Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SilkTork (talk | contribs) at 18:23, 17 January 2013 (→Including/Bolding the title of the 2011 Tucson shooting article: commenting). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!!! Pull up a chair, let's have a nice chat. I'm glad you called. I'll put the kettle on.
SilkTork

I will listen to you, especially when we disagree.

— Barack Obama

Philip Larkin's women

Remember this discussion from back in August 2012 at Talk:Patsy Strang? Shall we go ahead? GiantSnowman 14:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes. I'll take a look into that, though I may not have the time to do anything until I get back home. SilkTork 14:15, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks, happy Holidays. GiantSnowman 09:36, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I've done the basic merge. More work is now needed to expand it, and tidy it up. SilkTork 10:27, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Good work, many thanks! GiantSnowman 10:29, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

An invitation for you!

	Hello, SilkTork. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's article for improvement. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the list of members. Happy editing! Northamerica1000 01:25, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Annie Hall

What do you recommend we add to the Lead and Plot to make it passable for GA? -- NoD'ohnuts (talk) 18:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

As I indicate in the GA Review: "the lead needs to be an adequate overview of the whole of the article. As a rough guide, each major section in the article should be represented with an appropriate summary in the lead." Currently the lead's explanation of the film consists of: "Alvy Singer, who tries to figure out the reasons for the failure of his relationship with the film's eponymous female lead, played by Diane Keaton"; which is clearly inadequate as it provides little information, and is questionable as a summary of the film. I think a casual reader could learn more about the film from glancing at the categories than from reading the lead! I notice that a cast list has returned to the article. Given the problems with stability in the article, I am unwilling at this stage to do any editing myself. I feel it might be better for me to fail the review, and for the significant contributors to resolve disputes, then resubmit for review when stable. SilkTork 20:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I've closed as not passed as GA due to instability. SilkTork 20:19, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

A redirect

Hi, Silktork. I didn't redirect the Returning citizens pages -- after I declined the Speedy Deletion request -- because I couldn't find the same information in the Taxation in Israel article. From what I see, the text at Returning Citizens (a definition and explanation of the term "returning resident") doesn't appear at Taxation in Israel#New immigrants and returning citizens (which only delineates the tax benefits for the "returning residents"). Either the Returning Resident page should exist on its own -- or the text and refs should be merged first before you redirect it. Although I don't have much knowledge about the subject, the information seems significant enough to appear in one place or the other. Either way is fine with me. Cheers. — CactusWriter 17:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Returning citizens is entirely a term for tax purposes. I felt that the article had enough information for someone to make sense of it, but you're right, there was some additional useful material which I have now merged in. Thanks for the nudge. SilkTork 18:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Nice. Thank you. — CactusWriter 01:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Including/Bolding the title of the 2011 Tucson shooting article

Hey, SilkTork. You might be interested in weighing in on this. Flyer22 (talk) 18:11, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

OK. SilkTork 18:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)