User talk:Joan-of-arc

Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Please respect others' copyrights; do not copy and paste the contents from webpages directly.
Please use a neutral point of view when editing articles; this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add unreasonable contents into any articles, such as: copyrighted text, advertisement messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Adding such unreasonable information or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism, and will result in your account being blocked.

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. Again, welcome!

--WillMak050389 00:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion v. AfD[edit]

Greetings! The article Rodney Anderson was probably a likely candidate for proposed deletion. However, once any article has been attempted to be placed in proposed deletion or goes to an AfD discussion, it is ineligible for proposed deletion. Accordingly, I have removed the prod and prod2 tags from this article.

Also, you cannot second your own proposal—i.e. you cannot place the {{prod2}} tag on an article where you yourself applied {{prod}}. You may want to refamiliarise yourself with the proposed deletion guidelines to be more familiar with the process. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! —C.Fred (talk) 04:02, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notes on talk pages of prodd'd articles[edit]

Joan, it makes things easier for a PROD's closing admin if you put your "delete, kthx" comments in the article with the {{prod2}} templates, since a lot of objections to a PROD go on the talk page - so we have to look at each and every talk page. It's just a lot easier if the talk page doesn't exist in the first place. --maru (talk) contribs 21:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Luisa[edit]

Yes, it can be merged without the need for an AfD... I was just closing the discussion, merging is up to whoever is interested in the article. Thanks. --W.marsh 20:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should never blank pages, it's harmful. See Help:Moving a page if you want to move a page. Thanks. --Zoz (t) 09:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

...for editing on the Human Rights in the PNA page. I was getting lonely! Elizmr 22:48, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look forward to more of your edits. Take care. Elizmr 22:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

South Africa[edit]

Hi Joan of Arc - Here's the problems with the Sunday Times article 'Farms of Fear.' The 'quote' was not even from the body of the article, it was from the summary at the beginning of the article, which is a sensationalist tagline meant to entice readers to read the piece! It is not based on any research or fact, it is simply there to get people to read the article, which the person who put it there obviously did not. I have read the whole article, and it is really a poor piece of journalism, and shouldn't even be cited in an encyclopedia entry about South Africa. Also, it is not from the main body of the newspaper, it is from the 'magazine' section of the paper, which has looser journalistic standards than a normal newspaper piece. The article basically consists of a few interviews, with no real research. It is hardly a neutral and reliable piece. If you are interested in some well researched information on crime in the farming community in South Africa, you should read the the Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Farm Attacks here: http://www.issafrica.org/CJM/farmrep/index.htm. This is a well researched report that is actually from a neutral point of view. I'm currently working on re-writing that paragraph in the agriculture sub-section of the South Africa article with some information from this report, rather than the biased, pov statements that are currently on that page.

Further, just because you can source something from the internet, doesn't mean you should. This is one of the biggest problems on Wikipedia. Many users do not know how to critically evaluate sources before citing them. Most users think, 'if I can link to it, then it's ok to include it in the article, its sourced, and not original research.' This is a really poor way to conduct research and to write an encyclopedia entry. Please don't accuse me of censorship when I take the time to critically evaluate sources, and insist that a neutral point of view and some decent research techniques be prerequisites for citing sources. Cheers, Jason Lionchow 19:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

looking forward to your scholarly editing of that section. regards. Joan-of-arc 02:58, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Evaluations for the California WikiProject[edit]

From my watchlist, I noticed that you have started doing some article evaluation for the California WikiProject. Thank you for your work.

I would like to ask one favor. As you are doing your evaluations, for those articles that are on Southern California topics, could you change {{WikiProject California}} to {{WikiProject Southern California}}? ^Blank ^Verse 11:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gène Hanssen[edit]

Hello Joan-of-arc. Thank you for tagging this article for cleanup. Also, I have a question for you. As I was working on the article a bit, I noticed that you deleted a reference from it because it wasn't in English. I've never seen a requirement that external sources be in English (especially when there are no alternative sources in English). I also added a Dutch language link to the article as this is common practice for Dutch sportspeople who played in the past (prior to the internet age). Please let me know if I misunderstood. Otherwise, please don't delete foreign-language sources unless you believe there are comparable alternatives in the English language. Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 20:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Down in Mississippi (Up to No Good)[edit]

Explain to me how "fourth and final single from the album" is something that needs a citation. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 19:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]