Jump to content

User talk:Shearonink

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ohlson38 (talk | contribs) at 10:19, 1 April 2013 (Ohlson 38). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Messages left on my talkpage sometimes won't get as quick a response as they should. And if there's something I promised to do on-Wiki and it hasn't gotten done?...I apologize in advance.
Let's make a pact, you and me...don't make assumptions about me and I won't make assumptions about you.
I try to think the best about others...so try to think the best about me, OK?!?
Assuming good reasons for our fellow Wikipedia editors' behavior should be the first thing we do BEFORE we reach for the keyboard...
not just a bunch of pie-in-the-sky-sweet-bye-and-bye malarkey that we feel we have to pay lip-service to.
And stating that "Our social policies are not a suicide pact" is not really a decent excuse for any Wikipedian's poor behavior.
Shearonink (talk)
IP-editors can visit my alt-talk page and leave a message by clicking -->HERE<--' .

Welcome and introduction

Hi, Shearonink. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. The tips below should help you to get started. Best of luck!  Chzz  ►  22:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ようこそ
  • You don't need to read anything - anybody can edit; just go to an article and edit it. Be Bold, but please don't put silly stuff in - it will be removed very quickly, and will annoy people.
  • Ask for help. Talk to us live, or edit this page, put {{helpme}} and describe what help you need. Someone will reply very quickly - usually within a few minutes.
  • Edit existing articles, before you make your own. Look at some subjects that you know about, and see if you can make them a bit better. For example, Wikipedia:Cleanup#2009.
  • When you're ready, read about Your first article. It should be about something well-known, and it will need references.

Good luck with editing; please drop me a line some time on my own talk page.

There's lots of information below. Once again, welcome to the fantastic world of Wikipedia!

-- Chzz  ►  22:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles

A nice cup of...


This user is a recipient of the Editor of the Week award.
This user desires open communication and respect from the Wikimedia Foundation for the English Wikipedia's dispute resolution processes.




QThis user used to have access to Questia through The Wikipedia Library.
1758 pending submissionsThis user is a participant in WikiProject Articles for creation. You can help!
HThis user had access to HighBeam through The Wikipedia Library.



At the end of Wikipedia is a black mountain

When all article titles (~ 5.9 million) are sorted alphabetically the last one in the list is 黑山 -- GreenC 03:22, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just liked the photos of this chapel so much I just had to keep them around. All the time.

Picture of the Day: The interior of the Romanesque Chapel of St. John in Pürgg, Styria, Austria. The frescos date from the 12th century, probably around 1160, the crucifix from the 11th century.
The exterior of that church
















DYK 29 January 2020

These pics too - from one of the DYK articles for today...

Did you know ... that the bell of the Church of the Good Shepherd (pictured), one of New Zealand's most photographed buildings, commemorates photographer and explorer Edward Sealy?













Moar favorite pics

Yeah...another favorite pic. From User talk:El C.Enjoy.







Found this one looking for pics of cyclists

Want to post here? A simple request then...

Think
Think

Think before you post. OK?
And ummmm...if you want to leave me a message here, it's easy, just click on the
New section tab up at the top.

Thanks.




Holiday cheer

Holiday Cheer
Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings.

I am sorry

Please, give me a chance! I assure you! I have changed! I seen the error of my ways! I will change! Truly I will change!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.15.172.0 (talkcontribs) 17:25, 28 January 2013(UTC)

Yes I promise to use my edits for verifiable sources instead of making up some...— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.15.172.0 (talkcontribs) 17:40, 28 January 2013(UTC)

Just got a Bot notice about the March AFC Backlog Elimination Drive. I was going to sign up for the AFCBuddy, but noticed something weird about the linkage... the links all go to the January 2013 drive instead of March, so it looks like the Buddy is out of date. I see that another person has signed up today for the March drive and put January 2013 into their signup... Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:36, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the previous backlog drive page was simply copied and updated so that it could be used for the March backlog (Actually, the default signup link still asked users to create a January backlog subpage). The AFCBuddy page had the same issue - since i only learned about the backlog drive when the bot send me a message i hadn't changed the signup page to accommodate sign-ups for the new drive. Either way, that issue should be fixed now. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 18:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to barge in, but will the buddy be run at some point? cause i'm starting to worry my tally will be 0 :P FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 22:19, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what the Buddy is supposed to do, but as I've been doing my AfC Reviews, I've been manually transferring the Review-links to my Backlog Drive page myself. So far as I can tell from looking at the editing history on the other participants' Drive pages, everyone else with numbered entries on their Drive pages is doing the same. Shearonink (talk) 22:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
bugger, then it's back to square one? how on earth am i supposed to count the hundreds of reviews thus far? i just hope it's run sooner or later. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 22:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the offer of the Teahouse, but I don't think I'm going to bother helping with Wikipedia anymore. I feel overwhelmed by the regulations. And given my lack of access to a decent academic library, I don't have the resources necessary to adequately "prove" anything. The other part that makes this very difficult is that a whole lot of knowledge with hypnotists is passed down orally, so wikipedia's reliance on written documentation makes things difficult. Scwalsh (talk) 20:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thank you for your input about the article on Peter Tiboris. I've been hoping to receive constructive criticism and finally have suggestions that may help me better the article. Tomorrow I will revise the intro and, if you don't mind, run it by you. Again, thanks. Dzeidman (talk) 22:45, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to a Women in the Arts Meetup & Edit-a-thon on Friday, March 29

In honor of Women's History Month, the Smithsonian and the National Museum of Women in the Arts are teaming up to organize a Women in the Arts Meetup & Edit-a-thon on Friday, March 29, 2013 from 10:00am - 5:00pm. The event is focused on encouraging women editors while improving Wikipedia entries about women artists and art world figures. This event is free of charge, but participation is limited to 20 volunteers, so RSVP today! Sarasays (talk) 23:20, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for tightening up my article on Marc Geiger. I'm a former publicist -- I have to watch the adjectives. JSFarman (talk) 21:40, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, no problem. I am in the middle of a Review on it too. Shearonink (talk) 21:41, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, it's an article Marc Geiger. Shearonink (talk) 21:44, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw it! I've got goosebumps. Literally! THANK YOU! JSFarman (talk) 21:52, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Shearonink. You have new messages at Mdann52's talk page.
Message added 11:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Mdann52 (talk) 11:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ohlson 38

Sorry, I give up and will not continue to submit an article on the matter.

Here was your comment, please see my additoons in Italics: Even though there are a number of references for this draft, in my opinion the notability of this particular boat design has not been proven. If the creator of this draft is interested in these boats then perhaps an article about the designer might be do-able...after all, it is the *person* who is in the Encyclopedia of Yacht Designers. Comment: This comment lacks relevance. a) The information on Einar Ohlson is scarce to say the least, otherwise I would have quoted more. I would love to write an article in the the designer. I am in contact with the family with no benefit as they are not able to share more. The reference to the Encyclepedia does not make any sense as I was the contributor. b) Whether the reviewer sees the relevance of this boat seems to spring from his personal opinion rather than expertise.

Sections of this entry appear to be possible copyright violations of content from the Ohlson38 website: Ohlson 38 Production and Ohlson 38 History. If you are the copyright owner of this content and you want to donate it to Wikipedia, you will have to read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. I am the owner of the website but with all intents and purposes I cannot find the document to fill in. No reviewer before has identified this as an issue so the review process seems to show a lack of constancy.

Sorry, this is a deeply frustrating exercise! I have published more than 10 scientific papers via peer review process and I have never experienced a process like this. I repeatedly get different reviewers who do not even have the courtesy to respond to questions nor seem to value what has been addressed before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohlson38 (talkcontribs) 15:32, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia can sometimes be an exercise in frustration because it is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, so any single one of us can have a different answer than another editor as we all can possibly have different levels of experience and different understandings of policies and guidelines. Anyone who takes the time to Review AfC submissions is a volunteer as are all the other editors you will come into contact with on the project - people who edit Wikipedia live in many different timezones and many different countries, they have lives that sometimes interfere with responding to messages or concerns. All that being said, on to your comments:
  • Articles must be supported by multiple, independent reliable sources. I was trying to help you out here, saying that if you cannot find sufficient content to support an article on the boat, perhaps you could find content to support an article on its designer. The sailboat data references are data *only*, nothing about what makes this particular boat or its designer notable. Why this boat? Why not his other designs? Why not the designer himself? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it relies on what has been published elsewhere in reliable sources. If there are not enough sources to support an article about the designer, then there's not much to be done. Wikipedia requires sources to protect the subject, to protect its readers, to protect the information...because Wikipedia relies on the concept of verifiability. If anyone can write anything and they don't have to have enough sources, then Wikipedia would not be an encyclopedia, it would be a simple blog.
  • So, the content that I mentioned is from the Ohlson38 website, I am sorry other Reviewers did not catch it. Wikipedia takes others' right to their own work very seriously and requires written permission to re-use cut&paste content from other sources. If you still wanted to work on this draft and use the content from the Ohlson38 website, again, this is what you should do:
  1. Go to Consent form for content to be re-used on Wikipedia and look it over.
  2. Copy the following text and fill out the form as follows:
I (YOUR NAME) hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the content at the following website address: http://PUT ADDRESS HERE.
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike License 3.0, and the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of these licenses are held at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License and http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:GNU_Free_Documentation_License.
I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.
SIGN HERE: DATE, NAME OF THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER
Send the above filled-out text/form to: permissions-commons|wikimedia.org
And, yes, Wikipedia is a completely different kind of animal than writing articles for a peer-reviewed journal or perhaps writing an essay. I hope this helps. And, please remember, even if in your opinion it doesn't?... I did just take about a half-hour to type it up and try to help you. Shearonink (talk) 16:35, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. I sent the declaration requested.

Vidal101 submissions climate data

Sorry for any confusion but the weatherboxes were not for submisson - its just a little testing I was doing and/or just to pass time. Once again sorry for any confusions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vidal101 (talkcontribs) 14:58, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Easter!!!

Happy Easter!

So a print encyclopedia, a strawberry shortcake, and a sycamore walk into a bar - wait, have you heard this one? (talk) 00:13, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]