en:User:Meaghan/Sunshine

Hello there, and welcome to my talkpage. Feel free to contact me here by starting a new section at the bottom of the page. Thank you, and remember, be polite! I will try to address any concerns, but in order to do that effectively, we must all be calm.

Also, please note that I will probably not need {{talkback}} templates: either I have watchlisted you (if I work with you often, or you are in WikiProject Warriors) or I will be periodically checking for replies.

Thank you! Brambleclawx

Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.

Archives

Archive 1 (October 2009–May 2010) Archive 2 (May 2010–August 2010) Archive 3 (August 2010–March 2011) Archive 4 (March 2011–Current) This page is archived whenever it reaches 40 threads, 50 KB, 10 main threads, or has threads 2 years old

Have you thought about using Twinkle? It makes new page db- tagging a lot easier, as well as other things. "Pepper" 15:18, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shared computer. Plus, I'm using IE 7. But yes, I've thought about it before. Maybe when I get my own computer, I will. =) I've always thought of Twinklers as cheaters though, beating me to the reverts all the time. Brambleclawx 15:23, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Um, excuse me, how do I get to your talk page? 216.183.185.33 (talk) 19:42, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you around greatly improving the warriors book pages,so I thought I should thank you.

Nyswimmer (talk) 02:26, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aw... Thank you! I love this new WikiLove thing. =) So convenient, eh? Brambleclawx 21:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as I don't have much experience in the issue, would you be up (and okay) with changing the "image" in the Warriors barnstar to the cat/bear logo instead of a "w"? "Pepper" 23:56, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to give it a shot. Brambleclawx 19:06, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced the image, but for some reason, it still looks the same on the barnstar... maybe it takes sometime or something... I will check again tomorrow. Brambleclawx 19:26, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Shadeleaf's Ninth Life
	Shadeleaf has deemed fit to bestow a life upon Brambleclaw! Eyreya Sashi of the Elves (talk) 18:30, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Er... thank you! You might need to move ShadowClan Territory back to User:Eyreya Sashi: "ShadowClan Territory" is in the mainspace, which is for articles, not userpages. Brambleclawx 19:34, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	(In a friendly kinda way)
	So they put out all of these improvements while I'm away huh? Seems like the action always happens when I'm not there, and nothing happens when I'm actually around. Hope this puts a little nuance in your summer! :) Airplaneman ✈ 23:51, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You had me worried for a while... I'm surprised you actually managed to stay away for so long. I finally got my hands on Lightning Thief! Brambleclawx 22:51, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And for the cookies! I'll be sure to come and ask you when I need help :) Hart Wud (talk) 15:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Brambleclawx 16:06, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You tagged an article I'm working on, The Sign of Diolyx (The Tomorrow People), as needing more references. This is an audio adventure and is largely self-referential. In comparing it to similar Doctor Who audios from the same company (i.e. Sirens of Time), I don't see where it differs other than the fact that it needs to be fleshed out more (which is what I'm working on). Please let me know what type of references you think it's lacking so I can improve it. The first two audios in the series were not tagged, but another editor tagged the one before it, The Ghosts of Mendez (The Tomorrow People), with similar notes to yours. Thank you.

Hiram (talk) 02:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

None of those articles appear to be of exceptional quality, even the Doctor Who one. What shoudl be noted is that the article currently consists almost entirely of a plot summary, which is something you want to avoid (see Wikipedia:PLOT). You will want to add reliable third-party reviews and other information to the article, and doing so would involve referencing those third party materials. Brambleclawx 01:39, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hey man! thanks for you're welcome; however, i'm not totally new here. i used to have an account a long time ago but i lost it. anyway, i'm currently working on the BCD article. look i have a question about adding pics. i find lots of pictures online that i use to post on forums and such. am i allowed to post them here even though i don't know their owners. if yes, what is the procedure that i have to use to ensure that they dont get removed. Thanks in Advance. A.K.Khalifeh (talk) 18:47, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It might not be a good idea to use them if you do't know the owner, because they could be copyrighted. Generally, if you have permission to use a picture, the picture is your own, or it's in the public domain, then it can be uploaded to Wikipedia or it's sister project, Wikimedia Commons. Sometimes, copyrighted images can be uploaded, but you would need to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's fair use criteria first. Brambleclawx 01:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome! ---StevenBjerke 13:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Brambleclawx 15:35, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey deputy Brambleclaw, how are things with you? I got you message and I've joined the project :) I pretty much know how to write tropical cyclone articles, but not book articles. (I'm trying to get reviews for Crookedstar's Promise now.) Any advice? Thanks! Hurricanefan25 ^{tropical cyclone} 19:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at Into the Wild (Warriors). Someone did a very nice job with it, and it's a great example of what a Warriors article should look like ideally. Also, avoid making the plot summary too long/detailed. Happy editing, Brambleclawx 22:19, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hi, I am struggling with this wiki thing and my page has been deleted though the text was checked by Alberto Portugheis. I guess I just can't get my head around all the technical stuff being a 70 year old gran trying wiki editing for the first time and being inept. When a page has been deleted, can I have another go? I have re done the text and will have a go at validating the photos, which were provided by Alberto Portugheis himself and he he assures me that he can use them freely. I'm scared of it all now! So much for a world wide encyclopaedia to which we can add entries! I want to learn more but am unnerved by the messages I am getting and the deletion. Normaprocter (talk) 09:45, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine. A lot of newcomers have difficulty in the beginning, which is why we try to help. Anyway, it seems the reason your article was deleted was because it was copied directly from another website, which is against copyright laws (basically, it's somebody else's work, so Wikipedia is not allowed to pass it off as our own work). You seem to have fixed most of that now, so I'm not worried about that. In case I'm confusing you, yes, you're allowed to have another go. Somebody's moved it to your "userspace", so a normal search won't find the article, and you have a place to work on it until it's ready.

In terms of the pictures, we need Mr. Portugheis' permission. You said he allows it, so that's good, but we need some way to verify it, I think. I don't deal with pictures very often, so it might be better to ask someone with more experience (like user: Jeff G.); in terms of what I know, you're free to use any pictures you've taken yourself (in that case, upload them, and label them as "own work"); on the other hand, if you want to use Mr. Portugheis' pictures, either he should upload them (and tag them as "onw work", or if he's already put those pictures on the internet before, he should indicate that he allows their use elsewhere (either by putting it on the site he placed those pictures, or through email (see WP:DCM#Granting us permission to copy material already online).

Don't be too unnerved by the warnings... I'll try to help you as much as I can. If you meed more help, just ask. Brambleclawx 18:49, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. So good to have a humane human outthere to calm my nerves! I'll try to find the page right now. I didn't actually copy that sentence ( and it was only one sentence). Ironically, it was the sentence Alberto himself added. He tells me that everytime someone asks him how to describe himself, he always uses that first phrase. Hence, I suppose, journalists and publicity people have used it over and over. I just didn't question it as it was such a neat sentence! right. Thanks again. I am now going to brave the page again. Normaprocter (talk) 18:24, 17 August 2011 (UTC) REPLY TO LATEST ADVICE[reply]

I hope this is the correct place to answer you. First, many thanks for your helpful emails. Second, I followed the links to about you. Very interesting. Glad you love classical music so much. I will ask Alberto Portgheis to be in touch when he next comes to Canada. I see you are listed as 16 and gifted. you are clearly that. I have a grandson of the same age, gifted in mathematics. As for my piece on Alberto, I would be happy for you to do what you think is correct in terms of editing. Your help is so straightforward... but I still get nervous. Alberto is following the link the provided to sort out photo copyrights in giving me permission, but another helper advises photographs can be a mine field, so it might be better not to use the ones from his past. If I am replying in the wrong slot, tell me where to do it, please.Normaprocter (talk) 08:24, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I will go and take a look at the article. It's pretty good, but just needs a few tweaks here and there. I'm glad that you find my advice helpful. Brambleclawx 16:57, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brambleclaw you are sooooooooooo helpful. Thanks again.Normaprocter (talk) 16:02, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Brambleclawx 16:04, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind welcome. I am on the verge of moving the article about the Santa Monica's library onto the real Wikipedia. I plan to add a link to the page from the general article about the city of Santa Monica. I welcome your feedback and guidance. As a token of appreciation, here is a picture of one of my cats. Cheers. Raymond —Preceding undated comment added 19:39, 17 August 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for the cat (I like cats, yes)! Anyway, I'm going to go take a quick look over your article right now and do a little tweaking. Brambleclawx 21:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your concern. I will not break the rules. Please render an opinion on the dispute or find someone with appropriate knowledge who will. -Trift (talk) 21:53, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trift has now started following my edits around onto several topics, and are undoing edits I have done on several articles, in a case that smells like WP:HOUNDING ([1], [2],[3]). I would appreciate advice on how to handle disruptive editors like him, I find it very difficult. --OpenFuture (talk) 22:17, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In those cases, the reversions are for cause, with support from other editors. I do not wish to inhibit his editing, only to encourage him to pay more attention to the informed opinions of the rest of us. -Trift (talk) 22:37, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I am completely uninvolved and previously unaware of this dispute, so I'm going to offer a comment, as BCx may already be on wikibreak. OpenFuture, that is not significant evidence of hounding. Two of those reversions are on an article that you are both editing, which makes it edit-warring, not hounding. While it is possible that Trift has been watching your other edits, I see no evidence of true hounding. To the both of you, stop edit-warring. Until consensus is decided, the item should be left out of the article. OpenFuture, you may want to consider compromising on the notability, given an extended statement that says more than just, "There was a debate. It is on YouTube." It sounds to me that perhaps the debate was a notable event in relation to the book. However, Trift, I would suggest searching for any reliable sources that may help verify the notability of said debate, as that would clear up a lot of the conflict. Also, I suggest you carefully consider your use of the word "informed". It comes across as extremely arrogant (at least to me, and I'm not an affected party). I hope this comment has been some help to both of you, feel free to reply with any questions/comments. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 03:01, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"To the both of you, stop edit-warring" - I am not edit warring. *I* try to engage in constructive debate, this is being completely ignored by Trift. My question is how to deal with disruptive editors that refuse to engage in constructive consensus building and simply ignore everything people say. Sometimes the pop a fuse, break 3RR and insult admins, and then they get blocked. Most of the time they just continue their low-level disruption forever. There seems to be no good Wikipedia policies to handle this.

"Until consensus is decided, the item should be left out of the article." - Unsurprisingly, I completely agree.

"given an extended statement" - That would of course be different. But I can't find anything of note to say about that debate and evidently neither can anybody else. --OpenFuture (talk) 05:50, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have all (somedifferentstuff included) been edit-warring over various parts of the article. Best I can tell, in the most recent edit-war, none of you have been talking, simply reverting and directing to the talk page. I see no consensus on the note, just an argument that died after something else came up. In response to disruptive editors, as you claim Trift is, you can only interact as calmly as possible and assume good faith. Do not attack other editors or their viewpoint. And for heaven's sake, don't argue about who has more experience or better understanding of policy. And compromise, compromise, compromise. That's what most consensus involves. Both sides compromising. In the issue of the author's note, some mention of their response to criticism may be useful. I don't think the whole quote needs to be reproduced; a simple statement that the authors have claimed that their book should only be reviewed in peer-review journals would suffice. One sentence is not undue weight. In the issue of the debate, a reason for the notability of the debate (influence, prominence, etc.) should be established using reliable sources, at which point it would then be reasonable to include in the article. Keep your cool, and talk these things out before edit-warring over them. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 13:00, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise is good, when possible. In the debate case for example, I added it to External Links as a compromise, as I hoped that this was the reason Somedifferentstuff wanted the link there. But no, that made no difference, he continued edit warring. So I took in a third opinion in hope he would calm down. The third opinion agreed with me. That made no difference, he continued. Both Somedifferentstuff and Trift not only edit the same articles, and revert the same texts, they also both really are disruptive editors. The only thing I can do now is either to revert their vandalism, or let it stand. They are not open to debate or compromise. Somedifferentstuff even admitted that he sees this as a power struggle. [4] He doesn't care about content or policy, he just wants to "win". And I am at a complete loss at how to handle these kinds of editors. I've asked loads of editors, and I do exactly as all the recommendations, but it just doesn't help. They just keep on reverting... --OpenFuture (talk) 13:56, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for answering, Princess. I appreciate the help, and you've put it a lot better than I could've. Anyway, OpenFuture, like the warning I originally posted on your talk page says, do not edit war, even if you think you are right. Unless it is a blatant attack of some sort, just leave it there, and start a talk page discussion. That would be the best way to resolve things. By the way, you've got a 3rd opinion for redistribution of wealth now. If someone disagrees with the 3rd opinion, I guess you could look for a couple more neutral opinions. That way, a consensus can be established. (and then, once there is a consensus, only then might it be appropriate to label someone as disruptive: right now, without any real, visible consensus, it makes no sense labelling anyone as disruptive, because you're both being equally disruptive by edit warring. If things get really sticky, you may need to ask for Mediation. Brambleclawx 15:50, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer, but yet again you miss the point. You recommend me to start a talk page discussion. This, I obviously already did. I repeat: Trift and others DO NOT ENGAGE IN CONSTRUCTIVE DEBATE. This is the kind of editor that I need help handling. Editors that actually engage in constructive debate is not a problem. I do everything exactly by the book, and according to policy and dispute resolution papers. But those processes do not work when one party simply ignores them and refuses to participate in a constructive manner. The question is what to do THEN. --OpenFuture (talk) 23:07, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here I am going to be brutally honest, and please take this as kindly as possible. As an uninvolved party, it appears to me that none of you are really discussing this in the most constructive manner. Yes, Trift and others may not be correct, but you should consider that your actions might not be without fault. At the point you feel nothing is being accomplished, the next step would taking this to the Dispute resolution noticeboard. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 14:30, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's because it takes two to tango. I start a discussion, and it gets ignored, then I can't really discuss it constructively either. That's my point, this part of the dispute resolution process requires everyone to buy into the process, and they don't. Thanks for pointing out the Dispute resolution noticeboard, I didn't know it had been created (it's only two months old). Hopefully that can help untie the Gordian knot of these types of disruptive editors. I'll definitely use it the next time this happens. --OpenFuture (talk) 15:30, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have just uploaded a photo to the Wikimedia commons under the CC Share-Alike 3.0 license. I understand that I have to email permissions-commonswikimedia DOT org. Do you know if I can forward this email from the photographer, or if it has to be directly from him? I only ask because it would be easier to forward it (then I would get any replies, rather than the photographer, who would probably have to ask me what to do with them anyway...), but perhaps then there is no way of verifying the original email address of the photographer. Nullinfinity667 (talk) 08:09, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you've already gotten a reply at Commons. Nice to meet you, and those pictures really do add to the article nicely. Brambleclawx 15:48, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I did get an answer and I'll be dispatching the permission email as soon as possible. Nice to meet you too, and thanks :) Nullinfinity667 (talk) 16:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Michel Colomban has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. ^Avic_ennasis @ 18:04, 1 Elul 5771 / 18:04, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

HI that's fantastic I'm also fascinated by WARRIORS and WEAPONS PS:I can recomend "Weapons that made britain" on YOUTUBE!!! Who's your Favorite Warrior ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.167.108.215 (talk) 16:06, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Um... my favourite warrior is Brambleclaw. Obviously. Brambleclawx 19:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You've come highly recommended from some other users and I was wondering whether you could take a look at Obernewtyn (novel) and see if anything needs changing to get it up to GA status. Thanks --Limolover ^talk 03:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did a tiny little bit just now. It's rather late at night here, and I've got work to finish for tomorrow, but I should have time tomorrow to look it over. The fact there's a cat on the cover got me right away: I can't wait to look through this article. Brambleclawx 03:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for this. Hope you get your work done. --Limolover ^talk 05:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to start going through the style and grammar and stuff first. Is there any sort of time limit you need my look-over to be done by? Brambleclawx 00:11, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No not particularly. There is nothing really else I can do with it. So when you're done I shall try once more to get it to GA status. Thanks --Limolover ^talk 12:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity, how do you pronounce your username? Brambleclaw-x? Because whenever I look at it I think "bramble-clocks" which sounds pretty weird :P (and if you didn't notice, thanks.) "Pepper" @ 23:19, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should be Brambleclaw-x (like the letter). I originally wanted Brambleclaw, but it was taken, and by the time i heard of usurping, i decided I liked the x just as it was. Brambleclawx 02:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're retiring? HurricaneFan25 11:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, it's a vandal. They retired me as well. "Pepper" @ 12:50, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, Pepper's right. My edit count may be extremely down for now, but I have no plans on retiring yet. Brambleclawx 02:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Brambleclawx! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 11:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

It was good to have you on board this time around- we hope you enjoyed the competition! In case you are interested, signups for next year are open. Thanks, J Milburn and The ed17 20:41, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]