User talk:Kristijrn
Orphaned non-free media (File:Front_entrance_le_ff.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Front_entrance_le_ff.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 07:12, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Just to let you know, your article is named "Indiana Law Enforcement and Firefighter Memorial," instead of "Indiana Law Enforcement and Firefighters Memorial." I think you can rectify this by simply moving the page to the correct name. Mkadams888 (talk) 06:07, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
WikiWomen's Collaborative[edit]
| WikiWomen Unite! | |
|---|---|
 |
Hi Kristijrn! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative. As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:
Feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can participate! |
Your request for undeletion[edit]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is parental gatekeeping. JohnCD (talk) 09:34, 15 August 2013 (UTC) using the term "committed suicide" is outdated and poor form. Committed implies a crime; suicide is no longer considered a crime but an illness. Please research your opposition to my edit, so you will see that your insistence upon keeping the term "committed suicide" is improper.
Your recent edit at Ernest Hemingway[edit]
Hi! I noticed your recent edit at this article. I feel that the construction 'committed suicide' is more direct than your substitution, 'died from suicide'. I reverted your edit. If you disagree with my reversion, and want to seek a consensus supporting your change at the article talk page, please do so. I think I understand your reasoning because you left a very helpful comment. However, 'suicide' is an act, not a condition or an illness. Suicide may, or may not, be a result of a disorder. Major depressive disorder, a Wikipedia featured article, uses the phrase 60% of people who commit suicide. Variations on 'commit suicide' occur several times in the Hemingway article. Direct, objective statements, without attempts to be 'socially acceptable' are best for an encyclopedia article.
Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia, where anyone can edit, and where collaboration and consensus have produced more than anyone thought possible! - Neonorange (talk) 08:58, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- @ User:Kristijrn - I believe you meant to place your last addition to this page under my comment about 'committed suicide', rather than in the section above. Yes, we disagree. So consensus building in the Hemingway talk page will be necessary, a conversation that will include other editors. I will point out another difference; 'took his own life' is a euphemism that has its roots in the time when suicide was considered shameful, so also does 'died from suicide'; both are from a time when suicide must be hid in the shadows. - Neonorange (talk) 17:31, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Kristijrn, please discuss this on the Hemingway article talk page rather than restoring your edit that I reverted. This is the encyclopedia anyone can edit—it is also a collaborative project. When an editor makes an edit that is reverted, the next step should be discussion at the article talk page, not restoration. I welcome a discussion there. Three and a half years ago you made a similar edit to this article—my reasons for reverting that edit then are the same as for reverting this edit. The article is better with simple, direct expressions rather convoluted phrasing—see my post, above, from three and a half years ago. — Neonorange (talk) 07:35, 19 January 2018 (UTC)