User talk:Clementkuehn

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Clementkuehn, 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! Aboutmovies (talk) 18:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read/skim through Help:Show preview, Wikipedia:Images and Wikipedia:Featured article criteria. Thanks, –thedemonhog talk • edits 19:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anastasius Sinaita

Well, you've certainly hit the ground running and for that, kudos! Now you've done an amazing amount of work on this article today and that is impressive but the problem is that the article isn't yet featured article quality. The most obvious single difficulty with it is its length. We normally expect featured articles to be a minimum of 1500 words and this is barely half that. The other difficulty, as you freely acknowledge, is that there is probably not sufficient information available to expand this to the required length. The normal route for a featured article is for it to be peer reviewed as an early stage so that specialist input can be obtained. To be candid, from my experience of FAC, this article, in its current form, will fail but will in the process absorb the energies of over-worked reviewers. May I suggest that you withdraw the article, for the time-being, from featured article candidacy and instead devote time to working it up to meet all the usual criteria? I hope you don't mind me writing to you in these terms but it can be very disheartening for a new editor to have their cherished work mauled at FAC and you are obviously someone who has much to contribute to Wikipedia in the longer term. If you do decide to withdraw the article, and it is my strong recommendation that you do do so, you simply need to post Withdrawn ~~~~ on the nomination page. Withdrawing the article at an early stage, before it acquires any opposes, means the withdrawal will not appear in the article's history. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 19:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for withdrawing the article: I'm sure it was the right decision :) Good luck and best wishes, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 04:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages, as you did to Genesis creation narrative. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Jess_talk|_edits 02:53, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When one of your changes is reverted (as it was initially here), please do not re-add the material (as you did here). Doing so is considered edit warring, and is against policy. Per WP:BRD, the next step after being reverted is to discuss the change on the article talk page. You may consider reading WP:EL first. All the best, Jess_talk|_edits 02:56, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jess, I thought that I was adding useful information to the "Genesis Creation Narrative" site. Anastasius of Sinai (Anastasius Sinaita) discusses the Genesis creation narrative extensively in 12 books in his Hexaemeron. His Hexaemeron also contains citations of many previous commentators on the creation narrative: from Philo to Basil the Great. Thus his Hexaemeron, in many ways, is a compendium of commentaries on the creation narrative by Fathers of the Church prior to 700. Most students and scholars do not realize this, because his Hexaemeron was not published in the original Greek and was not translated into a modern language until 2007. Anastasius himself, despite his enormous importance in the Middle Ages, is often not taught in universities, because critical editions of his works have only begun to be published. Thus I also added a site about his life and works in general.

If, however, these two links still seem gratuitous, I would be happy to remove them. I do not want to be contentious. I enjoy your work on Wikipedia too much! (I did not see, at first, who had removed the two links.)

So let me know what you would like.

Thanks for your patience,

Clementkuehn (talk) 01:58, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Clementkuehn. I commented on my most recent revert of your content on my talk page, but I'll briefly add to that message to explain this. My revert from above was due to WP:EW (and WP:BRD) and really nothing more. It's important that when you add new content to an article and it's reverted, your next step should be to go to the article talk page to hash out the issue with other editors. It's not a big thing, really... this was just an informative message to let you know how we handle these sorts of situations. As I said in the other message, I'll stay out of the dispute for now; I do appreciate the contributions. Welcome to WP! :) Jess_talk|_edits 02:26, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jess, I am beginning to learn some Wiki etiquette. Thanks! All the best! Clementkuehn (talk) 02:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Hexameron ‎ has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. I also note that Anastasius Sinaita was mainly copyright violations. Dougweller (talk) 08:26, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond to avoid being blocked

In order to be sure that you will not continue to add copyright violation, I need you to respond here please about the warning. You should also not use the Minor edit box for adding/changing text, adding links, etc. It's for minor spelling, grammar, formatting, etc. changes. Dougweller (talk) 08:34, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond

I see you are editing right now, adding the same links you've been adding before and marking your edit M for minor. I will block you today if you don't explain what you are doing, acknowledge your copyright violations and agree to stop. I have just realised who you are, but that doesn't excuse the copyvio. And you need to read WP:COI. Dougweller (talk) 16:39, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Our policy on copyvio is very conservative. I now understand how you've been sourcing things, but it's been confusing from an outsider's point of view (ie you've copied stuff from other sources and cited it to your work). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 17:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Doug, I hope this matter has now been resolved. I am the author of most of the Wiki article on Anastasius, the author of the websites (from which I took information), and the author of the book (which I referenced). The ideas are the same in all three places. But now I have changed the wording in the Wiki Anastasius Sinaita article a bit, to make it more original.

Let me know if I should still make further adjustments.

And again I am sorry for my obfuscations. I am trying to learn to be an upstanding Wiki citizen.

Clementkuehn (talk) 02:07, 28 September 2010 (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) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Clementkuehn. 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 2017 election voter message

Hello, Clementkuehn. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]