User talk:WLU

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

/Archive 1

/Me-Mystar conflict

/arbitration
Please reply to my comments here, I will reply on your talk page.


Anyone want to discuss my edits? Do so on my discussion page. I'll justify why I do what I do.

WLU 18:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Note to Jance

If User:Jance still wishes to provide me with references for the Lupus article, please do so. Thanks, WLU 21:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I am barred from editing the Lupus article WLU

[edit] Herpes simplex virus external links

I will grant you that some of these sites are OK as links. But the behavior of the editor [1] is what led me to treat these contributions as spam. If you look at the speed of the edits, this is not a person reading our article, asking themselves "Will these links add to the information already there?", "Is there any content I can add to the article that will make adding this link unneccessary?". No, they're just spamming, the same conclusion that Kafziel came to looking at this editor's similar contributions on December 12.

Since you re-added them, let me ask you "What information is contained in these links that doesn't belong in the article itself? See WP:EL: "If the site or page you want to link to includes information that is not yet a part of the article, consider using it as a source first" and "Links should be kept to a minimum."

Incidentally, I enjoyed your Five stages of Wikipedia. Cheers! -- Mwanner | Talk 15:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

No, the landed gentry bit is fine; I must admit that I didn't check out the enema link. And probably more people read your user page than you think-- I actually had a guy request a photo that I had removed from my page months before-- he'd seen it and came back looking for it.
Anyway, feel free to do as you like with these links-- as I said, I can see that they're potentially decent links, though I feel pretty sure that you'll find some whose contents are already well covered in the articles or in pre-existing external links. Happy editing! -- Mwanner | Talk 18:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arbitration

Please see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/WLU-Mystar/Workshop#Motion/request by Mystar. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 18:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/WLU-Mystar

This arbitration case has closed and the decision is available at the link above. WLU (talk • contribs) and Mystar (talk • contribs) are prohibited from interacting with each other or commenting on each other, directly or indirectly, on any Wikipedia page, and may be blocked for up to one week for each violation. For the purpose of this remedy, any edit by either WLU or Mystar to one of the articles over which they had previously been in conflict (including, but not limited to, Terry Goodkind and Lupus Erythematosus) shall be considered an interaction with the other party. For the arbitration committee, Thatcher131 12:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I'm sorry

i'mn sorry for what is aid on Talk:Terry Goodkin d but every time i make a mistake 1 person corrects meand then everoyne else starts screaming at me like a bunch of maniacs its very frustratig. Smith Jones 01:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summary

Hi, If you didn't notice..your automatic edit summaries are failing.. All the summaries are the same: Revert to revision $1 dated $2 by $3 using popups Armando.Otalk • Ev 21:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)


Read this. Armando.Otalk • Ev 21:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Races of the Malazan

I'm not on wikipedia much (was only here to add some talk on the spime article), and I've got some stuff to do so I won't give a detailed response right now. However, I will say I probably won't be a solid contributer to any malazan stuff because I'm not a solid wiki contributor, but I will make special effort to correct or discuss possible mistakes and add new content if/when I'm skimming the stuff on here.

The only particular thing I'll respond to right now is that Mr Bucket is a children's game from the 90s. It's this weird bucket which I think moves around the room powered by batteries, and the players have to throw balls into it. It's often made fun of because of a vague hint at freaky pedophilia stuff. The bucket sings about "put your balls in and I'll pop them out of your mouth" so people often joke that the bucket wants you to "put your balls in his mouth". I started using this nick before I thought about stuff like that, and I find it kinda funny so I still use it at times.

I'm not sure if I'm supposed to post your comments above mine, but for now I'll neglect to do that and leave things as they are.--Mr Bucket 03:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and congratulations on your barnstar.--Mr Bucket 03:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your House actions

Hi, thanks for you comments and actions on the unprotection of House, which seems to have happened; as a Wiki newby, I haven't yet come to grips with all the conventions and procedures. cojoco 23:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I reverted your edit to Bodybuilding

Your edit to the Bodybuilding article really wasn't constructive. Firstly the reason I made some parts 'bold' opposed to 'subheadings' was due to the fact there simply wasn't enough info to warrant them being in their own sub heading. Moreover, The links you removed were already discussed and OK'd on the talk page. [[2]]. www.getbig.com, www.naturalbodybuilding.com, and www.bodybuilding.about.com were all OK'd as external links. You didn't even explain why you removed them. Please participate in the talk page before making edits like these. ThanksWikidudeman (talk) 22:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Discussion about the Tendonitis article removed

Hi I appreciate the clarification of the Wiki policy for external linking. You mention that "external links are for things that can't be put into the body text, like videos, sound clips, links to major organizations, company websites and such the like." Tendonitis.net is a site that offers information that is very valuable for Tendonitis sufferers by giving a perspective on the treatment of Tendonitis from a seasoned doctor who has treated this condition successfully. Regardless of the advertisements on the site, I strongly believe that users of Wikipedia will benefit from this site. Ultimately, I would like to ask the readers of Wiki to make the decision as to whether this site or any other sites I add in the future are useful by adding back the link if it is removed again. Chirostudent(Chirostudent 06:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC))

Thanks for keeping the discussion civil, it's a rarer practice than it should be!
Advertisements on the site are one reason why I think it should be removed.
The other big reason why it should be removed is its complete lack of references. There are none in the article itself. If you are a chiropractic student, you've got an undergraduate degree I assume. What would happen if you handed in a lab report, essay, paper or thesis with no references? I'm pretty sure you'd get marked down, if not failed. Wikipedia works the same way. If it doesn't meet WP:RS, it shouldn't be on the page. What the page really needs is wherever this guy got his information from, but he doesn't provide any references. So basically, that means I could put up any page that talks about it, and if it doesn't cite references either, and if it contradicts the information on the tendonitis.net page, we have no idea which one to trust. Right now it is at the level of one guy's opinion, it's anecdotal evidence. He may be incredibly informed, he may cure every single one of his patients who have tendonitis, but it is only his word that this is occurring. I could provide (or create for that matter) links that say he is wrong, his information is wrong, and that you should eat mustard and sassafras to cure tendonitis. If neither one of us has references, it's an even playing field.
Further, if the information on tendonitis.net accurately represents what is known about AT, then there should be other pages that have the same information, with references (like this one). Note that this page is not trying to sell anything, and is not sponsored. If Big Pharma put a link on the page advertising for Advil and their own brand ice packs, I'd remove that from the page as well.
Another point is that if the information is useful, it should be integrated as a reference, not as an external link. If that page were referenced, I'd be all for including it in the page, but I'd still push for turning it into a reference, or do it myself if I had the time (I don't, it's a big job). If you do take that road, use this page and section to help with formatting the reference.
As a final point, you say " I would like to ask the readers of Wiki to make the decision as to whether this site or any other sites I add in the future are useful by adding back the link if it is removed again." I am a reader of wikipedia, as are you. As a reader, I look at the link, I think, what the hell is a shitty spam link doing on an encyclopedia? And I leave trusting wikipedia a bit less (my internal reader is much harsher than my internal editor). As an editor, I look at the link and think, no references and it's trying to sell something. Looks like spam. If they are genuine, they should read Wikipedia:Spam#How_not_to_be_a_spammer and if not, they get a spam warning. Yours looks genuine, but if you really want to add to the page, add referenced content, not links.
I'm not going to remove the link yet, that would make me a dick, but let's discuss it a bit further and see if we can agree on what to do next. My thought is to remove the external link and try to find information that backs it up but is referenced. Then use the referenced information to expand the page. WLU 12:01, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear WLU I can understand you being cautious from your dealings, but the truth is that there are almost no sites out there that do not intake some form of monetary compensation to keep them going. Some may cleverly disguise them as donations, others may just use Google Adwords. For example, Quackwatch.com receives numerous external links from Wikipedia and they state that they accept donations for their research. They are not even a registered non-profit, so how do we know where the money goes? I think what is really important is the quality of the content. Yes, I do agree in showing studies and citing references, but there is also room for an expert opinion from a licensed healthcare practioner. As you know, studies conflict each other constantly, so it is up to a good health practioner to teach important points that may have never been addressed in studies to date, but have shown effectiveness in a clinical setting. I chose Tendonitis.net as a resource because I was impressed at the attention to stretching that it gave, which is ultimately what has helped my tendonitis. Yet, I cannot find any valuable studies on this very important aspect of tendon care that even mention the fact that you should not actually stretch the damaged tendon, but rather the muscle belly of the affect group. This is great information! In fact, Tendonitis.net has a stretch for the Achilles that the author created and is very easy to follow. That is why I have to take exception to your use of the word spam regarding this site. I am not saying that it should be a cited reference since it has not been published in a Journal that I know of, but it certainly can be a valuable external link. That is why I will continue to fight for this link and will continue to ask other Wiki members to judge the quality of content and usefulness regardless of any advertising and/or donations the site in question accumulates.

Thanks!

Chirostudent 15:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] House

I haven't assumed ownership of an article. I have linked to the official site for the show, which clearly shows the name. Thanks for your 2 cents. You can have them back. Billywhack 20:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, you are the one treating it like your own page. I linked to the official site to show the name. Since nobody else could link to anything official, you removed it. Meanwhile you knew the link was there as proof in the argument. If you can't be unbiased, you should leave the discussion alone. Especially since you have no official sources to back up your fantasies. have a nice day. Billywhack 20:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Please stop assuming ownership of articlessuch as House (TV series). Doing so may lead to disruptive behavior such as edit wars and is a violation of policy, which may lead to a block from editing. Billywhack 20:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

That's fantastic.
Your evidence and discussion, combined with the evidence and discussion provided by others proves that the show is known by at least 2 names, as is reflected in the article currently. "House, also known as House M.D.", indicates that right now House is called House M.D. in some venues. There is ample evidence for both, and by avoiding the word 'originally', we are avoiding the argument of which name is canon, and which name came first. Since we don't have definitive links for either one coming first, but there are lots of links showing that both names currently are used, also known as is the best wording. Now, if I don't revert to 'also known as', but other people do, will you leave it? WLU 21:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: House M.D ~ You are right about the title being a bad place to put the link to MD but there should be a link to tell readers what MD means, I had to look it up since it's an American thing and I'm not. Also, my two cents, it should be "House M.D. also known as House" The DVD I've been watching this week has the title on ever disk and on the box as House M.D. people are just lazy when it comes to the name of TV shows. An example of this can be seen in Star Trek: TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT. I was going to say something about this in the discussion page for House but it's really busy in there and kind of full.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Seraph 31 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Romanesque architecture

Hi WLU,

Thanks much for working with me on the changes to the Romanesque architecture article. I wrote the Transition section and included the image, originally. I lived in Maastricht for 3 years (a long time ago) and knew of this unusual example. Your willingness to compromise to achieve a correlation between text and image is much appreciated. Your addition to the caption does tie them more closely together.

Take care,

Larry

--Lmcelhiney 15:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Turning Attention in a disambig page

Moving the Attention page was probably a pretty big change to make without at least discussing it on the article's talk page. I understand that this was intended to help, and that this was made in good faith, but at the same time, you are not the only person editing that page, and other editors should have at least been solicited for their feedback. Please revert the wholesale changes that you made today, and solicit comments about this on the article's talk page. I will say that my vote would not be to have a disambiguation page for every useage, as some are clearly much more primary than others. Even if the other editors agree that there should be a change, the best way to do the change would be to do a page migration first, which keeps the article's history intact, along with its associated talk page, rather than essentially deleting the entire history of the article in the way that you have done it here. See Help:Moving_a_page Never mind. I've reverted your changes, created a more appropriate disambig page and undone your disambiguations all over the place. Edhubbard 22:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I would like to second the above. Attention generally refers to the psychological idea of attention. Secondary meanings can go on Attention (disambiguation). -- Selket Talk 22:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
No problem. Wikipedia encourages both "being bold" and seeking consensus... Better to be bold and make a mistake. As I said above, I knew that you were acting in good faith here. Edhubbard 23:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Attention

As I apologized to Edhubbard, so I apologize to you, I shall use talk pages before moving a major page. Thanks for the patience and civility. WLU 14:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

No apology needed. Please continue to be bold. -- Selket Talk 15:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the tip

Thanks for clueing me in to that indentation style. I had no idea. — Epastore 00:47, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reversed move/redirect

I think that someone wasn't too happy with your move/redirect! ;) Check out Romanesque (album) and ROMANESQUE. Might want to look at this again... I've had the exact same problem with Japanese article titles :( SkierRMH 04:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] move of Stress (medicine) to Stress (biological)

i was just about to do it, and then realised that theres over 500 pages linking to stress (medicine) - Special:Whatlinkshere/Stress_(medicine). any ideas? Thedreamdied 23:40, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/l/u/User_talk%7EWLU_850f.html"