User talk:Ec5618

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User:Ec5618)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome to my talk page. Please post new messages at the bottom, and use descriptive headlines when starting new topics.
I also prefer to contain discussions to a single Talk page. Thank you.


Archive[edit]

  1. /Human - Archive development and human interaction.
  2. /Technical - Where I keep all references to PUI, AFD, TFD, Stubs and the like.
  3. /Dan Watts - I was asked to discuss my beliefs.
  4. /Block - I was blocked.
  5. /Adminship - My request for Adminship failed.

de | fr | nl | it

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7[edit]

Hi there! :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 18:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I can see that you have put some work into the Gary Gygax article, which I have nominated for a GA review. If there is anything you can do to help it get passed, please join in! Also, feel free to comment on the D&D WikiProject talk page regarding our efforts to get articles in the 0.7 release. BOZ (talk) 13:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Intelligent design[edit]

Intelligent design has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 22:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Revert?[edit]

Why did you revert Creation Science rather than discuss when I had given clear reasons both in the edit summary and talk page? --PeterR (talk) 16:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

You made a unilateral change, one that others apparently disagree with. I suggest you make a case for the edit on the Talk page, and agree on what to do with the other editors. -- Ec5618 16:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Abrtion talk page[edit]

Why are you only addressing me??? If you want to partake in the discussion that is fine, just complaining is not. As far as I can see, the only thing you have done is tell me off. Try to be helpful to the discussion, not just tell someone off. I'm only trying to help you. And post on my talk page, not the abortion one. --Miagirljmw14 Miagirljmw~talk 01:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

You were addressing me. I addressed you. What is the problem here?
Asking the participants in an emotionally charged debate to use correct words seems 'helpful' to me. I'm sorry you don't agree. -- Ec5618 09:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Greyhawk[edit]

Hello,

We are considering what to do to make Greyhawk into a "Good Article". Please discuss here if you like, or just check out the article itself and see what you can do. :) BOZ (talk) 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Drow[edit]

Hey there. :) In my quest to get more Wikipedia articles up to "Good Article" status, I've gotten ambitious and decided to take on the Drow article. Yeah, call me crazy, but I'm going to do it. :) I've put a bunch of work into the AD&D 1st edition section, using the sources I had on hand (don't have Q1 so did what I could), though I probably went overboard and will need to trim back a bit. I'm going to start on the 2nd edition section soon, but I would appreciate any help you or anyone you know can give towards building up the publication history properly, finding sources, checking for inaccuracies and completeness, etc. I'd especially need help in bulking up the novels section, as I don't have any of these. Any help you can give, even as a cheering section, would be appreciated. :)

We can get this done... if you haven't seen what we've done already, previous successes include Dragonlance, Drizzt Do'Urden, Dwellers of the Forbidden City, Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, Forgotten Realms, Gary Gygax, Planescape: Torment, The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, Tomb of Horrors, White Plume Mountain, and Wizards of the Coast. :) BOZ (talk) 03:22, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies[edit]

Hi. I have emailed you to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change (survey described here). If interested, please email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 16:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert[edit]

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my talk page. Much appreciated, mate! Geoff T C 01:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Evolution book[edit]

Currently you have a book at User talk:Ec5618/Laboratory. I think you meant to have it at User:Ec5618/Books/Evolution (and if not, could you move it there, since that's where userbooks generally are?). Thanks. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 03:25, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Summary Gen.1[edit]

You deleted the summary of Genesis 1 from creation according to Genesis - why? PiCo (talk) 22:58, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I reverted a number of recent edits. Most of them from you. Why did you post "Genesis is true!" on a Talk page? I assume you weren't trying to avoid conflict? -- Ec5618 (talk) 23:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
You're welcome to revert edits, but I'm puzzled as to why you reverted this one - it seems absolutely essential to me the give a summary of Genesis 1. And if you revert Gen1, why leave Gen2? PiCo (talk) 09:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I reverted the most recent edits made by an editor who spammed Talk pages with biased and unproductive slogans. That was you, obviously. If you're arguing that one or two of those edits were useful, I really don't care. Quite frankly, I don't trust you to be honestly working to improve the article. Trustworthy people don't post-and-run biased slogans. -- Ec5618 (talk) 16:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Association of American Feed Control Officials[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Association of American Feed Control Officials has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of how this might meet notability guidelines. Lacks citations to significant coverage in 3rd party reliable sources.

While all constructive 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. RadioFan (talk) 23:52, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Ec5618. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Character class (Dungeons & Dragons) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Character class (Dungeons & Dragons) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Character class (Dungeons & Dragons) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 01:21, 4 August 2019 (UTC)