Welcome!
Hello, Theowarner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on
my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Jess
talk
cs 04:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Yeah... took a little while. But, I have it now!
Theowarner (
talk) 14:47, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I saw your removal of a section (and your edit summary) on WLC's talk page. Generally speaking, it's not ok to delete comments from talk pages besides your own. The process for getting rid of them is archiving, which you can find instructions for here. Generally, it's just a matter of creating a new page (like Talk:William lane craig/Archive 1) and copying the comments into that page. That said, we were the only two who commented in the section, and I don't mind my replies being deleted, so I didn't revert. I just wanted to let you know for future reference, as deleting other (non-vandalism) talk page comments elsewhere could get you a bit of scorn =P
No problem though! Just wanted to point you in the right direction. See you around! :) Jess talk cs 23:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
I have a question about your edit to K.C.A. You replaced some of that content with "The argument's first premise has been widely criticized [1], but such philosophers as J. L. Mackie, Graham Oppy and Quentin Smith and physicist Paul Davies." I can't tell if "but" is supposed to be "by", or if you accidentally cut off part of the sentence. Just thought I'd let you know about the potential typo! I do approve of you removing some of the debate stuff; it should make the article more concise. Kansan ( talk) 05:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! That's a 'by.' I'll fix it. Theowarner ( talk) 05:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Kalam cosmological argument, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.
My first barnstar! Wow. That was very nice of you, and it is very much appreciated. Thank you. Bill the Cat 7 ( talk) 06:17, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it seems this was a bit of a false positive. Be careful of your typos! It looked, both to myself doing RC patrol and to cluebot, as though you were replacing large chunks of text with disparagement, because in red letters in the summary appears "by suck philosophers as" and the old text is referenced. If you are trying to make it NPoV, please by all means continue and your work is much appreciated. I have deleted my vandalism warning to you, but be careful of spelling, especially such/suck. --Falcon Darkstar Momot ( talk) 21:45, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
William Lane Craig. Users are expected to
collaborate with others and avoid editing
disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 12:33, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
From what I gather after reviewing the language you use in your discussions, I would not place you any higher than . Quite clearly you are unable to form grammatical sentences that would qualify you on the level of , "Users with advanced and fluent level of English". As such, placing yourself in is very misleading and dishonest. Maiorem ( talk) 17:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Those are fantastic examples of typos. I appreciate it. Theowarner ( talk) 18:19, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi theowarner! You're receiving this notification because you were previously subscribed to the Feedback Request Service, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over three years.
In order to declutter the Feedback Request Service list, and to produce a greater chance of active users being randomly selected to receive invitations to contribute, you've been unsubscribed, along with all other users who have made no edits in three years or more.
You do not need to do anything about this - if you are happy to not receive Feedback Request Service messages, thank you very much for your contributions in the past, and this will be the last you hear from the service. If, however, you would like to resubscribe yourself, you can follow the below instructions to do so:
{{
Frs user|theowarner|limit}}
underneath the relevant heading(s), where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month.If you've just come back after a wikibreak and are seeing this message, welcome back! You can follow the above instructions to re-activate your subscription. Likewise, if this is an alternate account, please consider subscribing your main account in much the same way.
Note that if you had a rename and left your old name subscribed to the FRS, you may be receiving this message on your new username's talk page still. If so, make sure your new account name is subscribed to the FRS, using the same procedure mentioned above.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the Feedback Request Service talk page, or on the Feedback Request Service bot's operator's talk page. Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:40, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Theowarner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on
my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Jess
talk
cs 04:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Yeah... took a little while. But, I have it now!
Theowarner (
talk) 14:47, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I saw your removal of a section (and your edit summary) on WLC's talk page. Generally speaking, it's not ok to delete comments from talk pages besides your own. The process for getting rid of them is archiving, which you can find instructions for here. Generally, it's just a matter of creating a new page (like Talk:William lane craig/Archive 1) and copying the comments into that page. That said, we were the only two who commented in the section, and I don't mind my replies being deleted, so I didn't revert. I just wanted to let you know for future reference, as deleting other (non-vandalism) talk page comments elsewhere could get you a bit of scorn =P
No problem though! Just wanted to point you in the right direction. See you around! :) Jess talk cs 23:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
I have a question about your edit to K.C.A. You replaced some of that content with "The argument's first premise has been widely criticized [1], but such philosophers as J. L. Mackie, Graham Oppy and Quentin Smith and physicist Paul Davies." I can't tell if "but" is supposed to be "by", or if you accidentally cut off part of the sentence. Just thought I'd let you know about the potential typo! I do approve of you removing some of the debate stuff; it should make the article more concise. Kansan ( talk) 05:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! That's a 'by.' I'll fix it. Theowarner ( talk) 05:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Kalam cosmological argument, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.
My first barnstar! Wow. That was very nice of you, and it is very much appreciated. Thank you. Bill the Cat 7 ( talk) 06:17, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it seems this was a bit of a false positive. Be careful of your typos! It looked, both to myself doing RC patrol and to cluebot, as though you were replacing large chunks of text with disparagement, because in red letters in the summary appears "by suck philosophers as" and the old text is referenced. If you are trying to make it NPoV, please by all means continue and your work is much appreciated. I have deleted my vandalism warning to you, but be careful of spelling, especially such/suck. --Falcon Darkstar Momot ( talk) 21:45, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
William Lane Craig. Users are expected to
collaborate with others and avoid editing
disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 12:33, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
From what I gather after reviewing the language you use in your discussions, I would not place you any higher than . Quite clearly you are unable to form grammatical sentences that would qualify you on the level of , "Users with advanced and fluent level of English". As such, placing yourself in is very misleading and dishonest. Maiorem ( talk) 17:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Those are fantastic examples of typos. I appreciate it. Theowarner ( talk) 18:19, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi theowarner! You're receiving this notification because you were previously subscribed to the Feedback Request Service, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over three years.
In order to declutter the Feedback Request Service list, and to produce a greater chance of active users being randomly selected to receive invitations to contribute, you've been unsubscribed, along with all other users who have made no edits in three years or more.
You do not need to do anything about this - if you are happy to not receive Feedback Request Service messages, thank you very much for your contributions in the past, and this will be the last you hear from the service. If, however, you would like to resubscribe yourself, you can follow the below instructions to do so:
{{
Frs user|theowarner|limit}}
underneath the relevant heading(s), where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month.If you've just come back after a wikibreak and are seeing this message, welcome back! You can follow the above instructions to re-activate your subscription. Likewise, if this is an alternate account, please consider subscribing your main account in much the same way.
Note that if you had a rename and left your old name subscribed to the FRS, you may be receiving this message on your new username's talk page still. If so, make sure your new account name is subscribed to the FRS, using the same procedure mentioned above.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the Feedback Request Service talk page, or on the Feedback Request Service bot's operator's talk page. Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:40, 30 June 2020 (UTC)