User talk:Fenice

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

• To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
• Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
• If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
• Follow the Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset
• Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
• Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

---

Please read and be aware of Wikipedia:No personal attacks, particularly the bit about personal attacks in edit summaries. You can be blocked from editing for personal attacks on Wikipedia - David Gerard 20:00, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Contents

1 Your Apology 2 Umlaut 3 Gender role dispute 4 Peter Weibel 5 IDX 6 Long nails 7 Appreciation 8 Article Licensing 9 A request 10 Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Barefoot and pregnant 11 ماركيز 12 Santa_Reparata 13 COTW 14 Partial Birth Abortion & IDX 15 Oral contraceptive 16 NPOV 17 NPOV 18 Abortion links 19 Why don't you say anything? 20 The POVIP 21 COTW Project 22 Explanation 23 COTW Project 24 Barnstar 25 So You Want to Run the AID 26 Spanish Translation of the Week 27 Collaboration of the week 28 PNG 29 Geography articles

Your Apology

Fenice, I'm still confused why you called me a "self-confessed misogynist" on several pages, just because i have a link to "misogyny" on my user page. I really don't care what you do here, but stop making personal attacks, and stop making edits based upon unfounded claims. Since it is clear that English is not your first language, I would be particularly careful in the future of misinterpreting information on people's user pages. In fact, even if you were to discover that a user was a misogynist, that's no reason to revert one of their edits. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 14:59, Aug 5, 2004 (UTC)

Fenice, If I didn't make it clear earlier, your apology is accepted, so you don't have to worry about it anymore. As you mentioned on your talk page, you were emotional at the time; everybody makes editing mistakes or hasty judgements when they're emotional, so I totally understand. No hard feelings, -- DropDeadGorgias (talk) 15:52, Aug 5, 2004 (UTC)

Umlaut

I notice that in the article Nümbrecht you recently changed "Ödinghausen" to "Ödinghausen". What's up with that? Is there a problem with putting umlauted characters directly into the text? I'm not aware of one, and have, in fact, tended to go the opposite way because it is easier for naive editors when they encounter it.

By the way, in general, I've noticed you've been doing a lot of really good work, glad to have you here. -- Jmabel 16:31, Aug 15, 2004 (UTC)

Sounds like we're in agreement then. By the way, you probably should make yourself a user page, even if it's only a few sentences. The red link on User:Fenice sort of screams "newbie". A user page helps your credibility. -- Jmabel 19:11, Aug 15, 2004 (UTC)

Gender role dispute

Fenice - Sorry it took so long to get back to you WRT Gender role - I've been very busy lately. The gist of it is - if you are going to dispute an article, you have to state your reasons for doing it - that much is non-negotiable. If no one else comments, go ahead and make whatever incendiary changes you want - that usually gets peoples' attention. We'd rather have an edit war in the short term than a POV/factuality dispute in the long term.

I will warn you though - being politically incorrect is not per se reason for changing an article - and if you demand that an article be radically changed because of it, you are going to have some hostile run-ins. Most people (myself include) do not care for PC pushers - this is an attitude I think you will find common around here, so I think I'll warn you now. →Raul654 09:51, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)

Peter Weibel

Could you look in again at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Peter Weibel? I've reversed my earlier vote & think you might want to take a look at what I've found. -- Jmabel 23:38, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)

IDX

Your grammar was fine, I'm sorry; I thought a few sentences where fragmented due to repetition of words but looking back I found that it was OK. I thought I deleted the comment then, but apparently not.

Sorry!

Long nails

FYI, I asked a question here about your removal of the "long nails" picture. – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 15:42, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)

Appreciation

Hi,

I have missed your sensible presence. I guess the seas that we share have been calm of late. I just wanted to say to you personally what I wrote to one of the helpful "senior" people operating out of France, that you are so far the best I've seen at responding to a disagreement in an agreeable way, saying, in effect, "I see your point of view too." (For instance, nobody else says, "I have changed the section accordingly." They just grump off.)Most people will never admit the other person might be right. Many people seem to look forward to opportunities to put other people down. It is good to see somebody in the Wikipedia world who operates on behalf of truth instead of on behalf of their own ego. Thank you. P0M 05:09, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit&section=new)| talk)

A request

Hi,

I've missed your presence. I guess you're working on other things these days. I'm working on the "race" article and I need to ask an author in Italy for permission to use a map that he made. Could you help me? My Italian is 0.

Thanks.

P0M 07:12, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Barefoot and pregnant

Hi, I'm just wondering how this VfD actually works - I thought everyone could vote on it? Or did you just make a mistake adding up?

What I'm so confused about is that, if you add up the votes - and since everybody puts votes on these VfD-pages I assumed that's what counts - it would have had to be deleted, because the calculation is the following: Delete: 8 votes, two of which with merge option: Kevin Rektor, Megan 1967, nixie, The Anome, Silversmith (with merge option), Fenice, Ambi, Master Thief Gerrett (with merge option) Keep: 7 including your own (I assume): 66.01.21.112, the Epopt CarsonDailyCity, ZZyzx11, Alex R, one without signature (I thought they did not count?), and probably Tony Sidaway One vote was only for Merge: Thryduulf

How did you add that up to get the result you got? --Fenice 17:20, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

On Wikipedia we don't really do "votes" as such. We look for a rough consensus. 80% or more to delete, and I delete unless there are clear complaints of irregularities. I count 75%-80% as marginal and usually determine it as consensus if, after I investigate, it seems that there are no voting oddities. 66-75% tends to be "no consensus". Less than 66% to delete, "keep". I apply a similar rationale to merge/redirect votes, with the default again being "keep". Other people who close a deletion listing have their own ways of doing it. Some will delete on as little as 66% for deletion.

Discussions where merge and delete are significant alternatives are treated very differently by different people. I always count them as totally distinct, I would rather close with "no consensus" than delete if there's any question.

I didn't vote and I have no preference one way or another. There just weren't enough people saying "delete" outright to justify deletion according to my way of thinking. Five keep votes is a very strong showing so I closed it with a "keep". With fewer keeps but still not a consensus to delete, I would have closed it with "no consensus", which means "keep" but would be a green light to people who wanted to merge (you could still try merging anyway if you like but you may encounter more opposition).

All votes count if I'm satisfied they were made in good faith by a regular editor. The unsigned vote was tparker393, and he's too new for his keep vote to count (a lot less than 50 edits). --Tony Sidaway|Talk 17:48, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

ماركيز

I have just left you a note at the Vdf page. Svest 07:25, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

Santa_Reparata

Could you have a look at my remark/question at Wikipedia:Pages_needing_translation_into_English#Santa_Reparata -- Jmabel | Talk 06:42, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

COTW

Please respect the current voting rules of the Collaboration of the Week project and remove some of your votes. It is allowed to vote only for three nominated articles on the list. Any further discussion should take place on the Talk page of the project. Thanks. --Eleassar777 12:47, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

The restriction applies to all voting that takes place after the policy was changed. The policy had changed before you voted (actually on 6 May 2005 at 23:06 UTC). --Eleassar777 12:57, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Partial Birth Abortion & IDX

Fenice, you were right to return the POV tag to the IDX page -- thanks and sorry for the oversight. I hadn't noticed the recent editions since the last time I read the entire article. However, I don't think the Partial Birth Abortion page still needs a POV tag, let me know your thoughts on the talk pages. --Quasipalm 16:01, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Oral contraceptive

I think the anon should not have put the NPOV tag there in the first place. In my mind it should only be placed on a page when there is a reasonable antecedent on the talk page to show what the difficult points are. Let's keep it off. If the anon puts it back, we may need to discuss what actually bothers him, and issue a request for comments if he's unreasonable. JFW | T@lk 06:07, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Fenice, I hope you haven't misunderstood me. NPOV tags are only of any use if there is an indication what the argument is about. Neither yourself nor the anon have stated what the contentious issues are. This makes it very hard for anyone to join in and help. Again, I'm quite willing to help here, but I would be disappointed if you quit at this juncture. Please hold on for a little while longer. The anon has now had several warnings, and he will probably be thrown off the project anytime soon. JFW | T@lk 17:37, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

If you come accross any quotes on the Pearl index for oral contraceptives lower than 8, please let me know. JFW | T@lk 22:09, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

NPOV

Fenice,

The NPOV tag is not a bludgeon. I agreed to your compromise...a balance of the links, with my choice of pro-life link removed. Just because an anon decided to revert that is not my fault, and you certainly shouldn't punish the page by adding NPOV. I've removed both your NPOV tag and the link. I strongly suggest you seek guidance from the other editors on the page before adding it again, just as I did when I removed what had been a very long-standing NPOV tag on the page.

--MikeJ9919 14:44, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

NPOV

I never said that the anon edit was "harmless"...I agree that this guy is doing damage. But the correct action is to revert his change, not to add an NPOV tag. Clearly he's mostly just vandalizing. You're lending credence to his vandalism. That's all I'm saying. Also, with due respect, my personal politics are none of your business as long as it doesn't affect my neutrality. --MikeJ9919 15:17, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry...I know how annoying dealing with vandals can get sometimes. Best of luck. --MikeJ9919 23:01, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Abortion links

Why move the abortion links without discussion? I have replaced them. Please do not remove them again without reference to the talk page first, --SqueakBox 01:13, May 18, 2005 (UTC) I have not attacked you in any way. Please explain your accusing me of having done so? --SqueakBox 04:45, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

Why don't you say anything?

Dear Fenice, I just saw that you are improving the English version from our LdL-German-article! It's outstanding! Why don't you say anything? ;-))--Jeanpol 08:41, 26 May 2005 (UTC) By the way: I just tried introducing the foto from the German version in the English one, but it didn't work. How can I do that? Funny, if the foto would be in the Chinese Version (or the French one). ;-))--Jeanpol 08:41, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Please look at my German userpage (there I answered).--Jeanpol 12:33, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

I just answered again! ;-))--Jeanpol 14:22, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

And now I succeeded uploading my foto on the German Wiki (Jean-Pol)!! Great!! Now I'll try it on the English and later the French page!--Jeanpol 04:52, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

The POVIP

POVIP is now the subject of a RFC. Please offer your opinion: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/214.13.4.151 JFW | T@lk 01:13, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

COTW Project

You voted for Roaring Twenties, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. Falphin 03:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

• Awesome job on the Roaring Twenties article. Love the impact of the Chrysler Building picture on the left hand side. Thanks! Jacob 20:44, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Explanation

Whoa whoa whoa ... 'bullying'? Please explain this claim. You're the one who has been repeatedly posting messages on my talk page (you even refuse to use your own) over and over regarding the deletion of one short sentence. Now, this doesn't bother me, but I really fail to see how deleting one sentence and attempting to explain my reasons for this civilly constituted bullying. That's an unfair accusation, and Fenice, I'd like you to apologise, please, and we'll leave it at that.

I won't even take up the other lie about me being openly disruptive and admitting it, neither of which are true. I'm posting this on your own talk page as well. Feel free to delete it, then I know you've read it. Proto 09:20, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

COTW Project

You voted for High Middle Ages, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

I will do so. Best wishes, SqueakBox 16:23, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

• Thank you. I really, really needed that. -Litefantastic

So You Want to Run the AID

First off, congratulations. I really decided that after six turns, I just didn't want to do it anymore. However, I'll help you wherever I can, and when you inevitably get sick of it.

User:119 set up the system; I just continued it. When you do the rollover, you'll also have to update the /History and /Removed sections, which is a bit of a pain. That really is it. When things get sluggish, nominate an article or two, just to keep things lively. Don't do it too much, though: the AID should hardly exist just to keep itself alive. It's one of those things that should just be allowed to die when the are ready. -Litefantastic 23:25, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Actually, no, as I said on the talk-page of the AID, I cannot promise to take on the responsibility completely and by myself (which has nothing to do with the AID but with my real life). I will however try to do much, which can be all of it at times - except for the archiving, which you mentioned above. (I have no idea how to do this archiving and have never done it. Maybe I will change the system so I can handle it.) I have figured out the template thing though, I think, and I created one (IDRIVEtopic) so that the portal page is updated automatically. As you say - if it dies, it dies. I want to give it a chance though, because it is so young. Much of it is a matter of advertising - the AID was not on the main maintenance-templates. I would apreciate it if you stay, but I understand if you don't.--Fenice 05:21, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hey, I'm here for you. One thing, though: why did you change the name of the AID to 'This week's improvement drive'? Nothing personal (really!) but Article Improvement Drive was shorter, made a nice mnemonic and was, in all honesty, a little more accurate. Incidentally, this is how sort of how things began:

• • • I effectively thought it up.
    • User:Maurreen backed me up and helped hammer out the rules.
    • User:119 came up with 'multiple winners' and named it.

Anyway, since you've scrapped most of those ideas (not that I'm complaining: if I'd wanted things done my way, I would have stayed in charge) and basically reinvented the AID, the ball is in your court. However, as I said before, I'm here for you, and if need be I suppose we could drum up the others if we had to. Incidentally, I gave 119 the same Barnstar you gave me, since he/she did even more for the AID than I did. -Litefantastic 23:12, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Looking good. Judging by the amount of support you've drummed up, this new system obvious works one hell of a lot better than the old one ever did. However, could you clean up the far righthand column of the /History chart if you have some spare time? I looked at the code and couldn't figure out how, myself. Not that it matters, anyway. In retrospect, when me and the other AID founders laid down the system, we probably should have just gone ahead and copied the COTW format. Ah, the best laid plans... -Litefantastic 16:34, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Spanish Translation of the Week

Thanks for taking the initiative. In the future, please remember to copy all of the Spanish text into the English article when setting it up for translation. — J3ff 20:48, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Collaboration of the week

I'm dropping you a note to let you know that The Seventies, which you voted on, became a Collaboration of the Week! You are highly encouraged to contribute whatever you can to the topic! Mike H 01:22, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

PNG

Clarification: I did not remove PNG because of its unsuitability. I removed it because the nominator hadn't added anything to say on its behalf. I'll review the page and let you know shortly what's missing. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 11:42, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

The article is to short.

• Expand the lead-in by summarising the article. You can detail the name of the country, a little history, its location and what is is famous or known for. Should be 4 times the current length.
• History is too short. Expand to a summary of six paras
• Politics and government should be expanded. Talk about the executive, legislature and judiciary. At what age do people vote? Something on the political parties can also be included. Minimum three medium-sized paragraphs.
• Do provinces have thier own government? A map is needed. (See how India is done).
• geography can be expanded. Rivers? Lakes? climate? geology?
• Economy section is too small. Should be expanded.
• Demographics has too little info. I reccomend merging part on the religions with it. Include growth rate, males:females, Life expct., languages spoken (% speakers) and so on. These facts should be easily available.
• Expand =culture=; arts, literature, sport and so on

Optional

• Holiday table
• Media
• Military & foreign affairs
• Flora and Fauna

You'd need to compulsory reference all your work. Also include inline references. See Geography of India as to how to reference all this. Keep the page length around 30kb not more than 37kb. =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:18, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Geography articles

I posted your suggestions to the talk-page of Papua New Guinea. You seem to have quite a clear concept of what a country-article should look like. Many of the country articles here need improvement badly, long before tiny PNG does, look at Brazil for instance. I thought you might be interested in founding a geography collaboration? Something like a biweekly geography workshop.--Fenice 09:01, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I have critiqued a few country and city articles in the past in Peer review and Featured Article Candidates. I agree with you that country article should be given a higher priority. I don't think I can be committed to a geography collaboration. I am willing to lend my ideas, but contributing and taking care of them will take up a lot of my time. I write India-related featured articles, and since I am usually the only one contributing to the material, it takes up most of my time. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:26, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)