Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:
If you have any 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 a Wikipedian!
Tip: you can sign your name with ~~~~
Dori 06:03, Nov 20, 2003 (UTC)
Good Witch of the North. Do you think there needs to be a cite for which book she is compared to Gaylette in, or a cite for how she is often compared to Gaylette by some scholars and fans of the series? (the later I am not sure how to do efficiently, but you can search any oz forum and see the topic come up, and I believe people would be compelled to do so if so intrigued.). To your other comment, yes I do believe this point is notable because let's face it, the GWotN is one of Baum's lesser characters and any substantial "reoccuring subject" attached to her that creates additional interest should be deemed notable to a full bodied entry. Oz in Black (talk) 21:04, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay I see now what you are specifically going for. While I generally agree with your cause and plight, there are sometimes tidbits, ideas and trivia that are unfortunately very difficult to quantify and cite… yet they exist in focused circles and established specialized discussion groups none-the-less. As you said, citing passionate 20 page forum discussions on the topic at hand is probably counter-productive, and mentioning that it has been a point of discussion amongst attendees in arranged discussion groups at various Oz conventions from time to time even less helpful still. I suppose in this case we’re talking about a re-occurring topic or theory that rears its head on every Oz platform of discussion amongst fans, fanatics, fan-fiction authors and “Oz scholars” that I can think of... none of whom having the resources, medium or opportunity to broadcast this more trivial aspect outside of their fan-base, the reach of the forums membership base or those who attended said seminars, to the world at large. However, even in the face of such an obstacle, I feel it would be a travesty to let such an interesting nugget of mystery and intrigue be excluded from a minor character in Baum’s books, especially one who needs every boost she can get in the public eye, or I would have never went out of my way to include it. While I don’t “hope people will go search Oz forums for it”, I would be honored to have caused the spark to create such an interest in a researcher to do so and perhaps open a new avenue to a budding Oz fan. In closing, I’ve shared the knowledge of the existence of the theory and have taken the entry as far as I can before judge and jury. Oz in Black (talk) 20:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
It's not vandalism if it's true, you know. Only Americans use American English: All Americans are idiots. There you go, logical! Or are you American and that's too intelligent for you? Poor you. I'll send you over a dictionary.
I appreciate the time and effort you put into making this great site what it is today. In reference to your edit in regards to Milton MA. I would have to respectfully disagree. The town of milton is divided into two sections East and West. Anyone who has lived or spent time in Milton even if it was for a week can make the claim that west Milton's residents are primarily minorty and jewish residents. While the majority of East Milton residents come from Irish decent. If you need furhter proof you can look at data that sites demographics of the local elemntary schools in their respective east milton and west Milton neghborhoods. If you would like to visit milton and discuss this over a cup of coffee I would be happy too. If you have any questions regadring this matter you can contact me @ 617-529-1161. Thank you for being understanding in regards to this matter. I admire all the time and effort you put into repairing wikipedia. I especially admire the corrections you made to Cape Cod and the Barnstable villages. I also have a summer cottage in a Barnstable village. Thanks again
Sorry about that! Thanks for the repair! -- BCorr ? Брайен 17:59, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hi again -- I don't think that you follwed the links I added. They did not go back to the Villages of Barnstable article. Go back to this version [[ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Villages_of_Barnstable%2C_Massachusetts&oldid=1967626]] and you'll see that. Thanks, BCorr ? Брайен 20:59, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I take it back -- I didn't realize that you had made redirects -- I'll do some more figuring out -- I had only checked Centerville, and I guess I just lucked out... -- BCorr ? Брайен 21:03, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
OK, here's what I'm thinking for the future: rather than redirecting all of the villages to an article that talks about the villages collectively, it would be much better to leave them uncreated, so that people will add information to them, rather than having redirects. People like to create those links to encourage articles to be written, and generally that won't even happen if a redirect is already living there (a lot of people don't know how to edit the redirect, since even that redirects you to the page that's pointed to.) Also, Hyannis, for example, will probably get it's own article sooner or later if there isn't a redirect. Also, you should visit WikiProject Cities for more info, as well as User:Rambot. Please let me know what you think. Thanks again, BCorr ? Брайен 21:13, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I get it now, I think you're probably right. Sorry for the confusion! - Hephaestos 02:57, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Your analysis was correct -- I ought to stop editing when I'm sleepy :-) -- BCorr ? Брайен 00:04, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)
There I go again with Massachusetts. Let me know if you think Shirley, Massachusetts should be moved back. My personal feeling is that there should be at least one unambiguous article about each town, with the other census anomalies linked to it? - Hephaestos 05:39, 24 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Regarding your edit to Boston, Massachusetts: a close study of the maps proved instructive. There is no question that Newbury Street, the defining locale of the Back Bay, is west of Tremont Street, although it forms an acute angle to Columbus Ave. The dividing line can be taken to be Huntington Ave. these days, which runs roughly northeast-southwest. Evidently you consider the north-south axis to be more significant. From my perspective, the South End having largely been filled prior to the filling of the Back Bay, its important north-south relationships are with the original Boston landmass (relative to which it is named) and Roxbury (from which parts of the South End were annexed before the rest of the town). The Back Bay fill properly includes the land west of the Southwest Corridor (ex-Boston & Providence RR) and north of the Boston & Albany. East of the B&P and south of the B&A is the South End.
In general, I appriciate the work linking the CDP and town articles. But, I have a question about Amesbury, Massachusetts. Why did you change 'town' to 'city' in the article. AFIK Amesbury is a town, and Amesbury (CDP) is the central villlage in the town. Thanks .... Lou I 17:55, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Thanks. I've updated the article with some details. I've also changed the description of your links to the (CDP) page, and shifted article titles. I've got a list of CDP articles that I plan to shift the same way, but I'd appreciate it if you would look at my changes to see if you agree before I adjust any other articles. Thanks, Lou I 09:04, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I chose 'urban' as the description since Amesbury had become a 'city'. The coupole of these entrires I've handled before I used 'village', or sometimes 'neighborhood'. Essex County is clean, I'll put further discussion of that subject on the talk page for CDP's. Thank's for looking. I'll shift the rest of Essex County articles before I go back to history. (FYI, I got here in the first place while researching Josiah Bartlett). See you around the Wiki! ... Lou I 09:07, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)