User talk:JDPhD
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome
Welcome!
Hello, JDPhD, 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
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}}
before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Cirt (talk) 22:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Trademark symbols
Hello JDPhD, I've noticed that you've added Trademark symbols ("®") to several pages, including Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Scientology, and Dianetics. I've removed the symbols per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks), which states, "Do not use the ™ and ® symbols, or similar, unless unavoidably necessary for context (for instance, to distinguish between generic and brand names for drugs)." As I don't believe there is any necessity in these four subjects to distinguish between the trademarked and non-trademarked terms, I don't think the "®" symbols will need to be added back onto the pages. Comrade4·2 19:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Coitus reservatus
Hi! Your edits made be suspicious at first, so I reverted them. But now I've looked into them more, they look more plausible, particularly as you are a new user. If you are committed to these edits, please re-revert (you can do this in one go), and I apologise in advance. Stephen B Streater (talk) 20:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- I've put it all back myself to save you the bother (except a cliché). Stephen B Streater (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Gee thanks S.B.S., I was going to say how do you do this 're-revert' business? And then as if by magic... it happened. Thanks, I appreciate it. I really sweated it out in doing that major editing of this particular article. Enjoy!JDPhD (talk) 21:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- Just as a general point: you can reduce the amount of hassle you get here by turning your name blue. Stephen B Streater (talk) 19:11, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Burton reference
Your recent edit to Richard Francis Burton appears to be a reference to a primary source and not a secondary which would be required in this instance (for clarification see:WP:PSTS.) Is this from the introduction? Can you supply an excerpt so the citation can be scrutinized? Thanks ~ Alcmaeonid (talk) 18:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- The ref is from an introduction by Charles Fowkes. It goes something like this:
- "In Karachi, Burton was asked by Napier to report on the brothels frequented by the army" (they were afraid of syphillis) ... "the General was deeply shocked to learn that three of the brothels catered for homosexuals." A report was ordered to be written down so that the brothels could be closed. "The report could not have been more comprehensive or, ultimately, less confidential.' "Richard Burton had already met the doctor and orientalist John Steinhaeuser who shared his interest in exotic erotology. Perhaps it was this shared passion for the bizarre which prompted him to fill the report with so much detail on the practices of the eunuchs and the boys, and the demands made by clients. Perhaps it was. "The army had never been the right place for Richard Burton. The army knew it and he knew it - and now the army thought it knew something else about him..." JDPhD (talk) 21:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Scientology
Given that an editor has previously reverted your recent edit, and to avoid an edit-war, I suggest you propose this insertion on the article talk page before adding it so that a consensus can be reached. I'm not an expert, but this addition seems contentious and would appear to warrant some discussion prior to its addition. Thanks, --Rodhullandemu 23:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)