User talk:194.24.244.5

Hello there! If you want your stub on Brain fingerprinting to survive, please follow the instructions on the copyvio notice and write the stub on the /Temp page. Your text is still accessible in the page history, so you can do a copy/paste to the /Temp page. If you overwrite the copyvio notice, we cannot remove only the previous infringing content, and hence your stub would be gone, too. And I don't want to do the copy/paste because then the author attribution would be wrong. Thank you. Lupo 08:04, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/The Ten Most Influential People of the Second Millennium

Welcome to Wiki. You'll find much Sound and Fury here, so don't get discouraged; you'll also find much useful information. Consider creating an account since you should sign your vote. Just add ~~~~ at the end of an edit. Cheers, Vincent 07:11, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Daylight saving time

While we appreciate your contributions to this page, unless you can provide a verifiable source for the information you keep adding to the artice for Daylight saving time it is considered original research and in violation of Wikipedia policy. Peyna 02:06, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi, This is not supposed to be a precise scientific statement of measurement. Just common sense observation that should be quite obvious, yet vital for general criticism of DST. You might replace billions with zillions or countless or innumerous. The point is not to measure the wasted manhours. Just to state that the waste is enormous and forms the basis for calling DST in question. Stay healthy m.c.

It's still original research; if someone doing a study on DST maybe found it useful to point out that's one thing, but we don't put a note about how many man-hours are wasted each morning tying our shoes into an article about velcro shoes either. It's a poor argument at best, a straw man argument at worst, and doesn't belong on the page unless you can provide some source using it as an actual argument against DST. Peyna 02:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

It seems the waste of time is not obvious to you. So much more this should be added to enlighten others. Call it then "many people are furious with a stupid waste of time caused by DST". Is that "original research"? Do you not hear curses all around at the time-switch day? If I do not want to waste time on velcro, I give it up. DST is an unavoidable pain for many imposed by governments. Intrusion into their peaceful lives. And changing clocks in one's own mind only is a demonstratably workable solution that could help many angry people relieve their frustrations. Do you not want to help others?

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I noticed you are known only as an IP address; that means you are not signed up. To sign up, you only need to click Create account and choose a username and password. You don't need to provide any personal information. If you sign up, you'll have a username that others can use to recognize you and leave you messages on the wiki. You'll be able to sign your name just by typing four tildes (~~~~) when you leave someone else a message. Plus, you (and others) will easily be able to see a list of all your contributions to Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, ask at the Village pump, or feel free to ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 22:24, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Polyphasic sleep

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. While the Wikipedia community appreciates your obvious efforts to increase the amount of information on the site, we'd like to point out our policy on Original Research and not citing sources for the information you provide. Wikipedia tries to bolster its reputation by linking to reputable outside sources for the information it gets. Thank you again, JHMM13 (T | C) 20:08, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment, but please do so on my talk page in the future and not my main page. Although I can't agree with your point that more unverified material won't hurt the already OR-packed article, I think I'm just going to solve this for now with an {{originalresearch}} tag. I don't know anything about the subject, so if you could verify some of those claims, it would be useful. If you would like to discuss the matter further, you can do so on the Polyphasic sleep talk page. Thanks, JHMM13 (T | C) 20:35, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Blanking

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages or sections with blank content. It is considered vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Aksi_great (talk - review me) 08:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Eugeroic

An editor has nominated Eugeroic, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugeroic (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of SuperMemo World

A tag has been placed on SuperMemo World 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 about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, 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, 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. Teapotgeorge^Talk 21:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Alisha Davis

I have nominated Alisha Davis, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alisha Davis. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. MBisanz ^talk 04:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Tod Nielsen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tod Nielsen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tod Nielsen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article.

Clarityfiend (talk) 11:35, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

---