Hi, Hanengerda. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or . – Joe ( talk) 17:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello! Hanengerda,
you are invited to the
Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! –
Joe (
talk)
17:22, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
|
Hello, Hanengerda! I'm
Joe Roe. I have replied to your question about a submission at the
WikiProject Articles for Creation Help Desk. –
Joe (
talk)
17:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
– Joe ( talk) 21:11, 27 December 2017 (UTC)Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited George Cheyne (physician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enlightenment ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
You have been doing very nice work in a field that is great need of better coverage here--and of interest to me. DGG ( talk ) 05:33, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Samuel Richardson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Cheyne ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:40, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on An Appeal to All that Doubt (William Law) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from {{{value1}}}. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
I really do not understand why someone wants this page to be deleted. All the sources have been quoted. The text quotations are from books of the eighteenth century, so no copyright infringements. I personally own the copyright to “The Sprititual Side of Samuel Richardson” which are only used as a reference. Duplications, if any, go back to the original sources from the eighteenth century. The Appeal was written in 1742 by William Law, and I personally have the original first edition of 1742. So WHY would anyone want to delete this article? Best regards, Gerda and Han Hanengerda ( talk) 18:13, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Fortunately, some experienced Wikipedian (Drm 310) stepped in and removed this “speedy deletion” remark! He added that it had been an unfortunate mistake.
Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Hanengerda", may not meet Wikipedia's
username policy because Wikipedia accounts
cannot be shared. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a
change of username by completing
this form, or you may simply
create a new account for editing. While it appears you have been a registered user on Wikipedia for some time, it is unfortunate that no one has noticed until now that this account is shared between two people. This is not allowed under Wikipedia's
username policy. Each of you will need your own individual accounts, each accessed by one and only one person, for the accounts' entire lifetimes.
Drm310 🍁 (
talk)
21:26, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for creating The Way to Divine Knowledge.
I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
This article spends way too much space on a detailed plot summary. Instead, the article should include more information on the book's context and reception. Please see the "Philosophical literature" section of MOS:PHILO for more information on how to format the article.
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
.
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
signed, Rosguill talk 22:59, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing the page on William Law’s “The Way to Divine Knowledge”. I appreciate your comments. There is indeed a lot of detailed plot summary. The reason for this was that the book itself was and still is not widely available. I have been fortunate enough to have been able to buy a contemporary edition. I felt that in order to allow users of Wikipedia to interpret “The Way to Divine Knowledge” on its own merits to quote the original text as much as possible. This way I thought to avoid the contamination of the text with my own interpretation. Also, I thought I avoided the comments of “citation needed”. If you feel the need to delete some of the citations of the book, and if you believe that this will indeed improve the page, that is just fine. I am only sorry to see some of the beautiful prose that William Law wrote to be lost in editing the page. But so be it. As to the reception of William Law’s works, especially as to the reception of his so called “mystical works” which appeared after 1737, I can say that some people liked his “mystical” writings, such as Samuel Richardson, George Cheyne and John Byrom, and even the Methodist Charles Wesley appreciated his works, whereas some people such as William Warburton and the Methodist John Wesley, the brother of Charles Wesley, deeply disliked Law’s “mystical” works. So, you see, very little has changed over the centuries: we are either “for” or “against” someone or something. For the reception of William Law’s works by his contemporaries I refer you to the page on William Law. For a twentieth-century reaction see Aldous Huxley’s comments on the page of William Law. Best regards, Gerda Hanengerda ( talk) 17:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Dewritech ( talk) 12:32, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Louis de Vries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dutch ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 07:43, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post-Vac until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
( t · c) buidhe 14:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I saw your editing of Tintagel. These captions are not sentences so need not have been changed. Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Captions Johnsoniensis ( talk) 20:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi, Hanengerda. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or . – Joe ( talk) 17:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello! Hanengerda,
you are invited to the
Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! –
Joe (
talk)
17:22, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
|
Hello, Hanengerda! I'm
Joe Roe. I have replied to your question about a submission at the
WikiProject Articles for Creation Help Desk. –
Joe (
talk)
17:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
– Joe ( talk) 21:11, 27 December 2017 (UTC)Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited George Cheyne (physician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enlightenment ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
You have been doing very nice work in a field that is great need of better coverage here--and of interest to me. DGG ( talk ) 05:33, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Samuel Richardson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Cheyne ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:40, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on An Appeal to All that Doubt (William Law) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from {{{value1}}}. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
I really do not understand why someone wants this page to be deleted. All the sources have been quoted. The text quotations are from books of the eighteenth century, so no copyright infringements. I personally own the copyright to “The Sprititual Side of Samuel Richardson” which are only used as a reference. Duplications, if any, go back to the original sources from the eighteenth century. The Appeal was written in 1742 by William Law, and I personally have the original first edition of 1742. So WHY would anyone want to delete this article? Best regards, Gerda and Han Hanengerda ( talk) 18:13, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Fortunately, some experienced Wikipedian (Drm 310) stepped in and removed this “speedy deletion” remark! He added that it had been an unfortunate mistake.
Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Hanengerda", may not meet Wikipedia's
username policy because Wikipedia accounts
cannot be shared. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a
change of username by completing
this form, or you may simply
create a new account for editing. While it appears you have been a registered user on Wikipedia for some time, it is unfortunate that no one has noticed until now that this account is shared between two people. This is not allowed under Wikipedia's
username policy. Each of you will need your own individual accounts, each accessed by one and only one person, for the accounts' entire lifetimes.
Drm310 🍁 (
talk)
21:26, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for creating The Way to Divine Knowledge.
I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
This article spends way too much space on a detailed plot summary. Instead, the article should include more information on the book's context and reception. Please see the "Philosophical literature" section of MOS:PHILO for more information on how to format the article.
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
.
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
signed, Rosguill talk 22:59, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing the page on William Law’s “The Way to Divine Knowledge”. I appreciate your comments. There is indeed a lot of detailed plot summary. The reason for this was that the book itself was and still is not widely available. I have been fortunate enough to have been able to buy a contemporary edition. I felt that in order to allow users of Wikipedia to interpret “The Way to Divine Knowledge” on its own merits to quote the original text as much as possible. This way I thought to avoid the contamination of the text with my own interpretation. Also, I thought I avoided the comments of “citation needed”. If you feel the need to delete some of the citations of the book, and if you believe that this will indeed improve the page, that is just fine. I am only sorry to see some of the beautiful prose that William Law wrote to be lost in editing the page. But so be it. As to the reception of William Law’s works, especially as to the reception of his so called “mystical works” which appeared after 1737, I can say that some people liked his “mystical” writings, such as Samuel Richardson, George Cheyne and John Byrom, and even the Methodist Charles Wesley appreciated his works, whereas some people such as William Warburton and the Methodist John Wesley, the brother of Charles Wesley, deeply disliked Law’s “mystical” works. So, you see, very little has changed over the centuries: we are either “for” or “against” someone or something. For the reception of William Law’s works by his contemporaries I refer you to the page on William Law. For a twentieth-century reaction see Aldous Huxley’s comments on the page of William Law. Best regards, Gerda Hanengerda ( talk) 17:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Dewritech ( talk) 12:32, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Louis de Vries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dutch ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 07:43, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post-Vac until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
( t · c) buidhe 14:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I saw your editing of Tintagel. These captions are not sentences so need not have been changed. Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Captions Johnsoniensis ( talk) 20:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC)