User talk:Faedra
PLACE YOUR COMMENTS HERE:
Please note: Useful and constructive comments from other users are recorded on this page. All comments are ultimately deleted, to make room for the latest items, ths offensive comments are removed immediately, (havnt had any yet) all data can be found via 'history' tab.
Thank you for taking the time to bother at all!...
Special thanks to: (order of contact)
01 Thue 02 Burgundavia 03 Deb 04 Finlay McWalter 05 Charles Matthews 06 Acegikmo1
for valued advice and assistance.
REF: useful Wikipedia pages:
THANKS ALSO TO; Graham :) | Talk| ALargeElk|Talk | Jmabel | Golbez|
Ref: Personal profile of contributor Faedra
latest...
My reversion
MrWeeble 22:00, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I just reverted your last edit of Thames Gateway and I feel that it is only fair that I explain my reasoning more fully. While I understand your feelings against this project, to use the phrasing that you did is not really appropriate in an encyclopaedia as it states your point of view too much.
- reply: (Faedra 11:28, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)) It is not an opinion that the present government has failed to locate weopons of mass destruction in Iraq, it is a fact. This comparison is relivent because the overwhealming evidence presented by the consultation process against an Airport at Cliffe also shows the government to be in error of judgement. The relitivity between the two illustrates the fact that government policy is flawed, and this must have a baring on the multi million pound investment scheme proposed for North Kent...
If looked objectively at the question of WMDs in iraq, it is not related to this issue in any way except that you disagree with the decision made by the government in both counts.
- This is not so, I was supportive of the policy of liberating Iraq from Saddam, but misled by the British government by their flawed reasoning. I do not wish to see such deception ruin North Kent.
Likewise the bit about "a total disregard for public opinion" implies that all public opinion is against it - it isn't.
- Such members of the public would do well to stay at home.
Sorry for having to revert, your contributions to the page (may) have been invaluable, but I could see no way of NPOVing it.
MrWeeble 22:00, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I do not dispute the fact that the government has not found wmds, I disputed the relevence to the current issue. The governement did not state anything as fact only to be disproved after the event. In this case the govenment consulted (ie asked opinions) and then, upon hearing the opinions decided against that possisble course of action. Policy was not to build an airpoirt, but to investigate the possibility which they did successfully. Regarding your comment about "Such members of the public would do well to stay at home" I am afraid I don't quite understand what you mean? I am such a person; My home is in the Thames Gateway area; the area I live in has seen a number of benefits associated with the scheme. What do you mean that I should "stay at home"?
Maclellans (or McLellans?)
In case it may seem like I am picking on you, I should say that, normally, the first thing I do when I log on is to look at the list of new articles and pick out any that I think might need work or that I think I may be able to add to. The reason I picked up on the "Lord Kirkcudbright" ones is that there are a lot of people here who are interested in the peerage, and consequently standards have been set up for articles on the subject of noble titles and their holders. If you haven't already looked at these, you could consult User:Lord Emsworth on the points you are unsure about -- I haven't made a study of it myself. Deb 12:39, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Kirkcudbright
Just wanted to let you know that, instead of deleting these pages, I left them as redirects to the new pages. In case you don't know how to do this, you do it by replacing the content of the page with "#REDIRECT [[Name of new page]]". Thanks. Snowspinner 15:04, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)
Swanscombe
On my talk page you asked what 'my problem' is with the original Swanscombe content. I really don't have a problem with it, except that I could see a certain number of things that needed editorial attention including spelling, fact checking, wikifying, redundant content, content that seemed out of scope for the article, copyediting etc. I think it could still use a bit more work. You wrote a fine article but the usual editing is certainly in order. If there's anything in particular you would like me to explain please let me know. Best regards. --LeeHunter 14:18, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Welcome
This is about two months late, but welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! BTW, you can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Here are some things you can do to get started:
You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)
Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.
Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.
By the way, just for your information, talking in ALL CAPITALS is considered shouting on the internet and may cause some to ignore you for rudeness. Just a pointer, and again, welcome. Johnleemk | Talk 13:57, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Whoa, calm down please. I haven't participated at all in the Swanscombe debacle, although I've cursorily read your complaint on the Village Pump. I was just trying to be nice. I just tried to be helpful, but if you want to ignore my advice, that's fine. This isn't some arcane Wikipedian behavioural thingy, though — you're actually lucky the majority of Wikipedians are nice. Quite a few places on the internet are far less tolerant of typing in all upper case. Anyway, no hard feelings, and I wish you well. Johnleemk | Talk 11:14, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Robert Holborn
Hey, sorry about that, Faedra. I took a look at that page and I'm not entirely sure why I tagged it as an inclusion dispute - it seems perfectly encyclopedic to me. Really it needs cleanup. Hopefully there are no hard feelings. :) Andre 16:42, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
One note, though - you mentioned It is intersting to note that his family name reocours in the context of shipbuilding in almost every suceeding generation of his family right up until 1930, however, this information is not granted as public domain, at least not by me. Information isn't copyrighted - images are the medium with this difficulty. So please go ahead and add any and all pertinent information about this to the article. :) Andre 16:44, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)