Welcome to Wikipedia, Mission fleg! I am Triwbe and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{ helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! 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! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{ helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! triwbe ( talk) 07:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
You've added a speedy deletion tag to GeoSmart within seconds of me creating the article, and while I am actually still editing it. I'd appreciate a little more time to flesh it out before you try to delete it for not being notable. Socrates2008 ( Talk) 08:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about that. Maybe use the {{underconstruction}} template till its ready ? See also, [ Construction]
Mission Fleg ( talk) 08:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
You can't be serious, can you? Literally two seconds after I create a page you've tagged it for deletion. I doubt you could've even read the page in such a short amount of time. It's clearly not a vandalized page and Microsoft is obviously a notable company so I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Before you start deleting pages, at least give the editors more than two seconds to expand the content. People like you make me not want to even bother contributing to Wikipedia anymore. SeanMooney ( talk) 07:06, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Please slow down and give the users time to develop their articles. For example, have a look at this. You tagged an article the instant it was created. Please look over the speedy deletion policy before continuing. Best, Steve Crossin Contact/ 24 07:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
{{
expand}}
being one of them.
SeanMooney (
talk) 08:51, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted your tagging of this article. School articles are not eligible for speedy deletion under CSD-A7 Mayalld ( talk) 10:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
ok, ok, i give in, i'll stop. mea culpa, mea maxima culpa! :)
i'd like to note tho that i expect others will fall into the same trap i did so something somewhere needs fixing, here are the steps i went thru...
1/ looked someone up on wikipedia, she didnt have an entry so i created one (and incidently was impressed at the speed with which feedback was given).
2/ having done that i looked around for something i could do to help out.
3/ found the new pages patrol, read the articles about CSD, monitored the page for a while to see how others did it.
4/ acting on the "Be Bold" thing, i then dove right in, fully expecting to get some stuff wrong but figuring i'd learn as i went along.
so it seems to me that if you dont want to have to keep telling people to slow down, the real fix is just to delay the new pages feed by whatever amount seems necessary, then this whole issue would go away.
anyhoo, thanks for clueing me in :) Mission Fleg ( talk) 08:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I can patroll new pages, what is happened? Excuse me, my English isn't very good.--Vatrena ptica 09:53, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I hope I have added enough material to show why this company is notable. I haven't removed the tag. Roisterdoister ( talk) 08:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
You know, you could do a lot of good if you worked on the articles that are further in the backlog.
Articles only stay patrollable for 720 hours. Try the articles that are still in the newpages queue after a few weeks. DS ( talk) 22:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Nope, needs a source compliant with WP:V/ WP:RS at the article itself, see Citing sources for some help with that. Cheers, Cirt ( talk) 07:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
The article survived AfD but read like a PR release so I stubbed it. I plan on adding back some of the basic information when I can find sources. BJ Talk 04:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Mission Fleg . . . good point. I usually don't mark the ones I tag as potentially worthy of deletion, but you are right that I haven't been marking the ones that look OK. I also skip over a large swath of ones that I know I see no merit in but that there seems to be a consensus (at least among zealots) to keep (like every place name no matter how trivial, and every football player who ever touched leather). Will try to remember . . . and thanks for the note. Bongomatic ( talk) 08:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
West Bank School of Art and Culture, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Eastmain ( talk) 17:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
I note that you applied the unreferenced template to the Softonic.com entry, despite the fact that the website's statistics are referenced properly (albeit in a Spanish language website). As I understand Unreferenced, it should be applied only to entries that "have no sources at all". As this is not the case with the article in question, I propose that the Unreferenced template be removed.
Notability is a separate issue and I will do some work to get that fixed. Cheers. Tomclarke ( talk) 11:28, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey there, I thought (because of your participation in the conversation here) that you would like to know that I coded a bot to mark CSDed AFDed and PRODed new-pages as patrolled. See the bot's discussion for approval here]. I would appreciate your comment. NOTE: I am not trying to canvas you, I just wanted some input. Tim1357 ( talk) 02:16, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia, Mission fleg! I am Triwbe and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{ helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! 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! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{ helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! triwbe ( talk) 07:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
You've added a speedy deletion tag to GeoSmart within seconds of me creating the article, and while I am actually still editing it. I'd appreciate a little more time to flesh it out before you try to delete it for not being notable. Socrates2008 ( Talk) 08:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about that. Maybe use the {{underconstruction}} template till its ready ? See also, [ Construction]
Mission Fleg ( talk) 08:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
You can't be serious, can you? Literally two seconds after I create a page you've tagged it for deletion. I doubt you could've even read the page in such a short amount of time. It's clearly not a vandalized page and Microsoft is obviously a notable company so I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Before you start deleting pages, at least give the editors more than two seconds to expand the content. People like you make me not want to even bother contributing to Wikipedia anymore. SeanMooney ( talk) 07:06, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Please slow down and give the users time to develop their articles. For example, have a look at this. You tagged an article the instant it was created. Please look over the speedy deletion policy before continuing. Best, Steve Crossin Contact/ 24 07:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
{{
expand}}
being one of them.
SeanMooney (
talk) 08:51, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted your tagging of this article. School articles are not eligible for speedy deletion under CSD-A7 Mayalld ( talk) 10:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
ok, ok, i give in, i'll stop. mea culpa, mea maxima culpa! :)
i'd like to note tho that i expect others will fall into the same trap i did so something somewhere needs fixing, here are the steps i went thru...
1/ looked someone up on wikipedia, she didnt have an entry so i created one (and incidently was impressed at the speed with which feedback was given).
2/ having done that i looked around for something i could do to help out.
3/ found the new pages patrol, read the articles about CSD, monitored the page for a while to see how others did it.
4/ acting on the "Be Bold" thing, i then dove right in, fully expecting to get some stuff wrong but figuring i'd learn as i went along.
so it seems to me that if you dont want to have to keep telling people to slow down, the real fix is just to delay the new pages feed by whatever amount seems necessary, then this whole issue would go away.
anyhoo, thanks for clueing me in :) Mission Fleg ( talk) 08:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I can patroll new pages, what is happened? Excuse me, my English isn't very good.--Vatrena ptica 09:53, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I hope I have added enough material to show why this company is notable. I haven't removed the tag. Roisterdoister ( talk) 08:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
You know, you could do a lot of good if you worked on the articles that are further in the backlog.
Articles only stay patrollable for 720 hours. Try the articles that are still in the newpages queue after a few weeks. DS ( talk) 22:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Nope, needs a source compliant with WP:V/ WP:RS at the article itself, see Citing sources for some help with that. Cheers, Cirt ( talk) 07:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
The article survived AfD but read like a PR release so I stubbed it. I plan on adding back some of the basic information when I can find sources. BJ Talk 04:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Mission Fleg . . . good point. I usually don't mark the ones I tag as potentially worthy of deletion, but you are right that I haven't been marking the ones that look OK. I also skip over a large swath of ones that I know I see no merit in but that there seems to be a consensus (at least among zealots) to keep (like every place name no matter how trivial, and every football player who ever touched leather). Will try to remember . . . and thanks for the note. Bongomatic ( talk) 08:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
West Bank School of Art and Culture, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Eastmain ( talk) 17:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
I note that you applied the unreferenced template to the Softonic.com entry, despite the fact that the website's statistics are referenced properly (albeit in a Spanish language website). As I understand Unreferenced, it should be applied only to entries that "have no sources at all". As this is not the case with the article in question, I propose that the Unreferenced template be removed.
Notability is a separate issue and I will do some work to get that fixed. Cheers. Tomclarke ( talk) 11:28, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey there, I thought (because of your participation in the conversation here) that you would like to know that I coded a bot to mark CSDed AFDed and PRODed new-pages as patrolled. See the bot's discussion for approval here]. I would appreciate your comment. NOTE: I am not trying to canvas you, I just wanted some input. Tim1357 ( talk) 02:16, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)