User talk:Randolph
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome!
Hi Randolph, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!
- Editing tutorial, learn to have fun with Wikipedia.
- Picture tutorial, instructions on uploading images.
- How to write a great article, to make it an featured article status.
- Manual of Style, how articles should be written.
Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :
Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)
- Mailer Diablo 17:43, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] The conversation begins now....
Please post messages below this line.
[edit] Liberal Christianity
No problem, I don't mind having a couple of little words changed. :)
- Cool, thanks. :) --Randolph 05:36, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Søren Kierkegaard
While I'm totally fine with my edits being changed, your revert has done nothing to clarify the issue either. The facts are: Nietzsche was not an existentialist, both existentialism and Nietzsche's philosophies are atheistic, and Kierkegaard stands opposite those philosophies in different ways. My edit addressed the first issue, and I tried to leave the other two intact. Your revert ignores the first issue and muddles the last, and in your edit description you give future editors nothing much to work with. How do you think that we could get the issue of Nietzsche and existentialism fixed without "confusing the issue"? -Seth Mahoney 19:21, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
- I'd be happy to take up this discussion on the relevant talk page. Have you posted this message there? --Randolph 19:23, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Sharyn Clough VFD
Hey, Randolph... I've rewritten the article on Sharyn_clough, and I'm wondering if you'd consider taking a look at the rewrite and reconsidering your vote for deletion. Best wishes, --Jacobw 15:26, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
- I've revisited the article and posted comments in the relevant vfd section. I'm still not moved to change my vote at this point. --Randolph 16:12, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Amilcar Compund page fake
Randoplh you are correct the information on the Amilcar Compound is completely fake.
[edit] Melbourne High School
Are you an old boy of Melbourne High School?
Just wondering...
- Nope. --Randolph 02:30, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] History of Queensland
The History of Queensland article has finally become the current Australian Collaboration. As you voted for it, you might like to visit and improve the article as you see fit. Thanks --Scott Davis Talk 14:52, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Hi Randolph
I have noted your fine work on Gold Coast suburbs. You must be a local.
I have initiated some discussion on the Surfers Paradise article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Surfers_Paradise%2C_Queensland Maybe you might care to comment. Gerard... --WikiCats 09:49, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
I live in Southport, so I would like to do some more work on that page. Gerard... --WikiCats 07:04, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Thank you for voting!
Hello there! I wanted to thank you for taking the time to vote on my arbitration commitee nomination. Although it was not successful, I appreciate the time you spent to read my statement and questions and for then voting, either positively or negativly. Again, thank you! Páll (Die pienk olifant) 22:42, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- No problem. :D It was a lot of time reading it all too! ;) --Randolph 22:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
