Woland37
Wait! Are you here because your article was speedy deleted? Click here before leaving a message to find out why.
expressions and propositions in tautologies
I want to add the following to the article but there is a dispute concerning it please resolve: Please discuss at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tautology_(rhetoric)
The Pragmatics or context with 'unmarried bachelor' by the user would determine whether it is a tautology or language verbosity. In an academic setting such as a peer reviewed journal propositions are put forward in an attempt at deriving an independent explanation for an observation. Tautologies in such a setting would be a tautological proposition and unacceptable. Tautological expressions used in an informal setting such as a sports event with its associated colloquial speech is acceptable because of the pragmatics with it. The dividing line between a tautological proposition and expression is pragmatics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.208.48.160 (talk) 07:23, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Trevor Veitch - notability established?
I was reading the Trevor Veitch page and saw the notability caution from last October. I am wondering if notability is established through his production credits of notable songs from the 80s in particular, such as Toni Basil's "Micky", and which are discussed in the article.
What to do ?
Hi Woland37,
What to do with http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abloux&diff=291438650&oldid=291437616 ?
I wrote the article following the 2 (official) sites given in the references section.
- The Abloux at the Sandre database The Sandre provides an alphabetic list of the communes along the course of the river, its length...
- The geoportail provides very accurate maps which allow to find the precise coordinates of the source and the mouth (with their elevations), and to build the list of communes ordered from source to mouth.
So, what can I do to avoid {{nofootnotes}} ?
Thanks in advance.
Alvar☮ ☎ 12:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- I would look at WP:foot and Help:Footnotes. Both of these articles should provide you with what you need to know and how to do it. Its not a huge deal with smaller articles like this but it lets us know which statements came from which sources. Ciao.--Woland (talk) 20:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Ok. I think the template will remain a long time on the article. I don't know how to explain... for example, look at this. How can I cite my source ? I found this information on the map provided by the Géoportail. But, in fine, you are right, it's no big deal ;D Ciao Alvar☮ ☎ 13:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
GA Review of "Natural selection"
As part of the GA review sweeps process (see:Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps, a project devoted to re-reviewing Good Articles listed before August 26, 2007), the article Natural selection has been re-reviewed. I have placed the article on hold until sufficient citations can be added to the article. If an editor has not expressed interest in improving the article within seven days, the article will be delisted as a Good Article. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 04:35, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
lets work it out
copy paste the firs grammatical mistake. Ok? 76.16.176.166 (talk) 16:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- Its really not salvageable at this point. I have no clear idea of what you are trying to express. The language barrier is a real problem in your edits. Perhaps try to save your edits someplace else before trying to add them.--Woland (talk) 16:36, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- Not at all ? Lets try in small increments OK? 76.16.176.166 (talk) 16:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
So do how we can together work on finding the best way to structure the text? You didn't provide me any factual information. Why did you reverted all structured sources ? Are you going to provide me any meaningful information? 76.16.176.166 (talk) 17:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
What is you level of expertise in molecular genetic ?
- As I said, I can't provide you with factual information because it is nigh impossible to understand the intent of your edits or to even comprehend what they are saying in the article itself. This is (at this point) less of a content issue and more of a simple comprehension issue. Your edits simply are not understandable. No reader of English is going to be able to read and understand the article. As our audience is an English speaking/reading one it is imperative that it be readable (at the absolute least). --Woland (talk) 17:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- check now now is very easy language and easy to edit
76.16.176.166 (talk) 19:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- That is not an improvement. Please revert your edits. Why in the hell are you changing the word hypothesis into evolution? It simply makes no sense.
You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:56, 17 June 2010 (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) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)