User talk:Penelopy Jupiter

Hello Penelopy Jupiter, and 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
Article Wizard — a Wizard to help you create articles

The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.
Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia.

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 or 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.

Penelopy Jupiter, good luck, and have fun. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 16:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Home-Education: Rationales, Practices and Outcomes

The article Home-Education: Rationales, Practices and Outcomes has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability. Unsourced

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. noq (talk) 17:36, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Home-Education: Rationales, Practices and Outcomes

A tag has been placed on Home-Education: Rationales, Practices and Outcomes, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 18:06, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please slow down

Wikipedia does not work like this. Please concentrate on building a solid article (ie Home education) and expanding out from there. Most of your additions will be deleted as they fail Wikipedia's requirements for notability and verifiability. Lame Name (talk)

Edit war on Dr Paula Rothermel

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Dr Paula Rothermel. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. There appears to be a dispute regarding the notability of the subject of this article. Rather than repeatedly removing the notability tag, please discuss your concerns on the article's talk page, so that a consensus may be reached. Thank you! Davnor (talk) 20:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Family searches

Hi, I have once again removed your addition to the Short Brothers article. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. It is not the place for searching for family members. It has many well established requirements for content that is added to it, as linked from the welcome message above, including the types of external links that are useful for improving articles. Exploring these explanatory links further may be beneficial for your future contributions. Lame Name (talk) 22:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK Lame Duck. So little is known about the Short Brothers, I considered the original link was legitimate. People use Wiki to find out information and finding info on the lives of these brothers is almost impossible, considering they were fairly high profile in their time. Using the link to PR allowed searchers to find out more about the brothers.

As I see you are chasing me around Wiki, I have to ask you to remove your incorrect comment on home education. Your write "frequently adopt an informal style of education..", but this is not true. Research shows that these are not the majority. This is your view, not the one that the research supports. I've not corrected your entry for fear of looking like this was 'tit for tat' given you comments on my PR page and removal of the link from the Short brothers. However, you do need to tone the comment down, perhaps with the use of the word 'some' which would, I believe, be supported by the research evidence. Autonomous home educators are a minority. Penelopy Jupiter (talk) 22:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May I proffer one further link? You are most welcome to make any changes to any article providing they are within Wikipedia's guidelines and are referenced by reliable published sources. Lame Name (talk) 22:46, 5 April 2010 (UTC).[reply]

I cannot think I have written anything that is not civil. I have just spotted it. When I wrote "OK Lame Duck" that was a mistake. It's Easter and I am sat here, writing, thinking, and eating a marzipan duck from the Easter cake. I am genuinely sorry. And when I said, "OK" I was meaning, 'yes, I accept your comment' (whist not necessarily agreeing). I will tweak your entry, although probably now that there is at least a page for home education, someone else is sure to. However, as you have left it, the imnpression is that home educators are of a certain type which is not at all what the evidence shows.Penelopy Jupiter (talk) 23:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm cake. I have changed the article to include home schooling but the article will be written and rewritten several times. There is no deadline. Lame Name (talk) 23:15, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 07:50, 6 April 2010 (UTC) Thank you --Penelopy Jupiter (talk) 07:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]