User talk:Matthew Stannard
Good places
The Moon
Dori's Advice
Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.
Questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedian]]!
Tip: you can sign your name with ~~~~
Dori | Talk 19:47, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)
- Hi again Stan. I am not sure I understand your question. My post above was simply meant as a welcoming message and a couple of links to help you get started as an editor if you so choose. Could you be a bit more specific as to that you want to do and are having trouble with? I am following your talk page so if you want you can post here (or at my talk page, either is fine). regards, Dori | Talk 20:48, Jan 14, 2004 (UTC): Hi again. I don't think there is a real knowledge of what
Wikipedia covers in depth and what it doesn't. One thing I could point out is the cultural coverage of many countries is lacking. That's just one thing I have come across, but there is no overseeing editor at Wikipedia. There are however more experienced editors, and a better place to ask this question is on the Wikipedia:Village pump.
However, if you are looking for something to do, there are some pages you can look at, namely: Wikipedia:Cleanup (clean up articles that others have submitted), Wikipedia:Pages needing attention (similar to clean up), Wikipedia:Requested articles (articles that other Wikipedians want to be written).
- Regarding, the edit links on the right, those are section edit links. You can divide the articles into sections when they get too long in order to improve the flow. You can also set up your Preferences to not show up the edit links but rather to edit sections when you right click a section name. See Wikipedia:How to edit for more information and nifty things that you can do, but you can create sections and subsections by using equal signs. See below for a sample. hth,
Dori | Talk 18:32, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC)
couple of tips
Hello again Stan. I noticed that you are editing on your talk page and I wanted to give you a couple of tips in case you are not aware of them. First of all, you can have pages under your userspace such as . Second, it's usually good to leave a note on the talk page of the original article you are improving that you are doing a re-write (if you are doing this). That way people are aware of the changes. Or you might just work directly on the article itself. This is up to you. Good luck, Dori | Talk 04:20, Jan 26, 2004 (UTC)
Link archive
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Fuck
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Naida
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Lopadotemachoselachogaleokranioleipsanodrimhypotrimmatosilphioparaomelitokatakechymenokichlepikossyphophattoperisteralektryonoptekephalliokigklopeleiolagoiosiraiobaphetraganopterygon
http://wikiquote.org/wiki/Confucius
In Finnish:
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Naida
Moved from Talk Page 13-Mar-2004
Culture Pages
What I mean was many countries of cultures do not have a Culture of ... article about them yet in Wikipedia. I think it would be worthwhile to have something on as many of them as possible. Culture lists some articles, but even those are not all that complete. You can look at the list of countries or at the list of ethnic groups and see if you can find one that is lacking in the culture section and that you know something about. Dori | Talk 20:46, Feb 6, 2004 (UTC)
Dog vomit
Trophallaxis. Explain. Psb777 00:40, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Well, that's what I figured. My e-mails are possibly widely but not universally so regarded.
Franklin Jones: "Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger." Psb777 23:17, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Self-referential words
- self-referential
- word
- newword
- GNU
- missspelt
- glottal
I got those before seeing this:
A link to sesquipedalian.
If missspelt is not allowed then many, many others would also have to be disallowed also. I think you must give the reason missspelt should not be allowed. That so-and-so would not allow it is not good enough. Did you see hyphenated and non-hypenated: Mutually-referential. Talk to Psb777 09:16, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Missspelt is self-referential but sjsjssj is not. I allege, however, that it is mis-spelt. Paul Beardsell 03:13, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi. I'm sorry, but I redirected Sir Bob Geldof to the existing page Bob Geldof. You might want to re-add your contribututions, in context. Mintguy (T) 18:08, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Message Section
Matthew, presumably you're the Matthew Stannard I know. Psb777 14:23, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Quotes
Finding out if anyone's reading your stuff
- The hit rate is easy to get by visiting http://wikimedia.org/stats/en.wikipedia.org/. Choose the month, in this case March, move down to Urls and see the View all Urls link at the end of that table if your article didn't make it into the top 50. Beware, that list is long... Use you browser's find function to see your articles's rank and hit count for that month. --
Kerry v Bush: Who won the Shared Parenting vote?(McKenzie 63)
Kerry v Bush: Who
won the Shared
Parenting vote?
Well neither, but an interesting
side show was the placing of a
question about “joint custody” on
the Massachusetts State ballot.
Around the world, shared
parenting has become a left-right
issue.
Massachusetts is an
interesting little laboratory of
voting intentions. It is a “liberal”
state, that is to say, it went for
Kerry and returned a Democrat
Senator. One of the obstacles
facing the shared parenting
movement worldwide is that, for
no obvious reason, it gets
marginalised as a “right-wing”
issue. So all the negative press
about the Geldof on Fathers
programme was in liberal-left
papers like the Guardian, Observer
and Independent. Especially where
it concerned Gelfdof’s views on
marriage (he thinks couples give
up on it too quickly) they lost no
time in aligning him with those
terrifying bogeymen of the
sinister “Christian Right” – Bush voters!
Yet Massachussetts voters
went 8 to 1 in favour of shared
parenting. (see page 5).
In the UK, Margaret Hodge, after
some rhetoric in which she
decried the Tories turning of
parental equality into a party
political issue, turned it into, er,
a party-political issue.
When FNF visited
Shadow Attorney-General
Dominic Grieve MP about a year
ago, he, like Hodge, said this
must not happen; up, he warned,
would go the shutters against
any meaningful reform. We’d get
window dressing instead. He
wasn’t far wrong; July’s Family
Resolutions Green Paper does
look like window dressing.
Yet when Grieve’s very
reasonable Children Bill
amendment was placed, asking
for a presumption of equality,
Hodge was withering in her
dismissal of it, accusing Grieve
of “Jumping on a band-wagon”
and of “opportunism”.
The amendment was
roundly rejected. Labour has
spent a century championing
equality trotting, yet all their MPs
- including some who support
shared parenting, obediently
trotted through the “No” lobby,
while Tories and Lib-Dems went
through the “Aye” lobby. There
were no exceptions, no rebels, no
MPs voting acccording to
conscience. It was as if this were
an issue comparable to high or
low tax.
The strange thing about
this polarisation is that both John
Baker, FNF chair, and Martin
Crapper, vice-chair have been
Labour activists. FNF has always
been the broadest of churches,
with members from all races, all
classes and all political
persuasions, absolutely not
identified with left or right.
For Fathers' rights movement in the UK
Who am I today?
Checking my own ip address. 66.9.197.113 09:48, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
And again: 66.9.197.113 09:52, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Last updated: 06-01-2005 00:06:54
