User talk:Seansinc

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello Seansinc! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Image:Wikisigbutton.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c
20:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

[edit] Homer or Marge's cousin is Bart's cousin as well?

Although technically they are first cousins once removed, the term "uncle" is frequently used to refer to an elder member of the family. I doubt that the show was trying to be canonical, and just from my own experience, I've never seen a cousin of a child's father or mother referred to by the child as a cousin "once removed," just as an aunt or uncle.--Folksong 02:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words, Sean and happy editing at Wikipedia.--Folksong 19:14, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Relatives of Harry Potter

Hi. I'm wondering why you reverted my edits to Relatives of Harry Potter, saying, "Corrected possible years of James Potter's birth". What distinction do you see between "born in the early 2000s" and "born between 2000 and 2005"?
Also, "James is not the son of the previous James Potter and so is not James Potter Jr or James Potter II" is not correct. The kid's the grandson of the previous James Potter, so he can't be 'James Potter Jr', but he could be 'James Potter II'. Almost certainly isn't, but he could be.
—wwoods 20:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Seansinc, cheers for talking this over instead of just engaging in an edit war, as many editors would have done. I didn't notice the Crouch or Longbottom until you mentioned it, but I'll go and remove them as well. It pains me to do so, as common sense tells us they're related, but consensus around here seems to be that we can't assume even the most obvious stuff. :( faithless (speak) 08:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Well, we tried...

On User talk:BlastOButter42, Seansinc said:
Hey BlastOButter...

Nice try on getting Dumbledore's sexuality a more prominent mention. I kind of lost interest in the whole debate after restoring this part, which I think is enough when combined with the mention in the Grindelwald section.

On the less editorial side, may I comment that it's pretty funny that the "Dumbledore" topic is number 69 on your talk page.

Also, that's cool about each of your names having 6 letters. The same is true of Ronald Wilson Reagan. (Not to compare you to him in any other way.)  :)

Seansinc 23:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, oh well, though as I said on the talk page I've actually come to agree at least somewhat. And yes I suppose that is pretty funny about my name... I'm named after my father, who was named after my grandfather, so I'm the third; that name's been around for a while... -- BlastOButter42 See Hear Speak 00:20, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Albus Dumbledore. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. V-train 07:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dumbledore vote

Hi. All the arguing over where we should discuss Dumbledore's sexual orientation is proving useless. We need to work out just who is in favour of what and a vote seems the only way to go about it. I'm asking for your opinion since you had a say in the general argument. Thank you. asyndeton 10:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

That's OK. And it's probably the most heated discussion I've ever seen too; it's amazing how worked up a person can get over where to put a sentence ;) asyndeton 15:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)