User talk:Forward Unto Dawn/Archives/2013/July

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

The Signpost: 03 July 2013

deletion request

why do you mark User:Nikiwaibel/howtos for speedy deletion? (already done, by the way).

the reason you've given is: Wikipedia:CSD#G1 which does not apply, as this is within my user namespace.

"This excludes the sandbox and pages in the user namespace." --Niki W. Waibel (talk) 13:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

If you take another look at your talk page, you'll see that I tagged Benutzer:Nikiwaibel/howtos. That was, in fact, in the Article namespace. Regards --Forward Unto Dawn 13:08, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
In addition, you'll see that Administrator RHaworth deleted it as per CSD G1.--Forward Unto Dawn 13:11, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
On the German Wikipedia user: and benutzer: are interchangeable. That does not apply here. User:Nikiwaibel/howtos had never existed until I created it a minute ago. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:16, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
thank you for the clarification! you are right. i've used the localized german namespace-name on the english wikipedia. 'User:' instead of 'Benutzer:' would have been right. --Niki W. Waibel (talk) 13:19, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
No problem. Happy editing!--Forward Unto Dawn 13:22, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 July 2013


Hello Forward Unto Dawn,

I really appreciate you have come to me and you have tried to help me. Indeed, I am rather a new Wiki gnome and I have so many things to learn.

However, I am very motivated to improve and to rich up Wikipedia. Because I was quite free yesterday and today, I benefited from that available time to post a little bit. All I edited was right and thought and balanced, whatever it was (adding a reference, writing new sentences to achieve each time more the articles and so on).

I will increasingly learn about the way of editing for Wikipedia and do my best to be as high as what is at stake with that encyclopedia.

Thanks a lot for your help and vigilance

~~ Dorval28 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorval28 (talkcontribs) 15:01, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Just remember to take a look at those links I posted in my welcome message on your talk page. Be bold but, at the same time, be careful.--Forward Unto Dawn 07:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 July 2013

RfC for User:Baboon43

Hello! I was wondering if you would review my outside view and potentially add your name to the endorsers? I'm trying to get the RfC to wind down and come to a conclusion. Dusti*poke* 00:55, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Done.--Forward Unto Dawn 09:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
It's at WP:AN now if you're still interested in the issue. MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Well I've honestly got to say I was never interested in this RfC/U. I only provided my account reluctantly. Nevertheless, I've added my opinion to the AN. Regards, --Forward Unto Dawn 10:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Nu jack swing

Thanks your for your welcome. And thanks for your notice regarding New jack swing. Unfortunately, the time to do a speedy deletion has already been passed. You may proceed with a request to do a normal deletion. You may not have noticed it, but I already contested the speedy deletion and explained by reasoning, on the very talk page you linked to. I'd also like to challenge your sentence "Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page". Not administrators will decide that to do - but the collective of all the users of Wikipedia together will decide what to do. Best regards, Norrk (talk) 10:16, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Please note that the creator of a page may not remove a CSD tag. Please also note that you were the only editor who commented on the talk page and removed the CSD tag without allowing for other editors to comment on the request for CSD. And finally, please note that you also removed the CSD tag within 5 hours of my initial placing of it on the page (which was added 3 minutes following its creation). I will be referring this matter to an administrator for comment. Rest assured I'm content with whatever decision is made regarding this redirect's fate. Kind regards, --Forward Unto Dawn 10:38, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 July 2013

Misplaced user sub-pages

Hi. Thanks for patrolling new pages. When you encounter a title like Uporabnik:SmozBleda/Peskovnik, it is usually because a foreign user has tried to make a user sub-page but used the foreign word for "user". German "Benutzer" is a common one. I haven't met "Uporabnik" before - it turns out to be Slovenian. When the author is User:SmozBleda, that confirms it, so the thing to do is move it to User:SmozBleda/Peskovnik, drop the user a note, and tag the resulting redirect with {{db-r3}}. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:33, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah, my apologies. That's not the first time that's happened. I think from now on if I see a colon in the title, I'll perform a Google Translate of the page before tagging. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, --Forward Unto Dawn 10:11, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Disagreeing with you

Twinkle! Do you care what the article was about? Concerning I guess Twinkle! means you have not read the article to know if was original reasearch or not. Also the edit summary clearly stated "basing introduction on the body of the article." And, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section i.e. WP:LEADCITE says: "The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in every article nor prohibited in any article." So, I guess Twinkle! has its problems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, I am familiar with the article. You should take another look at WP:LEADCITE, friend. It says, and I quote, "there is not, however, an exception to citation requirements specific to leads. The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case basis by editorial consensus. Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require many citations; others, few or none."
As you can see above, the talk page clearly marks this article's subject as controversial and thereby necessitates the addition of citations to the introduction. You replaced cited text with what was, in my determination, original research with no neutral basis on the body text. In such instances it is better to discuss such a large alteration to the introduction with your fellow editors on the talk page of the article before making such changes. I've been editing Wikipedia since 2006. I don't blindly revert changes simply because they were made by an unregistered user. Regards, --Forward Unto Dawn 09:36, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
The citations were in the body of the text, but I think you should have time to know that. Encyclopedias articles are traditionally written and verified by people who know what they are talking about. I recently read an article in the New York Times, which said Jimmy Wales interviewed someone in London, corrected an article based on that interview, and somebody reverted it because it had no references to tabloids. Well, the article I edited is about American Exceptionalism. I live here and know what the word means to us yet the Wikipedia article is totally wrong about that. I will find your citation, an if the article is reverted anyway I will continue to think you are editing for fun. (talk) 15:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Friend, I have a PhD. So trust me when I say I scrutinise everything in great detail. If you do add a citation, I will check it, like I do all citations. Remember that anyone can stick a citation next to a sentence, but there's no guarantee that what they've written is contained within the reference. That's why it's always important to follow a citation to the source. If what you write is backed up by reliable and verifiable sources and is written without using weasel words and original research this time, I won't revert it.
Finally, don't make negative assumptions about your fellow editors. You should always assume good faith. I take the editing of Wikipedia very seriously.--Forward Unto Dawn 10:14, 30 July 2013 (UTC)