User talk:All Worlds

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

"Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free".

Welcome![edit]

Hello, All Worlds, 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 talk 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Epipelagic (talk) 20:06, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

The information you have provided is most valuable to me and your comments and offer of help are more that greatly appreciated and look forward to a continuance of all efforts in earnest towards a growing encyclopedia of knowledge for all. All Worlds (talk) 21:19, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Copyright[edit]

Please read up on this policy page WP:COPYVIO. This is taken VERY seriously here. Heiro 02:26, 18 May 2012 (UTC)


Avoiding copyright problems[edit]

Hello, and welcome. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
  • In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to visit me at my talk page. Thank you. This is an almost word for word copy and paste WP:COPYVIO from the source. Please read this policy page and do not repeat this behabior. If you insert copyright violations into articles, it opens up the project to legal action from the copyright holders. If you repeat this behavior, I will take this matter to the admin boards to seek their input on the matter. Heiro 03:23, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

This might also help you: Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Please note that also it's marked an essay that it is something that those of us who enforce this policy (Administrators such as me) follow when deciding what action to take). Your efforts to avoid copyvio are appreciated. Dougweller (talk) 05:11, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Rooftops[edit]

Hi, I am sorry t revert, but I really tried to find a few solid WP:RS sources about the rooftop story and could not confirm it. Do you have a better source than the passing mention in that article? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 12:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I will work on that and research more on it and get back to you as soon as I can. All Worlds (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

The Amazing Book of Useless Information: http://books.google.com/books?id=zXKVsRH3PFsC&pg=PA15&dq=Pope+Nicholas+I++cockerel&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OQzAT-jDNYqk9ATu2dGcCw&sqi=2&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=cockerel&f=false page 15

The Naked Truth By J. R. Farrell http://books.google.com/books?id=lXWDZnersAAC&pg=PA91&dq=Pope++cockerel&hl=en&sa=X&ei=IBDAT9TtCo-m8gSSqKTDCw&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAzhG#v=onepage&q=Pope%20%20cockerel&f=false page 91

American folk sculpture by Robert Charles Bishop Dutton, 1974 Tradition maintains that a ninth-century pope decreed every church should be capped by a cock, an emblem alluding to Christ's statement to Peter http://books.google.com/books?ei=fVzAT83dMJGE8ATb8NGoCw&id=IxjaAAAAMAAJ&dq=Pope++cockerel&q=Tradition+maintains+that+a+ninth-century+pope+decreed+every+church+should+be+capped+by+a+cock%2C+an+emblem+alluding+to+Christ%27s+statement+to+Peter page 44

Our Vanishing Landscape By Eric Sloane http://books.google.com/books?id=WhfIGc61EdsC&pg=PA96&lpg=PA96&dq=pope+Nicholas++steeple+cock&source=bl&ots=_R7N1FjFcd&sig=zzVICjxFLGSnAU6q55G12S8hSzU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pGXAT8r8G4Sm8gSK6rGjCw&ved=0CFYQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=pope%20Nicholas%20cock&f=false page 96


Civility barnstar.png Civility Award
After our recent interaction, and having checked out some of your other interactions, I humbly award you the barnstar of civility. For not being offended by reversions and requests for citations and instead responding with sound research and a level head.DoctorLazarusLong (talk) 04:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


A kitten for you![edit]

Kitten-stare.jpg

Thanks for finding a new source to use on Cafeteria Christianity.

Tom Morris (talk) 17:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

  • You are more than welcome and will attempt to provide more sources as time permits.All Worlds (talk) 21:38, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Bible[edit]

If you read the articles on the Psalms, the books Solomon was supposed to have written, Jeremiah, etc you see that their author ship is disputed, yet your edits don't reflect that and are thus a violation of our core policy WP:NPOV. If I don't beat you to it, could you fix it? You can copy material from other articles but you must put in the edit summary, with a wikilink, a link to that article and say you've copied it from there. You also need to start using WP:Edit summaries. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 05:03, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Will do, or rather will try. Original intentions you know were simply to cite references and sources. Thanks. All Worlds (talk) 08:32, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

For your gracious email. I see you are still having the sort of problems that new editors often encounter, but if you persevere and try to follow our polices and guidelines you will succeed I'm sure. Dougweller (talk) 09:05, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Leo G. Perdue, All Worlds!

Wikipedia editor I dream of horses just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I removed a section header.

To reply, leave a comment on I dream of horses's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Thank you for the help cleaning up that page. All Worlds (talk) 08:03, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Quotation marks[edit]

Thanks for your contributions! You don't need to put quotation marks around small snippets of text that you are referencing. Just paraphrase it as best you can. Editor2020 (talk) 15:32, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Modifications in Cockfight[edit]

I presume you are one of the latest editors of the article Cockfight. I invite you to see if you agree with the content I added to the article today. Yours, --Cacucho (talk) 18:19, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

  • I have added a small amount of content and moved the pictures somewhat in relation to the appearance, but I think you have improved the article to represent an even more worldwide view of the page. Glad to have you here. All Worlds (talk) 18:58, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I haven't figured this out yet, but James Crenshaw should NOT be deleted. He is one of the most prolific and prominent of current academic bible scholars. He has held named chairs at Duke and Vanderbilt. My university library shows 16 books by him, but that's not all there are. submitted by Michael Fox. MichaelVFox (talk) 19:51, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


The article James L. Crenshaw has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable author. No evidence of coverage in independent reliable sources. All references are to his own work.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:09, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Agonist (Christian) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Agonist (Christian) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agonist (Christian) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. StAnselm (talk) 19:50, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Sacred cockfight for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sacred cockfight is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sacred cockfight until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 16:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)