User talk:Timlight

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original talk page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Timlight.

Timlight (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

March 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to User:Calliopejen2 has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 20:38, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I'm trying to change info on my userpage by removing things unrelated to Wikipedia. Reading the guidelines here is a must so I'm editing my userpage now by putting some of my activities on Wikipedia plus voicing my opinions about it. Thanks. Timlight (talk) 21:08, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

As this was an edit to your own userpage, you can ignore this notice. It would have looked as though you were editing someone else's userpage. I'm not quite sure why your userpages were moved, but I've now move-protected them so it's not going to happen again. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

zzuuzz, thanks for correcting my userpage's name that was changed on "13:48, 27 March 2009 The Wandering Traveler (talk | contribs) m (3,011 bytes) (moved User:Timlight to User:Calliopejen2)" Timlight (talk) 21:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, strange one that. You can expect a lot of strange things on Wikipedia. I notice that the user also restored the notice at the top of this page after you removed it. You are welcome to remove all notices on this page if you like. I have added a welcome below for your benefit. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome...

Hello, Timlight, 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:

Introduction

Help

The five pillars of Wikipedia

How to edit a page

How to write a great article

Editor's index to Wikipedia

Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question below. Again, welcome! -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

That's a great help from you :) Thanks again. Timlight (talk) 22:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King James Bible Statistics

I see you included some templates in your statements on this AfD. I just wanted to mention that you can show templates without actually transcluding the templates (because they take up so much space). You can use {{tl}} to do this. So for example, if you type {{tl|cleanup}}, you'll get {{cleanup}}, instead of typing {{cleanup}} and getting this:

Just thought I'd let you know. :) — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  21:01, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the shortcut info but not everyone here is familiar with them. Timlight (talk) 21:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Yup, there are a lot of things I'm still not familiar with around here too. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  22:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Greetings from WikiProject Medicine!

Welcome to WikiProject Medicine! I noticed you recently added yourself to our Participants' list, and I wanted to welcome you to our project. Our goal is to facilitate collaboration on medicine-related articles, and everyone is welcome to join (regardless of medical qualifications!). Here are some suggested activities: Read our Manual of Style for medical articles and guide to Reliable medical sources Join in editing our collaboration of the week (the current one is Pneumothorax) Discuss with other members in the doctor's mess Have a look at some related WikiProjects Have a look at the collaboration dashboard If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page, or please feel free to ask for help on my talk page. Again, welcome!

David Ruben ^Talk 04:00, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the hospitality, hahaha! As an initial contribution to WikiProject Medicine, I made a list of acronyms on diseases and disorders and perhaps, in the future, I'll add on anything psyche-related. I'm very much willing to share my time with you guys! Timlight (talk) 09:29, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I've just realised duplicates intent of existing List of medical abbreviations - so will need merge items - but always good to have a fresh view of items and lets see what had been previously missed off :-) David Ruben ^Talk 17:44, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

The List of acronyms on diseases and disorders (without abbreviations used in prescriptions, laboratory, apothecary, etc.) is totally focused on names of diseases and disorders. Timlight (talk) 18:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Cardiology task force

Cardiology task force is looking for editors to help build and maintain comprehensive, informative, balanced articles related to Cardiology on Wikipedia. Start by adding your name to the list of participants at Cardiology task force Participants. ECG Unit (Welcome!)

Maen. K. A. (talk) 17:31, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation --Timlight (talk) 08:54, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Your Most welcome Maen. K. A. (talk) 21:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Spiritual distress

A tag has been placed on Spiritual distress requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ironholds (talk) 17:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

No intended copyright violation was made to an external link data cited by the author in an article here on Wikipedia or any violation on Wikipedia policy because addition of the said copy was accidental. Still, thanks for putting the Speedy Deletion notice.Timlight (talk) 19:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Philippine Fathers

I have nominated Philippine Fathers, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philippine Fathers. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Lenticel ^(talk) 02:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Are you a Wikipedia:INSPECTOR? Timlight (talk) 04:30, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biruitorul

At Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biruitorul you have not provided any evidence that resolution of a dispute was attempted via talking to User talk:Biruitorul. In fact it may be actually a mistaken accusation. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

List of people branded with 666

<template redacted, more a BLP issue than an attack>

This list is not a personal attack on people though it contains controversial labels by referenced authors.-Timlight (talk) 22:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Please read and understand Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living persons, verifiability and original research. Articles and assertions of this sort are not acceptable on Wikipedia, just because somebody said it somewhere else on the Internet.. Acroterion _(talk) 22:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Most lists contain controversial titles/labels. How should we make it NPOV if it's part of the topic? Timlight (talk) 22:29, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

"Most"? You may not attribute defamatory or controversial characteristics to living individuals on Wikipedia without rock-solid sourcing. Period. Your sources are far from acceptable, where they exist at all, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Acroterion _(talk) 22:34, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

An editor posted that I made personal attacks on people when I made a list on people branded with 666. I just want to clarify that it's not intended for that purpose. I used "most lists" to describe lists that contain controversial titles/labels but I didn't say it's within Wikipedia.-Timlight (talk) 22:39, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm with you on that - I understand your intention, and I appreciate your work, but in this matter you're running up against a very inflexible policy that we must enforce. We rerally need a template that says something like "this article violates Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living people", rather than lumping it in with attacks. Acroterion _(talk) 22:45, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• Again, how should we make a list with controversial labels in-a-NPOV-manner if it's part of the topic?-Timlight (talk) 22:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Don't state it as fact, for one thing. "Alleged" is a good word. Even then, you wouldn't be on firm BLP ground in my opinion. Also, as I said, ironclad sourcing, far in excess of normal sourcing for things like "there are 436 stoplights in Rockford, Illinois" type citations. Acroterion _(talk) 22:51, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

So, should the title be changed to List of people allegedly branded with 666? -Timlight (talk) 22:55, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not going there. My opinion is that such speculative content ("alleged" or not) has no place on Wikipedia, and I won't advise you in this particular matter, except to say that stating such things as plain certainties is a short road to deletion. Acroterion _(talk) 22:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• Acroterion, did I personally attack people when I made the list? Porturology said that I made personal attacks (tag above). Can you correct the tag above about the alleged personal attacks I made?-Timlight (talk) 00:19, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Done. As I said, the templates typically used for that sort of thing does not fit all occasions. Acroterion _(talk) 00:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. By the way, is that list categorized as vandal? Was there an article of the same title prior to the article I created today?-Timlight (talk) 00:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

That one's my fault - it should have been a custom notice as well; I'd been deleting silly vandalism just prior and didn't change the category. Acroterion _(talk) 01:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

By the way, just to make it plain: I do not believe you submitted the article in anything other than good faith. I do think that it's a very difficult subject to pursue within the editing guidelines of Wikipedia, with BLP colliding with numerology. Numerology by its nature is pretty much all original research and largely unsourceable to something that meets WP:RS. I've given it some thought and am at present stumped for a suggested line of approach. Acroterion _(talk) 02:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Moved List of saints and List of Servants of God back to original titles

I hope you don't mind but I have reverted the above moves and have given my reasons in the edit summaries. Please talk to me if you disagree. Cheers, Organic Cabbage (talk) 16:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

New Wiki

You may enjoy http://www.textus-receptus.com 124.184.242.189 (talk) 08:50, 10 June 2009 (UTC)