User talk:SamanthaG
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Drop mom a message.
Congratulations! Squeezeweasel 17:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Infant edit
I reverted your most recent edit to Infant, as I don't think you can say for certain that a baby stops being an infant as soon as it becomes a toddler. "Child" is usually defined as between birth and puberty, although "with child" seems to contradict this. Some definitions of "infant" do specify walking as the cutoff, but others say around 2 years as this is the age that children tend to start speaking. Legally an infant is one who hasn't reached the age of majority. In other words, unless there's a set definition it's best to leave it open and clarify later. Ciotog 20:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 3RR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Three-revert_rule
please be aware that you have reverted the Oprah article 3 times, which is against the wikipedia 3 revert rule. Sennen goroshi 19:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Oprah
are you trying to say that because she is female, that she deserves to have that in her intro, if world changers such as FDR, Bill Gates and Gandhi don't have it, then why should she? at the end of the day, what some magazine says about her should be/and is much further down the article. It is not as if she won a Nobel peace prize or anything, to have such a positive statement in the intro is hardly NPOV.
oh and regarding the 3rr rule, it is 3, not more than 3 - but unfortunately we both made 3 reverts, not just me..so lets leave the article alone, at least until the 24hrs is up, there is no need for either of us to get a ban over this.Sennen goroshi 19:14, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
also she might be important to someone living in the States, but for the majority of the world, she is just another chatshow host, she is rich, so are madonna and michael jackson - they are hardly important, they dont change the world. time magazine concentrates on US issues, and while her being on their list is worthy of an entry, it certainly isnt worthy of a mention in the intro.Sennen goroshi 19:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- im not saying you are wrong, but could you show me where Time magazine said she was the most important woman in the world, i saw some shit about her being one of the top 100, and she managed to get that in 2 centuries..the most important woman in the world, seems to have been missed by me.
-
I would be more than happy if what some magazine etc says about someone is removed from their intro....unless they won an oscar or a nobel peace prize, then I dont see any award being NPOV, when mentioned so early on in an article. I have no issue with it being in the article, its just a little biased to start an article with something along the lines of "so and so says that the above person is awesome" let people read the article, find that detail later, once they have learnt a little about the person. The intro should be free of opinion, even if its a fact that some magazine did say something, its them giving an opinion, rather than the magazine stating a fact.Sennen goroshi 19:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wp:npov#Fairness_of_tone this talks about what I was trying to say above. what you wish to be in the intro are facts, i dont deny that, but they are facts that set the tone of the whole article, awards etc do not belong in an intro, if there are other articles that have them, unless that article is mainly about the awards that someone won, they should not be there either.Sennen goroshi 19:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Im not going to waste my time or yours on a silly edit war, you have been polite, despite my slightly aggresive attitude, however if I can be bothered, I might get a 3rd opinion, because I still stand by what I based my edits on - I assume if there is a strong consensus or other valid reason for my edit to stand, you will not object - this is nothing personal, and I have no issue whatsoever if consensus shows me to be wrong, and the edit stays in the way that you wish it to.Sennen goroshi 15:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
-
Thank you for helping improve the lead in the Oprah article, it's looking a lot more like a featured article now Shii (tock) 08:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)