User talk:Cinnamon colbert

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

14 jan 2007 APOLOGIZE for messing up format Iraq war

Contents

[edit] speedy

First of all removing speedy deletion tags is considered vandalism and therefore a blockable offense. If you disagree with a speedy deletion tag then simply type {{hangon}} below the speedy tag. Second of all the page you created is infact pure nonsense. It does not even come close to wikipedia's standards. I speedy'd it because of that reason. Please see: Wikipedia:Patent nonsense. Second of all if you are going to create a page then do not state your future ambitions for it on the main page, place them on the talk page. It is quite obvious that you do not know what you are doing. Before creating anymore articles or even editing I would more than strongly suggest you look at the following pages: Wikipedia: Tutorial and Wikipedia: Manual of Style. Until your "future" article is up to par I believe that it shouldn't be on wikipedia. First read the forementioned pages then go through the creation process slowly so as to find any mistakes before you save anything. --Tainter 02:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Your note

Sorry, bud, I am an atheist. Wikipedia, however, is an encyclopedia -- it's not the right place to preach about what religions people should or shouldn't follow. Our task is to relay verifiable facts we can attribute to reliable sources, in as neutral a manner as possible. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I disagree in the strongest possible terms -- statements like "atheism is the bestt!!!!" and "Buddha for the win!!1" are all over the religion pages, on Wikipedia. They're not helpful, they make the encyclopedia look bad, and they damage the project's credibility. We are not here to decide which religion is best. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Right, but one way or another, you're arguing the merits of a religion, and that's not at all the purpose of an encyclopedic article. Our duty is to describe the subject, and nothing more. You may wish to see what Wikipedia is not for more information. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
We're not here to give precedence to anything. Again, we're here to present verifiable facts which we can attribute to reliable sources, in a neutral manner. We are an encyclopedia, not an authority on which religions are or aren't correct. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Statins

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did at statin. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. Additions should be attributable to a reliable source. MastCell 23:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Boston

Please do not add any biased unencyclopedic unsupported material into wikipedia articles. Thank you.--Loodog 13:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Building of the World Trade Center

Please write in a balanced, neutral style and cite your sources. If you know the sewage flowed untreated into the river, say how you know so someone else can look it up. "Monument to Governor Rockefeller's ego" is right out. Tom Harrison Talk 00:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ZS Genetics second opinion

If you're still around ... ZS Genetics got re-added to the DNA sequencing article. I ended up removing this section and then restoring some the old writing about unproven commercial proposals for DNA sequencing methods. I tried to be neutral, but I know there's an apparent of a conflict of interest for me on the issue, if you get a chance I'd like you check over the situation and decide what you think is best. Many thanks! Madeleine ✉ ✍ 21:24, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Source Material for News Stories

A tag has been placed on Source Material for News Stories, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ukexpat (talk) 14:49, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help desk

If you have a question about editing, please try the Wikipedia:Help desk Dlohcierekim 15:09, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted material

It was not an Encyclopedia article. It was basically incoherent. It was at best an essay exploring a subject. That is not what Wikipedia is for. Please read the Manual of Style for more information on how to write an article. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 14:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] day middle school notability

"perhpas that would be a good project" Indeed so, but not an easy one or one that I would like to get involved in. Generally, consensus, such as it is, holds that secondary schools are of themselves notable but that primary/elementary schools need something more than the fact that they exist and serve their local community; at least, that's what a few years on Wikipedia has led me to believe. Personally, I would tend to err on the generous side. In the case of Day Middle, to be honest, there's not a great deal in the article to suggest that the school is any way notable. The awards were two years ago; the feted teacher has retired. You will notice, however, that I did some work to improve the layout of the article and left it to others to sort out notability. Emeraude (talk) 17:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Day Middle School

I think that what was written are facts unless they can be unproven. You have not edited the section concerning the celebrities who have supposedly attended Day Middle School.

"Some current modern day celebrities who have gone to Day include Matt LeBlanc, Ian Mclean and Matthew Doeringer"

There is no source on the fact that these people have attended the school. Without a source, those facts should be edited from the page as well.

Unless you can disprove what I have added to the page, I think that they should stay up, and they will stay up. I'm sorry but why did you remove my edits to the Day Middle School page? Do you have a personal connections to the Daytime? And can you prove my facts as untrue? I removed your comments because they are not verifiable. Verifiablility is a fundamental policy of wikipedia ( go here, and look for the verifiable part http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About#Wikipedia_content_criteria) If, according to this policy, you can provide a source, then go for it. HOwever, you have not provided any sources, therefore I have deleted your material.

wikipedia also has strict rules on biograpies of living persons; i suspect these are to prevent libel lawsuits, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons If you go to this page , I think you will agree that your material qualifies for deletion.75.67.134.245 (talk) 12:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC) as to your other questions - obviously i have a connecton to dya,who else wuld bother ? As to disproving your facts, this stands on its head the basic wiki policy of verifibable material: it si the obligation of the poster to show that what they write is right. It is not the obligationn of others to disprove them. regards