Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:13, 3 December 2005

Archived: Greeting

Freestylefrappe RFA

Thanks for your support. freestylefrappe 02:01, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Possible copyvio

Borghunter,

I received your message about the article "Bouncing back" that I posted. However, it shouldn't be a copyright violation, as I'm the same person who wrote the Amazon review -- I wanted to create a page for Bouncing Back but didn't have time to write another piece all over again, so I simply posted my own review of it on Misplaced Pages. (I credited myself for it too, so it wouldn't look like I just stole a random person's review.) How do you take the copyright stuff away and put the original article back? If it's a problem leaving the article as is, I'm happy to change it to a more encyclopedic-style piece.

thanks, Shane Stein

Please follow the instructions on the copyright notice, specifically: "If you hold the copyright to this material, or if you have permission to use this material under the terms of our license, please indicate so on this page's talk page and under the article's listing on Misplaced Pages:Copyright problems." But yes, the entry is definitely less than encyclopedic as it stands, and it could stand to be NPOVed a bit. But thanks for your contributions! Regardless of the copyright mess that's there now, they're appreciated. --BorgHunter (talk) 12:13, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Welcoming message

Thanks for the welcoming message on my talk page, I'll be sure to check as much as I can about the rules and all of this stuff as I spend some more time here. Optimager 15:58, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Airespace

Well, when going through dozens of CSDs, with more being added by the second, it's hard to give too much attention to any of them, if your goal is to actually process all that are listed, so, no, I didn't check the talk page. It was a borderline case, certainly, but a really bad article. If you or anyone else wants to write a half decent stub on it, it shouldn't be speedied. -R. fiend 06:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Kohan

Well I wasn't actually bold, I was just curious what would happen, since I knew something would, so here the reasons why to use Kohan instead:

• Article names should not include undertitles, since they are usually not used when you talk about the games. In this case it could help to differ between the meanings of Kohan, but it would be inconsistent and Kohan (computer game) is also a choice.
• It is a series, Kohan: Ahriman's Gift is actually an Add-On to Kohan, but can be played without it (just like Serious Sam TFE and TSE) and there is a real successor, Kohan II.

The second is the reason why I would propose Kohan for the article page instead of the disambig page. The Kohan series doesn't warrant several articles for the two (or three) titles (and likely the series will continue). Listing all the titles in the disambig page is not a solution, either we leave Kohan: Immortal Sovereigns as is and link to it in the series article Kohan (computer game) or change the disambig to the series page and put a "if you were searching for the priest, see Kohen" on top. The latter is what I would prefer because the game series is more important in my eyes than an almost never used singular of Kohanim. Actually as I understood it, Kohan is plain wrong and Kohen is the correct singular of Kohanim.

Also, I don't see what's wrong with moving the content if you state where it came from (as I did). The history is not lost, everyone who wants to look at it can just go to Kohan: Immortal Sovereigns. I don't like putting this up for WP:RM, but I will at least copy the content back from Kohan to Kohan: Immortal Sovereigns because your revert "deleted" the changes I made to it. -- Darklock 10:33, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

To tell you the truth, your proposal does sound good to me. I'll go ahead and list it on WP:RM.

Also, you do need to use the move function when moving a page. See here. It's difficult to keep track of histories otherwise. --BorgHunter (talk) 15:40, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Pharmacology

I'm sorry, your right I've been acting like and arse but i'm just a little frustrated. I've been been spending alot of time working on several pharm pages which I will be adding once they are unto scratch and the last thing I need is people for people to merge articles on me. This is no excuse however for my behaviour, please accept my applogies. Bartimaeus 22:02, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Featured article for December 25th

I noticed you have listed yourself in Category:Atheist Wikipedians. That said, you will probably be interested in my suggested featured article for December 25th: Omnipotence paradox. The other suggestion being supported by others for that date is Christmas, although Raul654 has historically been against featuring articles on the same day as their anniversary/holiday. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-28 08:06

Hillary Clinton

Why did you remove the information on ghostwriters on the Hillary article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.87.210.3 (talk • contribs)

You firstly provided no sources, and secondly the wording of your claim is derogatory and further inconsistent with the Misplaced Pages Manual of Style. As others have suggested, if you want to add the information, "Controversies" would be a good location. —BorgHunter (talk) 17:11, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

How is it derogatory to mention the fact that Clinton uses ghostwriters and then, breaking with tradition, refuses to credit them? --SpinyNorman 17:13, 3 December 2005 (UTC)