Talk:ChloeRed

I restored some of the changes made in this edit as it seemed odd to not have links to ChloeRed's website or contributor information, or not to include the picture that was uploaded specifically for this article (if this picture should be deleted, please comment here or on the picture's talk page and it can be). I left the other edits, as I could see why they could be viewed as private information. --GreenReaper(talk) 23:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I just couldn't be bothered anymore.


 * The majority of the stuff about me became "fluff", the information that to myself, seems to go together (where to find me, irc or IM) was seen to be better split between two different pages (user page and the article itself), and the feeling "well, the person who edited down all I wrote about me didn't really care what they were doing", afterall, what else can you say when someone edits an entry about someone else, who's name is all over the article, yet they spell the name wrong in the only bit added?


 * I agree about the IM information - it's often best to put that on a user page. Things that you feel are worth preserving but which others consider "fluff" might also be better-placed there (I put a lot of mine there). As for the editing . . . well, people just don't always type things right. I've spelt my own name incorrectly enough times to know that! When it's someone else whose name you are unfamiliar with, it's even easier to make a mistake. Fortunately this is a wiki, so it's easy enough to correct. :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 00:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

See, to me, contact info is contact info.. You wouldn't expect to pick up the phonebook and find someone's phone number, but have to get a different one to find their fax line... So I just decided I couldn't be bothered to have that there, and as the editor took out the majority of the information about me, I felt the article had become totally sterile feeling, and so I took out the rest. As it is, with me it seems pointless to have 2 pages that are trying to give the same information out. The user of the wiki and the person are the same thing, having 2 pages about them, having to have slightly different information on them seems dumb.

If the "main" article about me is meant to be so sterile, and devoid of actual information about me, I might as well just ask to be excluced and not bother.


 * It's meant to consist of factual information about yourself, just as a Wikipedia article would - and stuff like "Say "Hi" to her online." just doesn't seem to follow that. I don't follow the logic that if it shouldn't have such things, the article shouldn't be there at all. To us, factual information is the actual information - the sort of stuff that someone who's looking up this ChloeRed person that they've heard about somewhere might want to know. Anything else is just a personal opinion. In particular, that's why there's a link to your website and user page - so they know where they should go to find out more information about you, from your own perspective. --GreenReaper(talk) 00:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, can I request the removal and locking of the ChloeRed entry then.


 * I really don't understand why you want that, but OK . . . --GreenReaper(talk) 01:12, 16 July 2006 (UTC)