User talk:Thenewguy34

Here are some guidelines I ask everyone to follow:

• Follow the talk page guidelines.
• I prefer informal messages over "Hello, welcome to wikipedia. We are happy to have you here, but unfortunately, blah blah blah...". I do not like wikipedia's "formal" messages. Yet, please remember to keep good clarity.
• Although admins have the secret right to lead a personal attack, please refrain from leading one against me, as I find them nonconstructive. If you have a problem with me, just say so. This goes hand-in hand with the previous message.
• Any question someone asks me here will be answered here. It is too confusing to relay back and forth on talk pages when we can just keep it on one talk page.

Please follow these, and I should be able to get on the same page with you, or sort things out. --Thenewguy34 (talk) 22:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Despite confirming my account, I am not considered "registered". I remember seeing something about having to "wait 4 days before being registered". Does that have to do with me not being registered yet? --Thenewguy34 (talk) 12:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• See Autoconfirmed, which takes 4 days and 10 edits. Dru of Id (talk) 12:17, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I notice that Template:Spoiler has been consistently deleted, yet the reason has also been archived beyond my reach. Why was this template deleted? I was going to copy what I have in my sandbox, but since the deleted template is protected, I cannot do it. Why is this? --21:52, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

There was a TFD discussion which resulted in the template's deletion. The content of it appears to be preserved at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template. Robert Skyhawk ^{(T C)} 22:34, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Joseph Kony Face.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Morning Sunshine (talk) 13:07, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alliance against Hunger and Malnutrition has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Might be a non-notable organization.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 07:48, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thenewguy34. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 04:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Why does wikipedia lack proper categorization? For example, Template:Multiple Issues not categorizing something into clean-up when you insert the "cleanup" section into the template? --Thenewguy34 (talk) 13:49, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Try using WP:TWINKLE's tagging tool. It is much easier than doing it manually. Or, add the catogory manually - eg. add [[Category:articles needing cleanup]]to the bottom of the article. Mdann52 (talk) 15:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC) Mdann52 (talk) 15:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thenewguy34. I responded to the question you raised in Talk:Protist. Essentially, there's nothing wrong with talking about archaeplastids in the protist article (most are arguably protistan, as the term is commonly used), but you're quite right that it's wrong (or at least very confusing) to put them in the taxobox under "Protista Haeckel, 1866", as if the group were formally placed within the old biological kingdom.  Deuterostome  (Talk) 14:00, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong with this term. It's precise and refers to an age range. "Youth" "Young" and the other substitutions you are forcing into articles by edit warring are less precise. Would you please stop it? Thank you, Antandrus (talk) 13:26, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am making this edits because they are not accurate within this time period. Adolescence itself did not exist as a concept before World War II and using these terms within the articles I have tried to change them in are historically misleading.

Let me give you another example of where this might be more problematic: if we wrote an article using the term "teenage" to refer to Jesus of Nazareth would that not be reverted? In regards to that time period, Jesus would have been an adult at age 13, when adolescence starts in modern culture. The question of an article like Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is no more different; the term "teenager" is misleading, as it is gives a misleading impression of what Mozart's life was like when he was in that age range. A scholar would never settle for the usage of the term "teenager" in this time period due to it belonging to another time period, and given that Wikipedia is a site that attempts to follow scholarly standards, why would we be any different? --Thenewguy34 (talk) 13:32, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are trying to restrict articles to an MOS:INUNIVERSE vocabulary and concepts, which is specifically discouraged by Wikipedia policy. This affectation is inappropriate in a contemporary encyclopedia, just like restricting analysis of Shakespeare's plays to Elizabethan English would be inappropriate. If you persist in this affectation you will receive warnings from multiple editors, and will soon risk being banned from Wikipedia. Please stop making these changes, and undo any you have already done. Reify-tech (talk) 14:20, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Eve Teschmacher currently redirects to Superman (1978 film). However, Eve Teschmacher also makes a number of appearances in the show Supergirl, and may have made a couple of cameo appearances in some of the comics. What would be the appropriate template to put onto the article Superman (1978 film) to indicate that Eve Teschmacher should no longer redirect to this article, but should instead be made into its own article? --Thenewguy34 (talk) 15:21, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Follow this link and now you can be able to edit it directly. –Ammarpad (talk) 19:18, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

wumbolo ^^^ 22:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

wumbolo ^^^ 22:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]