Talk:Kim Wilkie

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal 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
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group.

Australia: Politics Low‑importance

	Australia portal Kim Wilkie is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Untitled

Hi Adam Carr, you reverted my edits of this page and said "revert wikification of common nouns, which is ugly and contrary to policy" I was wondering if you would be so kind as to link me to the particular policy page where it mentions that this is contrary to policy, as I looked on various pages and couldn't find this exact information. It would help me a great deal and help me save my time and others in the future. :) Thanks for reading.

"A nice thing to do is to drop the note on the Talk page first, and then revert," - [1]

I have never claimed to be nice. I don't know where the policy pages are but I have been told several times that there is a policy against excessive wikification. But even if there isn't a policy I will revert excessive wikification. Wikifying common words is ugly and distracting to readers. Adam 00:03, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you, Adam, for your response. I would appreciate a direct link to a policy page in the future if I'm being told that my edits were somehow against policy, it's only fair. :) Perhaps you have never claimed to be nice, but I never assumed or suggested that you were! :) I just pointed out something from a Wikipedia page above. It's nice to be nice to other members, after all, no man is an island. :) I appreciate the time taken in your response and will try in future edits of pages to not add what you call "excessive wikification" though until informed by a policy page I would be inclined to think of this as an opinion and a matter of taste. Your amusing example of excessive wikification is a little extreme, but I do see the point. I was not adding internal links to Wikipedia pages that didn't exist but only to pages that did exist, to help the reader. By all means, revert any "excessive wikifications" if you feel they are correct and an admin or someone in the know has confirmed this as policy. I however am nice, and appreciate those who are nice to me in return. It's nice to be nice. :) Edit: and I don't see how farmer and prison compare to words like is and to --Demonslave 20:13, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)