User talk:Cor martyr

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Cor martyr, 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! FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Peter Yu Tae-chol

A tag has been placed on Peter Yu Tae-chol requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ukexpat (talk) 18:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. — Gwalla | Talk 20:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits on Blessed Caius of Korea

Please note that the correct English when adding dates is "on 7 July, 1867" and not "in 7 July, 1867" as you keep changing the dates to, and which is not correct English. Yet despite my edit summary explaining this, you changed it back again. "In" is only used for months and years, for instance "in July 1876". In addition dates should be wikilinked, which you also removed. I have again changed it back to the correct format and I would be grateful if you would refrain from changing it again. Also I should point out that other wikipedia articles cannot be used to verify content on articles, I have therefore removed the "ref" you added using the 26 Martyrs article as a source. You may also wish to know that there is a "book template" that can be used for book sources which makes it much easier for other users to read, and also if possible, the ISBN should be checked and added. Checking on amazon usually helps to get information such as the ISBN, publication date etc. Thank you. ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 21:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that; I was in the process of correcting it when you corrected it and there was an edit conflict so I copied and pasted what I corrected which I thought you didn't change. Cor martyr (talk) 22:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, it is sorted now.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 23:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Accounts

Further to your message today on the Blessed Caius of Korea discussion page, it was User:Caius k who added the "removed allegations" edit summary, yet you are apologising for saying it? In that case then you clearly have two accounts on wikipedia (and you also seem to have edited whilst not logged in too as an "IP user"). I would be very careful in that case, as you seem to be using both accounts for the same edits, on the same articles. I am presuming that you are doing this out in good faith. However I would strongly urge you to read this Wikipedia:Sock puppetry which states,

Although not common, some Wikipedians also create alternative accounts. An alternative account is an additional username used by a Wikipedian who already has an account. In such cases the main account is normally assumed to be the one with the longest history and most edits.

There are limited acceptable uses for alternative accounts, and a number of uses which are explicitly forbidden - in particular, using an alternative account to avoid scrutiny, to mislead others by making disruptive edits with one account and normal ones with another, or otherwise artificially stir up controversy is not permitted. Misuse of an alternative account may result in being blocked from editing.

If someone uses alternative accounts, it is recommended that he or she provide links between the accounts in most cases to make it easy to determine that one individual shares them and to avoid any appearance or suspicion of sockpuppetry (see alternative account notification).

And also have a look at this part - Alternative accounts. I really would urge you to have a good read and consider using one account only, (and placing a note on that account that you used to use the other account) and then have the other account closed. At the very least you need to provide links between the accounts as stated above and in the article I have linked you to. I hope you understand that I am only trying to avoid any possible problems that are more than likely to arise for you should you continue with both accounts, and not linking them. Otherwise it is very likely that someone might accuse you of being a "sockpuppet" at some point, which wouldn't be a good thing to go through when it can be avoided. Just a suggestion but I would use only one account and have the other closed, and place a note on the retained account about previously also having another account.

There is also another user who seems very similar User:Bernadeta is that also your account as it has a virtually identical edit history to your two accounts above. You also would it seems have edited yesterday when you weren't logged in (User:24.247.42.146), it is best to check you are logged in beore you edit. If this isn't clear or you need any help please let me know and as I said above I hope you understand why I am leaving you this (very long!) message. It is though easily sorted. ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 15:13, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]