User talk:Chronic2

Welcome!

Hello, Chronic2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Andvd (talk) 09:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)Andvd[reply]

September 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Bryant G. Wood, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. I've just removed a footnote of yours that was clearly OR. I shall probably remove some more OR but won't add any more warnings unless of course you insert more after this warning. Please read Wikipedia policies on OR carefully. Doug Weller (talk) 06:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse of article discussion page

Chronic2, you are using an article discussion page to discuss an editor. Have you read WP:GF and do you think you have been following this guideline? I find it tedious at best to wade through your long posts to find out what your problems are with the article itself, and that is the whole point of a discussion page, to improve the article. If you want to make an official complaint about an editor, go to the appropriate board, but please drop this haranguing now. And as I shall say on the talk page, this is an article about Wood, not Garstang or Jericho, your edit is far too detailed for the Wood article. Also, a statement like " It was not derived from the Bible and then imposed on archaeology, as is occasionally stated by those who have not read Garstang's own writings on the subject." needs a very good reliable source that says that. As it stands it is original research by you, please also read WP:OR. Doug Weller (talk) 06:22, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BibleAndSpade.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:BibleAndSpade.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tyre

Hi Chronic - I didn't remember where I got that list from, but I suspect it was probably from this list. Although the compiler of that page lists a large number of sources, and is generally fairly accurate on subjects in which I have independent knowledge, some of the sources seem to be quite old, and nothing is footnoted to specify where individual pieces of information came from, and I would say that it probably does not comprise a reliable source - and certainly if we have better, more reliable sources, it is fine with me to replace it. Do what you will. john k (talk) 02:57, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Note: this was in response to my request about the List of Kings of Tyre page, where the dates given for the kings did not correspond to those in the individual articles for the kings. Chronic2 (talk) 21:57, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jericho

I don't want to insert myself into contentious editing in Jericho but I wanted to let the regular editors there know via the talk page, that I objected to the deletion with the rather arrogant edit summary. patsw (talk) 19:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bryant Woods

Hi Chronic. Questions relating to an article should be placed on that article's talk page rather than on an editor's own talk page.PiCo (talk) 05:34, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A suggestion re Deuteronomy

I'm concerned that you should I'm crowding out your contribution to Wikipedia. I believe part of the problem is the paucity of editors on the articles under dispute - with only two of us, it's not really possible to speak of "consensus" nor even to have a really useful pool of expertise. I suggest that we seek a few more people to participate. I suggest FimusTauri as a starting point - he's conservative in his outlook, and thus probably more aware of your concerns than I am, and I personally respect his capacity for fairness and his depth of knowledge. Wikipedia needs to be a collegial and enjoyable experience for all of us. PiCo (talk) 11:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake in page "Athaliah"

Please look at this page. Where did you find this information ? Can you check it on ? Thanks -- Jan^IIISobieski 14:26, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cyaxares II, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Xerxes and Histories. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cyropaedia

Regarding your concerns about "the low regard that the Cyropaedia has among many historians", and your efforts to 'set the record straight' on various articles with your own interpretations and conclusions, you should probably read WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and WP:ADVOCACY.--Jeffro77 (talk) 03:40, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Chronic2. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:20, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]