Dalek~enwiki

Welcome to Wikipedia!

{User plays RuneScape} Dear Dalek~enwiki: Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

• Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• Community Portal
• Frequently Asked Questions
• How to edit a page
• How to revert to a previous version of a page
• Tutorial
• Copyrights
• Shortcuts

Please could someone help me write an article about Revelation, a film which came out in 2001?

Thanx Dalek 16:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Newcomers help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Wikipedians try to follow a strict policy of never biting new users. If you are unsure of how to do something, you are welcome to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator. One last bit of advice: please sign any dicussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD! Arundhati bakshi 11:47, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Help Is Here!

I understand you want to start your first article. How may I be of assistance? Arundhati bakshi 11:52, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I need to make something that is acceptable to different religions and doesn't offend anyone who is a firm beleiver in any faiths that are connected to the subject of euthanasia in Nazi Germany Dalek 11:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

First do a search and see if there are any similar articles. If there aren't then you will be asked if you want to create a page. Click on that link and start editing. Add the {{inuse}} template to the top of the page to let others know that you are working on it and not to delete until you are finished. try this and if you have probs, let me know. Arundhati bakshi 12:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Click here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Euthanasia_in_Nazi_Germany&action=edit to start the article. It seems there isn't an article dealing specifically with this topic. Good luck! Arundhati bakshi 12:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Hold that result - you may first want to check T-4_Euthanasia_Program, which is about precisely that topic! Camillus (talk)

Regarding your request on the new user's page for help with your user page, I would be glad to assist.

I am familiar with Wikipedia mark-up and HTML, and image up-loading (and any related copyright issues), and would only be too happy to help you format your page - all you need to do is make a start by clicking on the "edit this page" tab at the top of User:Dalek, (or just click here), type whatever details you want to add about yourself (such as age, location - but no need for your full name, or exact address - you can be as anonymous or open as you like), and your areas of interest - don't worry at all about the layout - I will fix that for you, and I will show you how to add any user categories or userboxes you want to add.

So go ahead and make a start - I will put you page on "watch", and come back and do any formatting etc. you require!

One small thing - do remember that your user page is not the same as a "blog-spot" or a "geocities/tripod" page - it's really just to describe you in terms of your interests as a Wikipedian!

Looking forward to being of assistance! Camillus (talk) 01:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Autism

Hope you don't mind... I categorised you as Autistic. I myself am aspergian.--Tdxiang 陈 鼎 翔 (Talk)ContributionsContributions Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 10:18, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

No offence taken, I am wanting to say that as I am only 15 and not used to doing big discussions i can sometimes be very shy so please be very patient - i will require someone to try and help me get anything up on MSN since I could not find an article about them and therefore i am pretty much in the dark about who they are. (Dalek 17:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)).

Dominic Wade

The article Dominic Wade has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki 18:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply to your blanked comment

Here we don't have a sense of humour when it comes to vandalism. If you want to be childish, you can go to Encyclopedia Dramatica. Also, blanking your warnings doesn't make them go away and is an acknowledgment you have understood them, so if you decide to make any more jokes you will be blocked. Consider writing constructively instead of joking around please. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page. Have a good day, Matty (talk) 10:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I think you've done it just fine haha. I'm sorry about the rather strict sounding comment but its not appropriate to joke around in the mainspace, especially on articles like George Bush, the US, and Adolf Hitler - they're all very public and sensitive articles. I'm not really sure about how to set up a category but I guess what you did worked? Now all you need to do is get it on a few articles and from there it will spread via other editors. Matty (talk) 11:06, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Parodies of Wikipedia

I have nominated Category:Parodies of Wikipedia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 01:52, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Parodies of Wikipedia

I have nominated Category:Parodies of Wikipedia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 04:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Date format

In case you did not know, CE and BCE are equally acceptable as AD and BC, and Wikipedia policy is to leave variants such as that (like spelling in different varieties of English) the way they already were unless there is some compelling reason to change them. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). In the case of Battle of the Teutoburg Forest, the battle precedes Christianity and therefore CE and BCE are more appropriate, so this exception does not apply. --Yngvadottir (talk) 17:59, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Recently you have arbitrarily been making changes in the date format of several articles, from "BCE/CE" to "BC/AD", with no discussion apart from the comment in the edit summary that this particular usage is more "correct".

Although Wikipedia does not have a preferred style for year numbering systems, please note that Wikipedia policy on this subject (see WP:ERA) states: "Do not change from one style to another unless there is substantial reason for the change, and consensus for the change with other editors."

I have therefore reverted the changes that you made to the article List of historical drama films. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 07:48, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

However, I am a Classics student at Leeds University where we are given dates as BC and AD. Also BCE and CE sound the same whereas BC and AD don't. I blame the secularisation of Wikipedia and the fact that people don't like the traditional notation that has been perfectly accepted for centuries. Dalek (talk) 15:52, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

You can hardly fault Wikipedia for being secular! It's a worldwide all-inclusive encyclopedia. I could see the argument for the Christian-based nomenclature being more correct when discussing either Christian-related topics or history in places that were entirely or predominantly Christian at the period under discussion. But it is a pure anachronism for pre-Christian events, and Wikipedia's policy on leaving it to editors who create articles to set the policy for those articles on things like date usage and British/American (or other varieties) of spelling unless there is a compelling topic-associated reason to prefer one usage is eminently sensible. I suggestn you discuss the issue with your lecturers at uni. I suspect you'll find that at least some of them publish using CE/BCE but lecture using AD/BC precisely because those are more familiar to students and easier to distinguish aurally. In any event, even if you disagree, it's Wikipedia's policy not to change such things simply because you have a preference.--Yngvadottir (talk) 03:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I disagree with you Yngvadottir and Bahudhara because you don't understand the reasons for what Dalek and myself are trying to achieve. BCE and CE are very similar which explains why WIkipedia is one of the few places that are using those terms. However, I edited the Teutonberg Forestarticle so that 9 CE was 9 to make it in line with similar edits to articles regarding the Roman emperors from Nero onwards. Please do not give us bullshit excuses to cover your inepitude over this issue. Thanks 129.11.107.111 (talk) 04:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Calm down James! Dom and I have now started to use the policy to ensure the uniformity and stability of articles are maintained. The flagrant violations of WP:ERA in the form of sudden implementations of BCE/CE without following protocol will be halted, but you need to do the same. 78.146.132.102 (talk) 20:45, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Classics Seminar

Hey Dom, sorry to have to contact you via the WP but you do realise that you've got the seminar to prepare for? Also since we've got my parents coming up to visit us, have you made sure that the "operation" is complete and ready to initiate? Mira 78.146.132.102 (talk) 00:29, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Darling, everything is under control and you will love the present that I've got you. Will meet you back at Devonshire Halls as planned. Enjoy your girls weekend and don't get into your usual type of trouble. Dalek (talk) 00:31, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

A suggestion

Dalek, when proposing wholesale changes to long-established era systems used in articles, would you please consider offering diffs from article histories in support of your proposals? In such cases, the link should point to the edit in which one era-system was substituted for another, without consensus for the change. That would be a helpful courtesy to all involved. Thanks. Haploidavey (talk) 14:00, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Further to this, would you please just slow down a little; before you post a notice of intended reversion at talk-pages, you might make sure that a "violation" of era-policy has actually occurred. These things are easily checked; one compares article versions in the article history. You seem to have presumed, without evidence, that some articles using BCE/CE should be reverted to BC/AD. See, for example, Talk:Bias of Priene‎ and Talk:Bacchiadae‎. Thank you. Haploidavey (talk) 18:53, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the slap to the back of the head. Really needed it. Will ensure that in future I look at back histories and then decide what the best course of action is. You've spoken to my wife already about this along with another editor who is interested in Classics. We've decided that if we are in doubt, then you will be our first port of call and then we will decide what course of action to take. My wife's user page is 78.146.132.102 , but that is reached by her alt acc, 78.146.132.102 Classics User:78.146.132.102 Classics. Regards Dalek (talk) 08:49, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Era convention again

I trust that by now you're up to speed on WP:ERA, Dalek, but I do have one further suggestion about your approach to this. (I believe it's already been suggested that you propose changes on the talk page first, as this is a bizarrely contentious issue, and provide evidence of which convention has standing in the article.) I wonder whether as a matter of diplomacy you would also consider not thundering on about "violations" of policy. It sets a bad tone for the discussion. I mean, sure, one can use it as one might use the phrase "parking violation," but I hope you see my point: as a rhetorical strategy, it leaves much to be desired, as it really can't be taken as assuming good faith.

For instance, I once rewrote a stub into a rather long, fully researched article, and in the process used the BC/AD although the stub had used BCE, though there was only, I think, one instance of a convention used at all. At the time, as a relatively new editor, I was blissfully unaware that any such thing as an era convention existed. The article remained that way for two years before era-convention patrols began reverting it. Although mostly I don't care about this (though I find BC/AD less susceptible to scribal error, at least from this scribe's hand; both are Christian-centric ways of dividing time), the change struck me as both counterproductive and a waste of time for a number of reasons which need not be rehearsed here. But the notion that I committed some "violation" of policy would be a tad insulting. Do you see what I mean? Thanks for considering this. Cynwolfe (talk) 22:33, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if I caused any insult to your contribution to Wikipedia, it was not my intent. As of now, I will be aiding any editors with queries on Classics and not be concentrating solely on date notations. If you require assistance, then don't hesitate to post on my talk page or that of 78.146.132.102, who is also 78.146.132.102 Classics. We are always happy to help with Classics. Once again, my apologies for any insult I caused against you. Regards Dalek (talk) 08:43, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

No, you didn't insult me; I was reacting to the tone as used in regard to the contributions of other hardworking editors. Also, I don't know what you and your confrère mean about a Wiki Classics section; I'm sure you're aware of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. If you're undertaking some broad activity in the sphere of Classics, you might want to seek consensus from the WP Project first. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:58, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up about the WikiProject, will definately be getting involved with that. Wiki Classics section is what we were calling the articles relating to Classics, but the WikiProject seems to have taken care of that. In future I'll cooperate with the editors in a manner more fitting for an editor of Wikipedia and not, as my wife described it, "a little kid who wants to carve his name into everything". Reminded me of Agamemnon in Troy_(film). Dalek (talk) 16:17, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Dalek. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Dalek~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

23:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

11:53, 22 April 2015 (UTC)