User talk:Auchick

Welcome!

Hello, Auchick, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! – Liveste (talk • edits) 06:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work today (=8 Sept.) on editing the Elizabeth Bennett article.--Jbeans (talk) 09:10, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bidget Jones vs. Elizabeth Bennet[edit]

Hi, Auchick. You seem to have something against Bridget Jones's Diary, which is unfortunately leading to some discord at Reception history of Jane Austen. As several editors have already pointed out, that the novel and film were inspired by Pride and Prejudice cannot be denied. Like any modern-day retelling of Austen's work (Cher from Clueless, for example, is obviously Emma), of course there are going to be updates and changes regarding setting, characterization, and perhaps even basic storyline. These changes, however, do not detract from the fact that the essential story is taken from Austen's work. The small mention of Bridget Jones in the "Adaptations" section is not POV; it states a clearly recognized fact. Bridget Jones was based on P&P. Because the film and novel happen to be incredibly popular and award-nominated adaptations of Austen's best known work, I believe it should remain in the article. I hope this helps clear things up. María (habla conmigo) 01:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would second this - we can't let our own opinions of movies and books get in the way of reporting scholarship. Please see WP:NPOV and WP:V, which explains that articles have to reflect mainstream scholarship, not the views of editors. Sometimes this is extremely difficult to do and we appreciate your review of the article, but I am confident that we have the sources to back up the claim that BJD is indeed an important modern adaptation of P&P. Awadewit (talk) 12:46, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who thinks that Bridget Jones is inspired by P&P is a nutjob. The Author even says it is not. The Author says she modeled the male love interest on the love interest of P&P. Just because the love interest is inspired by... does not make the full book inspired. I think that you are instead confusing the movie with the book. FFS

Proposed deletion of Michael J Dorris[edit]

The article Michael J Dorris has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. AstroCog (talk) 17:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]