User talk:Dee Fraser

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Dee Fraser! I am Mysdaao and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out Wikipedia:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome!

Mysdaao ^talk 16:11, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oba Chandler

You seem to be interested in crime articles. Take a look at Oba Chandler. Might be interesting reading. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 15:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Willie Rae v. Willy Ray

Please provide a reliable source that the spelling change for Brenda's mother's name is correct; otherwise it must remain at status quo. Sites such as IMBD and TV.com are partially or entirely fan-submitted (one has Ray, one has Rae, Rae being the feminine form of the name), and media sites generally take their information from them, most are not considered reliable sources (a survey of them runs about 2:1 Rae v. Ray). A reliable source would be TNT or their media site. If you disagree with the spelling, you can begin a discussion on the BLJ article talk page, but any further reverts will be considered edit warring, and can get you blocked. You've been editing long enough to be aware of these Wikipedia policies.

I've also removed much of your discussion and speculation on the source of various names, and the parents' history. We only add content that is verifiable, not speculation. This is an encyclopedia, not a fan site, and we limit our content accordingly. If you want to speculate, you might find a fan wiki more satisfying. --Drmargi (talk) 19:24, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My source for the "Willie Ray" spelling was TNT, remembered, except that references to the show had aged off the TNT site at that point. I watch the show for enjoyment, not to dissect it on a fan site. If I'm going to dissect a body of writing to the level of such minutiae, then I'd like to be paid for indexing it. I checked the reliable sources that were available to me. Credits for the episodes showed only the actor's name, not the character's. It's not on Warner Brothers' site at all. Therefore, for citing the spelling, I consulted the next best thing online: the cast list on IMDB, which was provided by either TNT or Warner Brothers, or online journal sites, presumably copyedited like their sibling print versions. All such sites agree on "Willie Ray"; all cites of Willie Rae are from the user-contribution portion of professional sites or are found in the wild. I merely toned down an existing passage on Southern names that I was tempted to delete or move to the talk page. But I ain't got no dog in this hunt, and I didn't have the time to quibble in September. Mostly, I'm interested in fixing minor errors across Wikipedia — tweaking the writing — and making terms consistent. The quality of writing and the copyediting was the one criticism of Wikipedia in a circa 2007 study by (IIRC) Scientific American that otherwise found it more accurate than established print encyclopedias. There are several articles on Wikipedia that spell the character's name "Ray" and several that spell it "Rae." They need to be consistent. Someone else can change them now; I have neither time nor interest. The citation is back on TNT, in a blog entry by the Closer writer who created the character: http://mobile19.tntdrama.com/series/closer/display/?contentId=42037 "episode 408 - September 1, 2008 / Parents. History. The acorn doesn't fall far from the tree. I love when Willie Ray and Clay come to visit because it gives me a chance to really explore with a passion just where Brenda Leigh got her quirky style...two words Willie Ray! When I break down a script and start sketching, sometimes the design dictates the direction I take an episode . . ." Dee Fraser 10:51, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Hi Dee Fraser, I just wanted to ask you about the talk page for Joan of England, Queen of Sicily. On this page you asked for others to comment on your plan to revert an edit on the article. However the next two people to comment were completely new accounts with no other contributions but on that talk page. I suspect you made those users to make a consensus so that you could revert the edit. This goes against wikipedia policy, and also you should have been bold and reverted it anyway. I'd like you to admit to making these accounts if you have. If you have or you haven't I wish to still report you to the administrators for sockpuppetry so that they can just double-check that everything is in order. Thanks for your time, and I apologise if I am found to be wrong, SamWilson989 (talk) 20:34, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I ABSOLUTELY did not make up the other accounts in support of my argument, and I strongly resent the implication that I did. I would NEVER do such a thing. That would be mean, wrong, selfish, petty, and unprofessional. Did you check the IP addresses before you made your accusation? I'm in eastern North America. The first respondent was in the UK. I don't know where the second posted from. I'm a professional copyeditor with thirty-five years' experience and I've made hundreds of mainly minor edits on Wikipedia. Did you check my history? What happened was this: I saw a post on this in a discussion group, made by a published author whose research skills and knowledge about the MA I greatly respect. Someone wistfully wished it could be changed, and I said it was easy to do, looked up the Wikipedia article, and set up the talk page in illustration. I was going to "be bold," as you say, and just change it, but a distasteful experience here a few months ago, when I was also accused of violating Wikipedia policy (and hadn't), made me cautious, and I thought the group deserved to participate. Dee Fraser 08:13, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I was just suspicious because it looked very odd that just as you asked for consensus, two users are created in the hours following and agree with you, and hadn't made any other edits on wikipedia. It was odd. I didn't check the IP addresses, because they can quite easily be faked, I was just wondering what you'd respond with if I told you I suspected you. I'm not trying to start anything here, I always try to assume good faith, so I'll retract my previous statements. However I still will be suspicious when I see something like this in the future, and I will, from time to time, check that I don't see those IPs being used to create consensus again. Thanks, SamWilson989 (talk) 17:12, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]