User talk:Tm93/Archives

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All of the Archived messages are copied into this Archive folder. To narrow your search it is arranged by month on my main talk page Tm93 (talk) 18:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] How To Post A Message

  1. Double click the discussion tab.
  2. Click at the top of the typing box that appears after you double click that tab.
  3. After you've clicked at the top and your cursor is all the way to the top of the typing box, push the Enter button twice.
  4. Then push the up button first.
  5. To put a title before you type your message:
    1. Type two equal signs
    2. Type your title.  !Don't put a space in between the equal signs and the title. You can use spaces between words in your title.!
    3. Type two more equal signs.  !Don't put a space between the end of your title and the last two equal signs.!
  6. Start typing your message just like you want it to appear.  !Don't worry about capitalizing anything in your message. Don't try to adjust the font or the font size. Don't make text bold or italic. I will go back and edit your message. If you want something italicized, place an apostraphee before and after the text. If you want something to be made bold, place either the money or the and sign before and after the text.
  7. Once finished typing the message, put four tilde symbols (~) at the end. Type your first name and last initial (without the period). Then push the space button and type you email address, so that I may write you back.Tm93 (talk) 18:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Instructions above...

...are completely wrong and may confuse new users (especially the part about leaving real names and email addresses - something we discourage). Would you care to remove them? Thanks. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 11:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I will

I will remove the message above, How to post a message, once I'm finished talking with ЯEDVEЯS. It should be removed no later than 3:00pm PT, June 13, 2008.Tm93 (talk) 23:12, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] It's finished

Thanks to ЯEDVEЯS, my instructions above, How to post a message, are accurate. they have been fixed. Tm93 (talk) 17:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Witness T

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages such as Witness T, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Vianello (talk) 07:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] In response to your question

Hello! Thanks for coping maturely with the deletion of your article. It happens, you know? Even good articles that are mostly written in the proper spirit of the site sometimes get deleted over some problem or another. Anyway, unfortunately, Wikipedia is meant to be an 'online encyclopedia'. Religious sermons or proselytization aren't the kinds of things you randomly stick in an encyclopedia, you know? It'd be kinda like finding a copy of "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" in the middle of a book about economics. You're 100% welcome to write articles here, but personal sermons don't really qualify as that. There are other, much better places for putting those sorts of things where they won't be removed. Free web hosting, online blogs/journals, and things like that, might be more what you're looking for. - Vianello (talk) 03:12, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Ohh. Now I understand what you're asking. I've taken a quick look at user page guidelines. They're mainly meant for talking about things in relation to Wikipedia itself. But there's really not a lot TO be said about that on there. Frankly, a lot of people do put up a lot of stuff that's related, at best, tangentially. Unfortunately, I think something as large and prominent as that might result in some raised eyebrows. To quote the article on user pages, a user page is "... a way of organizing the work that you are doing on the articles in Wikipedia, and also a way of helping other editors to understand with whom they are working." If you really want it up, what I'd advise is that maybe you could pare it down to be a lot smaller and include it in that form. If it's just some unobtrusive little statement of faith, rather than a big blinky neon sign (figuratively speaking), I don't think anybody's going to raise a fuss. Even if they do, it's not going to get you in any real trouble. Worst that'll happen is someone might ask that you take it down. I'm not an admin or anything. I could easily be wrong about this. That's just my thoughts/advice. - Vianello (talk) 03:27, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes, user pages are what I'm talking about too. Like I said, I think if you could pare it down to something little, nobody's going to raise a fuss. Or, heck, you could just tack it all up as-is if you want. It's just maybe a bit likelier someone'd raise an issue if you make it really obtrusive, as that's not technically what user pages are "for". It's up to you, really. No major risk either way. - Vianello (talk) 03:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Glad we could get that cleared up!

It's really swell of you to be able to think about the broader implications of things on here. Heaven knows, we all come across stuff on Wikipedia now and then where we'd just love to give the public a piece of our own opinions. But that just doesn't get anywhere or help anyone. With that kind of nice, objective outlook, I think you'll have a lot to add to this place. If you have questions about anything else or need help, drop me a line any time. I'd certainly like to see more editors like yourself getting into the thick of it, so to speak! - Vianello (talk) 03:46, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion

I noticed that you tagged the page User talk:A beautiful mind for speedy deletion with the reason "This page is in a foreign language". However, "This page is in a foreign language" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use WP:MFD if you still want the page to be deleted. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 11:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Heads up

Hi. Back then, I had warned many users for having innapropriate usernames, using Special:Listusers. If you see one and feel that it is innapropriate enough, you can report it at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. There still remains about a dozen users I've tagged with innapropriate usernames, so feel free to report them or I can do so myself, and if they are indefinately blocked then their usertalkpages and userpages can be deleted after a few months. Thanks. ~AH1(TCU) 12:49, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Geheh, no harm!

Well, I tagged your page because it wasn't an "article" per se. Not everything here has to relate to history per se. But you're right, I'm just a user like you, with just as much or as little authority. Becoming an admin, I'll advise, is HARD stuff. It's not something to think about for a good while. They insist adminship is "not a big deal", but they sure don't make it easy to obtain! I may not have any authority, but I do know a thing or two just as a user, so I'm still good for answering questions, I think. I see you've figured out how to set up a talk page archive of your own, by the by. Well done! That's a good step if you do wanna become an admin. They like it if your old talk page contents are archived instead of deleted. Easier to peruse so they can study your past correspondence. Having a good personality is important, so they like to check that out. - Vianello (talk) 04:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Successful applicants for adminship will have done somewhat more edits to the article namespace than you have. There are no rules but think of a minimum of about three months and a thousand edits. By that time you will have found out what adminship involves and how to apply. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] In response to your questions

First off, it CAN be hard to know if someone's an admin sometimes. The easiest way is just to go to their user page (not their talk page, mind) and take a look around. Admins are required to identify themselves as such on their user pages, I believe.

Second, regarding your concerns about having to remove something because another user doesn't like it, that's a little more complicated. You see, GENERALLY speaking, someone won't tell you to do something just because they "don't like it". Well, that might be the hidden reason, but even if it is, if they say so outright you can pretty much laugh them off. Anyway, things on Wikipedia run through processes. You can remove something if someone complains about it, but you aren't compelled to under any circumstances. If the problem is something on your user page or talk page, someone will GENERALLY just ask you to take it down, unless it's something really awful or egregious (in which case they can take it down themselves). No, what happens more typically, and what happened in the case of your article that got us talking, is that someone just flags an article for attention.

See, only admins can actually delete articles. What I did, basically, was put up a little red flag that said "Hey, this page is in violation of X Y and Z official policies, it needs to be taken down." You can do this too, if you encounter an article that probably or definitely doesn't belong. If you'd wanted to, you could have contested this and chosen to explain why, in your opinion, it does NOT violate those. Then the admins would look the situation over and come down on one side or the other. Of course, I and a lot of other users will happily revoke these little "flags" when confronted with a good reason without even having to get the administrators involved. So, I can't just go and destroy your content (well, except by vandalizing it or blanking the page, but then people could and should undo that and give me a warning or block me). But I, or another user, can let the administrators know it might have an issue that needs looked at. I know at times it seems weird how much power individual users do have on Wikipedia, and it doesn't always end up working out for the best. But all in all, you might be surprised how fair people can be here. I know I was!

Does this answer your question/concern? I may have misunderstood exactly what you were wondering. Just remember, unless an administrator asks you to make a change, you're never strictly REQUIRED to. People can ask you, advise you, or order you (if they're impolite), but they can't make you do something against your will unless they convince an administrator. And like I said, it's hard to become an admin, and I think most of them are pretty even-handed. So you're in good shape, I bet. - Vianello (talk) 09:43, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Oh, a random formatting/etiquette tip you should watch out for. Generally, in talk pages for users or articles, people want new messages posted below old ones. This doesn't mean to put all your posts right on the bottom. Rather, put your post below the post(s) you're replying to. If you're making a new section entirely, put it all the way at the bottom. It's really not a big deal, it's just the norm of how people tend to do things around here. See, personally, I think it'd make more sense for new sections to go at the top where they can be seen right away. But, hey, that's just how things work. I did that several times early on. Like I said, it's not remotely something to worry about, just one of the routines here. - Vianello (talk) 09:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I fear you are getting some misleading advice from Vianello. "Hard to know if someone's an admin sometimes". Ridiculous nonsense - admins are not required to identify themselves. Whilst someting like the rather twee on my user page is usually honest, it is can be applied fraudulently. The simple and totally definitive way to see if a user is an admin is Special:ListUsers as in this check on Redvers.