User talk:Macwoman

Welcome!

Hello, Macwoman, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Introduction

5 The five pillars of Wikipedia

How to edit a page

Help

Tips

How to write a great article

Manual of Style

Fun stuff...

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! King Lopez ^Contribs 09:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and Welcome to Macwoman's Talk Page

Please post your Wiki messages to me on this page and I will respond as soon as possible. Please excuse me if I take some time to respond. Any non-Wiki messages will be removed. Any abuse of this page will be reported to Admin. I would ask you very kindly if you would please NOT DELETE my postings or the postings of other people on this User Talk page or refine my text. Please use your own User page for text refining. Any messages that contain the real name identities of Wiki users will be either edited or deleted, as the use of real names is not allowed on Wiki. Thank you in advance, for your co-operation and I look forward to working with you on the Paul Bowles page.Macwoman (talk) 18:17, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a Reminder for my User Page

The Wiki three core content policies:

1) Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR) "Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought" [1]

2) Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV) "Neutral point of view is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia." [2]

3) Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:VERIFY) "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth" [3]

Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS) "is a guideline discussing the reliability of particular types of sources" [4] Thus (WP:RS) cannot take precedence over any of the three core policies Macwoman (talk) 21:19, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Respecting the Privacy of Paul Bowles

I'm always very happy to contribute to the Paul Bowles page, and try to do so within the Wiki Guidelines. There has been much rumor about Paul Bowles on certain subjects and it is my strong belief that one has to respect his privacy, just as we respect each others now. Some people on talk pages have said that there may be a 'cover up' in this respect, but this is just not true. I mean, what's to cover up?

More to the point, who has the right to expound on things that are not proven, and thus untrue? People can speculate off-Wiki as much as they like, but if the man himself never said it, then why should we? If Paul Bowles would have wanted to make some of his thoughts public then he would have done so. The fact that he did not means that this, in effect, is a closed subject because to comment to the contrary can only be rumor, gossip or speculation on anyone's part - all 3 of which are banned as encyclopedic entries to the Wiki - and any or all of these three I will 'undo' if I encounter them on the Paul Bowles page (however attractively or discreetly they are packaged, or tagged on as a precursor or afterthought to the narrative of a novel or short story) on the grounds that 'Relying heavily on rumor is not allowed on Wiki and thus contravenes Wiki Editing guidelines.' (which also automatically cancels out any quoted web link used in support of any rumorous entry - however 'elite' the source.)

You never know, maybe other people will 'undo' rumorous edits before I get a chance to do so. I really do hope so. So then, when we speak of 'Criticism' we mean 'literary criticism' - and not criticism of Paul Bowles as a person.

Please let us try and concentrate on the work and achievements of Paul Bowles and expound on his genius. His travels and comings and goings are very interesting parts of his life, but it is his works and music that comprise his public legacy. He truly was a great writer and composer and there are many, many people who agree with this. Let us all, together, make the Wiki Paul Bowles page a lasting tribute to his work as one of the greatest writers of the 20th century. Let the future generations know about his work and feel that they want to read his books and listen to his music. Together, we can all make the Wiki Paul Bowles page a lasting tribute to Paul. It is my sincere hope that we will.

Gee, I can hardly see my keyboard for my tears; this is really important stuff we're talking about here. Rest in Peace, Paul. We're making a great Wiki page for you.

I hope that if you are reading this that you understand my position. If you have need of any (legitimate) published reference then please let me know. I would be happy to help (if I'm around) and have the complete works of Paul Bowles, all published works by other authors concerning literary criticism of his works, and most of his music. Macwoman (talk) 03:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Bowles

Just a note to let you know that I'm quite happy with your most recent edit to that rather controversial material on PB. You're right, being anthologised as a gay writer is not an "achievement", and you've found the right place to mention it.

I'm now trying to build the article up to FA status, using Henry James as a template. Please join. First task is making sure we have the proper subheadings and sources. PiCo (talk) 09:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)==[reply]

By Henry James as a template, I presume that you are talking about the Template (TOC) and not the actual 'style' of content of the James page? Macwoman (talk) 02:19, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By "template" I meant using the section heads from the Henry James article as a guide to our own section heads. We can't follow HJ slavishly, of course, but we should at least look at that article to see if there's anything we can use for PB. (I'm suggesting HJ because that's already a featured article). And no, I'm not suggesting mimicking the style of that article - it would be impossible, anyway, IMO.

Let's talk about the article on the Talk page in future - I want other editors to join. PiCo (talk) 06:19, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. It will be good to get more editors involved. I'll go over there right now. Macwoman (talk) 05:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you like Paul Bowles so much - but also a bit afraid, because the nature of wikipedia is that nothing is stable, everything changes. If you want to make a lasting tribute to Paul, don't do Wiki. A complete list of all his music would be a great tribute - but paulbowles.com would be a better spot to put it.

I don't know what your background is, whether you're a professional in the fields of writing or music. If you are, then professional journals might take something.

I'm a journalist and writer. Wiki is something I do between projects. Yes, it's addictive - and it's also a great time-waster! If you're actually living in Tangier, you're wise to have no internet. Life is outside the internet. Take tourists on tours of Tangier - Paul Bowles's Tangier. That would be worthwhile. All best. PiCo (talk) 07:22, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a great pity that Wiki does not have a "verified" user system in place PiCo, maybe after a period of quality editing or something like that, because it means that one has to spend the rest of their life sitting on Wiki to make sure that nobody vandalises ones input, which is why I'm counting on you to watch the page and the work that we are doing together. I hope you will do this for us. I have email problems today, which is why I am late online, but I would like to talk to you in email, PiCo. If you do email me and don't hear from me within 24 hours then it is because my email problem continues, so please keep trying. I think that you are a very good Wiki editor, PiCo. My background is at the bottom of the homepage. When I see your next post below I will delete this current and next paragraph from this page.

I tried to delete the crossed out text of ONLY MY ENTRY on your user talk and when the page refreshed, I saw it had crossed through ALL of the text of everyone else below it. Terrible. I didn't delete all of that text, PiCo, I swear. What is the problem there? The text might not cross through if people add to your User page above your last comment. Just an idea, but don't know if it will work.

Yes, the Doubleday contract cancellation is on the same reference as next statement, Without Stopping (WS) page 292. Do we need to place the reference twice? What do you think PiCo? Is it okay to mention Doubleday at all? I left it off when I originally expounded on this bit, just in case. Will sort out and add more music ASAP Macwoman (talk) 13:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Verified" user system

You could start by registering an email so that your user name is not in red. Also it helps to edit more than one page. Hope that helps Opiumjones 23 (talk) 17:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Opium, I'm very glad that we can be friends. Thank you for the advice. Not in red, eh, mmh, sounds tricky to me and I'd probably blow it. I'm useless is what I am (sure, many would agree with that :-). Please can you tell me how to do this? (step by step walk through would be lovely! and if I do it, can all and sundry contact me, or is there a preference/filter system? Macwoman (talk) 18:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

go to preferences on top of page and add an email address which should then be verified.

People can email you through wiki. as long as you only reply through wiki you remain anon. You "poor little old me act" appears to me rather disingenuous but I shall assume "good faith" as per wiki guidelines Opiumjones 23 (talk) 18:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Got it, Opium, but won't be able to sort it out till my email is up and running again as it can't be verified. BTW, I didn't pull a "poor little old me act" I said "I'm useless" and when it comes to the Wiki interface, fershur that's true. If this was not so, then I would not have asked for help. I mean, you've been on Wiki forever, whereas I haven't been here for so long. I know you don't know me very well, Opium, but I am sincere and try not to express otherwise. later Macwoman (talk) 19:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To contact after England

If you want to contact me after yr return to Tangier: Go my Talk page (i.e., go to the name-tag with which I'll sign this at the end which will say PiCo|talk|contributions, and click on the word "talk"). Once you're there, go to the left hand side of the page, under the Wiki logo (looks like a globe made out of jigsaw pieces), and you'll see three large boxes full of links. The bottom box contains a link called E-mail this user. Click on that, and you should be able to send me an email. I'll then email you back with instructions on how to write me letters, the old-fashioned way (hell, it was good enough for Paul Bowles). I have no objection to you knowing my real-life identity, but the internet being what it is, I do like to keep some control. (AND, no, I'm not the same person as opiumjones - I don't know who or what he/she is). PiCo (talk) 07:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(On references: It's better to keep the number of footnotes as small as possible, as they interfere with smooth reading of the text - Wiki is a popular encyclopedia, not an academic one, and I think the average reader will be someone, often perhaps a high school kid, looking for their first information. So if fact A and fact B come from the same source, try to put them next to each other and use a single footnote.) PiCo (talk) 08:46, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

>(AND, no, I'm not the same person as opiumjones - I don't know who or what he/she is) I never thought for one minute that you were opiumjones, PiCo and the thought never crossed my mind - I know who opiumjones is and "he's not a bad lad" as we say over here in Blighty, - where does this idea come from PiCo, or were you just thinking that I might be thinking that? but, after doing a quick bit of searching, I did notice that you have posted on his User Page. Is that relevant in some way? bests Macwoman (talk) 13:30, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

>Wiki is a popular encyclopedia, not an academic one, and I think the average reader will be someone, often perhaps a high school kid, looking for their first information. Well that is one opinion, I guess, whereas actually, it's both. A quick look at a page like the Acts of the Apostles will bear that out. Personally I am not interested in Wiki reader profiles or opinions about them, as they are not relevant to editing Wikipedia. Somebody else can do that job (if it is indeed a job to be done). All I care about is editing in accordance with the Wiki editing rules. >On references: It's better to keep the number of footnotes as small as possible, as they interfere with smooth reading of the text ...... The footnotes are way down the page from the body of the text. I don't mean to offend you, PiCo, but this is an encyclopedia that we are editing, not a novel, but I'm sure that you know that already, PiCo. No offence intended, but that is my response, which I considered before writing it. Nevertheless, all entries must be referenced, however long the reference list becomes. A subject like Paul Bowles with a huge opus deserves to be fully referenced, so that people can see how great and extensive his works were. I mean, can you imagine someone making a statement like that about William Shakespeare? and as far as I'm concerned, Bowles beats Shakespeare hands down any day of the week. References are only a small blue number next to the sentence. The editor that makes the edits makes the references. So I say once again that I will remove all entries by any editor that are not referenced under the Wiki rule that they must be verifiable and not be based on rumor, or subjective evaluations, however elite the source. I hope that we can continue our teamwork together, PiCo. As a man on Wiki once said: "Don't forget that Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth." Macwoman (talk) 16:00, 23 August 2008 (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) 17:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]