User talk:Kriegerdwm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] The Two Witnesses
- You have recently re-created the article The Two Witnesses, which was deleted in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policies. Please do not re-create the article. If you disagree with the article's deletion, you may ask for a deletion review. JuJube 06:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Regarding your edit to The Two Witnesses:
Your recent edit to The Two Witnesses (diff) was reverted by automated bot. You have been identified as a new user or a logged out editor using a hosting or shared IP address to add email addresses, phone numbers, YouTube, Geocities, Myspace, Facebook, blog, forum, or other such free-hosting website links to a page. Please note that such links are generally to be avoided. You can restore any other content by editing the page and re-adding that content. The links can be reviewed and restored by established users. Thank you for contributing! // VoABot II 09:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image tagging for Image:TWO_WITNESSES.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:TWO_WITNESSES.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Two Witnesses
- A few general words of advice that I think will help with editing ... anything that is an internal Wikipedia link should not be linked with a URL. In other words, instead of this:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eschatology eschatological]
... do this:
[[Eschatology eschatological]]
I think that's a big part of the formatting issues in there. Also, things like "Additional links/content will be added within 24 hrs." are generally a bad idea - see WP:ASR. Basically, you want to avoid references to Wikipedia itself.
Lastly, see {{cite web}}. This template lets you cite a website and is better than linking everything inline. So what you can do is this:
<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.somewhere.com/whatever|title=Name of website}}</ref>
Then, at the bottom, add:
<references />
Everything will neatly be displayed at the bottom. --BigDT 06:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Take a look at where I have changed the link to Revelation 11 into a "reference" link. Anything that is actually an external reference should be linked like that. If the article isn't really a reference and is just somewhere that happens to use a word, it probably shouldn't be linked at all. Take a look at Wikipedia:Introduction - you may want to read through some of the editing tips. Also, somewhere good to read is Wikipedia:Manual of Style. This page gives a number of editing tips. Also, one other thing, on one of your edits, you overwrote everything I did. If you are adding a paragraph, it's best to just add that or edit that paragraph, not re-copy the entire article. Please let me know if I can help you in any way. --BigDT 07:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your kind words on my talk page. I have removed your email address - as a general word of advice, it's a bad idea to put your email address on a page because you can get spam as a result of it. But if you have not already done so, you can go to the "my preferences" link at the top of the screen and add your email address - that way, anyone who wants to can contact you using the "E-mail this user" link on the left side of this page. Really, though, it's better to keep everything on Wikipedia when possible. One other suggestion, in general, "role accounts", meaning accounts where multiple people are using the same account, are frowned upon. It is best if all of you create your own account. --BigDT 07:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Two Witnesses
This is to BigDT - O.K. - it is time, after trying some time, to ask for help from experienced and trusted folks - I need to either REDIRECT or somehow cut the article in at least two parts - it will "hang together" if I can "splice" the entire section of "Exegetical Considerations" along with graphics (as is) on to another page as suggested - it's still a bit too long on both but this would make it 43/43 or so - so, how do I do that? Also, I probably should simply add a "See Also" to reference back and forth on the two articles because of their interconnectivity - is that a simple [[]] situation? Any help will of course be greatly appreciated. Thicked-headed Technician of sorts.
[edit] The Two Witnesses - Exegetical Considerations
I appreciate that The Two Witnesses is long and could probably do with splitting. But what is the difficulty about it? First and most important, please use edit summaries to explain what you are doing. When splitting an article, one fork must inevitably lose the edit history, therefore it is vital that you indicate in the edit summary where you have copied the stuff from.
But so far you have merely copied large chunks of it to The Two Witnesses - Exegetical Considerations without removing them from the original article. But in any case, I suggest you propose and discuss the split first at talk:The Two Witnesses. -- RHaworth 09:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Dear RHaworth:
The spliting of the article into two parts is simply a consideration on my part to keep the overall piece within some semblance of conformity to Wikipedia's desire to restrict articles to 32Kb, etc. - however, the exegetical considerations do add immediate clarity to the article and it does "hang together" - this topic is so controversial and receives such diverse interpretation (especially in today's explosive Middle East) - that the symbolism and imagery simply cannot be confined to a paragraph or two. Perhaps it should be left as is without delimiting it without the exegetical considerations--considerations which occupy immediate interest in light of the preceeding items. DWK 06:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
