reads more naturally. If I misunderstood something, please let me know. Thanks. Xiner (talk, email) 02:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adolescent sexuality articles

Sorry I've been away for the last several days, but I'll try to give what support that I can with Adolescent sexuality and related articles. Basically, straw polls are supposed to run for something like at least two weeks before acting on them, so let it run for another week before acting on anything. Also, Wikipedia is based on consensus rather than voting, which can make dealing with a single, obstinant user extremely difficult. In practice, we can probably treat a super-majority as de facto consensus, especially if there is consensus on the part of everybody except Illuminato. If this user keeps acting against everybody else's consensus, then the next step is to ask him to participate in a request for comment on the issue. If he refuses that, then there are other steps that can be taken. I wish the process for dealing with obvious POV-pushers was easier, but that's how Wikipedia works. Iamcuriousblue 04:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'd gone to visit my parents for a week, so sorry about the late reply. I'll take a closer look at it as soon as I get caught up with things now that I'm back. :) --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 04:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok, yes. I was planning to let it run for a week or two. So i'll let it run for another week like you advised lam. Anyways, Illuminato is pretty much the only person objecting. However a few months ago (right around new years time) he copied a bunch of his 'facts' into almost every article where they could conceivably fit.

And while they got deleted forcibly in most cases from those articles for having incredibly vague correlations I'm currently trying to fix the section on adolescents in the article culture of the united states or something similar like that. That section is just filled with Illuminato's favored quotes and i'm currently running a discussion on the talk page for that article to try and rebuild that section. Participation is welcomed.

Nateland 15:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes, I've noticed that more than a few pages have content copied and pasted directly from his own article. I was a bit shocked to see that, especially in articles that were in a different topic. --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 23:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I read your comment on my talk page. The whole thing makes my head spin! I also sometimes have a bit of trouble comprehending your statements about what action you think should be taken. I hope this all works out somehow. Adolescent sexuality already looks better, although the text has been moved to adolescent sexual behavior. The only part I have trouble with in that article is stating the opinions of some researchers (that sexual behaviors screw teens up mentally) as if the researchers are the authoritative voice on the matter. It states the opposing opinion as if it's only one person who disagrees with the majority, which is a judgment call I don't think Wikipedia should make. --Strangerer (Talk) 23:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Colours

Sorry about that.I don't know how it happened, but I fixed it. I also fixed someone signing off and changing the rest of the page grey (I think that's what happened to me <|:) The WikiWhippet 04:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

Hey, maybe you should start archiving your talk page. It is getting pretty long.

[edit] Adolescent sexuality in the United States

I've just erased the article and redirected to Adolescent sexuality. I now feel sufficient time has passed and their is sufficient consensus to do this. I fully expect Illuminato to revert this. If you want to keep an eye on the article and keep my version or some other version, feel free to. Iamcuriousblue 08:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving talk page

Meet User:MiszaBot/Archive_requests, or you can copy and modify the header on my talk page for your own use. Xiner (talk) 14:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "7 X 1.14159 = about 100"

I think you have a typo here. Even without doing the exact calculation we can see that is not correct. Given that 7*1=7, and 7*2=14, it is quickly obvious that 7*1.14159 is nowhere near 100. (For that matter, 7*3.14159 doesn't even approach 100.) :) -Aleta 01:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

No apology is needed! I just thought you might like to get it right.  :) Aleta 03:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh i wasn't apologizing. I was jokingly saying 'I fully apologize for my stupidity'. Nateland 03:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CTG music (website)

The article CTG music (website) has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki 02:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the encouragement Nateland

Hey there Nateland, thank you for your encouragement and support for my edits in the Adolescence section, earlier the psychology of adolescents section was extremely biased and portrayed adolescents as mostly anti-authority figures, but being a highly social adolescent myself, I thought it wasn't really helping anyone and wasn't neutral at all, so I edited it. I also only touched the psychology section since I am a psychology student (and probably a famed psychologist in future :P) and changed the picture, which was very disputed.

But hey thanks and kudos to you for all your contributions to Wikipedia! Keep it up :D

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../n/a/t/User_talk%7ENateland_ee2a.html"