User talk:Jmanigold

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome 2 THANK YOU 3 January 2008 4 :) 5 Vandalism 6 RfA 7 Philosophy & Ethics

[edit] Welcome

Hi Jeannie! I'm so proud to have the first edit on your talk page. Eventually, you and I are going to work on the Arbornet page. Tanthalas39 (talk) 19:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] THANK YOU

Thanks to my boy Daniel, I am going to waste MORE time on the internet by editing wiki articles. Jmanigold (talk) 19:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] January 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to NOFX, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Malinaccier (talk) 01:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, some kind of mistake in there. It's all ok now! Malinaccier (talk) 01:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit]  :)

[1] :) Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 00:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Raviv Ullman, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. - Jimmy Pitt (talk) 00:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment on my talk page -- it's better that you reply here, otherwise things get really confused :) We might have been at cross-purposes, but if you check the edit history for Raviv Ullman, you'll see that I reverted a piece of vandalism at 00.28 and you reverted my revert at 00.29 and when I did another rv at 00.44 you reverted it at 00.46. On each occasion you reinstated the vandalised text that I'd just removed. That's why I posted the notice above. Jimmy Pitt (talk) 01:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfA

Hey Jeannie! I'm adding personal thank-yous to everyone who supported my RfA, and didn't want to leave you out. You need to Wiki more often ;-) Tanthalas39 (talk) 22:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Philosophy & Ethics

Why have you put this article for speedy deletion? Bsrboy 01:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Correction - Why has it been deleted? Bsrboy 16:28, 26 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsrboy (talk • contribs)

I nominated it for speedy deletion (per wiki policy) because it had no content and apparently someone agreed with me. Perhaps if you think your information is useful you can add to an existing page (perhaps Philosophy or Ethics?) and add references to it. Jmanigold (talk) 03:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

"because it had no content". What do you mean by this? Bsrboy 16:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsrboy (talk • contribs)

Not enough content to make it a viable wikipedia article. Jmanigold (talk) 22:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I mean "content". What exactly is it? Bsrboy 23:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you actually looking for a definition of "content"? I recommend Wiktionary. Jmanigold means that the article not only had very little actual content, but from what I remember, said nothing different than the already robust articles Philosophy and Ethics. The fact that some school puts these two topics into a class together is non-notable. We do not have descriptions of every individual college/high school course. Tan | 39 00:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)