User talk:Paulfp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Paulfp, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  JFW | T@lk 21:25, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 adding local links 2 Trying to prove? 3 Liverpool City Christian Union 4 Liverpool Cathedral 5 Removal of comments from talk pages 6 New Message 7 Robbie Fowler

[edit] adding local links

Hi Paulfp,

Thanks for your contributions. But when adding links to local organizations, please only add to articles where readers would be particularly interested in that organization. There are, of course, Christian organizations in thousands of large cities, and since we can't possibly link to all of them in one article (unless it were a article that served only as a list), it doesn't make much sense to link to a few of them. Thanks, and happy editing. --Allen 00:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trying to prove?

I'm not trying to prove anything, just that I think your edits are out of place. What are YOU trying to prove? It would also be quite nice if you could cut down on the rhetorical questions and accusations such as "immature and abusive" and "continued vandalism". chowells 17:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• • "What are YOU trying to prove?" <--- there's a rhetorical question there ;)

[edit] Liverpool City Christian Union

Would I be right in assuming you are a member? I don't think it of any real interest that you all went to a concer? You should perhaps create an article along the lines of Liverpool Jewish Students Society and leave it at that. Rather than leave URL's all over the place.--IanDavies 18:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• I was a member last year, but I'm not actually a member anymore, and I didn't go to the concert myself :) - Paulfp 19:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Liverpool Cathedral

Please don't use Wikipedia for self promotion. I've no idea why you are so interested in that particular concert, but this summary really has almost no significance whatsoever in the history of Liverpool Cathedral. -- Solipsist 19:12, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm fascinated to discover how on earth you think that's self-promotion? I'm not a member of the band, although I am a keen follower of them, and I don't work for the Cathedral. I mentioned a society that I used to be a member of... ummm apart from that I'm lost. And the concert is part of the Cathedral's history, therefore it is relevant to the article. Thank you Paulfp 19:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Why else would you imagine that this was the most important concert ever to be held in Liverpool Cathedral? I assume that is what you must believe because the article so far doesn't discuss any other concerts or events that were held there. Personally I would suspect that the premier of Paul McCartney's Liverpool Oratorio was rather more significant, but even then hardly worth mention in the article on the Cathedral.

Also, you would do well to read Wikipedia:spam, since you appear to have been spam linking quite a bit recently. Fortunately most of those edits have already been reverted. Quite why you thought that Liverpool City Christian Union was relevant to the article on Jesus, beggars belief. Be warned that these sorts of edits can easily be regarded as vandalism and can lead to being blocked. -- Solipsist 19:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, I take your point about there being other concerts there, but I myself have less knowledge of these. I thought the whole point of Wikipedia is that people add information, and then others add even more to that, and that's how great articles are made? Perhaps a section about memorable events could be greated, including both the McCartney and the Delirious (plus others!) concerts. Seems like a good idea to me, and would make the article an even more interesting read. Please let me know how on earth you considered it Self-Promotion, as I honestly don't understand why you thought that.

I've at no point been intending to spam Wikipedia... thank you for point out if my actions were resembling that; it is never the intention. We learn as we go along, and I'm always learning, especially in the last few days.

I also take your point that maybe the CU site wasn't specifically relevant in the "Jesus" article, but take another look at what you wrote:

"Quite why you thought that Liverpool City Christian Union was relevant to the article on Jesus, beggars belief."

"beggars belief"?? C'mon, it's hard not to read that and chuckle. "Jesus" and "Christian" are completely unrelated now, are they? -- Paulfp 19:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

That's fine. And yes that's the way that Wikipedia grows, but it also grows and improves by editors removing irrelevant content.

Its really a question of asymetric relevance. Actually I ought to write a guideline article at Wikipedia:Asymetric relevance. It is quite commonly the case that a link from one article to another is relevant only in one direction. For example, I recently wrote a section on the 'Dulux dog' in Old English Sheepdog. As part of the research I found that one of the dogs, Digby, and his owner, Cynthia Harrison, were invited to meet to the Queen. I almost included that fact in the Old English Sheepdog article, it would have been relevant in establishing the level of fame that Digby acheived. But there is no way, no how, that it would be worth mentioning in the article on Queen Elizabeth II. The queen meets thousands of people every year and most of them are not relevant to a summary of her life and the fact that she once met a particular dog certainly isn't worth mentioning.

Sorry to delete your paragraph, but I can't think of any article that it would be relevant to. I don't even think it would be relevant to the article on Delirious, assuming that they have played more than one concert.

Similarly the Liverpool City Christian Union is almost certainly not significant enough to be linked from any article. -- Solipsist 19:58, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• Adding new content to pages is indeed valuable. However it is often the case that removal of of unimportant material -- and the ability to identify what is and what is not important -- is far more valuable. I think most people would prefer to read half a page of excellence than 500 pages of tedious dribble. chowells 20:20, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of comments from talk pages

Please note that removal of comments from talk pages is viewed by some in the Wikipedia community as being somewhat uncivil and hostile. [1] [2]. Even if it is your own talk page. You might want to consider reading Wikipedia:Talk page. chowells 20:15, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing this out, although I strongly suspect this was just so that you could smile at my relative unfamiliarity with this community - I'm not impressed. Paulfp 20:25, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• You are free to suspect whatever you want, though I cannot think of a better place to make a comment about your edit summary, which I consider to be inappropriate, other than your talk page. chowells 20:27, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Message

I've just logged in and was told I had a new message, but clicked it and can't find any message. If anyone can help, i'd be grateful! :-) Paulfp 10:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Looking at the history for your talk page, it looks as though it was an automated bot making a minor alteration to the welcome message at the top of the page, which only affected the markup code (i.e. what you see when you edit the page), and did not affect the way your talk page looks. So you didn't get a new message, but a typographical error made by the user who welcomed you was corrected. The new messages banner pops up whenever your talk page changes, even for minor things like that. Oldelpaso 14:22, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Robbie Fowler

I have removed your recent edit to Robbie Fowler as part of a cleanup of the "Return to Liverpool" section, as I don't think scoring on his birthday is particularly notable in terms of his overall career (as opposed to his previous goal, which saw him overtake Dalglish in the all-time Liverpool scorers list, a notable event). Oldelpaso 14:22, 9 April 2006 (UTC)