Talk:11:11: Difference between revisions
TheRingess (talk | contribs) reply |
Jesuslawyer (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:No need for name calling, and no you did not fix it. The material you continue to add does not point to an existing article.[[User:TheRingess|TheRingess]] ([[User talk:TheRingess|talk]]) 04:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC) |
:No need for name calling, and no you did not fix it. The material you continue to add does not point to an existing article.[[User:TheRingess|TheRingess]] ([[User talk:TheRingess|talk]]) 04:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC) |
||
actually...nevermind. i get it. thanks! i will end run around you :) |
|||
== <s>Original Research!</s> Disambig Page! == |
== <s>Original Research!</s> Disambig Page! == |
Revision as of 04:33, 26 March 2007
Disambiguation | ||||
|
i added a statement about what 11:11 may refer to. i am the co-author of "The 11:11 Phenomenon" and i know what the book is about...at least my part, which is about my expression of 11:11 through the website i created. There is no reason for this to be deleted as it speaks the truth.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jesuslawyer (talk • contribs).
Actually, the article is a disambiguation page, so material added should point to an article, not an external link.TheRingess (talk) 04:29, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
fixed. thanks for your anal retention.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jesuslawyer (talk • contribs).
- No need for name calling, and no you did not fix it. The material you continue to add does not point to an existing article.TheRingess (talk) 04:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
actually...nevermind. i get it. thanks! i will end run around you :)
Original Research! Disambig Page!
Okay so, TheRingess doesn't seem to like me adding my well-researched and cited article. First he deleted it because it was "original research" (even though it wasn't), now he's deleting it because the page is a disambig page, even though there's no rule against turning a disambig page in to a regular article. If 11:11 is not a recognized phenomenon then why do we need a disambig page at all? Why are there no disambig pages for 11:10 and 11:12 hmm I wonder... -- GIR 00:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Actually for a long time I've wished that this page did not exist at all. The simplest answer to why it exists is because fellow editors wish it to. Your previous assertion that all of the articles referenced in the page deal with the synchronicity belief; is not proven. The simplest answer as to why there are no articles for 11:10 and 11:12 is that no one has yet desired to create one. (that's assuming that they don't exist, I didn't check). For that matter, anyone can create a page for any time of the day if they so desire. TheRingess 00:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I can tell you don't want the page to exist ;) And you know the reason there's no pages for 11:10 or 11:12 is because no one recognizes that as any kind of phenomenon. Where-as 11:11 is a notable enough phenomenon and enough people believe in it that it turns out people write songs and albums and movies after it. I know you believe that the whole 11:11 thing is just a coincidence, but do you also believe that people are naming movies and songs and albums "11:11" is just a coincidence too? -- GIR 00:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Disambig pages are designed to help editors find different articles with the same title. Converting a disambig page to an article should only be done when there is nothing to disambiguate. Since the other 11:11 pages still exist, this should remain a disambig. If you believe you can satisfy WP:V, WP:CITE, & WP:NOR, then create a new article and add the link to it to this disambig. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 00:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Redirect
I redirected this page to synchronicity. For several reasons.
- The article contained a list of references to the time in 11:11 in popular songs. Those references can be included in each song's articles.
- The article contained a list of books. If the books are notable enough, they should have their own articles.
- No one has supplied any references to any sociological references to how widespread this belief is, where it originated from, etc. It seems overkill to have an article for every single synchronicity that people might believe in.
- The only other section was a see also. Again any reference to 11:11 can be included on the individual articles.