User talk:Joungok

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Joungok, 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)
Manual of Style

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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 07:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you !

Hello,Aboutmovies nice to meet you and thank you very much for your kind information. Joungok (talk) 12:38, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP:OVERLINK. It is incorrect to link the same words repeatedly, and it is incorrect to link ordinary English words. Ground Zero | t 03:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK!

Hi, Ground Zero Thank you very much for kind information , I am thinking about [ cite needed ] but the rule of overlink is much more importent as you recomended . Thank a lot ! --Joungok (talk) 05:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jin Wang Kim for deletion

The article Jin Wang Kim is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jin Wang Kim until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved, instead of writing it yourself. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you. --bender235 (talk) 20:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you know there are upgrade work in Wikipedia during last week so you may be misunderstanding which is the first thing to do in this job ,at this moment you may understand what's happening .--Joungok (talk) 09:41, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jin Wang Kim

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages, as you did at Jin Wang Kim, you may be blocked from editing. --bender235 (talk) 09:11, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why are you doing like this it is kind of vandalism I think--Joungok (talk) 09:17, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is standard procedure. Read WP:AFD for further information. --bender235 (talk) 10:09, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1) Removing AFD tags will get you blocked. 2) Removing AFD tags will not prevent the deletion discussion from progessing. 3) If you disagree with the suggestion to delete, make a useful and policy-based argument in the deletion discussion (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:15, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I disagree with the suggestion to delete,so I make a useful and policy-based argument in discussion thank you.Joungok (talk) 14:55, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jin Wang Kim

This is your last warning; the next time you remove Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages, as you did at Jin Wang Kim, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --bender235 (talk) 10:08, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --bender235 (talk) 10:14, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,the suspicion and charge by user bender235 is starting from misunderstanding about several points. And some technical problem occured during upgading process of wikipedia , last week. anyway I would like to talk politely but I am very very tuff in scientific discussion. Thank youJoungok (talk) 15:08, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And remember bender235 according to wiki principles you got a big mistake , because you must say about the article " Jin Wang Kim " , Not people Jin Wang Kim itself as you know ! Joungok (talk) 15:15, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD discussion

Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. --bender235 (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your special concern in this article , but I don't really understand what are you doing here, because before the judge the deletion process without talk in my talk page and abruptly decided like this, so I think it is one kind of the "vandalism" and second your suggestion regardless of minor or major edit, wikipedia computer system guided it very well during the editing don't you think Joungok (talk) 19:10, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Counsel, and future participation

Hello, Joungok. I think the article you worked on so hard is almost certain to be deleted: Wikipedia simply does not and cannot allow articles like this, for many different reasons. I'm sure this is all very disturbing to you, though, and I just wanted to let you know I understand that, and I'm sorry. I hope you will contribute to Wikipedia in the future, but not in any way that promotes your own personal interests, or the interests of anyone you're personally connected to. You'll need to spend some time learning our policies here if you do want to contribute productively in the future, though. If you have any questions, the helpdesk is a good place to ask them. Please don't try discuss the current "Articles for Deletion" process about your article there, however. That is not the purpose of the helpdesk. Best regards, – OhioStandard (talk) 18:37, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ;OhioStandard thank you very much for your kind consideration but as you know there are another main rule in Wikipedia for discussion is don't ignorence about question and answer ,so as you mentioned early for the future I try to talk ,that all! thak you again and best warm regards Joungok (talk) 19:00, 18 February 2011 (UTC) [reply]

WikiProject banners

Hello Joungok,

I have corrected the assessment for WikiProject Medicine at Talk:Jin Wang Kim. It is not possible for this, or any other, article to be rated A-class: WPMED does not use that class.

Furthermore, as the "importance" actually means "how soon will volunteer members improve this article", and they have said categorically that they have far more interest in improving articles about diseases and treatments than articles about people, all articles about people (and companies, and hospitals, and medical schools) are rated "Low" importance by the project, no matter how famous or important the person is. These standards are documented at WP:MEDA, if you would like more information. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello WhatamIdoing, As you can see the last correction by --bender235 (talk), so I think it is matter of procedure . But I remember of your kind information . Thank youJoungok (talk) 06:19, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jin wang kim

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Jin wang kim, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Jin Wang Kim. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Repost of Jin Wang Kim

A tag has been placed on Jin Wang Kim requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template {{hang on}} underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. bender235 (talk) 18:40, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article with verifiable source can do. As you know Bender 235 Thank you. Joungok (talk) 19:00, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jin Wang Kim

You recently contested the speedy deletion of [Jin Wang Kim] but never provide a reason that the article Jin Wang Kim should not be speedily deleted. If you do not the article will be deleted. Put a reason on the article's talk page immediately. Gabriele449 (talk) 20:01, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Gabriele449 I try to put many several real reasons which is in wikipedia but as you know the page is speedy gone away , and I try to several times but it is impossible to doing that as you know. I think it is matter of procedure but I don't know why unreasonalble delete and why do not want to talk any more discussion thank you Joungok (talk) 11:34, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]