:LOL I just gave one to '''i''' last night! I don't think I'm all that surreal, but I do love surreal art, especially [[René Magritte]]. I was blessed to have seen the exhibition tour when it was at the [[Art Institute of Chicago]], and bought several prints. <sup>[[user:ArielGold|<font color="8B00FF">'''Ariel'''</font>]][[Special:Contributions/ArielGold|<font color="F64A8A">♥</font>]][[User_talk:ArielGold|<font color="007FFF">'''Gold'''</font>]]</sup> 22:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:LOL I just gave one to '''i''' last night! I don't think I'm all that surreal, but I do love surreal art, especially [[René Magritte]]. I was blessed to have seen the exhibition tour when it was at the [[Art Institute of Chicago]], and bought several prints. <sup>[[user:ArielGold|<font color="8B00FF">'''Ariel'''</font>]][[Special:Contributions/ArielGold|<font color="F64A8A">♥</font>]][[User_talk:ArielGold|<font color="007FFF">'''Gold'''</font>]]</sup> 22:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::I'm sorry but I more of a expressionist. However, me want a b-star. :( --<font face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:The Random Editor|<font color="Black">Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor</font>]]</font> 23:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::I'm sorry but I more of a expressionist. However, me want a b-star. :( --<font face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:The Random Editor|<font color="Black">Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor</font>]]</font> 23:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:::That is a funny one. --<font face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:The Random Editor|<font color="Black">Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor</font>]]</font> 00:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Leave a new message!I will reply and drop a note on your talk page unless I know you'll check back here. Please be sure to sign your posts with ~~~~ so I know who you are!
Hee hee, that's a cute version of it, made it masculine, I like it! And of course I don't mind, everything is, in part, inspired by others, so steal away! Hee hee. Ariel♥Gold16:58, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, thought I should check with you first :P I don't know if I want it yet, but how would I go about making it take up the entire width of the page? (For any sized screen). Thanks again, Tiddly-Tom17:01, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You can just add a width to the style of the table, if you want it to be almost full, you could just add width:90% to the style line at the top of the table. I actually like it a little more compact, personally, maybe it is because I'm on a widescreen, high res monitor, lol. Ariel♥Gold17:17, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have just implemented the new look talk page, and there are a few things that I don't like the look of. Can I reduce the gap between the 'To view this page in non pretty colors, please click here' and the 'Welcome to my talk page' box, and can I make the contents box the grey color and the archive box the same? Does anything else stand out that I should change as this is an attempt to make it look prettyfull! Feel free to make any changes... Thanks, Tiddly-Tom19:34, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ack! The layout is scrolling horizontally quite severely, and I'm on a high res widescreen monitor, lol. Let me finish up what I'm doing and take a look at the code. Ariel♥Gold21:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC)X[reply]
Wow! Thanks for spending so long over it. I didn't realize that you would have to scroll to see it :S it is fine on my 1280 X 800 laptop screen. I really don't know weather I need the 'click here to see this page in non colourfullness' message? I was trying to do it for if anyone was color blind and found it hard to read the text... Maybe I should just have a white background with a boarder, like you do :P You make a good point about the TOC, and I think I should probably have it in a simalar location to yours, but with a grey boarder :P What are your views? Thanks for you help with the Malcolm Pointon subpage, although I had actually gone ahead and already made the Malcolm Pointon article, but because I thought your changes were so great, I merged them with all the changes that other users had done :) Tiddly-Tom09:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, How the donkeys do you do over 6k edits a month! I have just done 1000 this month and think it is quite a bit :P You do like 150 edits a day! No wonder you have to archive your talk page every 36 hours! Tiddly-Tom11:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
lol, well I'm retired, so I don't have many other things to take up my time, and I enjoy a really wide variety of areas on Wikipedia, there's always stuff to do! Hee hee. So, just tell me what you'd like, if you'd like me to put changed into your talk page, or if you'd like to see them first, I'm more than willing to help, I think it would look a lot better with a modified design, and you could even have a really light grey background if you want to. Just let me know and I will leap into action! Ariel♥Gold19:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow :) I think it is important that everyone can read my talk page, so if you dont mind, could you sort the width, lighten the color, move the TOC out of header... Anything else you see appropriate would be appreached, and I'll look through all the changes and if I am not impressed by some thing I'll have a go at changing it, but I don't like it how it messes up for other people (I looked using Vandle Proof) and it looked weird, so go ahead and make any changes you like :) Thanks again! Tiddly-Tom20:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you kind of have to consider all types of ways it will be seen, Firefox, Opera, Mac, IE6 and 7, and then the various programs like VP and AWB, so sometimes, the simpler the better, especially for talk pages. You can get a bit more fancy with userpages, because if they don't display right, it isn't a huge deal, but I like to keep talk pages clear, concise, and organized. Let me work on it, and I'll holler when I've put the changes into effect. Just a warning, it may look quite a bit different than it does now, but the color scheme will not change, and the content will not change. Just the way things display for variable widths will change. (~*Ariel rubs her hands together... mwuwhahahaha I love doing this stuff! *~) Ariel♥Gold21:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I like it! Thanks! I have just added a boarder around the Archive box so we are now on V1.1. :) I think I might like the text in the 'Welcome to My talk page' box to be a little larger, and would it work if it was center aligned? Thanks again!! Tiddly-Tom06:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How hard would it be to make the archive box the width of the old 'Welcome' box, going across the top (with rounded corners). With 'Archives' on the top line, then 'This page is archived by..' and then 'Archive 1' on the next, with the ability to expand the number of Archives. Then below it I can have the rules centered? How does that sound? Thanks again, Tiddly-Tom06:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That would actually be easier than the way it is now! lol. I'm not a fan of columns, except in certain situations. Let me go to work on that. And thank you for the barnstar! Ariel♥Gold06:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thanks for all your work. I have changed it slightly (size of welcome, and mered two of the boxes) and think it is brilliant now, just as long as it does not mess up on different browsers :P I think I might do some vandle fighting and then face the daunting task of a User pageshudders. Thanks again, Tiddly-Tom16:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't look any different in different browsers, other than their size, you know, like how AWB or VP may display in a smaller window. The two boxes combined looks good, very nice! Ariel♥Gold20:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I live in nowhereville! There is no radio reception here, lol. I can go to the NPR page later and see if they put a podcast up for it. I checked that link and they're talking about some sports team thing, so I missed it I guess. Thanks for letting me know, though, I'll check the NPR page for the archive later. Ariel♥Gold18:39, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hee hee, I actually noticed that issue earlier, and I'm not sure you need any more help, you seem to be doing pretty well there, plus you have FisherQueen helping, ans she is awesome, so let's see where that goes. As for the new issue on the EC page, Blah, lol. Let's see where that goes, he seems willing to discuss it, and he's obviously in the minority, so hopefully he won't end up revert-warring. (P.S. Are you a BLP magnet? LOL) Ariel♥Gold06:51, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re:EC, he brings up a valid point. We didn't discuss whether or not it was appropriate for the lead, we just all assumed it did. And his argument seems fairly strong, re the MOS. I'll go grab those other editors again and see what they think. (and I'm hoping it's just a BLiP ;) ) — TimotabTimothy (not Tim dagnabbit!)06:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we had no valid reason to discuss it, it wasn't a point of contention. Yes, his reasons are valid, but at the same time, it doesn't harm the article to have the passage where it is, so I have no real opinion on the matter, y'know? P.S., I looked around the Sung talk page, and the editor's talk page, and nobody seems to have even mentioned his obvious WP:COI, maybe it would be a good idea to drop that note on his talk page? You can use my template if you want, {{subst:User:ArielGold/coi}} Ariel♥Gold07:13, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I did, I looked it several hours ago, so those weren't up there. I thought you'd gone to bed, because I knew you'd have brought it up, lol. (And hey, I was right! Am I psychic?) Ariel♥Gold07:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, well, okay, obviously it is humor. Now, I actually find some of them funny, "Big kids don't play with sockpuppets, but they do play in sandboxes." hee hee. But some of them are just stating the obvious, and not sure why they're funny (#1 and #4). Of course, I'm notorious for not "getting" the joke, so it could just be me. I'd probably change WP:BAN to WP:BLOCK, because it is pretty rare for an editor to truly be banned. But then, there is the question of, what purpose will the page serve? I mean, userspace pages are not safe from MfDs, so what reason could be used to keep it, if it were up for deletion? Now, don't get me wrong, I believe that fun and humor absolutely has a place here, and I think that the fun or "light" pages are great, especially when they illustrate policies and guidelines while being funny, as this one does, and as WP:LAME does. I think that with anything in life, a job, a friendship, a project, a hobby, whatever, fun simply must be included, because if we are not having fun while doing what we do, it turns into something we end up disliking, and resenting. I'm sure you realize that not everyone feels this way, and there are editors opposed to the humor/fun pages on Wikipedia. So, okay my philosophical rant aside, I kind of like it. I also think you could do a "Top 10" list, like Letterman, but I'm not sure exactly what the Top 10 would be... Top 10 reasons to edit Wikipedia? (Hrmmm, wonder if Letterman actually has already done that...). Ariel♥Gold19:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I was really just curious whether it was at all amusing or not. I took your recommendation on the WP:BAN link, 'cause I was conflicted too. Numbers 1 and 4 are really just a nod to the fact that I don't think that the average, casual end-user realizes just how much anyone can edit Wikipedia. I'm not worried about MfD or anything, I think I rate as an "editor in good standing" and have a little latitude in what I use my user space for. I'd considered a top ten list as well, but rather like the twist of phrasing things from a parental point of view. ;) Anyway, thank you very much for your quick and thorough opinion. As always, I have tremendous respect for it. Into The FrayT/C19:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thank you for asking me, I do think it is funny, and I'll be interested in seeing you use that in various situations, lol. I bet when Timothy gets here, he'll have some really hilarious suggestions as well, and I'd also bet he thinks it is funny as well. And okay I see your thing about 1 and 4, lol. Anyway, I am not worried it would be MfD'd, but was just pointing out a "worst case" type deal. I like to think of all eventualities, lol. I like it, "Ariel gives this humorous page a Thumbs Up!" Ariel♥Gold20:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
;) So Timothy's not confused, I userfy'd it here, threw out the number ten, removed the humor tag and tossed a pic into it. Thanks again. Whimsy, I know, but I like to be silly now and then. I did create a real article yesterday, though. I was all a-squeal with delight. Into The FrayT/C20:34, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would probably suggest that you keep the humor tag, but that's just me. I like the picture though, lol. Also, when I read number 10, I was sure that the link to "Father" would be to Darth Vader, lol. Ariel♥Gold20:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hey, thanks Videmus! I'm really glad you think they help, I don't use them all the time, but I do find them helpful in certain situations, especially with kids. Thanks for the barnstar! Ariel♥Gold08:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just meant finding the typo and then showing it to you to giggle over. Something I'd expect more from the male, junior high demographic. :P GlassCobra19:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
tiddly? You do realize that AnonDiss is reading this discussion... G rated please, or you could head over to Jmlk17's talk page... *runs* --DarkFallstalk05:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, based on this guy's contributions, I'm having a really hard time seeing how he's not been blocked yet. I know that you in particular champion the cause of "four strikes before you're out" and all that, but this guy's been breaking the rules since day one; he hasn't made a single good-faith edit. But just because he only vandalizes once or twice before leaving for a bit means that he gets to escape the boot? GlassCobra09:46, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you're right that the account appears to not be used in any constructive manner, Cobra. However, 9 edits in 6 months, even if they are all unconstructive, I'm not sure if that they would warrant an LTA report. Admittedly, the editor is not contributing positively, but you know, it isn't that disruptive, a couple edits here and there that are quickly reverted, and I'd still like to think that just maybe, over time, someone like this will end up finding that Wikipedia is a wonderful project, and decide to help, instead of harm. All that being said, if you want to ask an administrator what they think, that might be a good idea. Ariel♥Gold18:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I understand that, and yes it can be hard when all you do is deal with editors who seem to have no respect for the project. But, this is just one of the things that I think is so awesome about Wikipedia, that when you get tired of that, there are just so many other things you could go do, that are fun, that show you there are people who do care, and that help you see the big picture. In cases like the above, I really think it would be more helpful to continue to encourage the person, as they aren't someone I'd really label a long-term malicious offender, and maybe it is naive, but I'd like to believe there is good in everyone, and maybe some day, they'll turn around. Ariel♥Gold21:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Argh, I know, but vandalism is always going to be our biggest problem. People who are bored and figure "Oh, I'll go claim that I invented Facebook" (actually happened today). I just feel like the second I turn my back, these sneaky buggers slip by and edit something that won't be seen by anyone for months. Just very frustrating sometimes. GlassCobra (Review) 06:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Barnstar
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Forget random—this is a Barnstar for Persistent Acts of Kindness. For your thoughtfulness and helpfulness with me and with everybody else with whom I've ever seen you interact. Truly, you are inspirational. Moonriddengirl13:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now, as far as I know, we've never had a difference before, Ariel. But your brand of "humor" on my talk page is something that I just can't help take the deepest delight in. Let this be a warning to you; I shall always accept such jokes from you with a surprised laugh and warm regard. I am purposely writing to you today in an officious style so as to hopefully get you to do a double-take. Into The FrayT/C13:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have a sense of humor, who knew! Okay, here's the thing. Wikipedia is a serious project, sure, but I don't think that means you cannot have fun. As with anything in life, if you're having fun while doing work, you're much less likely to get bored, or burned out, or sick of the "work", and I think that Wikipedia is no exception. That being said, my sense of humor is, occasionally, a bit odd, and if you ever think I'm serious or take offense to something, feel free to let me know, so I can just assure you that I'm just weird, lol. Anyway, I'm glad that you could find the humor in that, as I thought that name at WP:UAA was just priceless, and i's "interpretation" was awesome. Ariel♥Gold18:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I knew. And I think I knows too. That you have a sense of humor, that is. ;) And, really, don't worry about me taking offense. I'm not at all fragile and it's relatively unthinkable that I'd ever take offense at a jest coming from someone as warm and friendly as you are. Cheers! Into The FrayT/C18:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, IMDB is just like Wikipedia: Editable by anyone, and thus, not reliable. Plus, unlike Wikipedia, it does not require any sources cited for trivia or information, and there is an abundance of incorrect information on that site. Same goes with TV.com, and NNDB.com. I'm 99.9% sure of this, and I'm not sure why someone would tell you that it is an RS. I'm looking for refs now, though. There have to be at least some out there. Ariel♥Gold22:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find where they said that, was it recently or a while ago? No matter, I've added three respected references, but you may want to re-write the article, as it seems the subject is known not for her acting, but for this affair and the controversy it caused. Go figure. Ariel♥Gold22:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
LOL Thanks dear! I think actually, the article could be expanded greatly, combining info from the three refs, with that of her lawyer's article, evidently this case was a landmark family rights case, and that alone, is notable, even if her acting roles may not be. Let me know if you'd like me to do it, or if you want to. Ariel♥Gold23:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ROFL! I'm done. I added loads and loads of refs, but someone who knows about law stuff really could go through all those articles, and re-write the entire article, around this landmark case, since it defined Family Law in London. I'm not legal-person, lol. Ariel♥Gold23:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers, Lights (♣ • ♦) has wished you well! Joy promotes WikiLove and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the WikiJoy by sharing the joy someone else, Try to brighten the day of as many people as you can! Keep up the great editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I know what you're thinking, not another article with WP:BLP issues. But no, in this case it would be hard, now, as he died 10 days ago. Anyway, I want your opinion. I'm fleshing out the games listed in the Works section. Should I make each game title a level 3 heading? And if so, should I put the publication year in the paragraph about the game? — TimotabTimothy (not Tim dagnabbit!)02:30, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(Actually, recently deceased people still fall under WP:BLP issues, so all the same policies apply for now.) I'm sitting here staring at that article, and trying to figure out why it looks so ... not pretty, lol. I think that putting each game in a subheader would clutter up the page with the [edit] boxes, so I would not do that. I think that what I'd do, is put the ones that have their own pages into a list as "most notable" and then put the others, non-bold, but italicized, into a prose list, like after the paragraph about Big City, add:
Along with Big City, two other games are well known, TransAmerica, and TransEuropa. Other titles include Hellas (2002), Zahltag (2002), GoldBräu (2004), Dos Rios: Valley of Two Rivers (2004), Nah Dran! (2004), Fjords (2005), Manila (2005), Kunstmarkt (2006), Zanzibar (2007), and Container (2007).
Ahhhh, well you didn't say they were all going to be their own paragraph, :p hee hee. In that case, yeah I'd make them level 3 headers, probably. Ariel♥Gold02:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And just seeing you pop in to say hello brightened my night! Are you psychic? I actually was just going to bug you but you hadn't edited in 8 minutes (gasp) so I didn't know if you were around, lol. Lucky for me, I found someone who was, and didn't mind my stupid question, lol! Ariel♥Gold04:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I actually saw you were on from the pages I stalk watch, such as Dark Falls' page. I've been busy in real life and I haven't been on as much in the past week. I know, crazy! -- Flyguy649talkcontribs04:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed! Ariel not like it when Flyguy isn't there to bug! ~*pout*~. I hereby decree you shall be "Unbusy" from now on! There, how's that? Ariel♥Gold04:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Awww, well, yes, that probably should come first... harumph! lol. Take a day off this week and come hang around the 'Pedia with us! Ariel♥Gold04:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
New Yorker Cartoons in general versus the "On the Internet..." cartoon
As the article you cite even mentions (much as I despise unreferenced weasel words) this is the "most reprinted" of all The New Yorker cartoons, which should strongly suggest an AFC go ahead. And besides, the phrase has a currency which had taken on a life of its own, which even the minimum sourcing I've put in the article so far should suggest. 183 G-books hits (not to be confused with its 48,900 G-hits) for a 14 year old cartoon is nothing to sniff at. And the real besides, shouldn't the article about the most famous cartoon about anonymity on the internet be created via WP:AFC? Geez, that's not irony, that's poetry! -- 146.115.58.15207:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I am in no way questioning the notability of the cartoon at all. I'm sorry if it seemed as if that were the case. Since I'm one who tries to use caution, I just put the "maybe" template up for other editors to know it had been reviewed, and wasn't rejected, so they'll take a good look at it. (I've never heard of the phrase, nor of the cartoon, and I've had a computer since 1986, and been online since the very early 90s, so it may be an East Coast thing, I don't know, lol.) I'll just let another editor more familiar with the subject handle it. Ariel♥Gold07:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm I have to wonder per "early 90s" exactly which side of Eternal September you were logged on at. But, as a computer science major in the early nineties this concept came up a lot. Er, that or I've had a lot more cyber sex than you? That's actually a significant undercurrent, which I expect to find in the sources. You meet a "girl" online, etc., but maybe she's a 40 year old man, etc. Anyway, it is/was a real meme even beyond the standard comp. sci. textbook use about internet privacy, though I can understand if you missed it. -- 146.115.58.15208:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
lol yes Timothy dear. And probably I led a sheltered life, I'm sure most people have had more 'cyber sex' than I have, (that would be none, for me, lol) And I really don't doubt the notability or the popularity, I just haven't heard of it, lol. I did edit my "Maybe" to reflect that it is just my ignorance that led me to neither accept nor decline it, hee hee. And, um, I've never heard of Eternal September either, lol. But I've been online since the early days, (1988-1989-ish) when the internet was just PINE and usenet groups from universities mostly, lmao. My first computer was a $4,000 dollar, top-of-the line screaming fast 10mhz processing machine! I was the envy of everyone else who had a computer (all two of them!) Ariel♥Gold08:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hrmm, I think there's an insult in there regarding my age, but I may just be getting too senile to grasp your young whippersnapper comments... Ariel♥Gold08:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yow, cyber sex? This is even worse than the pubic comment, haha! Ariel, your talk page can certainly get racy. I know Wikipedia isn't censored, but think of the children! :P GlassCobra (Review) 15:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the articles Lantana and Lantana camara should be merged, since both seem to overlap. HOW do I make the request? What text do I add to the pages in question and where do I report it, or is there an automatic protocol that pops-up? Please leave it for me to do... I need the practice! Hope you're going strong!!! Shir-El too15:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~*Butts in*~ Two ways to do it, depending on how WP:BOLD you are feeling, or how controversial you think the merge would be. One way, is to pick the article that you think has the more appropriate title, merge the information from the other into it, then make that latter title a redirect. All the information is revertable, and if someone does, you should then discuss, per WP:BRD.
The other way, once you've selected which article you plan to merge to, is to use {{mergeto}} and {{mergefrom}} templates at the top of the appropriate articles and then discuss it (noting to direct people to the same talk page, per the documentation on those templates). No need to report it anywhere; editors interested in the article will see the request, editors interested in merges will see it in the categories. Lastly, I've wikilinked the articles in your comment, to make it easier for people to go there - hope you don't mind. — TimotabTimothy (not Tim dagnabbit!)16:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Timothy, and hi Shir-El! I hope your holidays were wonderful! Timothy has explained it quite well I see, but if you have any other questions, feel free to ask me! (And no worries, I won't do it for you! Hee hee) Now, if you decide to go ahead and just do the merge, the way to make a redirect would be to remove all the text on the page, and replace it with this:
#REDIRECT [[Lantana]]
(This is assuming you'll be merging the subtype into Lantana.) That will make it so anyone visiting the Lantana camara page will be "auto forwarded" into the Lantana article. Holler if you need any help, dear! Ariel♥Gold20:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I did notice that earlier, and considered replying on your talk page, but I saw you'd already left a note about COI, and figured you'd be able to explain everything (as you have) quite fully when you saw the message. I think you did a marvelous job, nothing more you could add (I fixed some typos, but that's all I had to add), and if the person cannot understand, point them to WP:BLOG and perhaps suggest a MySpace page instead. While I understand the daughter's frustration, at the same time, as you've said, policy and guidelines must be upheld. I think you've handled it fine! Ariel♥Gold00:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
RE: Felicidad (Gloria Estefan song) and Copy edit of the Gloria Estefan articles
LOL I just ran across it doing "Random page patrol", and decided to clean it up. Did you tag any other articles that you're concerned about? If so, no real need to worry, the "cleaning team" will get to them, lol. I'll take a look at some of his other submissions though, and see if there's anything I can do. Ariel♥Gold00:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
