Talk:Nina Clifford

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nina Clifford article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Sexology and sexuality: Sex work Low‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Sex work task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled[edit]

Nominator said requires numerous 'non-trivual' sources to keep - which makes it painfully obvious that nominator did not do a Google search on the subject. If you are going to suggest deletions, please include a better reason than this. Especially when it is so factually incorrect. John the Apostate 21:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about avoiding the personal attacks? That's not how we do things round here - we discuss the content not the editor. I did run the goodle search but nothing spectacular came up from the first page. Now you have sources in place all is at peace. Isn't that good? Try a little less anger next time --Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't personally attack anyone sir, assume good faith from my comments please. And if you had run the Google search (instead of goodle) you would have found the same links I did. Next time, please contribute to the encyclopedia by finding sources yourself, not by tearing down unsourced (but perfectly acceptable and notable) information. This is a form of vandalism, and that is undisputed. That you're using an official tool for it might raise a few eyebrows if you do it again, so watch yourself please. And thank you! John the Apostate 22:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'd like to note that it goes completely against the idea of the entire encyclopedia for you to think it's good policy to mark any new article without sources for deletion, and then everything is peachy-fine when the original author adds them. You are supposed to be a contributor too, not some kind of elite editor of cruft. Please try to contribute, and not just to delete. John the Apostate 22:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I apologize for assaulting your spelling. I don't know what else would have caused offense. John the Apostate 23:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How's about one of you geniuses figure out whether or not the tunnles led to her place, if it was in a cave or above ground. This article tries to have it both waysDoug O'Connell (talk) 04:08, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]