User talk:VeronicaPR

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, VeronicaPR, 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:

• 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:Questions, 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!  Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 15:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

You didn't explain this edit. So I reverted it, as per Talk:Minors detained in the global war on terror.

Cheers! -- Geo Swan 01:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the edits to Kristen Blake, she was never legally adopted by Stefano, and her character's original and final name was Kristen Blake. (Same with Peter, who never used DiMera and was never credited as such.) Stefano raised the two, but he never adopted them. D'Amico 12:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pig (zodiac)

I have reverted your large scale deletion from the Pig (zodiac) article. Please do not delete meaningful content from articles without discussion or an edit summary. --Sumple (Talk) 05:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, thank you for the effort in building up and maintaning these articles. Nonetheless, there is a significant naming issue with the Pig sign, as you will no doubt note if you read through the paragraph I have added. My motivation in adding this article actually came from a big argument at Talk:Chinese New Year. That there is such a significant difference of opinion on such a basic issue as naming relating to this sign is not only notable: it requires disambiguation.

It is not "irrelevant" - the article previously (incorrectly according to dictionary translations, or improperly according to Wikipedia policy) identified the animal as "boar". No doubt some people will still come to this page thinking that it is a "boar" and wondering why it's called a "pig" instead.

To answer your specific question about the Rat: the difference is that everyone almost invariably calls it a "Rat". Very few people call it a "mouse" or a "hamster". By contrast, while most people seems to call this sign a "Pig", a significant proportion uses "boar". --Sumple (Talk) 05:40, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I find the "attributes" section very strange - that the zodiac symbol is "traditionally" associated with modern states which didn't exist in ancient times.... (Jordan, Angola, Lebanon, to give some examples; Nepal was considered part of the Empire in the Qing Dynasty). Is there a source for these associations? --Sumple (Talk) 06:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, as a Chinese person I must say I've never heard of the pig being associated with Lebanon, a Muslim country! I would suggest that the more unverifiable parts of these tables (specifically, the countries) should be removed pending proper sources being found: see policy at WP:V. --Sumple (Talk) 07:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I fear we have a basic misunderstanding concerning wikipedia policies here. I appreciate that you have put much effort into this and other pages. Nevertheless, Wikipedia pages are subject to a number of fundamental policies. These are:

WP:NOR: No original research. Basically, this means that information from articles cannot be based on any editor's own, unique research or findings. Thus, anything one posts in an article needs to be referrable to a source. Thus, it is okay to write about things published by a Chinese "astrologer" in a book or similar source, but it is wrong to insert things based on "what a self-proclaimed Chinese 'astrologer' said".

WP:V: Verifiability. This ties into the second issue, verifiability, which states that all information must be verifiable. Even if it is something is based "myths" and "tradition" and "fun" (which the Earthly Branches are not - they are a fundamental part of traditional Chinese philosophy), it needs to be verifiable. Thus, for example, Hitler Has Only Got One Ball gets into Wikipedia because it containes verifiable information, and is backed up by reputable sources.

WP:RS: 'Reliable sources. The third policy states that information needs to be backed up by reliable sources. It is by no means impossible - in fact quite easy - to find the attributes associated with any of the Earthly Branches - they are clearly recorded in the various Chinese philosophical and astronomical/astrological classics. Thus, the Hai sign ("pig") is Yin, is Water, is the 12th sign, is in the north-northwest. A claim that it is related to Angola, by contrast, cannot possibly be in the classics, and unless a verifiable source is supplied, something from "an editor who claims to be an astrologer" is a fortiori not acceptable. --Sumple (Talk) 22:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 21:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)