Jump to content

User talk:Athanasius1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 64.107.159.130 (talk) at 01:13, 18 July 2009 (→‎Thanks + links). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome!

Hello, Athanasius1, 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!

You've done some good work already, I see. Always happy to have another valuable editor around! John Carter (talk) 14:39, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NCNOLT sourcing

Do you want to take a quick swing through and see if there are any refs that really shouldn't be there? I'm at work, so I shouldn't take the time for a thorough review before Natty's block expires.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responded at talk page. AthanasiusQuicumque vult 10:39, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just threw in a request for editor assistance here, perhaps not with any well-thought out idea of what I was asking for; it's more of a cri de coeur in narrative form, resulting from accumulated frustration I suppose. I'd appreciate any words of wisdom or useful commentary you may have (whichever way they may cut). Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 17:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Someone suggested posting a query at WT:IPNA, so I did that. Here. I'll be interested to see what shakes out. As I said there, I don't much care how the thing finally looks so long as a few competent and knowledgeable Wikipedia editors conclude that it's okay. JohnInDC (talk) 19:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editor Assistance/Requests

Please don't overuse the "stuck" tag. That shouldn't be used more than once in probably a hundred taggings - usually another tag will work. For instance, the "Sciencewatcher" section can be tagged "unresolved" or even "answered" since we did give the guy advice, and the "telepathy" section is a clear "answered" or even "resolved," per Mendaliv's answer. Thanks! Fleetflame 23:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WP:SFD

Hi Athanasius1 -looks like you completely misunderstood the nominations I made at WP:SFD - please check the reply there. Grutness...wha? 01:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

s'alright - you weren't the only editor to be fooled, so it was probably my method of nomination that was at least partly to blame. Grutness...wha? 04:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Landover Baptist Church‎;

Thanks for looksing anyhow. --Carlaude:Talk 21:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Project 86

Hey guy, that user Schwabette done those thing again (remove sourced information).

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Project_86&action=history

If you can, report it to the admins speaking that it was done again. My english is poor, sorry. Bye. (JoaquimMetalhead (talk) 02:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Hi, Athanasius1. Thanks for your participation here and your intervention here. NB these two IP editors have a long track record of problematic behaviour. For reference, please see here, here (old WQA re 64.107.xx.xxx), here, here, and here. I'm (still) not interested in a pissing contest with either or both of them; my interest and intent is the gradual improvement of articles. (and I certainly won't be replying to 12.73.xx.xxx' latest accusations at EAR; there seems little I could say that would improve matters any). —Scheinwerfermann T·C19:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please not the discussion that was attempted with what's his name long ago on this subject. Only result was no change, a worse-off article, and his removable of citations. His rebuttal seems to be that 'people don't agree with his viewpoint so they must be bad people'. And who exactly is archiving these discussions to bury his hostility and unwillingness to do anything more than post long-winded non-responses?

Ford FE discussion

hey, you want discussion on the Ford FE page, well I'm trying to discuss. But as usual, the other guy doesn't want to discuss/be satisfied. Thanks for no help on this issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.159.130 (talk) 01:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]