User talk:Wikisux

Consult page history for earlier chatter.

Constantia Jones and Fumoto no iro

What exactly are your sources for Constantia Jones and Fumoto no iro? They're orphans, and they bring up nothing on Google. -- Andre 03:35, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

For the former, Peter Linebaugh's excellent The London Hanged: Crime and Civil Society in the Eighteenth Century (2nd ed.), page 147. For the latter, Timon Screech's Sex and the Floating World: Erotic Images in Japan, 1700-1820. I added these articles partly because I found the subject matter interesting and partly because I feel Wikipedia leans too much towards regurgitating trivia that's already available elsewhere on the Internet. Wikisux 08:06, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I'll take your word for it until I can get both of those books from the library. - Andre 19:03, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

comment

Thanks for taking a stab at Media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; perhaps something can be salvaged after all.

I agree with you 100% with regard to typography, but many people here consider lacing texts with HTML codes editor-unfriendly and will revert you. There has been sporadic talk of have the Mediawiki software automatically convert double hyphens to emdashes and the like, but nothing has come of this. If you feel strongly about this issue, you might pursue that possiblilty further.

Forgive me for saying this, but you have a hideous handle, but if that is how you want to be known... All the best. -- Viajero 15:48, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

the wall

Hi and thank you for helping the article. Not that I agree with all the changes, but hope it will only win from extra caring hands. Few results from google:

• the Feb. 11 edition of The Australian ran the headline: Israel to cut 100km off 'apartheid wall'. [1]
• Media Monitors Network, courtesy of the Media Review Network
• Let's not exclude al-Jazeera

Sometimes, media bias is hard to distinguish from political one. I need to find where I read that in the ME, everyone has a mission.

If you strongly feel about removing this expression, fine. I really think the article should have a paragraph on Jenin, as I believe that the damage that has been done by unverified irresponsible broadcasts is almost impossible to undo. I hope you don't lose your sleep over it, though. ←Humus sapiens←Talk 03:20, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

subjectivism

Sorry, subjectivism probably wasnt the best term for that, of course one can never remove all subjectivism from an article, especially statements that are not easily quantifiable (ie Columbia is one of the leading universities in the world). However, I attempted to remove some of the personal opinions that do not seem to fit well with an article in an encyclopedia that purports to adhere to at least some semblance of professionalism - the comment about gentrification for instance. Opinions, such as the prestige of the university, which is rooted in a long history and certain facts, tend to be more widely accepted.

~S

Re: NYU Table

I don't think this one is uglier, personally, I prefer the new one but I'm not vested in it enough to feel like stepping on toes.

Privacy policy

Good evening. You recently weighed in with an opinion on the discussion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/User:Tim Starling/Password matches. On the basis of that discussion, I have proposed some changes to our privacy policy at Meta:Draft privacy policy. I would appreciate your thoughts if you have time. Rossami 22:20, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Constantia Jones (again)

Ok mate I concede: I found a reference that not only shows that she existed but that gives an execution date for her as well. That said, I'm still not convinced that this woman's execution can be used to prove anything outside the harsh laws of the time: all it says on the records found is that a pick pocket was hanged at Tyburn on December 22nd 1738: nothing about her being a prostitute and I feel that's going to be very hard to prove one way or the other. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 16:49, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Image:Gifford Miller midbite.jpg

Could you please provide an image copyright tag for this image? Thanks! --Diberri | Talk 23:03, Aug 26, 2004 (UTC)

Image:Gifford Miller midbite.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Gifford Miller midbite.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

dbenbenn | talk 00:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Deleted page "FreshDirect"

A page you created, or image you uploaded, FreshDirect, has been deleted in accordance with our deletion policy. In particular, it meets the one or more criteria for speedy deletion; the relevant criterion is:

Blatant advertising. Pages which exclusively promote a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic.

Wikipedia has certain standards for inclusion that all articles must meet. Certain types of article must establish the notability of their subject by asserting its importance or significance. Additionally, since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, content inappropriate for an encyclopedia, or content that would be more suited to somewhere else (such as a directory or social networking website) is not acceptable. See What Wikipedia is not for the relevant policy.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable notability guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content; it will be deleted again and may be protected from re-creation. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article. If you have any questions, please contact an administrator for assistance. Thank you – Gurch 08:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Democrat In Name Only

Democrat In Name Only, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Democrat In Name Only satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Democrat In Name Only (3rd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Democrat In Name Only during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 20:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Republican In Name Only

An article that you have been involved in editing, Republican In Name Only, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republican In Name Only (second nomination). Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 20:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Nomination of Democrat In Name Only for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Democrat In Name Only is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Democrat In Name Only (5th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. edg ☺ ☭ 22:17, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Democrat In Name Only for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Democrat In Name Only is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Democrat In Name Only (6th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Brianga (talk) 14:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)