User talk:Neilbeach

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the Wikipedia

I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:

For more information click here. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be bold!

User:Sam Spade

Contents

[edit] Barog

I saw your edit on Barog. Keep up the good work. Thanks, Ya ya ya ya ya ya 03:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Hi. I undid this edit of yours because the original verb tense seems correct. Thanks though. Xiner (talk, email) 13:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About summary importance

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

Edit summary text box

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Ødipussic 22:25, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletions

Neilbeach could you stop deleting stuff from the Scientology page with out justification. Is just vandalims and it will get you ban. Can you explain your self? Bravehartbear 00:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I made a mistake. Bravehartbear 21:28, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Little context in Robert Black (Auditor General)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Robert Black (Auditor General), by Gilesbennett (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Robert Black (Auditor General) is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Robert Black (Auditor General), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Robert Black (Auditor General) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 10:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I have changed this to proposed deletion, see the talk page of the article. DGG 13:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your revisions

I notice that you have been around since September last year, so I don't have to treat you as if you are a "newbie" and don't know how it works.

  • First and most significantly- You are in the habit of labelling every edit that you make as m. Very few of them are minor edits. A minor edit is fixing a spelling error, adding a capital letter or making a link work that isn't working. In other words, they are edits that noone would dispute (unless, of course, you make the mistake of turning English spelling into US spelling, or the reverse, in an American article.) Turning one sentence into two sentences is not minor, because it changes the way that the parts of the sentence relate.
  • Your changes to Leonardo da Vinci substantially changed the meaning in at least one case. There are not 15 paintings attributed to him. Not precisely! There are perhaps 15 paintings, attributed to him by experts. The reason that there is a question about it is that only about 90% of experts are in agreement. I, for one, am not, since I discount two paintings that are commonly accepted. (However, I cannot offer that POV in the article.)
  • Your simplification of the sentence that said that the Mona Lisa and Last Supper occupied unique positions did nothing to clarify the meaning. They are not referred to as The "Mona Lisa" portrait and the "Last Supper" religious painting. It's poor literary expression.
  • The division of sentences-
"The Sirens of Greek mythology are sometimes portrayed in later folklore as mermaid-like; in fact, some languages use the same word for both creatures."

You made this into two sentences! While I realise that there are several wikipedia editors who use semi-colons to link sentences that ought to be separate, in this particular instance the second half of the sentence follows on. There is only one single idea here, being first stated, then expanded and as both ideas are short, it is fine to link them with a semi-colon.

  • You have done the same sort of thing in the first sentence of Mermaid, and I have just reversed it.

If you are going to keep rewriting material written by competent editors into a highly simplistic and often incorrect form, as you did in the case of Leonardo, then please do not mark any of your edits as minor. The other alternative is to drop the use of your name and just use a number. That way your edits will always be checked out immediately to find out if they are appropriate.

--Amandajm 05:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Neil!

This is my really constructive suggestion!

Did you know that there is a whole section of this encyclopedia called Simple English Wikipedia? I like to write articles for Simple wiki because it isn't as demanding as writing a scholarly article on something like Romanesque architecture (Look but don't touch).

Simple wiki is often editted by people who really do not undersatnd how to write simple English. They try to take regular articles and simplify the language, which doesn't always work because often the concepts require the language that has been used. The wikipedia articles need to be entirely rewritten to suit simple wiki.

If your aim is to write simply, then those articles are designed especially for children and people with beginner's English. Short sentences, basic words. You can use technical terms and longer words if you explain them.

There are two samples of vocabulary lists, but I don't find them veru helpful. Obne thing to remeber is that short words are not always the best knownn ones. Some short words are not common at all, (trait, gross, prig) while some long words such as "beautiful", "exciting", "frightening", "accident" etc are in even the 5 year old vocabulary. You might find editting some of the articles there a really rewarding enterpise.

The other thing is, Simple wiki doesn't always require a vast knowledge. You can write about the simplest things- an article on "chair" or "blue" or "teapot" probably doesn't exist. There are black holes out there!

If you go to the link above, you can then follow another link into the encyclopedia itself. You will have to sign in, separately from the regular wikipedia. All the best! --Amandajm 06:28, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: KISS

Good work! Have fun... I get over there regularly... --Amandajm 14:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Juan Eduardo Cirlot

I just wanted to say thanks for your cleanup work on this new article. Robert K S 13:54, 22 September 2007 (UTC)