User talk:Wander Woman

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to my Talk page. Wander Woman (talk) 22:13, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool name

Just wanted to say I dig your handle :) Warren (talk) 00:24, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. :-) --Wander Woman (talk) 20:01, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Coalition for Marriage may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

rights activist alike mark 'watershed' moment as gay marriage is legalized |publisher=The Telegraph] |accessdate=4 August 2013}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:03, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. :-) Wander Woman (talk) 11:12, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re Christchurch

Hi Wander Woman, Thanks for your recent edit to the Christchurch article. I've moved the information to the History of article as I consider that a more appropriate place for such a level of detail. Of course you are free to disagree and revert if you so wish. Thanks for your interest in the article. Happy editing--Ykraps (talk) 22:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC) ... and here's a welcome template with some useful links.[reply]

Hi Ykraps,

I will not revert, but I do think that the Domesday Book is worth a mention on the Christchurch page, as when I read the page, I actually wondered about it, which is why I added the sentence and ref - I think it's a detail that people routinely want to know about when learning about British towns/villages. In my opinion the Domesday Book is better known among laypeople than the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, if your rationale for paring down history on the page is level of detail. I didn't know about the History of article or I would have taken a look and edited that article as well. :-) Thanks for moving my edit! Wander Woman (talk) 14:19, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also think it's misleading as Christchurch actually has no entries in the Domesday book not having existed as such at the time. And I'd even go so far as to say inaccurate. If we take the author's point of view, Christchurch would have many more than just the two entries he claims. Holdenhurst, later part of the Manor Christchurch and later still part of Bournemouth; and Hobourne, Knapp, and Hurn (still part of Christchurch today), are just a few that come to mind. I also thought it wasn't that extraordinary, there must be many towns that have grown to encompass smaller settlements and thus many towns that have multiple entries in the Domesday book. By the way, the customary way of replying to a thread is through indentation (click link), not emboldening the text which, like capitalizing, is considered by some to be hammering your point home. All the best--Ykraps (talk) 10:10, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ykraps. I understand the point you make above concerning misleading and/or inaccurate information. I still do think it is worth a mention, since I must not be the only person to wonder about Domesday Book references. Perhaps not in the way that I originally included it, because you make a fair point. I do think, however, it is just as deserving (and better known to the lay person) of inclusion as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. It is quite routine to mention the Domesday Book when discussing general history, as that gives ordinary people (children included) a good and immediate frame of reference when considering the history and importance/value of a town/area. I do feel strongly about this (oddly, lol! Little did I know that when I joined, Wikipedia I would sometimes feel as if I were defending a thesis. lol!) but I certainly do not want to be branded as disruptive or a vandal - which is why I did not revert. Perhaps we could look for other references to the historical Christchurch area in Open Domesday or refer to it in some general way.

I also suggest including a See Also section with History of Christchurch, Dorset included, as well as other pages about surrounding areas, so people can easily refer to those pages if they don't find what they're looking for on the Christchurch page.

I certainly did not intend to offend anyone by being bold. Referring to both text and edits. With regard to the text, it is simply easier on my eyes and I have limited this preference to my own pages since I understand that some may not understand my intention. I did know about indentation. Wander Woman (talk) 21:03, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Wander Woman, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Best regards--Ykraps (talk) 22:32, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for trying to help the Newbie. :-) Wander Woman (talk) 14:19, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question at Talk:Coalition for Marriage

Hey, i'm Jenova20. I just got back from holiday and saw your question but didn't know the answer myself. I am interested greatly in you uploading these images and so i asked for you at the Reference Desk Here. Hope to see you around more and if you need anything then just drop me a talk page message or use the email function on my signature for a faster reply. Thanks so much for the contribution ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 20:01, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia:Media copyright questions it's not usable since the text and images on the leaflet are likely to be copyrighted. Thanks for trying though Wander Woman ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 19:10, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jenova20. Thanks for the hospitality and for helping to answer my question! It looks like the page has had a lot of activity since my edit. I hope you don't mind, but I'm copying your answer to the C4M Talk page so others can see why I haven't uploaded the image. Really unfortunate that it is forbidden, actually. Best, Wander Woman (talk) 21:03, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's the inconvenience of image copyright for you. Thanks for trying ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 21:32, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC Rescue Remedies Dog Rescue (August 9)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rescue Remedies Dog Rescue.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:14, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rescue Remedies Dog Rescue concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rescue Remedies Dog Rescue, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rescue Remedies Dog Rescue

Hello Wander Woman. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Rescue Remedies Dog Rescue".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rescue Remedies Dog Rescue}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 14:00, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested undeletion of this article. Wander Woman (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I left a message on Arthur goes shopping's talk page about this article on 30 April 2014. He is the reviewer who initially rejected this article. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Arthur_goes_shopping#Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation.2FRescue_Remedies_Dog_Rescue

I also include here, the message I posted to Arthur:

Hi Arthur,

You reviewed and rejected this article I submitted last August. Apologies for bringing this up so long after the article submission. The 3D world got in the way for awhile, however I am now working on the article again. If this is an inappropriate place in which to discuss this article, I am happy for you to move my discussion, or let me know where and with whom I should take up this issue.

I would like to submit to you a list of reasons why this article should be accepted for publication:

Rescue Remedies really is a legitimate, well-thought-of UK dog rescue charity. The way it lists its rescue dogs is utterly unique. Each dog has its own detailed blog – something that does not otherwise exist in the UK and possibly the rest of the world. This alone should justify its listing, since they have done something no other rescue charity has.
As you can see by the number of citations, even if some of these were initially unacceptable to you, the Rescue really does have a large internet presence – it just hasn’t been in existence as long as some of the ‘famous’ UK rescues.
There are at least two existing citations that are independent: Hertfordshire Life and Dog World.
The Charity Commission listing should also count as independent as only legitimate, registered charities can be listed on the site.
Twickenham Vet Surgery supports the Rescue and would not otherwise mention it on their site – the same is true of Paws in the Park.
Rescue Remedies works with two citable (and other as yet uncitable) organisations already listed on Wikipedia – Battersea Dogs and Cats Home, and Dogs Blog – this adds to the entry’s legitimacy.
Other UK rescues listed on wiki do not exactly have a robust number of citations. Examples: People's Dispensary for Sick Animals (PDSA); Battersea Dogs and Cats Home; The Blue Cross; National Animal Welfare Trust (NAWT)

I really would like to see my article published, so any suggestions you may have in order to achieve this goal (beyond citing newspaper articles that do not yet exist) will be appreciated.

Many thanks for discussing this article with me. Wander Woman (talk) 12:47, 30 April 2014 (UTC) Wander Woman (talk) 13:30, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Rescue Remedies Dog Rescue

Hello Wander Woman. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Rescue Remedies Dog Rescue".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:Rescue Remedies Dog Rescue}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. TKK! bark with me! 03:24, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]