User talk:Ofus

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Welcome!

Hello, Ofus, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!; Regards,--scuro (talk) 01:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Jack Kemp

I noticed you edited Jack Kemp this week. Your opinion on this article would be welcome at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jack Kemp.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

greetings and salutations

Welcome to wikipedia. Yes, the citation is very useful. There has been much debate about controversy and the first passage defines it well. I've read Dr. Silver's advice on LD online. He has an impressive resume and would be considered an expert, "Dr. Silver, a Child and Adolescent Psychiatrist, is in private practice in the Washington, D. C. area. He is Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Georgetown University Medical Center. Prior to his current activities, he was Acting Director and Deputy Director of the National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health. Prior to his positions at the National Institute of Mental Health he was Professor of Psychiatry, Professor of Pediatrics, and Chief of the Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry at the Robert Wood Johnson School of Medicine. For more than thirty years his primary areas of research, clinical, and teaching interest have focused on the psychological, social, and family impact of a group of related, neurologically-based disorders—Learning Disabilities, Language Disabilities,Sensory Integration Dysfunction, and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder". You can insert quoted material directly into the article, keep it brief. You can summarize information from passages, or you can post a potential edit first on the talk page. If you are quoting, the citation should be included. Give it a shot, I'll be watching as will many others. All editors are supposed to give newbies some leeway so don't worry about making mistakes. Look at the last pillar of the five pillars of editing. It allows for being bold, and I believe that to be especially true when an article is biased or not factual. The trick is what to do when your edit is rejected or criticized. My advice, sit on your hands, then post in talk.

If you plan at all to continue with Wikipedia, I'd consider changing your "user page", especially if you plan to edit controversial topics such as ADHD. Although editors are supposed to focus on content instead of the contributor, but things can get heated, and ANY past error may very well get thrown right back in your face. That's experience talking.--scuro (talk) 02:31, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the advice, scuro. I thought I'd wait and let the heat die down for a while before adding the quote. Hopefully now cooler heads are prevailing over there, so I'll give it a shot. Thanks for the advice about my user page as well, it was well taken :) Ofus (talk) 11:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, that didn't last very long. bleh... Ofus (talk) 03:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

LinkedLN mispelling

I don't think we should delete redirects from misspellings for web companies just because of a remote possibility of phishing sites. It is customary for us to include common misspellings in redirects. Gigs (talk) 15:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I completely understand and agree with the custom of redirecting common misspellings in general. I've set up quite a few myself. However, in many browsers' address bar, a lower case i and a lower case l look enough alike that someone could actually read linkedin as linkedln (I know because I did it myself ;p). Since the LN site appears to be set up for the sole reason of collecting traffic meant for the IN site; since i and l can be hard to differentiate for some in some circumstances; since I myself went to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/linkedln first and guessed others probably did the same on occasion, I think an exception in this case ought to be made.

I'm not going to change it back, though. You probably know more about Wikipedia policy, etc. than I do so I'll let it be. I would like to know, however, whether or not there is an official policy considering redirects/phishing/etc in general or not, and if not, I'd like to hear your reasoning on why you believe that the unique factors I mentioned above do not warrant an exception to the tradition of redirecting misspelled words. Thanks! Ofus (talk) 11:03, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The main reason is that I can't see a scenario where someone specifically types LinkedLN into wikipedia, gets confused by the redirect, and then takes that to mean that linkedLN.com is part of linkedin.com. I don't believe there is a specific policy on this, but if you want to get some wider community input on whether the redirect should be deleted or not, we do have a process called Redirects for discussion where you can nominate that the redirect be deleted. The outcome of that discussion can be used to help shape future policy on redirects that are similar to this. Gigs (talk) 15:15, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Man in Black

Heya. So I just rechecked the video that was cited. At 2:45ish the quotation is: "The Man in Black did have a name that was in the scripts... The name was Samuel." If you have a verifiable, reliable source to back up your statement, then by all means please cite it. Otherwise, please do not remove what is appropriately cited currently. -- Wikipedical (talk) 05:28, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Hola fellow Lost geek. Keep watching the clip you are citing after the 2:45 clip, beginning at 3:17:

"I think they just decided to not give him a name, 'cause it was cooler for him to just be this 'entity'" Ofus (talk) 05:51, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

That's in reference to calling out his name in the show. But he still has a name in the scripts. -- Wikipedical (talk) 19:48, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Woodrow Anderson III

The article Woodrow Anderson III has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:POLITICIAN "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article."

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jerzeykydd (talk) 13:09, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Keeping Secrets for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Keeping Secrets is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keeping Secrets until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. LK (talk) 10:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cover of Keeping Secrets by Skye Edwards.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cover of Keeping Secrets by Skye Edwards.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:24, 7 April 2011 (UTC)