User talk:Carriearchdale/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User talk:Carriearchdale/Archive template

Welcome[change source]

Hello, Carriearchdale, and welcome to the Simple English Wikipedia! Thank you for your changes.

You may want to begin by reading these pages:

For some ideas of pages to work on, read Wikipedia:Requested pages or the list of wanted pages.

You can change any pages you want! Any changes you make can be seen right away. You can ask questions at Wikipedia:Simple talk. At the end of your messages on talk pages, please sign your name by typing "~~~~" (four tildes).

If you need help just click here and type {{helpme}} and your question and someone will reply to you shortly.

Good luck and happy changing! Mr Wiki Pro (talk) 23:33, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[change source]

Hello, Carriearchdale. You have new messages at Mr Wiki Pro's talk page.
Message added 15:49, 27 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Mr Wiki Pro (talk) 15:49, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Carriearchdale. Thank you for your changes to Ronald Reagan. It was nice to see someone understand about dividing compound sentences.

I noticed that you made a lot of changes to Big Brother (TV series), including removing red links. On this Wikipedia, we prefer to keep most red links, even on articles that are tagged for having a lot of them. We see the red links as a way to determine what articles we are missing. Instead of unlinking the terms, we prefer to create the articles. Of course, no one is expected to create articles for every red link they find, so red links should usually stay. I have put back the ones you removed. Besides removing them, the way you removed some of them left bad coding behind. That's because you removed some that were piped, and you left the pipe coding.

Again, thanks for your changes, and welcome to Simple English Wikipedia. Feel free to let me know if you have questions about how things are done here -- we're a bit different from other Wikipedias. -- Carriearchdale (talk) 07:02, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick reply. Are there any other tags I might find on articles here that shouldn't be done or worked on? Thanks for the help. I am planning on working on some references that are incorrect so I plan to hang around, and do some work here. Do you know of any actual projects here that need help. I will work some more on the Reagan article tomorrow.
I read over your info on your page with links and reference points. You did a quite fine job there I must say. Is it okay with you if I copy some of the parts onto a resources page for me in my userspace?
Have a great night, and thanks again. Carriearchdale (talk) 07:02, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I wouldn't say the red links tag shouldn't be worked on, just that we work on it differently. Offhand, I can't think of anything else that shouldn't be worked on.
As far as projects that need help, I can think of a couple of things. One is expanding stub articles. We have a lot of stub articles in many different subject areas that could be expanded. Sometimes it seems that people think a simple article has to be short, but that isn't the case. The other thing I can think of is simplifying existing articles, because many of the articles here aren't as simple as they should be. To simplify, you have to understand how to write in simple language. Wikipedia:How to write Simple English pages gives good basic information on that and links to some other helpful pages. Does either of those things sound like something you'd want to work on? If you want something more technical and more tedious, I could think of something along those lines, too!
I'm not sure what exactly you're asking if you can copy to your userspace. If it's something in my userspace, copy whatever you like -- it's all public information. Let me know what exactly you're interested in, because some of the things were basic notes for myself and I didn't write everything that goes with them.
Other than that, take some time to see how things work here. Maybe read our Manual of Style, which includes notes on some of the things we do differently. Let me know if you have other questions. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:40, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Dealing with a vandal[change source]

Nice to meet you: hope you enjoy being here. However: about User:82.55.36.254, when you find a serious repeating vandal, please don't pussyfoot! Leave a note at WP:Vandalism in progress so an admin can put him out of action (if warranted). Some people just have to be stopped. Cheers, Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:34, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will definitely leave a note at WP:VIP when I see another repeating vandal. I really want to do a good job in helping to stop vandalism. Do you have any other pointers to share? Thanks for the note and please have a fabulous day! Carriearchdale (talk) 08:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting vandalism[change source]

Thanks for your report at WP:VIP. You could have used either the test page option or the vandalism option for that. When the page has something objectionable, I usually use the vandalism option. Don't worry too much about getting it exactly right, though. As long as the page really does need to be deleted, the admin who deletes it can choose a different option if necessary. Does that help? --Auntof6 (talk) 02:38, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

yes, thanks. Carriearchdale (talk) 02:41, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple changes to one article[change source]

If you can, try to make all your changes to an article with one edit. For one thing, fewer updates means less work for the computers where the articles are stored. For another, it makes it easier on the people here who look through the new changes. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 03:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I edit the way I do is that I am visually impaired. I have my screen resolution set so that I can see like a section or paragraph at a time. I make the needed changes and then save the edit. I am really sorry if the method I use to make changes is making more work for the computers where the articles are stored. Carriearchdale (talk) 03:24, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, don't worry about it! Thanks for the work you're doing even though it's extra difficult for you! --Auntof6 (talk) 03:56, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Carrie. I just tagged this article as needing simplifying. Would you like me to move it to your userspace for you to work on? If I don't, I'm afraid someone will ask for it to be deleted because it's the same as the English Wikipedia version. What do you think? --Auntof6 (talk) 23:22, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is not the same as the en.wiki version. I put that version in my sandbox and worked on simplyfy-ing it. I am so sorry to causing trouble. Please just delete it if you want, and I will go away. Carriearchdale (talk) 23:39, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are not causing trouble, and I do not want you to go away! You're still learning about this Wiki, but I think you're learning faster than most people do here and you've done some very good and much-needed work. All of us had to go through a period of learning the differences here, so don't feel bad.
As for the article, I do see a couple of places where it was simplified, so I apologize for missing those earlier. It still needs some more, though. I'll do some simplifying to show you what I mean. Please don't go away! --Auntof6 (talk) 23:48, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I simplified the article some more. Let me know if you have any questions. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:18, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I just forgot to sign in. :)

I enjoy editing Wikipedia, especially in my free time.

Cheers! Tjanaka (talk) 01:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

no worries!!! ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 18:52, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Constellations[change source]

See Aunt's comments on your new constellation articles. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:50, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note taken, thanks! ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 04:59, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Putting references after the punctuation[change source]

I noticed that you did some work to put references after the punctuation at the end of the sentences they go with. Thanks for that! I thought you might like to know there's a place that lists articles that need this fix. It's at this link. That site is part of the Check Wikipedia project, which scans the articles every day looking for different kinds of things. Let me know if you'd like more information about it. Thanks again! --Auntof6 (talk) 06:01, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is the site I use when working on those. I have it saved on my to do list. It gets a little tedious doing them one at a time though. It would be much easier to do them with AWB, I think there are more than 3000 listed for simple. I have been working on adding references to all the unreferenced BLPs. Those make quite a list as well. Looks like there is plenty of work to do around here! Thanks!!! ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 06:09, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Have you thought of asking for authorization to use AWB here? We're fairly particular about giving AWB access and about what it can be used for, but working on Check Wikipedia stuff is the kind of thing that's likely to be approved. If you're interested, the place to request it is Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:01, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That is a good idea. I will put a request together to do the reference/punctuation corrections from the Check Wikipedia list. Thanks for the info! ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 22:21, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links, Other websites[change source]

Hi, Carrie. You probably didn't know, but on this Wikipedia we use "Other websites" instead of "External links" for a section heading. That's because it's simpler language. I changed it in Marc Okrand. Another different heading we use is "Related pages" instead of "See also". When you create articles, please be sure to use the standard headings for this Wikipedia. Thanks! This information is explained in our manual of style. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:23, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I do know that. I am very familiar with the differences now. I missed switching that external links to the "Other websites" we use here. I do apologize. Thanks for changing it. ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 06:27, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Your suggestion[change source]

Dear Carrie, hello. Thank you for your comments/suggestion tag regarding some problems with the language in the new article I created on the famed Lahore Heera Mandi, a major cultural landmark here. I generally do try to keep the language as simple as possible, but possibly this article might be difficult. Could you kindly advise how exactly I could improve it, either by leaving me a note on my Talk Page or on the article's Talk Page? That would be helpful. If you could actually also help by working on it yourself, that would be great and also provide me a better understanding of how to go about writing better, for the Simple Wikipedia. One is constantly learning. With many thanks and good wishes again, Hamneto (talk)Hamneto

Sure, I will work on it some tonight, and also leave some other suggestions on the talk page of the article. Thanks for the note! ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 01:43, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and thanks! I have seen your very kind help, all that work youve put in. I hope I understand some points better now and shall try to follow the rules youve given. I have also noted the point about putting the period before the reference, sorry that you had to go through this repetitive little correction so many times. Many good wishes,Hamneto (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2014 (UTC)Hamneto[reply]
You are quite welcome! I really enjoy reading over the articles you have authored. I like to learn about the rich cultures in Pakistan and India. As far as the reference error, no worries there!!! That is a very common error some editors make. I am working on a list of over 3000 of them here, and I plan to correct them each and every one. It is something I like to do. And now you have learned a new thing! I always like to learn one or two new things, if not more everyday. Please do let me know if you have any questions on anything else. I will keep an eye on Heera Mandi until we get it all simplified, and then we can remove the tag on there. Have a great evening!!!
ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 21:39, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[change source]

I just wanted to stop by and express my gratitude for your noticing my new article and sending thanks. ツ That made my day, really. It has been a while since I have been thanked here. It is good to meet you and I wish you all the best. (and I love your pink page). Happy editing! Fylbecatulous talk 15:49, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carriearchdale! Nice to hear from you again. I'm just coming back from an on/off Wikibreak, so I'm getting ready to start adding to Simple Wiki again. Thanks for the talk page message~ ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 11:06, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So tell me...[change source]

How (and why) does a person develop a professional-level knowledge of the Klingon language? :) I'm impressed with all the languages you have on your user page. Languages are an interest of mine, but I don't know nearly that many. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:47, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I studied film (movies here at simple, lol) at university. I was interested in languages and linguistics. I was really fascinated with how Okrand constructed a whole language for Paramount. I ended up doing my thesis on the Klingon language while finishing up my masters work at Stanford.
Thanks for asking...Here you go, if you need a good insult for someone you depose, say this:
Hab SoSlI' Quch! to get the right sound --> http://www.kli.org/tlh/sounds/HabQuch.au
translation = Your mother has a smooth forehead! If you have seen star trek the klingon's foreheads are big and jut out. I guess it is sort of like an insult in the yo mamma is so____ jokes.
There are lots of people now that are quite fluent in Klingon now. We have several members who translated Hamlet. Also, a group is working on a translation of the bible. I am working on translation for some of the Seuss books. This one guy and his wife are bringing up their 2 year old boy to be bi-lingual. Mommy speaks English to the child, and daddy only speaks Klingon to him. We have a literary magazine, and word of the day emails. It is really kind of fun.
ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 03:43, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. :) Yes, I have been a Star Trek fan since the beginning, so I understand the reference. You remind me of the scene in Star Trek V where one of the Klingons talks about reading Shakespeare in the orginal Klingon! --Auntof6 (talk) 03:58, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Narratology category[change source]

Since "narratology" is not a simple word/concept, would you please put something on the category explaining what it includes? Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how you want that done. We could append "study of narrative" or "study of narrative structure" Or just change the name of the category altogether. Which do you think would be best?
ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 19:53, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking of just putting one sentence at the top to explain what it is, or maybe writing an article for it. The term "narrative" isn't simple, either, though, so the phrases you suggest wouldn't help much. However, changing the name would be even better if there's a simpler term for it.
By the way, please be sure that the articles you create for this are more than just dictionary definitions (dicdefs). I tagged one as a dicdef, but some of the others are close to being dicdefs as well. Dicdef articles are subject to being moved to Wiktionary and deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:02, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
After some thought I think the best idea is to do an article on narratology which fully explains what it is in the simplest of terms. I will work on it. thanks! ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 02:15, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Welcome[change source]

Thank you. --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 23:28, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

12 Treasures of Spain/Doñana National Park[change source]

It seems to me that Category:12 Treasures of Spain should contain the actual 12 treasures, and not other places. If we want a category for properties that were in the running but weren't selected, they should be in a separate category underneath that one. Do you have any suggestions of what to name that category? --Auntof6 (talk) 05:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was thinking the category itself is about the contest for the 12 Treasures of Spain. That would include the winners and named finalists. Of course we could make a category for the Finalists in the 12 Treasures of Spain, and move the finalists over. If you think that is better? It really is neither here or there to me. Which do you think would be most proper? Carriearchdale (talk) 05:41, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would make a separate category for the finalists. Otherwise, since the category name doesn't mention a contest, people could be confused about why there are more than 12 entries.
By the way, I also noticed that the infobox for Doñana National Park shows an invalid designation. It's probably a case of our template needing to be updated -- I'll look at it when I get a chance, if no one else gets to it first. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:25, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikify tags[change source]

I noticed that you put wikify tags on articles such as Málaga Cathedral. When you do that, would you put notes on the talk page about what you think needs to be done? I don't see any wikifying that needs to be done on the ones I saw. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:39, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations![change source]

You're past due for your first book, so here it is!

This editor is a Journeyman Editor and has the right to show this Wikipedia Little Red Book.

--Auntof6 (talk) 05:02, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! I really appreciate you sending it. I really have been enjoying working here with you and all the others at Simple English Wikipedia. ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 05:18, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: September 2014[change source]





Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Flood flag[change source]

Carrie, wouldn't it be better to have a flood flag for WP:CLEANER edits? You seem to be flooding Recent Changes... Regards, George.Edward.C (Talk) (Contributions) 16:22, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Personally I'd prefer to see these edits in recent changes - there's no real need to hide them and it's fairly easy to filter them out of RC if you're so inclined. That and, of course, FF requires an administrator to be around when required, which can be a pain. Just my 2 cents, of course. Goblin 16:30, 14 October 2014 (UTC) I ♥ Bsadowski1![reply]
It really depends on the scale, but I suppose it would be a pain to apply/remove. George.Edward.C (Talk) (Contributions) 16:54, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think these changes are fine to show in recent changes. It is quite simple to filter them out if so desired. ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 17:01, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It does't depend on scale, it depends on what the edits are. In this case the edits could affect page content and so should never be hidden. Flood flag is only for mass changes that are not related to content. Keep doing a great job, Carrie. Goblin 17:51, 14 October 2014 (UTC) I ♥ GoblinBots![reply]
thanks, Goblin!!! ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 18:48, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, my apoligies. Keep up the good work! George.Edward.C (Talk) (Contributions) 18:01, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
np, thanks! ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 04:12, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Monuments of Spain Challenge[change source]

Hi! Wikimedia España, the Spanish Chapter, is carrying out a writting contest about monuments in Spain, that you can find here. I'm checking edits and I've found out that you wrote Palma Cathedral. That article would qualify! By the way, there's no article in Japanese about Palma Cathedral!. es:Usuario:B25es

Gracias, I do thank you for contacting me. I will check it out for sure! ciao!!! Carriearchdale 13:25, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Categories on user pages[change source]

Please don't add categories to someone else's user or user talk page without their approval. Besides that, user categories usually go on the user page, not the user talk page. I have removed the category you put on my talk page. If I want a category on any of my user pages, I will add it myself.

What is Highbeam? --Auntof6 (talk) 16:53, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I left a message on your page. Please accept my apology. I was at the bottom of your page when I had left a note there. I got distracted and then tried to add a cat on what I thought was my page. It was purely a mistake. High Beam is a research tool that you can sign up for when they have accounts available. I will find the link if you are interested. ciao!!! Carriearchdale 16:57, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, no problem. I thought you might be letting me know I had access to the tool. I personally don't like user categories, so I don't usually add them except when a userbox forces me to. I'd be interested in learning about Highbeam. I've been doing research often for work on Wikimedia Commons, and it might be helpful there. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:39, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are in luck. Looks like they are still taking applications for the access to HighBeam. Try looking on this page. [1] ciao!!! Carriearchdale 17:54, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

River categories[change source]

Hi, Carrie. I noticed that some of your recent river articles had both the category Category:Rivers of New South Wales and Category:Geography of New South Wales. Since the river category is a child of the geography category, we only need the river category. You can read more about this kind of thing at Wikipedia:Categories#Choosing the correct category. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks for the note. ciao!!! Carriearchdale 08:35, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcoming users[change source]

Hi, Carrie. I see that you like to welcome new users. One of the users you welcomed, Maestro frog 1837, has made all bad edits. Maybe no one mentioned it before, but we prefer not to welcome users until we see what kind of contributions they are making. If a user makes bad contributions, we can either not welcome them or use a welcome specifically for vandals. In this case, your welcome came after all the users edits, but maybe you didn't check them to see that they were good. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:23, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. I missed the bad ones there. I will check out the edits more carefully. Note taken. Thanks, Carriearchdale 07:06, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update user rights[change source]

Hi Carriearchdale, I have given you patroller rights, which means your edits will not be flagged for checking, a right long overdue. I have also given you rollback rights which makes it easier to revert vandalism. I am sure you will use the new tool properly. any questions, just ask. Also I am enjoying seeing Australian pages being added, so as we would say here, "Goodonya mate," --Peterdownunder (talk) 11:31, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Peterdownunder! I am working on getting a lot of the Australia articles started, but the I want to go back and expand some of them. Good day! ciao!!! Carriearchdale 12:14, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks brother.

You are quite welcome. Please do let me know if you have any questions on here. ciao!!! Carriearchdale 11:19, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me to it! I was just about to mark the page Kongresi i vjenes when you already QD'd it! Nice job!Amanda Call Me 14:29, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ciao!!! Carriearchdale 14:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fleming crater[change source]

I noticed your message to Aunt this morning regarding the template problem and the article you’re working on. First, the only fix to this problem I’ve found so far is to avoid the {{cite book}} template. I just put a manual source citation in its place. Or (you may know this already), if you cite a book from Google books, click on 'Find in a library'. This links you to Worldcat listing the citation information GB doesn't (place, publisher, date, etc.). In the upper right of the worldcat screen is 'Cite/Export'. Click, choose your citation style and it writes the citation for you except for the page number(s). Secondly, the transwiki article you’re working on has a (general) references section that is essentially for show only. Most sources on this list do not even mention Fleming crater or, of those few who do, mention only the name. The list is one that someone has repeatedly used on several crater articles and is basically of no value to the individual article. The enwiki article also misses the most interesting thing about Fleming crater—the two people it’s named for. A couple of sources you might find useful are:

Anyway, I hope this helps and good luck with your articles. Rus793 (talk) 15:12, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I had not gotten to the part of checking the references there yet, so thanks for the heads up. I always check the refs carefully, and make sure they are all valid before putting the article in main space. I never just trust the refs from en.wp. Lots of time they are dead links or 403 codes. And like you say sometimes they are not really good strong references. I tend to be too thorough, lol! It was late last night. So I will take a look at them tonight. Thanks for your note. ciao!!! Carriearchdale 17:51, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: October 2014[change source]





Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Biographies of living people[change source]

Carrie, for now, please stop nominating BLPs for deletion based on their having no sources. Instead, please start a general discussion about it at WP:Simple talk. I personally would support changing our practice to delete unsourced BLPs because of the legal issues involved. BLPs should have sources, yes, but it has not been our practice here to be as insistent on sources as enwiki is. That is a failing on our part, but there needs to be some kind of heads-up to the community before we start being stricter. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:07, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And please also make sure you follow WP:BEFORE prior to nominating, it is up to the nominator to do a good faith search for notability sources prior to nominating. Most of these articles required a simple switch to the English page to grab one, and the others were within the first one or two pages of google results. -DJSasso (talk) 12:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Being tagged for having NO sources since April 2012 ( 2 1/2 years ago) reeks of neglecting BLP requirements[change source]

You may be sure that I am familiar with WP:BESURE. To quote, "The main four guidelines and policies that inform deletion discussions: notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), reliable sources (WP:RS), and what Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)."

@DJSasso - For you to even imply that I did not act in good faith while nominating some BLP articles that had no sources added (even after they were tagged for it two and a half years ago) is simply laughable. I think that maybe you are more upset about what I posted here from one of the articles currently up for deletion. [2]

"So it may meet en:WP:NFOOTBALL, but it definitely does not meet BLP requirements. The article has been sitting here does not meeting BLP requirements since April 2012. It was tagged for no source in April 2012. (2 1/2 years ago?) I think that is a long long time ago. This situation does not reflect well on sewp at all"

I was glad to see that you took the time to volunteer to try to find sources for the articles. That is great and good for the project overall!

At least @Auntof6 was more open and frank with her comments above. "I personally would support changing our practice to delete unsourced BLPs because of the legal issues involved. BLPs should have sources, yes, but it has not been our practice here to be as insistent on sources as enwiki is. That is a failing on our part, but there needs to be some kind of heads-up to the community before we start being stricter." I really appreciated her comment because she seemed to understand that leaving all those BLP article subjects with no sources for over two years, was a "failing on our part" not to mention an important BLP issue. Kudos to you Auntof6 for being quite honest.

But please DJSasso do not come here and try to insinuate I ever acted in bad faith here, because if you truly think that, you are QUITE mistaken!!!

ciao!!! Carriearchdale 13:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did not insinuate that you acted in bad faith. If anything I indicated that you acted out of ignorance of the requirements to do a good faith search for sources. If you were aware of that requirement you would have done so however, you clearly did not do so or else you would have found the same ones I found right on the English version of the page. We are considerably more lenient on how fast articles need sources here for a very good reason, we have at most 20 active editors. In order for us to grow faster we have through many discussion decided not to be as tough on sources as en.wiki can afford to be now that they are as large as they are. -DJSasso (talk) 13:32, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I "acted out of ignorance"? Reeeeaaaalllllllllllly? I do hope you have a great day DJSasso!!! ciao!!! Carriearchdale 13:38, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not knowing something exists means you are ignorant of it yes. So if you do something not knowing you were supposed to do something else then that means you were ignorant of it (aka acting in ignorance). -DJSasso (talk) 13:42, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You really do not need to be so condescending towards me in your posts. I am well aware of what "acting out of ignorance" means. So now you are making suppositions about what I did or did not know, "if you do something not knowing you were supposed to do something else then that means you were ignorant of it." I was not aware that you can also read minds DJSasso. Wikipedia is so lucky to have you here. I would appreciate it if you would stick to the deletion nomination discussion pages in the future when you would like to discuss or comment on any issues (broadly construed) surrounding any deletion nomination discussions. Thank you. Again, please do go out and have a quite fancy day!!! ciao!!! Carriearchdale 13:55, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sea ice terrain
Ice-floe params hg

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Carrie, please calm down. Djsasso has not made a personal attack against you. The word "ignorant" sometimes has a bad connotation, but all it really means is that a person doesn't know something. We all have something we're ignorant of. All Djsasso is saying is that either you knew about the requirement to look for sources before nominating at RfD, or you didn't. If you didn't, then you do now and you can look for sources in the future. If you did know about the requirement, then it appears you may have chosen not to follow it. That would reflect badly on you, so Djsasso is giving you the benefit of the doubt. --Auntof6 (talk) 15:02, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For Reference - note to self[change source]

Don't template the regulars --- from [3]

Don't template the regulars This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

"These templates serve to explain the various policies to new editors. When novice editors breach policies, it is quite possible (if we assume good faith, which we must) that they are unaware of them, and educating them is helpful. On the other hand, most editors who have been around for a while are aware of these policies. If you believe that they have broken (or are about to breach) one, it is frequently the result of some disagreement over the interpretation of the policy, or temporarily heated tempers. In such situations, sticking to "did you know we had a policy here" mentality tends to be counter-productive in resolving the issue, as it can be construed as being patronising and uncivil."

Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines. Carriearchdale 14:50, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IceBlockNearJoekullsarlon
Albert Bierstadt - Niagara Falls

Painting by Albert Bierstadt-Niagara Falls