User talk:Smiloid
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia
Welcome, Smiloid!
Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:
- Wikipedia:Five pillars
- Wikipedia:Policy trifecta
- Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages
- Wikipedia:Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.
You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.
Best of luck, and have fun editing! ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 05:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Stop unilaterally changing article names. You are causing chaos
Stop unilaterally moving pages. You are causing chaos to links and redirects. If you want to move a page, propose it at Wikipedia:Requested moves and let a vote take place. FearÉIREANN
\(caint) 15:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tarot
Hi there. I notice you contributed a bit to the tarot article. The article is being nominated for improvement here. Please vote if you wish to do so. :) Sam 22:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- I added a "little" comment to the discussion in Talk:Tarot. -- Parsa 09:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Smiloid, I added dozens of inline templates (and one section template) to the Tarot article. Feel free to add more or alter the tone of the ones I added! Even if the article is only about Tarot divination, it still has many paragraphs that are uncited, reflect personal opinion, or appear to be original research. - Parsa 23:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert in Tarot. If templates are added to improve an article, removing them is borderline vandalism. Instead, the sources need to be found to remove the template tags. The problem is that the editors from occult backgrounds are largerly basing their knowledge on hearsay and non-academic sources. Even the Encyclopedia of Tarot is not a reliable source. There are academic works on Tarot origins, history and even use for occult purposes, but none of these editors seems to have seen the books. BTW, note that I changed the web links to more of an historical nature rather than the "how to interpret Tarot cards" types. - Parsa 22:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Note: Since your revert was itself reverted, I added some new tags: {{vc}} which gives the template: [this source's reliability may need verification]. Two of the authors of the single reference source have a PhD and a Masters, but that doesn't mean they are credible to write a book on card history. I seriously doubt if this book went through a university press, peer review, etc. - Parsa 23:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC) Yes, this is something that needed to be done. I've looked at the first two paragraphs and it does appear that improvements are being madeSmiloid 07:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- He he, actually I did the edit on the first two paragraphs. I bet some will absolutely hate it. However the article needs to be balanced, and it's far from it.
- Another issue that I have found is that each and every Tarot card has a page, and they are even worse than the Tarot article. They are so clearly un-encyclopedic it's not funny. Check out the cards by going to this Template: Template:Major_Arcana. I added the tags on top and a note in each talk page. What a pain. I hope you can add your contributions. Worse than the above, some guy created templates for each suit and is listing every single tarot pip card. I think the articles and the categories should be recommended for deletion. How many academic sources can you find talking about one pip card? It will definitely all be occult nonsense.
- Category:Suit_of_Wands
- Category:Suit_of_Coins
- Category:Suit_of_Swords
- Category:Suit_of_Cups
- Most have had no content but a copyrighted image in six months, which could qualify for speedy deletion.
- - Parsa 09:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes! I too have noticed this. Wands should be Batons. I do think all this is unnecessary and perhaps it does warrant deletion. Can you imagine a single article for individual cards like "ace of hearts" in the playing card section? or a single page devoted to the pawn in the game of chess. Yes it is ridiculous!Wikipedia is not a dictionary or so they saySmiloid 08:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletions
You've nominated a few things for speedy deletion as blatant copyright violations, but didn't mention where the copyrighted material was copied from. Please include that information. Wodup 06:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- The Minor Arcana article was one of those you tagged, but the article has been on Wikipedia for many years. It is possible that the source you found was actually a copy of the Wikipedia article. Unless you give the source, the article will not be deleted.-gadfium 08:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I probably did not do this correctly, but there are some copyrighted images which are falsely indentified as being PD in the States. Here's an example
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Pents13.jpg One can plainly see the the copyright notice "(c) 1971 US Games" on the lower right corner. Smiloid 22:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- The uploader claims the image was first created in 1909. If this is true, then the claim of copyright on the image itself is probably void. I'll mark the image as needing investigation, and let someone more experienced at dealing with image copyrights deal with it.-gadfium 22:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've added it to Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2007 February 11/Images.-gadfium 22:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Divinatory"
Sorry. The word got picked up by firefox's spell checker, so i'd assumed it wasn't a real word. Guess i probably should have checked on google first before editing it out. --`/aksha 07:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Tarot Major Arcana
Hi there,
Just wanted to give you the heads-up that I've taken off the noncompliant tags from the Major Arcana articles. I agree with the points you made about them needing improvement, but feel that template was a too extreme, and have changed it to a clean-up request. As the articles are so similar, I suggest we discuss how to proceed with improving these articles at Talk:Major Arcana. Hope to see you there!
