User talk:Nowonline
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)
Here are a few links you might find helpful:
- Be Bold!
- Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
- Meet other new users
- Learn from others
- Play nicely with others
- Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
- Tell us about you
You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.
If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
We're so glad you're here! —The-thing (Talk) (Stuff I did) 23:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
.
.
Contents |
[edit] Cockacoeske
I've set up merge tags for Queen Anne and Cockacoaske, so that the articles will combined into one. For future reference, you don't need to start a new article if you think it should be under a different name. Just use the move function to rename the article. Asarelah 00:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Nathaniel West (Lt. Col.)
I moved the article to the natural capitalization and fixed the links -- Wikipedia does not all-caps last names -- and have proposed the original title for speedy deletion, since it is unlikely to be looked for or linked to under that precise capitalization. Robert A.West (Talk) 00:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Francis Knollys
We don't use titles or offices in article names, except as necessary for disambiguation. (We assume all Peers will need disambiguation, but that's a special case.)
Did you actually consult all these learned sources, or did you get your information from something closer to hand? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Historical Research" by Richard B. Autry
Hi,
I've noticed you are systematically going through articles changing the sources from "Unpublished Histrocial Reaserch" by Richard B. Autry and "Unpublished Geneological Research" by Richard B. Autry to simply "Historical Research".
If something has been published, please reference the actual work, preferably with an ISBN number, journal name or similar. If there is no publication, then please note that Wikipedia works on verifiability and no original research WP:Attribution, so unpublished (and therefore unverifiable) sources cannot be used. Please help to ensure this policy is complied with. Thanks, WLDtalk|edits 15:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Please respond. As Wikipedia is not a place to publish original research, please do not reference unverifiable unpublished research. If it can't be demonstrated that the information added complies with WP:Attribution, then the policy is to remove it. Regards WLDtalk|edits 16:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Just blanking the section without responding isn't really helpful. Please respond materially. Thanks. WLDtalk|edits 16:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Survey Invitation
Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 14:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me
[edit] Unpublished research
I've removed as a source "Richard B Autry". I appreciate all the work you've been doing to the articles on the Carey's, Knollys, Wests, etc. And as a professional genealogist myself, I can understand your keen interest in adding your research as a source. If you review WP:ATT you can find the rules on what we can, and cannot use as sources. One large one is, we cannot use *ourselves* as a source. I cannot add my own self as a source to an article, nor my research as a source. As an expert editor we are here to use our knowledge to collect together those sources that can be useful. But all the sources we use must be previously published in a reliable source. Thanks! Wjhonson 08:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
