User talk:Seraphim Whipp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Thanks for your questions. Please accept my welcome below.

Hello Seraphim Whipp! My name is Eric, and it is my pleasure to be the first to welcome you to Wikipedia! I hope you will decide to stay a long time and help us continue to make this one of the greatest sites on the world wide web. Here are a few useful links for you to explore:

In addition to that great wealth of knowledge, let me offer you this advice: do what you enjoy! If you enjoy contributing to sports articles, do so! If you like to correct typoes (...), write new articles, find better ways to organize articles, make useful templates, work on projects with others, or even welcome new members, do so! A happy member of our community is a productive member of our community. You can read all of the above links to the last word, or you can jump right into editing. Be bold!

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 have any questions that aren't easily found with the above links, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, or you can put {{helpme}} on this page with a question, and someone will come along to answer it. Once again, welcome to Wikipedia and enjoy!

Eric (EWS23) 02:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anna Nicole Infobox

Not to sound impudent or rude, but I am curious exactly where on the Wikipedia guidelines for biographies it is listed that the infoboxes of a deceased person must be silver. I have always selected pink for her infobox since it had been a favorite color of her and brightens up the page a little bit. Thanks! --Ozgod 21:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the link on infobox colors - fascinating! I am guessing however their use is obsolete? --Ozgod 06:35, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Colours

Thanks for your message. Most useful. Bright colours are not respectful to the dead, that's why silver is used. Thanks, --Tovojolo 10:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] General stuff

In an ideal world everyone on Wikipedia would be nice and helpful towards each other and explain issues clearly. Sometimes that doesn't happen and often the worst response is to let yourself get wound up by it, if the other person is seeking to wind you up it just encourages them, if on the other hand they hadn't really thought it could be taken that way you tend to push them onto a defensive (which can be aggressive if that makes sense.)

We generally encourage people to be bold in editing and it looks like you've followed that. On the basics I can get from the other editors comments (I didn't look too closely as it what they are saying is correct) other than not being at all helpful to you, seems to be suggesting the content is not really great enough or distinct enough to split. Keeping the information together can be helpful and use of redirects ensures people get led to the information easily.

Regarding names, I guess I've been long enough here to not draw any inference from user names. We have all sorts of people here and with varying sexual and gender identities, the username may or may not reflect that. Additionally language issues can confuse things further. There are several editors who have what in the UK would definitely be feminine names, who I know are male. --pgk 20:57, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Got sidetracked. I agree content needs a chance to expand, but that is often done in terms of a single article and then split out if the topic is substantial enough to warrant it. There is a certain amount of personal taste and judgment if/when this is appropriate. As above we encourage people to be bold, but when you know there is some difference of opinion it may be diplomatic to discuss such issues on the talk page, generally there is no great rush to do things, we don't have a deadline to meet. I can't say it's a subject I'm that familiar with and you'll often get better input from those writing similar articles or the appropriate wikiproject, but you are always more than welcome to ask. --pgk 18:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Glad you're getting on OK --pgk 10:44, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gregory Horror Show

Hi, I'll see what I can find although i've just had a quick look and it doesn't seem to be readily available. This is probably because it can't be ethically fan subbed, probably because it's licensed in North America. See Fan_Sub#Legal_and_ethical_issues. None the less I will have a more through search for it.
Aaron Hugh Brown 21:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Possibly, as all google seems to return are links to the game. Although give me a week to look properly and I'll let you know.
Aaron Hugh Brown 21:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
It's ok. Was there any others that you were interested in?
Aaron Hugh Brown 21:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Ahh, ok then. I'll keep on looking.
Aaron Hugh Brown 22:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] De Viris Illustribus (Jerome)

Thank you for the "third opinion" you offered at this talk page. However, I'm not sure it was very well informed, as you seem to acknowledge when you state, "I'm assuming that it's encyclopediac otherwise it wouldn't have been ok-ed with loads of people." In fact, there is no evidence that User:Doug Coldwell has convinced anyone that the dozens of articles he's creating offer any significant encyclopedic content; see my comments on the article talk page. While I can understand that you would want to assume good faith, it can be dangerous to try to mediate a dispute if you take at face value claims that may be untrue or deluded. The user is creating what seem to be inappropriate articles (cut and pasted translations of books). Please don't misconstrue this message. I wouldn't write it simply because I don't agree with your comments. Rather, it's that I feel the pages in question are very problematic, and I intend to pursue their deletion through AfD. I felt that it would be courteous at least to give you a heads up so that, if there's some valid argument in defense of these articles, you could let me know or bring it in for consideration at AfD. Wareh 01:00, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to my talk page

Oh God, I'm terribly sorry. I didn't see your edits to my talk page :( They must have been subsumed by someone else who had something else to say, or something similar. I hope that your editing goes well. Cheers, GracenotesT ยง 18:26, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] O RLY?

Random students' home pages are not reliable sources. It also doesn't suggest that it is anything more than an average meme (mere use of the word "phenomenon" does not make it so). Chris cheese whine 15:59, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3O thing

It's between me. I told him that no matter that an image cannot be owned by the site or person who screencaptured it, we need to know where it came from. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Banning spoiler warnings on the Final Fantasy Wikiproject

Hello, I've noticed that you're interested in the video game articles. You might be interested in adding your opinion to the discussion currently taking place on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy#Banning spoiler warnings completely. Kariteh 22:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cluck-U Chicken

No offense taken. Thanks for the note, though. Cheers. --Aarktica 14:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Alice Practice

An editor has nominated Alice Practice, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice Practice and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 20:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/e/r/User_talk%7ESeraphim_Whipp_8e4e.html"