User talk:Millicent

What is going on? World Blogs Clogs Elections The Bar (talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic) Welcome to RationalWiki, Millicent! Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing: Read what our articles are intended to be Check out the to-do list See our help page and Wikipedia's formatting cheatsheet If writing a new article, consider writing up a draft And most importantly: Pull up a goat and have some fun!

PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 20:27, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Read this....

Even if it available elsewhere on the internet, we do not include personal information about people in our articles. Thanks. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 20:47, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

It's not personal information, it's public information in Norway, published on the website of the national broadcasting company. Millicent (talk) 20:48, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

That's nice. But it does not need to be published here. Thanks. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 20:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Which policy says that we cannot include relevant context such as this[1]? This information was posted in an interview with himself published on his own website. Millicent (talk) 21:08, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, there's nothing there that says that, is there? Moreover, I fail to see how his employment history is relevant to his arguments. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 21:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

1) You didn't ask for details and 2) The fact that he has not had any recent affiliation with mainstream newspapers is relevant. Millicent (talk) 21:18, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

1) I didn't ask for details because I'm not interested in them and 2) No it isn't attack him for what he writes, not for where he does or does not work. Thanks. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 21:28, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Other articles here include such material. Eg. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ed_Poor#Ed.27s_job Millicent (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

And we need less of that, not more of it. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 22:56, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrolled + Sysop

Because of your edits to and time on the wiki, wizard Sysop has been added to your user rights. Feel free to let your newfound POWER course through your veins. Once the high wears off, see RationalWiki:Sysop guide for more information. If you have questions, bleat ask away.FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 18:45, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

What a lovely surprise :) Millicent (talk) 20:40, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Enjoy your incredible new powers. Remember, with small power, comes small responsibility. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 22:29, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Page you created for deletion

The citations included in the article don't bear out some of the charges about the subject, and I'd appreciate any insight you have about what I might have missed. Ikanreed (talk) 19:28, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Looks like we've gotten mentioned in VG

http://www.vg.no/nyheter/meninger/internett/nettets-moralpoliti/a/23537579/ --Slimy goop (talk) 16:35, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Indeed. It puzzles me how Giæver can think that a person who chooses to work for an organisation which talks about "fantastic Fjordman essays" and of Erna Solberg as a "cultural traitor" for visiting a mosque, should not be included in the Islamophobia category. Millicent (talk) 16:47, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

The inclusion of that particular category puzzled me as well. Btw I started a topic about Giæver's op-ed in the Saloon Bar. --Slimy goop (talk) 17:24, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Mona Levin

Hey there. I stumbled on the Mona Levin page today, which you created last year. It seems to me that the entire article rests on a single mildly silly comment she made in some debate. My Norwegian is limited to black metal songtitles, so perhaps something is lost in the (automatic) translation. I tried searching for more references, but couldn't find any English-language ones (we're the prime English-language resource on her), and the first few Norwegian ones seemed reasonable. IMHO, we should have a few more references before labelling someone "hysterical", "batshit crazy", "far-right", etc. Maybe you have some time do search for a few? Otherwise we should probably tone down the article a little bit... Thanks! Carpetsmoker (talk) 12:30, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

The article doesn't label her as hysterical, it only uses that term as a general description of those who label all criticism of Israel as antisemitic. RW isn't an encyclopedia and it isn't neutral, and the article is concerned with refuting her blatantly false claims in the Middle East debate rather than being a summary of her day job, as a theatre critic, which isn't RW material. She made a very strong claim, repeatedly over several years (and it's still frequently referenced), and in a very high profile context, that a former Prime Minister for the Conservative Party, who is known as a moderate centre-right figure who today supports human rights and environmental issues, is a horrible antisemite, and she sticks to this claim until this day, so this isn't just some unfortunate wording or "mildly silly comment", but more like those wingnuts who use a lot of energy over several years to claim Obama is a muslim etc. I will nevertheless reword the lead a little. Millicent (talk) 15:07, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Carpetsmoker is right. You're going overboard with all the articles about obscure Norwegians who may have said something you don't like once. Hanne Tolg Parminter doesn't even have a single Wikipedia article. Please stop editing, you're discrediting the wiki. --Slimy goop (talk) 16:11, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

You're right, RW isn't an encyclopaedia, and certainly has more relaxed reference standards compared to (for example) Wikipedia, but that doesn't mean there are no standards ;-) In this case, we're talking about a living person for which RW seems to be the primary English-language resource.That's a bit of a responsibility, and I think it's important to get a page on her as accurate as possible, don't you agree? Carpetsmoker (talk) 16:12, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Keep it up

Hello Millicent, I just wanted to tell you that - while I must be counted among those who have not read the articles on norwegians up close, nor even closely inspected the nature of the majority of your edits - I did however read that cringeworthy opinion piece (that I am glad Slimy Goop brought to our attention!), and I'd like to just claim that you should stay active and add more sources where they are missing and generally keep working on the articles and debating their nature, as you have been doing. Whatever we're doing, that opinion piece embarassed me to the point of having to burrow my face into a pillow. So, keep it up! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 02:07, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Millicent is adding good, missional articles. That it will result in many articles on Norwegians isn 't a problem for me; I wish many Anglophone Europeans would write here about their cranks and Islamophobes. France, for example, has some serious ones. My only misgiving is so many sources in Norwegian, a language not much accessible to English readers/speakers.---Mona- (talk) 19:22, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

I am trying to find English sources whereever possible and am working to add (more) English sources to existing articles. Millicent (talk) 19:26, 10 October 2015 (UTC)