User talk:Reneeholle: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 09:04, 1 May 2022

Kind & wise thoughts welcome!

/Archive 1

Thank you

Thank you for the barnstar; it's been enormously tiring and stressful and I really do appreciate it. I also wanted to thank you for helping with the discussions at Talk:Hogenakkal Falls and elsewhere. Your contributions are always welcome. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 22:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks from me as well. Discussions of this sort can get very tiring, and it very much helps to have someone say thank you. I just wish the situation was such that such tireless effort wasn't required. Oh, well. John Carter (talk) 22:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote

Yes, I'm sending you an e-mail with my e-mail address in it. Please send me the report. Hope you don't take this personally, but I believe in the "Trust but verify" principle. :) Marathi_Mulgaa (talk) 00:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Totally understand. I just sent it so you should receive it shortly. Renee (talk) 12:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments are welcome

[[1]]

wishing you happiness, Sethie (talk) 15:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow Renee.

Your post on ANI blew me away- so clear, concise and very civil. Wow. Sethie (talk) 20:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggested read/book on peptides and emotions. --DennisDaniels (talk) 18:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation: John Howard

Hello. A request for mediation has been lodged for the John Howard article, concerning whether information about an incident between John Howard and Barack Obama should be included or deleted from the article. The link for the RfM is Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/John_Howard. The issue is still being discussed on the article talk page. Please go to the RfM page and list whether you agree or disagree to be involved in mediation of this issue. Thank you, Lester 01:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sahaj Marg

I've been following the discussions on the Sahaj Marg page due to an interest in Cult Free World on another article. I won't be editing this article but I thought you might find this useful. I've left this same message on User:Marathi mulgaa's page.

http://books.google.com/books?id=0YYYAAAAIAAJ&q=Sahaj+Marg&dq=Sahaj+Marg&lr=&pgis=1

--PTR (talk) 16:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar. You're very welcome. I found it using books.google.com from the Google advanced search page. There's also a scholar.google.com and http://news.google.com/archivesearch --PTR (talk) 16:55, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Embedded marketing

Hi. I have taken care of the concerns that you raised at this afd. Would you care to reanalyze your opinion? Thanks,--brew crewer (yada, yada) 18:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YO

The "What a Brilliant Idea!" Barnstar

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		You have come up with more then a few great to suggestions to break gridlocks as of late.... and if you keep up such nonsense, level-headedness and reliance on wiki policy I see an adminship in your future! Sethie (talk) 17:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wolf Hunter

I don't see how any one has a right to delete some ones work from here. Wikipedia is a Encyclopedia for people to gain knowledge about things in life, pop culture and things from around the world. The Wolf Hunter film it's self is a film that has lots of fans and supporters as does the character. I think just because its not as well known as Freddy or Jason does not mean it should not be on here. I have already seen that some one else has edited the article as well. I think that if this does go off its a shame and what kind of Encyclopedia for the people rob people from learning about films and characters from a independent film.

--bloodline video 06:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

You need to have a few secondary sources (i.e., like from newspapers or magazines) that discuss the work. Articles without sources are frequently deleted so it's not just you, it's a common thing to ensure the encyclopedic quality of Wikipedia. I did a quick Google news search and couldn't find anything, but maybe you know of some? If you add some in let me know. Good luck! Renee (talk) 12:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RM

http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Real_Madrid_C.F.&diff=216049183&oldid=216048771

'rvt vandalism'? You are propogating it. 88.106.94.7 (talk) 21:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I reverted, my friend.Renee (talk) 02:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

: I apologise then; don't really edit much on Wikipedia, I just tried to revert the article back to the vandalism I tried to fix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.94.7 (talk) 18:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re your question on my talk page - it wasn't strictly speaking vandalism, it was simply promotional or advertising (WP:SPAM; WP:ADVERT). Either way, it had to go. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Orderinchaos 06:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/John Howard.

For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 16:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Comet AfD

Thanks for pointing that out. I tagged it with TWINKLE, so it must have missed it for some reason. I'll clean it up. -- Mark Chovain 02:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem

It was just a confusion in the edit history. Thanks for letting me know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Squaty squater (talk • contribs) 00:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BLP noticeboard

It was at WT:BLP [2] when i suggested it should be on the notice board. Yeah, the notice board is the best place to ask such questions Gnan garra 03:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

10 Maxims

Pls let me know what you think about this proposal:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sahaj_Marg#Proposal_-_Ten_Maxims

Marathi_Mulgaa (talk) 20:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Croatian-Australian_Socceroos

Hi,

Category:Croatian-Australian_Socceroos has come up for deletion at CfD. As this category was created as a result of this AfD, which you participated in, I thought you might have an opinion on this debate as well. This is a blanket notice that is being sent out to everyone who participated in that AfD. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Tauheed Ashraf GM changes

The changes made for the Greg Mortenson Early Life Section are made since Greg himself is not a Lutheran missionary, please allow this update since it is needed to showcase him in that light. http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Greg_Mortenson&action=edit&section=1

Tauheed_Ashraf (talk) 06:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Offline

Note: I'm going offline for a bit to get some sleep. Tauheed ‎has been invited to the discussion. Let's give him at least 24 hours to respond. If he doesn't in that amount of time, we will work out a solution between the two of us. Viriditas (talk) 13:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Anyway, I'm taking off

Thanks anyway for your invitation to talk, I've realized that wikipedia is no place for me though, it's too much drama, seems like too many negative people and spiritual articles don't get treated well in the long run anyway, they just get disparaged if they are up there for any length of time, look at Eckhart Tolle, Gangaji, etc. I figure it's best to just move on. Seems like mob rule on wikipedia and they aren't that friendly to spiritual articles anyway, would just be a fight all the time to get anything posted. I notice that a lot of famous people and organizations in this genre that I wanted to take part in are blatantly missing for some reason, and I have too much to do in real life than to take on fighting with people who are unaware. Life's too short. I can see why college professors strictly prohibit use of wikipedia as a source of information, now. It's not accurate or dependable information, nice idea though if it worked. Good luck to you and I hope you are able to bring some light and truth to wikipedia. If you can deal with the immaturity here, my hat is off to you! Namaste. (SpiritBeing (talk) 09:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)SpiritBeing)[reply]

Update

Do you know if Tauheed has proposed an alternative to your edits? Have you had some time to think about this? Viriditas (talk) 00:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Reneeholle. You have new messages at Viriditas's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Devine

Hi Renee. Thanks for your input to the RfC at the Miranda Devine article some weeks ago. The RfC was only delisted a few minutes ago. There were originally 3 paragraphs of criticism. Most editors involved in the RfC thought the 2nd & 3rd paragraphs should go. You kindly rewrote the 1st paragraph on the discussion page, so I just copied and pasted your paragraph into the article. Regards, --Lester 06:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, after I wrote the above message, an anon-IP has deleted all the text again :( --Lester 01:12, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great White Brotherhood

Hi Renee. I was just looking at the Great White Brotherhood article, which is (I think) a real mess. For instance, the History section [3] claims that the source of the teaching about the Great White Brotherhood originated from a writer called Karl von Eckartshausen....which is news to me, and might be OR.

For obvious reasons I am disinclined to work on it, but it occurred to me that you might be interested in doing a good deed for Wikipedia.

I hope you are having a good summer. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 14:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about being slow to reply, but have been busy with work...and a little argument over a WP article.

It is, of course, just a suggestion and I do not know if you would find the subject interesting. The teaching of the White Brotherhood (the Masters), seems to have spread from the writings of Helena Blavatsky, and the teaching was very important to Alice Bailey. For instance, the connection of Masters with each of the Seven Rays. This link gives some Bailey quotes about the origin of the the White Lodge [4]

K. Paul Johnson has made a scholarly study (which I have not read), that give a more sceptical view. I know there is plenty of information if you would find it interesting to dig a little. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 15:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

foot-in-the-door technique

Hi -- I corrected your description of the drink-and-drive experiment in the article on the foot-in-the-door technique. The way you'd described it, the effect would be unsurprising -- people who agree to signing the petition would of course be more likely to agree to a taxi; that wouldn't be evidence in favor of the foot-in-the-door technique. Joriki (talk) 16:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help with BKWSU article analysis

Hi Renee, Been away for a while but happy to be back. Hope I you are happy and well :-)

I was wondering if I could tap on your NPOV skills. In 2007 I did an analysis of the BKWSU article where I could highlight the problems I had with it at the time. This technique was quite successful in bringing in uninvolved editors as it makes clear what needs attention in the article i.e. makes it easy for them. I plan to attract more experienced editors in the same way who preferably don't have any connections to NRMs that could be interpreted as "pro", since that was a problem for me especially the last time I was around. In fact I would rather editors with an "anti" background did the actual editing as long as they put the ideals of Wikipedia first before their own views. That way the article is more likely to stick without the usual accusations of COI that get flung at me and other editor who dares to go near the BKWSU article. The new analysis I am working on is here and I would be grateful, only if you have any time, if you could look over it and mark it up in red in the same way as I have started. If you want to pass on this then that's OK too. Much appreciated Bksimonb (talk) 20:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear BKsimonb -- welcome back. I'll take a look at it over there. Thanks, Renee (talk) 14:25, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Lassa fever

Wow, imagine my surprise to find that you've made this edit. What are the odds that we share the same reading list? :-) Viriditas (talk) 11:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Three Cups of Tea is a real mess. If I start working on it, please keep an eye over your shoulder. Thanks. :-) Viriditas (talk) 09:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The photo was taken by Steve Jurvetson. His photostream on Flickr is one of the best; I highly recommend it. Viriditas (talk) 08:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Claude Anshin Thomas

Have you had a chance to read At Hell's Gate: A Soldier's Journey from War to Peace, by Claude Anshin Thomas? I thought you might be the person to ask. Viriditas (talk) 11:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Hope you're doing well. :) Viriditas (talk) 12:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eye of the Whale

I haven't had a chance to read this yet, but it's an ecological thriller based on real science. I think it might interest you. It's Eye of the Whale by Douglas Carlton Abrams. You can preview the book here to see if it is something you might like. The publisher's site is here. Viriditas (talk) 09:10, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar! :) Viriditas (talk) 11:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays

Aloha. Two more books for you: Mortenson's Stones into Schools has been out for several weeks now, and I received a new copy as a gift. Alex & Me (2008) came out about a year ago, but I think you might like it. It's about psychologist Irene Pepperberg and her research work with Alex, an African Grey Parrot. Viriditas (talk) 12:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brahma Kumaris

OK, can you tell me what is wrong with the statement and reference that I added?

Thank you. --Fear based teachings (talk) 07:00, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There may be nothing wrong with it and it probably just got reverted with all of the other changes. But, before adding it (and giving the apparent animosity between you and the other editor), let's please talk about it first. Please see the talk page, I've asked you to post it there so you can do just that. Renee (talk) 13:55, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archive and disruption

Hi Renee,

I was about to archive the page then I saw Beeblebrox‎'s suggestion to keep a list of issues on the Talk page. So I suggest keeping it as-is for now.

Also, a new account has sprung up immediately after the previous two were blocked. Although we are in our rights to revert disruption I realise that it isn't immediately obvious to outsiders that it isn't just another edit war. Based on our experience of the last day or so I recommend that we don't revert or respond at all to an account behaving like Lucy until it has been blocked. We are never going to get any sense out of him. I have come to the conclusion that he isn't here to work with other editors or towards a balanced article. He is here to sway public opinion against the BKWSU and anyone who crosses his path, such as me.

~~Will continue our discussion on the talk page once it's clear of disruption again.~~

Regards, Bksimonb (talk) 10:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal back

Thanks for your note. I've semi-protected both pages. However given the circumstances I'm not sure anything more can be done. Will Beback talk 21:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]