Talk:Keith Mann/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Keith Mann. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Keith Mann. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

"had elephant urine thrown over him by an angry clown"

I hate it when that happens ;) Rockpocket 00:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

LOL!! ;-D

Good work, by the way, with your recent edits. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 00:59, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Likewise. I don't have access to his book and couldn't find decent sources for much other than his arrests - its nicely balanced now, with your additions. I'm going to work on Neal D. Barnard this evening (a certain NealBarnard (talk · contribs) has given it a fine dusting of white paint). Would you mind copy editing for me when I'm done, to ensure balance? Rockpocket 01:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Will do, and feel free to rebalance the balance if required. :-) SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

See also section

I have removed the two (2) internal links since they are already linked in the article. What is up with adding them back?? --Tom 21:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Where are they linked in the article? SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

At the bottom, in the Animal rights box. Also, how are you doing? Cheers, --Tom (talk) 21:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)ps, I have been trying to do mindless house cleaning lately around here :) --Tom (talk) 21:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm fine, thanks. Something's being on the template doesn't mean it can't also be in See also. The latter is for things directly relevant to the subject of the article, rather than just relevant to the subject of the template. In this case, Mann has done a lot to promote veganism, particularly through his campaign to help prisoners who want to be vegans, and he was interviewed extensively for the film that was linked. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe they(the two see alsos I removed) can/should be worked into the article perhaps? I will try to do that over the next couple of days. Thanks, --Tom (talk) 00:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I think they're fine as See alsos. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 07:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I will try to work them into the article and then remove them. Is that ok? --Tom (talk) 14:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

What is wrong with them as See alsos? SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Please refer to WP:GTL#See_also, specifically about See also sections. And no, I am not trying to be a pain by referring a very experienced editor and admin to this.--Tom (talk) 20:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

You're misinterpreting it, and it's anyway only a guideline. It's not appropriate to go around forcing internal links into articles just to get rid of the See also section. But it's really not worth arguing about, Tom. This article is in the process of being re-written and is in a state of flux anyway. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

OK sounds good, I have removed those see also links and have also reverted the GTL section and commented there. --Tom (talk) 20:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) Slim, I have reverted the See also links BACK into the article and will NOT edit this article anymore but will defer to you. I will take this to the GTL talk page and work it out there. I have NOT been removing see also articles from pages unless they are already linked. I will try to tone down the drama as well. Cheers --Tom (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Much appreciated. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)