Jump to content

User talk:Dalek~enwiki: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 75: Line 75:
However, I am a Classics student at Leeds University where we are given dates as BC and AD. Also BCE and CE sound the same whereas BC and AD don't. I blame the secularisation of Wikipedia and the fact that people don't like the traditional notation that has been perfectly accepted for centuries. [[User:Dalek|Dalek]] ([[User talk:Dalek#top|talk]]) 15:52, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
However, I am a Classics student at Leeds University where we are given dates as BC and AD. Also BCE and CE sound the same whereas BC and AD don't. I blame the secularisation of Wikipedia and the fact that people don't like the traditional notation that has been perfectly accepted for centuries. [[User:Dalek|Dalek]] ([[User talk:Dalek#top|talk]]) 15:52, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
:You can hardly fault Wikipedia for being secular! It's a worldwide all-inclusive encyclopedia. I could see the argument for the Christian-based nomenclature being more correct when discussing either Christian-related topics or history in places that were entirely or predominantly Christian at the period under discussion. But it is a pure anachronism for pre-Christian events, and Wikipedia's policy on leaving it to editors who create articles to set the policy for those articles on things like date usage and British/American (or other varieties) of spelling unless there is a compelling topic-associated reason to prefer one usage is eminently sensible. I suggestn you discuss the issue with your lecturers at uni. I suspect you'll find that at least some of them publish using CE/BCE but lecture using AD/BC precisely because those are more familiar to students and easier to distinguish aurally. In any event, even if you disagree, it's Wikipedia's policy not to change such things simply because you have a preference.--[[User:Yngvadottir|Yngvadottir]] ([[User talk:Yngvadottir|talk]]) 03:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
:You can hardly fault Wikipedia for being secular! It's a worldwide all-inclusive encyclopedia. I could see the argument for the Christian-based nomenclature being more correct when discussing either Christian-related topics or history in places that were entirely or predominantly Christian at the period under discussion. But it is a pure anachronism for pre-Christian events, and Wikipedia's policy on leaving it to editors who create articles to set the policy for those articles on things like date usage and British/American (or other varieties) of spelling unless there is a compelling topic-associated reason to prefer one usage is eminently sensible. I suggestn you discuss the issue with your lecturers at uni. I suspect you'll find that at least some of them publish using CE/BCE but lecture using AD/BC precisely because those are more familiar to students and easier to distinguish aurally. In any event, even if you disagree, it's Wikipedia's policy not to change such things simply because you have a preference.--[[User:Yngvadottir|Yngvadottir]] ([[User talk:Yngvadottir|talk]]) 03:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
:I disagree with you Yngvadottir and Bahudhara because you don't understand the reasons for what Dalek and myself are trying to achieve. BCE and CE are very similar which explains why WIkipedia is one of the few places that are using those terms. However, I edited the Teutonberg Forestarticle so that 9 CE was 9 to make it in line with similar edits to articles regarding the Roman emperors from Nero onwards. Please do not give us bullshit excuses to cover your inepitude over this issue. Thanks [[Special:Contributions/129.11.107.111|129.11.107.111]] ([[User talk:129.11.107.111|talk]]) 04:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
::I disagree with you Yngvadottir and Bahudhara because you don't understand the reasons for what Dalek and myself are trying to achieve. BCE and CE are very similar which explains why WIkipedia is one of the few places that are using those terms. However, I edited the Teutonberg Forestarticle so that 9 CE was 9 to make it in line with similar edits to articles regarding the Roman emperors from Nero onwards. Please do not give us bullshit excuses to cover your inepitude over this issue. Thanks [[Special:Contributions/129.11.107.111|129.11.107.111]] ([[User talk:129.11.107.111|talk]]) 04:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
::Calm down James! Dom and I have now started to use the policy to ensure the uniformity and stability of articles are maintained. The flagrant violations of [[WP:ERA]] in the form of sudden implementations of BCE/CE without following protocol will be halted, but you need to do the same. [[Special:Contributions/78.146.132.102|78.146.132.102]] ([[User talk:78.146.132.102|talk]]) 20:45, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
:::Calm down James! Dom and I have now started to use the policy to ensure the uniformity and stability of articles are maintained. The flagrant violations of [[WP:ERA]] in the form of sudden implementations of BCE/CE without following protocol will be halted, but you need to do the same. [[Special:Contributions/78.146.132.102|78.146.132.102]] ([[User talk:78.146.132.102|talk]]) 20:45, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:45, 19 March 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia!

SORRY, I WILL BE CONCENTRATING ON MY GCSEs SO I WILL NOT BE ON UNLESS YOU WANT TO TALK TO ME - CONTACT ME BY E-MAIL TO nanosaur2002@yahoo.co.uk - THANX - DALEK!!

{User plays RuneScape} Dear Dalek~enwiki: Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

Please could someone help me write an article about Revelation, a film which came out in 2001?

Thanx Dalek 16:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Newcomers help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Wikipedians try to follow a strict policy of never biting new users. If you are unsure of how to do something, you are welcome to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator. One last bit of advice: please sign any dicussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD! Arundhati bakshi 11:47, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help Is Here!

I understand you want to start your first article. How may I be of assistance? Arundhati bakshi 11:52, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I need to make something that is acceptable to different religions and doesn't offend anyone who is a firm beleiver in any faiths that are connected to the subject of euthanasia in Nazi Germany Dalek 11:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First do a search and see if there are any similar articles. If there aren't then you will be asked if you want to create a page. Click on that link and start editing. Add the {{inuse}} template to the top of the page to let others know that you are working on it and not to delete until you are finished. try this and if you have probs, let me know. Arundhati bakshi 12:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Click here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Euthanasia_in_Nazi_Germany&action=edit to start the article. It seems there isn't an article dealing specifically with this topic. Good luck! Arundhati bakshi 12:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hold that result - you may first want to check T-4_Euthanasia_Program, which is about precisely that topic! Camillus (talk)
Regarding your request on the new user's page for help with your user page, I would be glad to assist.
I am familiar with Wikipedia mark-up and HTML, and image up-loading (and any related copyright issues), and would only be too happy to help you format your page - all you need to do is make a start by clicking on the "edit this page" tab at the top of User:Dalek, (or just click here), type whatever details you want to add about yourself (such as age, location - but no need for your full name, or exact address - you can be as anonymous or open as you like), and your areas of interest - don't worry at all about the layout - I will fix that for you, and I will show you how to add any user categories or userboxes you want to add.
So go ahead and make a start - I will put you page on "watch", and come back and do any formatting etc. you require!
One small thing - do remember that your user page is not the same as a "blog-spot" or a "geocities/tripod" page - it's really just to describe you in terms of your interests as a Wikipedian!
Looking forward to being of assistance! Camillus (talk) 01:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Autism

Hope you don't mind... I categorised you as Autistic. I myself am aspergian.--Tdxiang 陈 鼎 翔 (Talk)ContributionsContributions Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 10:18, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No offence taken, I am wanting to say that as I am only 15 and not used to doing big discussions i can sometimes be very shy so please be very patient - i will require someone to try and help me get anything up on MSN since I could not find an article about them and therefore i am pretty much in the dark about who they are. (Dalek 17:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)).[reply]

Dominic Wade

The article Dominic Wade has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki 18:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your blanked comment

Here we don't have a sense of humour when it comes to vandalism. If you want to be childish, you can go to Encyclopedia Dramatica. Also, blanking your warnings doesn't make them go away and is an acknowledgment you have understood them, so if you decide to make any more jokes you will be blocked. Consider writing constructively instead of joking around please. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page. Have a good day, Matty (talk) 10:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've done it just fine haha. I'm sorry about the rather strict sounding comment but its not appropriate to joke around in the mainspace, especially on articles like George Bush, the US, and Adolf Hitler - they're all very public and sensitive articles. I'm not really sure about how to set up a category but I guess what you did worked? Now all you need to do is get it on a few articles and from there it will spread via other editors. Matty (talk) 11:06, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Category:Parodies of Wikipedia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many ottersOne hammerHELP) 01:52, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Category:Parodies of Wikipedia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many ottersOne batOne hammer) 04:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Date format

In case you did not know, CE and BCE are equally acceptable as AD and BC, and Wikipedia policy is to leave variants such as that (like spelling in different varieties of English) the way they already were unless there is some compelling reason to change them. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). In the case of Battle of the Teutoburg Forest, the battle precedes Christianity and therefore CE and BCE are more appropriate, so this exception does not apply. --Yngvadottir (talk) 17:59, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recently you have arbitrarily been making changes in the date format of several articles, from "BCE/CE" to "BC/AD", with no discussion apart from the comment in the edit summary that this particular usage is more "correct".
Although Wikipedia does not have a preferred style for year numbering systems, please note that Wikipedia policy on this subject (see WP:ERA) states: "Do not change from one style to another unless there is substantial reason for the change, and consensus for the change with other editors."
I have therefore reverted the changes that you made to the article List of historical drama films. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 07:48, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

However, I am a Classics student at Leeds University where we are given dates as BC and AD. Also BCE and CE sound the same whereas BC and AD don't. I blame the secularisation of Wikipedia and the fact that people don't like the traditional notation that has been perfectly accepted for centuries. Dalek (talk) 15:52, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can hardly fault Wikipedia for being secular! It's a worldwide all-inclusive encyclopedia. I could see the argument for the Christian-based nomenclature being more correct when discussing either Christian-related topics or history in places that were entirely or predominantly Christian at the period under discussion. But it is a pure anachronism for pre-Christian events, and Wikipedia's policy on leaving it to editors who create articles to set the policy for those articles on things like date usage and British/American (or other varieties) of spelling unless there is a compelling topic-associated reason to prefer one usage is eminently sensible. I suggestn you discuss the issue with your lecturers at uni. I suspect you'll find that at least some of them publish using CE/BCE but lecture using AD/BC precisely because those are more familiar to students and easier to distinguish aurally. In any event, even if you disagree, it's Wikipedia's policy not to change such things simply because you have a preference.--Yngvadottir (talk) 03:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with you Yngvadottir and Bahudhara because you don't understand the reasons for what Dalek and myself are trying to achieve. BCE and CE are very similar which explains why WIkipedia is one of the few places that are using those terms. However, I edited the Teutonberg Forestarticle so that 9 CE was 9 to make it in line with similar edits to articles regarding the Roman emperors from Nero onwards. Please do not give us bullshit excuses to cover your inepitude over this issue. Thanks 129.11.107.111 (talk) 04:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Calm down James! Dom and I have now started to use the policy to ensure the uniformity and stability of articles are maintained. The flagrant violations of WP:ERA in the form of sudden implementations of BCE/CE without following protocol will be halted, but you need to do the same. 78.146.132.102 (talk) 20:45, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]