User talk:Matt Oid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, Matt Oid, my name is Auroranorth. Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like our encyclopedia and decide to stay. Thank you very much for creating a username, it's the first step to becoming a respected member of the community. Here are a couple of pages you might find useful. I won't go into great detail here, but if you ever need any help, you can always try Help:Contents. So, the pages:

  • Wikipedia:Your first article - how to construct a great first article!
  • Wikipedia:Cheatsheet - essential in learning about the different buttons you see when you click 'edit this page'.
  • User:Matt Oid/Sandbox - your very own sandbox where you can fiddle around with the buttons on 'edit this page'.
  • My talk page - if you ever have any questions, edit that page and ask!

I hope you enjoy being a Wikipedian! Always remember to sign your name with the four tildes (~~~~) on any talk page (not in any article) - this will produce your name and date, similar to what will appear at the end of this message. Remember, if you need any help at all, check out Help:Contents, my talk page or the help desk. Or if you like, place {{helpme|YOURPROBLEMHERE}} on your talk page (this page) and someone will swing by soon. Once again, welcome, Matt Oid!

[edit] Negrito

"arguably" is speculation. I fear this is the editor's opinion (which violates Wikipedia's NPOV policy) and not from a verifiable source. --Ghostexorcist 12:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Totally agree with you. But "arguably" is the same thing as "thought by some".
Then if the citation in the following sentence doesn't cover the sentence in question, it needs to be deleted altogether. I wasn't the person who originally added arguably in the lead. --Ghostexorcist 11:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
The citation covers both sentences. "...arguably the most enigmatic people on our planet." is a direct quote from a scientific research paper on the genetic affinities of the Andamanese. You can follow the link for yourself if you like.
If it's a direct quote, why isn't it surrounded by parenthesis? The citation should be at the end of the first quote. And it should be stated that the info comes from a research paper. So, you could say, "One recent research paper states the negrito are 'arguably the most...'" --Ghostexorcist 10:08, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Again, the citation covers both sentences.
Again, if it is a "direct citation", as you stated, it needs to be put in parenthesis. If not, it is considered plagiarism. It doesn't matter if it covers both sentences. Direct quotes have to be immediately cited. --Ghostexorcist 18:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello Mum!

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Hello Mum!, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Hello Mum!. --M4gnum0n (talk) 08:38, 20 March 2008 (UTC)