Hello, Zephyrad, and welcome to the Simple English Wikipedia! I hope you will be happy helping here. You should begin by reading these pages: Wikipedia:Useful, Help:Contents, Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines, and how to write Simple English articles. If you want some ideas of which pages to work on, read Wikipedia:Requested articles or the list of wanted pages.
Even though it is a good idea to research an article (like looking at the discussion page) before making large changes, please be bold and try! Any changes you make that are not perfect can be fixed later. We are also working most on core articles and the most common topics until this Wikipedia grows.
If you want to ask a question or talk with other members, you can visit our version of the "village pump" at Wikipedia:Simple talk. Administrators on Wikipedia can also help you with more difficult problems. You can also ask me for help. The best way to do that is to leave a message on my talk page. You should always sign your messages on Talk pages by typing "~~~~" (four tildes) at the end of your words.
re:Freedom of SpeechEdit
As much as it pains me to do admit I'm wrong, I guess I have to bite the bullet. Thanks for putting me straight.
But just for the record, even though I did in a way, support the man because I thought his arguements were valid, I am not a racist to any race, religion or gender. And I have visited the US several times (Mammoth and California, they were lovely).
Gwib-(talk)- 09:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Article about LSDEdit
Protecting your user pageEdit
I protected your user page because of edits like this or this (Razorflame is the trusted editor here); After the IP was blocked, the protection was no longer necessary; Page blanking (usp. opf user pages, by other users) is vandalism. --Eptalon (talk) 02:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
The ip hit another page several hours earlier. It is a VA address, so not ionas, add your page to my checklist for a while, but I think it was just a random attack this time. --Bärliner 15:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Disciples of ChristEdit
Hello Zephyrad, what I did was push down the article Disciples of Christ from Christian denominations to Protestantism (its subcat); as an example, both the Amish and the Religious Society of Friends are listed in Protestantism; both are of course Christian; I had a similar problem today with the Salvation Army (which has Methodist roots). If we find (or can make) two new articles, we can create a subcat Resorationism where we can put them, if you are uneasy with category Protestantism. --Eptalon (talk) 15:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- From the English article:
- The Disciples of Christ is a protestant denomination which has its roots in the "great awakening" on the American Frontier in the 19th century. This denomination evolved in the 20th century out of the Christian Church of the American Restoration Movement. Two separate threads contributed to the original movement of the 18th & 19th centuries. The first was led by Barton W. Stone at Cane Ridge, Bourbon County, Kentucky. The second, began in western Pennsylvania and Virginia (now West Virginia), led by Thomas Campbell and his son, Alexander Campbell. --Eptalon (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello, and thanks for the message; all I know about Restorationism basically is what is in Wikipedia (Restorationism and Restoration movement); I am not in the US nor a Protestant, so I cannot really judge how relevant these were; I am also not too firm in Church history. When I saw your re-assignment of cats for the Disciples of Christ, the following came to my mind:
- There are several y distinct Christian denominations; some of them are only marginally different (see Worldwide Church of God to see what I mean). We should be keen on keeping entries together; at the moment we do not need a small entry for every Christian denomination.
- We should try to group those entries together (as they evloved); thats what I meant with my problem; at the moment I could not put Salvation Army under the Methodism category; they themselves do not feel methodist.
- Articles should be in such a way that if the article is in more than one category, no two of the articles categories are so that one is a child of the other.
Therefore: If we want a category for the Disciples, I proposed Restorationism; if you have a better idea for something were we can group at lest 3 entries, feel free. --Eptalon (talk) 01:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Size of imagesEdit
Hi, when you put the text "[[image|thumb|text for image." put between thumb and text "|300px" or whatever number comes out the right size - 150px - 350px ... here I will put in an image in two sizes and you will know it.
You can skip "|right" as it appears on the right automatic but if you want left or center put in "|left" or "|center". Sometimes if you have three pictures you want one on the left. I think the pictures on Video game look good. This wiki is all to short of pictures! ~ R.T.G 16:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, you were looking at the video games I guess! Only some stuff has a big range of pictures like insects and mountains. I would put the Kerouac street sign at the top. Like you say, a portrait is best but for next best the street sign is a bit of an icon like the Hollywood star pavements. I will have a go over some your pages if you'd like but I've been going through the Nobel Prize winner articles to transfer them from en.wiki so it is lengthy. I'm going over a Bangladeshi bank for it now so for another hour or so I'll be doing that. ~ R.T.G 18:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Well if you think I've done wrong, undo the changes. If you think an article about the Brill building will be useful, create it - the text I removed is available in the page history. Let me know if you need any help with either of these. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 19:33, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Zephyrd. My intention was to copy edit this article, and not in anyway to be annoying...Not sure why it's annoying to copy edit . Many of the changes I made are grammatical or relate to syntax. This is my field and background at least one of them. Even the best writers, novelists have copy editors . And this is collaborative, after all . My understanding was that this was for children and in that case it is not appropriate to link to sexual intercourse, because the SI article contains material that is not necessarily child approachable or child understandable . If the child is on Wikipedia itself, a different matter. Our responsibility ends there as far as I'm concerned. If it's for those adults with limited language skills that's different.
I am not doubting anything you are writing about, but sources are necessary . If I haven't heard about these issues and I am somewhat familiar with the history than the regular reader with limited skills won't have either, so, the Wikipedia way is to give them some help with a reference.
This isn't hairsplitting, these are opinions given my experience . I you don't agree that's fine I'm not sure its fair to tell an editor they are annoying because you don't like their edits . At any rate apologies for any misunderstandings and best wishes.(Littleolive oil (talk) 04:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC))
|The Original Barnstar|
|For all your hard work here, I award you this Barnstar! -- America †alk 21:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)|
I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! --Fell on Black Days (talk) 19:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I just wanted to keep you in the loop as I don't think that you have edited on here recently. A couple of weeks ago (maybe more), we got approved for non-administrator rollback. Since I see that you like reverting vandalism, might you like to request rollback? I am sure that you will get it :). Cheers, Razorflame 18:59, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning that up. I didn't think that Dustin Hoffman needed explaining, but also didn't check the after-math of my edit. Your new edit makes much more sense and sounds better, to boot! Cheers! :-) fr33kman talk 05:38, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
our mini edit warEdit
Please fully explain your reasoning for this. When a changer sees a blue link, they don't click on it to see whether it has been created or not, because it's blue. If it's red, they create it or look for alternatives, such as transwiki. I think my way is better, and I don't see any advantages to your way, but explain. Griffinofwales (talk) 01:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
I note you are a long term contributor, and I thank you for your time on the project. Please consider not reverting the article Peter Ham back and forth with the other editor. I won't protect that article since the content dispute is such a long one. Please use the article talk page instead. If there is an impasse, I offer to mediate between the two of you. Thanks, NonvocalScream (talk) 03:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
You seem to be a respected user here, but I would like to remind you to AGF, and re-read this, which you did not do with S3cr3t's edit (another good user here). Griffinofwales (talk) 15:52, 10 October 2009 (UTC)