User talk:Crispincowan

Hello, Crispincowan, 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:

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.

I hope you don't mind that I gave you a formal welcome. If you are "the" Crispin Cowan, the one who's semi-famous in the free/open source software community, I'm sure you can figure out how things work on your own. But I've heard of you before and I'm glad to see you editing Wikipedia.

Again, welcome! -- Wmahan . 01:44, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am indeed that indeed that Crispin Cowan. Thanks for the welcome. Crispincowan (talk) 19:58, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Godfellas, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 22:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doniago, I am familiar with the Wikipedia standards regarding original research and proper citations. Which is why your removing my edit to Godfellas seems completely unjustified, because I provided references both to the Wikipedia and exteranl sources. My contrib was completely factual and externally supported. Crispincowan (talk)

If you're familiar with the standards, you should be familiar with the fact that it's inappropriate to include paragraphs about how a work "resembles" another work if there's no comments from the creators of either work, or even a 3rd party publication. Now if the creators of "Godfellas" actually mention Gift of a Useless Man I'd support the inclusion.

If you still feel your information is appropriate for inclusion, you should start a discussion on the article's Talk page so that other editors can weigh in. Doniago (talk) 14:00, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, never heard of that standard. It seems perfectly appropriate to me for an encyclopedia to point out that two thins are similar, and then provide external citations that the claim is true. Please provide a citation for your alleged wikipedia standard. Crispincowan (talk) 05:58, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notification

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Doniago (talk) 14:46, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't follow people around reverting changes which improved the encyclopedia. As you know, all information here must be neutral and sourced. You don't want to get on the wrong side of the harassment policy.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:57, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will stop following Doniago around, even though a cursory review of Doniago's "contributions" seems to show that his contribs amount to compulsively removing interesting facts from other people's articles. Crispincowan (talk)

October 2013

Thank you for your suggestion regarding October 29. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top.
The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 23:48, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 5

Cinco de Mayo is on May 5. ⁓ Hello 71 23:15, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, sorry about that. Was wondering why it wasn't there yet :) Crispincowan (talk) 00:02, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]