Sig test
Sig test. who? Is this thing working? 23:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, he is the president of Virgin Galactic which will probably be the first company in the world to offer spaceflights to non-professional astronauts, isn't that notable enough? This is mentioned in the stub-article and there is a few links which can verify this. Skizzik ( talk) 23:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Virgin Galactic is definitely notable but that doesn't mean Mr. Whitehorn is. However, I agree that the references do qualify as secondary sources per WP:EL but it is hard to tell without drilling down into them. I'll format them to make it clearer and explain my vote against on the article's talk page. Is this thing working? ( talk) 23:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:RobotKingdomCover.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 03:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
You moved Ambisonic decoding from {{tech-stub}} to {{electronics-stub}}. Unfortunately it doesn't really fit there. It is an audio technology and does not fit under any of the child stubs under {{tech-stub}}. ({{engineering-stub}} is probably the closest fit, although still a poor one.) While I approve of stub sorting in general, I am moved to revert your change. HairyWombat ( talk) 21:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
I proposed, and have now created the new stub {{audio-tech-stub}}. I have moved Ambisonic decoding from {{tech-stub}} into it. HairyWombat ( talk) 03:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
A couple months ago, you flagged the "Controversies" section of Harold Camping as non-NPOV. I don't see anything about it that really strikes me as NPOV. Can you elaborate on why you added the tag and what could be done to fix your concerns? Thanks, Kansan ( talk) 17:12, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- The phrases "claims to be a "Christian,"" and "not a true follower of Jesus" set off alarm bells to me. —
Is this thing working? (
talk) 22:02, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- You're right that those phrases are definitely NPOV violations, but I don't see them in the article, so can we remove the tag from that section? (There are issues with some of the other sections, but I just want to tackle it one piece at a time.)
Kansan (
talk) 23:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- That's how it read when I tagged it but it's much better now. Feel free to de-tag. Is this thing working? ( talk) 23:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- You're right that those phrases are definitely NPOV violations, but I don't see them in the article, so can we remove the tag from that section? (There are issues with some of the other sections, but I just want to tackle it one piece at a time.)
Kansan (
talk) 23:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello Is this thing working? I understand that a person close to the organization they are writing about could be a little bias but if any of my material (which is my own copyright) they would see all I wanted to state was the actual history of a Chinese pitbike. Wiki has SDG and Pitstar listed and nice paragraph articles on them but they came after us. They copied our business plan (ie bring in Chinese pitbikes and modify them with hop up parts). Also unlike most other pitbike companies like SDG, we are still around and if anyone asks around, we are the top Pitbike company in the US.
How do we get our proper information on that pitbike page? We created the Pitbike craze. I have magazine articles to prove it. Mleija23 ( talk) 16:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Go to
Talk:Pit bike and post the name of the magazine, the article title, author, date and page numbers. Wait for another editor to read it and add it to the article. Remember that Wikipedia is a volunteer project and it might be some time before a volunteer is able to get to it. --
Dennis Bratland (
talk) 19:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- What Dennis said. There's no need for hasty edits, if you make the sources available — which should be abundant if your product is in fact as well known as you say — then the volunteer editors will be eager to incorporate them in the article, and you don't have to worry about appearing to be here for self-promotion instead of building an encyclopedia. Is this thing working? ( talk) 22:02, 29 February 2012 (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) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Sig test
Sig test. who? Is this thing working? 23:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, he is the president of Virgin Galactic which will probably be the first company in the world to offer spaceflights to non-professional astronauts, isn't that notable enough? This is mentioned in the stub-article and there is a few links which can verify this. Skizzik ( talk) 23:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Virgin Galactic is definitely notable but that doesn't mean Mr. Whitehorn is. However, I agree that the references do qualify as secondary sources per WP:EL but it is hard to tell without drilling down into them. I'll format them to make it clearer and explain my vote against on the article's talk page. Is this thing working? ( talk) 23:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:RobotKingdomCover.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 03:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
You moved Ambisonic decoding from {{tech-stub}} to {{electronics-stub}}. Unfortunately it doesn't really fit there. It is an audio technology and does not fit under any of the child stubs under {{tech-stub}}. ({{engineering-stub}} is probably the closest fit, although still a poor one.) While I approve of stub sorting in general, I am moved to revert your change. HairyWombat ( talk) 21:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
I proposed, and have now created the new stub {{audio-tech-stub}}. I have moved Ambisonic decoding from {{tech-stub}} into it. HairyWombat ( talk) 03:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
A couple months ago, you flagged the "Controversies" section of Harold Camping as non-NPOV. I don't see anything about it that really strikes me as NPOV. Can you elaborate on why you added the tag and what could be done to fix your concerns? Thanks, Kansan ( talk) 17:12, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- The phrases "claims to be a "Christian,"" and "not a true follower of Jesus" set off alarm bells to me. —
Is this thing working? (
talk) 22:02, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- You're right that those phrases are definitely NPOV violations, but I don't see them in the article, so can we remove the tag from that section? (There are issues with some of the other sections, but I just want to tackle it one piece at a time.)
Kansan (
talk) 23:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- That's how it read when I tagged it but it's much better now. Feel free to de-tag. Is this thing working? ( talk) 23:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- You're right that those phrases are definitely NPOV violations, but I don't see them in the article, so can we remove the tag from that section? (There are issues with some of the other sections, but I just want to tackle it one piece at a time.)
Kansan (
talk) 23:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello Is this thing working? I understand that a person close to the organization they are writing about could be a little bias but if any of my material (which is my own copyright) they would see all I wanted to state was the actual history of a Chinese pitbike. Wiki has SDG and Pitstar listed and nice paragraph articles on them but they came after us. They copied our business plan (ie bring in Chinese pitbikes and modify them with hop up parts). Also unlike most other pitbike companies like SDG, we are still around and if anyone asks around, we are the top Pitbike company in the US.
How do we get our proper information on that pitbike page? We created the Pitbike craze. I have magazine articles to prove it. Mleija23 ( talk) 16:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Go to
Talk:Pit bike and post the name of the magazine, the article title, author, date and page numbers. Wait for another editor to read it and add it to the article. Remember that Wikipedia is a volunteer project and it might be some time before a volunteer is able to get to it. --
Dennis Bratland (
talk) 19:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- What Dennis said. There's no need for hasty edits, if you make the sources available — which should be abundant if your product is in fact as well known as you say — then the volunteer editors will be eager to incorporate them in the article, and you don't have to worry about appearing to be here for self-promotion instead of building an encyclopedia. Is this thing working? ( talk) 22:02, 29 February 2012 (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) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)