User talk:Xipirho
Oi oi
AD vs CE
[edit]Hey. Sorry about partaking in the 'AD' vs 'CE' wars on the Old English page, but I'm intrigued why you think it's best to use 'CE' rather than 'AD'. By all means make it 'AD X' (as opposed to 'X AD'), but why 'CE'? It seems just like a re-branding of AD in order to make it PC, but when it clearly corresponds with the AD system it seems absurd. Xipirho 10:46, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I didn't realise this was an edit war. There are a few reasons why I used CE/BCE rather than AD/BC, which are:
- CE/BCE is used as an industry standard among many historians and scientific publications.
- It is now used by government schools in Britain, Australia, etc. (not sure about America).
- It is non-religious specific (non-christian countries such as China, Japan, etc use our date system to some extent).
- Our date/calendar system has been adopted as the standard for international timekeeping.
- Why should non-christians (such as Secularists, Jews, Muslims, etc.) accept this notation for international timekeeping.
- I'm secular, not a christian or even religious, find AD/BC off-putting, and I don't see CE/BCE as being PC.
- Using the AD/BC notation 'AD 2005' or '2005 AD' is essentially saying the "2005th year since the birth of our lord Jesus Christ", which is offensive to non-christians, such as myself.
- The more this system is used, the more people will come to accept it.
- It's only a minor change, nothing like realigning dates.
- Even though I'm secular I think Jesus probably did exist, and that the AD/BC notation doesn't actually align with his now widely accepted date of birth c. 6-4 BCE.
- Christians don't have to find this offensive, they can interpret the 'C' in CE/BCE as Christian, while others can interpret it as Common.
- Hope this answers your question. -- 203.164.184.242 14:20, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, I spose it wasn't really a war - would an edit diplomatic incident be more appropriate? ;-) Anyway, I spose as it can mean 'Christian era' it's OK. Why I find it rather irritating, and I suppose that's the word to use, is because the dating system still revolves around approximately the time of the birth of (be he mythical or not) Jesus but it's just given another, meaningless (what does 'common era' mean?!) name. I'm not a Christian - indeed I'm an atheist - and for this reason when I first came across the system I thought it sounded good, but as it still dates from approximately the birth of Jesus it seems in many respects pointless to 'rebrand' it, as it were. I suppose that as it's 'industry standard' as you put it I can't really oppose it on a historical wikipedia page, and I also see that maybe referring to Jesus as 'dominus' (as in anno domini) could be a bit offensive to some (although surely you could think of it as 'lord [of the christians]' couldn't you?) - how about 'anno christi' ...or 'BJ' (could be problematic! :-) ) and 'AJ'!? I spose they're not gonna catch on! ...well, in brief, thanks for taking the time to explain your case - I think I'm basically I'm OK with BCE and CE now as 'c' can stand for 'Christian'. -- Xipirho 16:28, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I hope you don't mind, but I have copied your reply to your talk page, because It's probably better to leave replies here rather than on Anonymous talk pages as Anonymous users use non-static IP addresses, which can be shared between many users.
Burford
[edit]Hello. Your opinion sought at Talk:Burford. Cheers. — Trilobite (Talk) 06:31, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Your edit to Oxford High School (Oxford)
[edit]Your recent edit to Oxford High School (Oxford) (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 02:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
File:Table showing welfare losses and gains in trading between poluter and fishermen.jpg listed for deletion
[edit]An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Table showing welfare losses and gains in trading between poluter and fishermen.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ZooFari 00:13, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Graph of polluter and recipient of pollution.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Graph of polluter and recipient of pollution.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 06:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:File:Table showing welfare losses and gains in trading between poluter and fishermen.jpg
[edit]Thank you for uploading File:File:Table showing welfare losses and gains in trading between poluter and fishermen.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 08:13, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Unreferenced BLPs
[edit]Hello Xipirho! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 9 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
- Rysbek Jumabayev - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:26, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Some tips to help you out!
[edit]Hi Xipirho, I thought I'd drop a few notes on your talk page with some help on writing articles :o)
First of all, it may be best for you to do a bit of reading, starting with the Wikipedia manual of style, which will give you a lot of information about how Wikipedia prefers its articles to be written. It's not as hard to follow as it might look; quite a bit of the information there probably won't be vital for you at first.
Second, I recommend you make a user sandbox - which is just an area you can use to practise in, and to make notes in, and to get things ready in. If you click this red link: user:Xipirho/Sandbox, that will let you create that page (it gives you an edit window to start work in). Anything, anywhere, on the help and information pages which gives you an example, try it out in your sandbox until you're familiar with it.
For your article, the next thing you want to do is start collecting as much information as you can about it. Google searches (particularly in Books and Scholar) will be your best friend for this! Once you've found the information, the next most important thing is to start writing up each fact in your own words (very important, this), and make a note at the same time of exactly where that information came from. Build in the references as you go along; I'm going to copy in, down below this, a whole heap of help on doing references, which was produced by one of our best teachers (Chzz).
Here's another place that you'll find incredibly useful - citation templates which you can copy and paste into your sandbox, between <ref></ref> tags; you just fill in the blanks from your sources into the template, and you'll end up with nicely formatted inline citations :o) It all helps. Remember to add a references section to your sandbox (make a new line, and put ==References== on it, and type {{reflist}} on the next line, so that you can see how your citations look as you do them. Remember to save your page often! You don't want to lose your work.
Hopefully this will give you a good start and make life easier for you.
One last thing to keep as a motto: "It's better to write one good, well-referenced, nicely-presented article than it is to create fifty unreferenced one-line stubs!" Pesky (talk …stalk!) 10:02, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
How references work
[edit]Simple references
[edit]These require two parts;
- a)
Chzz is 98 years old.<ref> "The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref> He likes tea. <ref> [http://www.nicecupofteaandasitdown.com Tea website] </ref>
- b) A section called "References" with the special code "{{reflist}}";
== References == {{reflist}}
(an existing article is likely to already have one of these sections)
To see the result of that, please look at user:chzz/demo/simpleref. Edit it, and check the code; perhaps make a test page of your own, such as user:Xipirho/reftest and try it out.
Named references
[edit]Chzz was born in 1837. <ref name=MyBook> "The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref> Chzz lives in Footown.<ref name=MyBook/>
Note that the second usage has a / (and no closing ref tag). This needs a reference section as above; please see user:chzz/demo/namedref to see the result.
Citation templates
[edit]You can put anything you like between <ref> and </ref>, but using citation templates makes for a neat, consistent look;
Chzz has 37 Olympic medals. <ref> {{Citation | last = Smith | first = John | title = Olympic medal winners of the 20th century | publication-date = 2001 | publisher = [[Cambridge University Press]] | page = 125 | isbn = 0-521-37169-4 }} </ref>
Please see user:chzz/demo/citeref to see the result.
For more help and tips on that subject, see user:chzz/help/refs.
Something to make your life easier!
[edit]Hi there Xipirho! I've just come across one of your articles, and noticed that you might appreciate some help with references.
You might want to consider using this tool - it makes your life a whole heap easier, by filling in complete citation templates for your links. All you do is install the script on Special:MyPage/common.js, or or Special:MyPage/vector.js, then paste the bare url (without [...] brackets) between your <ref></ref> tabs, and you'll find a clickable link called Reflinks in your toolbox section of the page (probably in the left hand column). Then click that tool. It does all the rest of the work (provided that you remember to save the page! It doesn't work for everything (particularly often not for pdf documents), but for pretty much anything ending in "htm" or "html" (and with a title) it will do really, really well. Happy editing! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 10:02, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
The article Cristal Limón has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Only sources found are very trivial mentions in a couple of books.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 11:13, 2 November 2018 (UTC)