Jump to content

User talk:Zoe

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Koyaanis Qatsi (talk | contribs) at 03:26, 30 April 2003. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

-I'm moving the earlier versions of the Talk page to talk archive 1. -- Zoe 20:57 Oct 8, 2002 (UTC) Moving talk to User talk:Zoe/archive 2 - Zoe 02:11 Nov 8, 2002 (UTC)
Moving talk to User talk:Zoe/archive 3 - Zoe 02:44 Dec 4, 2002 (UTC)
Moving talk to User talk:Zoe/archive 4 - Zoe 20:40 Dec 24, 2002 (UTC)
Moving talk to User talk:Zoe/archive 5 - Zoe 03:48 Jan 17, 2003 (UTC)
Moving talk to User talk:Zoe/archive 6 - Zoe 23:20 Jan 26, 2003 (UTC)
Moving talk to User talk:Zoe/archive 7 - Zoe 00:10 Feb 24, 2003 (UTC)
Moving talk to User talk:Zoe/archive 8 - Zoe 05:42 Mar 30, 2003 (UTC)7
Moving talk to User talk:Zoe/archive 9 - Zoe 05:20 Apr 17, 2003 (UTC)
Moving talk to User talk:Zoe/archive 10 - Zoe 23:18 Apr 27, 2003 (UTC)

Active contributors greatly appreciated your through proofreading, edits, and dedication to creating articles that are scholarly, objective, and professional while readable, well-written, accessible to non-expert readers. Maybe a few vandals, Lir-types, or new users (like myself last December) might be thrown off by your emphasis on strict professionalism over contrived niceties, but this site is in a constant state of chaos where you have born the burden of keeping order. I myself failed to grasp what makes good, readable articles when I first found this site, but you have done more than anyone else to make me realize what does. I can understand your decision to focus on creating your own articles; that's what I do, and that's much more enjoyable and enriching (and less stressful). So I'm in really no position to request that you reconsider your "new policy", but I can attest to the fact that you have probably been the most valuable contributor on this site and that Wikipedia's going to go to hell without you. I can also attest to the fact that the vast majority of the active, valued contributors (the ones who matter) greatly appreciated your work despite disagreements from time to time. However, the best editor is not a specialist expert (though your expertise in many fields is impressive), but a professional editor who can easily spot mistakes and pick up subtle biases. 172

Zoe, your ruthless and constructive tidying will be missed. (OK, so there are times when you and I disagreed over some of it - viz the day before yesterday - but these are rare exceptions.) However, the way I see it, you have worked long and hard at a rather thankless task. If that's what you want to do - yes! Take a break and do whatever interests you the most. It's not as if you haven't earned it. Relax, find a topic you are interested in and enjoy. Tannin

Can I please echo that. In the time I have been here no one person has contributed more to giving wikipedia a proper stucture and cohesion than Zoe. We may disagree sometimes but wiki for all its faults is a success and a useful and regularly credible sourcebook, and much of that credit for achieving that belongs to a handful of people who in speciifc areas have brought 100% professionalism to what could be all to easily an amateur scribble box. People like Mav, Tannin, Deb, Michael Hardy, 172, John Owens and quite a few others have made crucial decisions and crucial interventions to keep this thing together. In my book, up at the top of the list is Zoe. So please do keep up with the editing, Zoe. WE NEED NOW and WIKIPEDIA NEEDS YOU. And do not ever underestimate the respect with which serious contributors view your activities and you personally. Take a break from editing by all means, but don't give it up. PleaseÉÍREman 23:58 Apr 27, 2003 (UTC)

To echo Tannin and Jtdirl|ÉÍREman and reecho myself, this site would go to hell without you. 172

Without Zoe, all the valued contributors will be scared away and this site will certainly degenerate, as Jtdirl aptly put it, into an armature scribble box. Within a month it will turn into the journal of Lir. 172

Ever since I came here, I've been amazed at your stamina. You seem to have an endless amount of patience with vandals and annoying users. As far as I can remember you've been doing this flat out since before I came. I'm hardly surprised you're tired. Have a rest. Have a permanent rest, if you want: I'd hardly be justified in manipulating your confessed Wikipediholic tendencies to the detriment of your mental health. But be assured that your contributions have been valuable, that the majority of Wikipedia users appreciate it, and that you've made Wikipedia a better place. -- Tim Starling 00:02 Apr 28, 2003 (UTC)

Dear Zoe: Hi! Thanks for pointing out those mistakes at the Tommy Morrison page. That Kansas City born at thing was a big blooper! LOL I remembered always hearing he's from Jay as soon as you pointed it out.

10 points to you for your boxing knowledge!!!

Thanks fr reading the article and God bless you!!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Party at Santa Monica Blvd!!!! Martin

A vacation once in a while works wonders. I don't recall you ever taking one - no wonder you are worn out. I do hope you come back into the full swing of things soon - you and your edits are very much appreciated. --mav 08:27 Apr 28, 2003 (UTC)

I concur with Mav, based on your reaction to my observation on the Northrop Frye article. Honestly, Zoe, I was trying to make a neutral observation about your change there, & added a comment directed at whomever might need that excessive bibliographical material that you excised. My intent was not in the least hostile -- but your reaction to my comment truly gave me pause. -- llywrch 02:00 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)

Hi zoe, i don't know if there is a wikipedia protocol regarding image placement, but IMHO articles look more balanced if the eyes of the subject of the image are pointing toward the center of the page. I went ahead and left-justified two recent images you added. It won't bother me if you switch them back, but maybe you will see the difference. Maybe not :) Kingturtle 02:48 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)

Yes I agree - although I sometimes do the opposite for people I don't like (check out Adolf Hitler). --mav
Ha! good one. oops. sorry zoe. i've started a conversation on your talk page that isn't with you. so let me just add, thanks for all your hard work. Kingturtle 05:13 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)
Ha indeed! That's not very NPOV of you Mav. I shall have to revert it immediately. (Unless I see something shiny and get distracted first, of course.) And I too am trespassing on your good nature Zoe. I'll stop now. Tannin

You're like the cavalry. Kingturtle 03:18 Apr 30, 2003 (UTC)

I might be excessively conspiratorial, but I'm under the suspicion that Zog is Lir/Vera out for revenge. Is anyone else? 172

Absolutely. One of the pix Zog uploaded was called Adam.jpg. Koyaanis Qatsi

Well, yeah, but that could relate to the first man vs. the primate. -- Zoe

There's also the immediate "what did I do under this name?" comment, which indicates a familiarity with the site and the idea that good behavior under a new name can wipe a reputation clean. Koyaanis Qatsi

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Zoe&oldid=875601"