User talk:Willowx

Archiving

Hi, just wanted to inform you that it is generally considered bad form to summarily blank your talk page as it gives the appearance to others that you are hiding or cowering from criticism (not that I am saying this is the case here). Usually people create archives for their old discussions, (when it gets full or they leave temporarily for some reason) which you could do by making a page such as User talk:Willowx/Archive 1 or something of that nature. --TJive 07:39, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

hi TJive. Thanks for the tip. It is more of a personal preference. There is still the history function. I was viewing it as more of an inbox, and when the "mail" was dealt with, tried to clear it off my "desk" if you know what I mean. But your archive idea is maybe preferable -- I'm not too much of a computer person, so techy code things are not my forte! Thanks Willowx 08:09, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Also note, though this is entirely up to you, that it is customary to place the talk sections in chronological order with the oldest first. --TJive 09:58, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Michael Lohman

I would ask that you reconsider your vote at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Michael Lohman. You said "now that he has not been convicted, the page strikes me as dubious" and I have just edited the article to address that concern and clarify why I believe the article is still noteworthy. Thanks, Sirmob 7 July 2005 04:52 (UTC)

Sorry, I see this as a non-notable, non-public figure. Not even a conviction. Most of all, I worry about people using Wikipedia for harrassment campaigns and personal vendettas. What's next? Sex offender lists? Dead beat Dad pages? Seems entirely inappropriate. If you really want to make personal pages, get a free blog. Willowx 7 July 2005 10:04 (UTC)

Baudrillard

The more I've read the Baudrillard essay and Lacorne's article, the more I believe that this entire section is the view of a distinct minority, none of whom have established that they understand Baudrillard's work in the slightest (and given the use in question, I'd even say that they haven't truly read "The Spirit of Terrorism"). I will be blunt in saying that I include you in this group, given that you acnkowledge these views to be consistent with your own. I'd even go so far as to say that the remarks you've made about authorial intent are a piss take to excuse a verifiably abusive reading (with or without reference to authorial intent, I believe that any reader who tries to read the essay as a whole could not justify the use of the quotations attempted by Lacorne, which I think is a plain hatchet job — no credible scholar challenging the privilege of authorial intent would set aside a larger examination of intra- and intertextual consistency as you seem to propose). I'd like not to think that this is pushing a point, but I haven't seen any reply on your understanding of Roger, Guery, and Revel. I'd prefer to see further reply from you before I make further conclusions. I'd also like to see you cite another source on Baudrillard's America, which voices as mainstream as the New York Times likened to Toqueville.

I am, however, inclined to think that the poor grade of scholarship demonstrated thus far speaks to this being a non-noteworthy perspective on Baudrillard amidst what may be other, more justifiable arguments about anti-Americanism. Buffyg 23:14, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello Willowx, welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are some tips:

Take a look at the Simplified Ruleset.
Read the Tutorial, How to edit a page and the Manual of Style.
Create a User page.
Sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~).
Add yourself to the New user log.
Ask questions at the Village pump or Help desk.
Be bold!
Use the Show preview button
Provide an Edit summary.

If you feel a change is needed, feel free to make it yourself! Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone (yourself included) can edit any article by following the Edit this page link. Wikipedia convention is to be bold and not be afraid of making mistakes. If you're not sure how editing works, have a look at How to edit a page, or try out the Sandbox to test your editing skills.

If, for some reason, you are unable to fix a problem yourself, feel free to ask someone else to do it. Wikipedia has a vibrant community of contributors who have a wide range of skills and specialties, and many of them would be glad to help. As well as the wiki community pages there are IRC Channels, where you are more than welcome to ask for assistance.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks and happy editing, Alphax ^τεχ 13:47, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! Willowx 14:06, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Angry Asian Man

Angry Asian Man, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Angry Asian Man satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angry Asian Man and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Angry Asian Man during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Chris! _{my talk} 21:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]