User talk:Informatus

Hi Informatus, and Please excuse this intrusion as you have been around a bit already but if no one has said it before: Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of Contents

Department directory

Need help?

Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.

Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations
The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.

Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.

If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Good luck, and have fun. FWIW, Bzuk (talk) 12:00, 25 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Cary Grant

There are standards for the opening sentence. It should be in the form X (is/was) Y. Please don't modify this form. Yworo (talk) 00:01, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Water

I have reverted your addition there because 'AskOxford.com Concise Oxford English dictionary online.' is not reliable reference on wikipedia, especially for such topic as grading precious gemstones. Materialscientist (talk) 09:58, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting I can (gladly) fix myself, but encyclopedic facts need proper reference(s). Materialscientist (talk) 10:16, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me clarify: I can not put on wikipedia what I know, I can only write what I can prove by reliable references (even if I know it is true). In other words, wikipedia is not about truth, it is about verifiable information. Materialscientist (talk) 11:14, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not method. The reference itself was not appropriate. Please stay WP:CIVIL, I am here to help and to guard from misinformation. Materialscientist (talk) 11:23, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Abbie Lee

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Abbie Lee 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 important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. DGG ( talk ) 20:52, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to United Airlines Flight 93. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 17:48, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like most publications, we have our own Manual of Style

Our Manual of Style dictates that we do not use honorifics like Miss, Mr. Dr. and the like in articles. This is not disrespect, this is standard 21st-century style (17th-century, for us Quakers). You would have to persuade other editors to change our entire manual of style; and the odds of that are pretty much zero. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:21, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately 21st century "style" in written and spoken English is mostly not respectful in its expression and ignores many of the the traditional rules of English according to all the English teaching I have had from my grammar school days up to and including my university years. The quality of English expression is declining because the general population is too lazy to try to understand how to use it correctly.