User talk:Arturo Cruz
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
ĬHi!!
You are welcome to my talk page.
I am a Filipino, i.e. a resident and citizen of the Philippine Islands. It has 7100 islands. On low tide, they say, the numbers might be different...:-)
Arturo Cruz
[edit] Welcome!
Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)
Here are a few links you might find helpful:
- Be Bold!
- Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
- Meet other new users
- Learn from others
- Play nicely with others
- Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
- Tell us about you
You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.
If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on [[User talk:{{{1}}}|my talk page]]. Or, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
We're so glad you're here!
KHM03 01:24, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi Arturo, though your addition of "The Opus Dei Information Office though has asserted that Dan Brown never interviewed any member of Opus Dei." in Criticisms of The Da Vinci Code is very welcome, could you add a source (URL) for that. --Túrelio 08:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] No refs in intro
Arturo, on Opus Dei you just removed a reference from the introduction (or Wikipedia:Lead section) citing in your comments "no references in intro". Is this am actual Wikipedia rule/guideline, or just your opinion about what looks best? If it's an actual Wikipedia thing, I'm embarassed to say I've been violating it for some time on various articles. --Alecmconroy 09:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- Okay-- so, am I correct in saying your removal of the ref wasn't because blanket belief that there shouldn't be references in introductions ever-- rather you thought in this particular case including the reference was excessive? I would suggest in the future you not delete the reference outright, but instead you move the reference to the main body of the article, so it's still in the article, just not in the lead section. In any case, I won't revert it-- we're getting ready to start mediation to discuss major revisions to the article, so no point in quibbling about small things like this. I just wanted to make sure there wasn't some big Wikipedia "no references in lead" rule that I'd been violating ten thousand times in my Wikipedia career. heheh --Alecmconroy 09:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Opus Dei
- I did not fully understand your message about the Opus Dei article. This may be because I have not been involved in the article. Could you explain in a little more detail perhaps?
- Pax tecum,
- Lostcaesar 16:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- I am glad you called this to my attention. The article is using doubious sources, and is misrepresenting those at that. I will work to improve this. I will have to do so in stages so that co-editors have some time to digest each one. Hope I can be of some help. Lostcaesar 12:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
