User talk:Alexjohnc3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
Archive 1 (June 2005 to January 2007)

[edit] Re: Thanks

And thank you for your kind comments --Michael Johnson 12:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Haruhiist Wikipedians

You nominated the category Haruhiist Wikipedians for deletion on November 3rd and it got deleted, which is fine by me. It just would have been nice if you left me a comment on my usertalk page telling me you had so I could redirect the category on the Haruhiism userbox Category:Wikipedians_who_like_The_Melancholy_of_Haruhi_Suzumiya. :P --Alexc3 (talk) 00:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe that this edit's summary listed a link to the discussion. - jc37 (talk) 12:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I know that, but I wouldn't have been aware of that edit except I happened to check here and noticed that my userbox had been edited. If I made a few more edits, it wouldn't have even shown up. --Alexc3 (talk) 03:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Join date

Sorry, I can't help you. If you created an account and didn't immediately edit with it, only a techie could tell you when your account ended up in the database, and that's probably nothing anyone busy keeping this thing running wants to waste their time figuring out for you. I guess you could ask at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) for more info.

As to your other point, my main dismay with the MassResistance article, which I just happened to click thru to while perusing User Talk:JoshuaZ, was exactly the citing of the opinion of the SPLC sourced to the SPLC itself. If their opinion about MR is notable, then it should be possible to source this to some 3rd party (i.e. a secondary WP:RS) making note of it. We're not a soapbox for the SPLC's opinions. They are, arguably, a little over the top with labeling just about everyone they disagree with as a "hate group." Letting certain organization's press releases -- I don't care who they are -- creep into our articles is exactly what WP:SOAP is supposed to prevent. -- Kendrick7talk 03:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I've simply seen too many articles about small political groups or even individuals teeter towards being bloated with dueling press release-type referenced material that simply doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. This is a case in point, in my opinion. Simply because a certain organization's opinion on some topic has been referenced by a reliable source doesn't make their every opinion about everything under the sun notable. I agree that WP:SOAP isn't as explicit in this regard as I myself would like, and I've been lax on generating consensus on a policy spelling that out more fully, but using primary sources in a he said/she said manner is exactly what that policy is meant to address -- that is, in essence, the meaning of propaganda. Anyway, I'm too busy IRL -- I'll come back to this in July I imagine.... -- Kendrick7talk 02:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Well I thought I found the answer to the join date question, having found my own logged here.[1] But, I checked, and you didn't show up in a search oddly enough. -- Kendrick7talk 18:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)