User talk:Daniel Helman

Welcome!

Hello, Daniel Helman, 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:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Cirt (talk) 18:42, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the introduction. I'm glad to be here.Daniel Helman (talk) 21:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About the red-link ...

BTW, your User link is red because the page is empty; doing just about anything to your user page will fix that. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:09, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! What cameraderie!Daniel Helman (talk) 19:38, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday I couldn't even spell it, and now I are one?? :-) ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:36, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity: what kind of geology are you into? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:35, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the question! I'm still relatively new to science, so I don't have much deep expertise in all my interests. I am fairly well-versed in mineralogy and crystallography, but my knowledge of stable isotope research is a bit weaker than many people's. I bridge into sustainability, and in that field I am well-versed in alternative energy, transportation, health, and various technologies. I know very little of economic geology, and am generally not involved in petroleum projects. I do some editing for "The Central European Journal of Geosciences" and have therefore read up on some recent developments across a range of fields. I'm working on an article for a geophysics journal, on telluric currents, and have some knowledge of that and other geophysics topics. That's for background. As far as interests: I'm very much interested in sustainability. I'm working on a project to promote some reasonable solutions to climate change that governments could implement (e.g. planting 100 billion trees per year would offset global anthropogenic CO2 and not destroy any country's economy). I'm also a fan of the arts, and, for example, would like to see enormous quartz crystal sculptures for the beautiful mood they would doubtless cast on public places. Generally, my interests are broader than the day.Daniel Helman (talk) 21:02, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

VAN Method

Hi, Daniel. Just a note that I am eagerly awaiting your comments on VAN, so we can work out what a suitable pov should be. I am also under a little pressure to move forward with this (more work to do!), so am hoping you're not entirely booked with other stuff. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:10, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JJ. Point me to where you mean in the VAN page? I'm happy to give my input.Daniel Helman (talk) 01:17, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:24, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Much obliged. Thanks for the good faith effort! Daniel Helman (talk) 04:54, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Griffith Park copyright concern

The material you included in the above article was copied from escholarship.org/uc/item/01m2d0cx, a copyright web page. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. If you are the copyright holder and wish to release this material to Wikipedia under license, please see the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted materials. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. Regardless of the copyright issue, Wikipedia frowns on scholars citing their own works on this website, as it may be seen as promotional or a conflict of interest.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:50, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all true. Perhaps another editor who feels comfortable with the work will paraphrase the information. I'll put something into the talk page of the article. Best wishes.Daniel Helman (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Daniel Helman. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Daniel Helman. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Daniel Helman. 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)[reply]