User talk:Xenophon777

Welcome!

Howdy, Xenophon777, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions; you seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics! If you need help on how to title new articles, see the naming conventions, and for help on formatting pages, visit the manual of style. For general questions, go to Wikipedia:Help or the FAQ; if you can't find your answer there, check the Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. If you have any more questions after that, feel free to ask me directly on my user talk page.

---

Additional tips

Here are some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!

• For Wikipedia policies and guidelines, see The Five Pillars of Wikipedia and What Wikipedia is not.
• Find everything in the Directory.
• If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, the Sandbox is for you.
• If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random article button in the sidebar, or check out the Open Task message in the Community Portal.
• If you have edits from before creating an account, see the page on changing attribution for edits.
• You can also upload images. Make sure you use the correct copyright tags when you do.
• Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date.

Be bold

Be bold in updating pages! You can find instantaneous help any time simply by typing {{help}} anywhere on your own user or user talk page.
You can find me at my user page or talk page for any questions. Happy editing, and we'll see ya 'round.

Joe I 04:59, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Reverting tips

Hey! Glad I caught the problem you were concerned with. When you're dealing with a vandal who's done multiple changes, the 'undo' function doesn't really work - it only clears the last change. What you do, is go to the page's 'history' tab, where you'll see a list of the changes made to the article. You can click on the 'diff' (or difference) next to the version that looks like it's the one where the editor started messing around, and then on the previous version (the one on the left side of the screen) click 'edit'. You'll get a notice that you're editing a previous version of the article, but that's okay; just add an edit summary saying you're reverting and why, and click save. WP:REVERT gives you what's probably a better explanation. Keep up the good work! Tony Fox (arf!) 05:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Xanten

Would you be so kind and answer the question on the discussion page of the Wikipedia article of Xanten. I am - still learning English to get better- very curious about your answer. I´d be rather thankful. Greetings,--172.173.226.138 13:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I think you missunderstood me. I wrote "Beneath other school..." not "Under other schools" (see discussion page"). Can you tell me why you corrected this in "Among other schools...". Thank you for answering: --172.174.35.174 13:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

"Beneath" would mean the same thing as "under" other schools. Did you in fact mean "Unter anderen Schulen..."? That would translate, in English, into neither "under other schools" nor "beneath other schools," but "among other schools." By the way, let me encourage you to set up your own Wikipedia account so that you can have a talk page. Xenophon777 19:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Dangers of marshmallow-roasting

If I were to procure a source on that information, would you not remove it as vandalism? 65.190.89.154 06:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC), Esq.

As vandalism? I suppose that "vandalism" is like pornography. It's hard to define, but, to paraphrase a certain Supreme Court justice, we know it when we see it. Or we think that we do. It depends on what you said, how you said it, whether what you said in fact flowed from the source, whether the source were viable and verifiable... If you had a verifiable and credible source which listed statistics on annual treatment of kids for minor burns due to trying to slurp down just-toasted marshmallows, or on bags of sugary marshmallows catching fire because they were left too close to a campfire, and you had a paragraph or reference fairly making use of this source, in a way which made sense within the context of the existing article, then that's something that I suspect most editors would leave in, or possible edit only in minor respects. If you want to put up something to show that anything to do with campfires is a wildly dangerous activity that no one should ever engage in, you'll probably have a hard time fairly connecting that point to a verifiable and credible source. If your concern is mostly about campfires, then perhaps that concern should be directed to an article on general campfire safety. If you have had a bad experience--personally, among family, or among friends--relating to marshmallows and campfires, then I'm genuinely sorry and sympathetic, but that would not justify an out-of-context or unfairly sourced section condemning the practice of roasting marshmallows. Wikipedia is descriptive, not prescriptive. It is not an advice column, nor a how-to. It describes the real world out there. BTW, I'm not, of course, the only editor out there, and am also not the only editor watching the marshmallow article. What reaction you may encounter from the other editors I do not know. BTW, why not either get a regular account (rather than signing on with your number), or, if you already have one, use it? Xenophon777 15:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Krefeld

Sorry for the late answer. I've chosen the word "territory" to make the difference between "Stadtteile" and "Stadtbezirke". The listed "districts" are "Stadtbezirke" in German Wikipedia. The "Stadtteile" are smaller and there are 19. I've found an Article in English Wikipedia called "Stadtbezirk" explaining exactly the "districts" about which we're talking. Isn't it the best solution to simply change it into "Stadtbezirk"? --Washio (talk) 22:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Works for me. We know that translation is an imprecise art in any event. "Territory" didn't seem like something we normally associate (in English) with municipalities. There are "districts," "wards," "neighborhoods," and the like. To be both honest and candid, I'm not sure I know the difference between a "Stadtteil" and a "Stadtbezirk." For that matter, I'm not sure I know the difference, in my native English, between a "city district" and a "city ward," either. Xenophon777 (talk) 02:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I thought that it would be more significant to discuss about it at talk:Krefeld. So, I've added the section there. Thanks.--Demoeconomist (talk) 09:26, 20 December 2007 (UTC)(I've changed my name)

Lorem ipsum

Just so you know, the text you see at http://www.dealipedia.com/tos.php is not real Latin but widely used placeholder text - see lorem ipsum. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 23:25, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you. My Latin prof from college (had just one semester...) would cringe that I didn't know. One learns something new every day Xenophon777 (talk) 23:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Dealipedia

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Dealipedia, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Dealipedia. NawlinWiki (talk) 23:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, I just saw your comments on the extant of Kafiristan in the talk page for the article. I would like to know the issue of National Geographic Magazine that had the article on Kafiristan.-Ravichandar 14:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll have to find that issue; as soon as I do, I'll post that information here. Xenophon777 (talk) 23:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Please don't delete the redlink dabs

There is a big project to create articles on all the towns and villages, and dabs are needed so that we know where to put places with the same name. I am part of that project, and you can be too. See the discussion on my talk page and on the talk pages of the others involved. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't follow. I understand what a redlink is. But a "redlink dab"? If you could point out an example--including where you feel that I've deleted one of these--I'd appreciate it. (I did not see an explanation of the foregoing on your page...) Xenophon777 (talk) 21:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Syunik, redlink dab is a disambiguation link to a redlink page. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:21, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Roselawn, Indiana & American Eagle 4184

I came across your question about the air accident as it relates to Roselawn, Indiana. To answer your question, the crash of American Eagle 4184 would indeed be notable as 68 people died. I even found a tribute video on YouTube. What if I added a 'See Also' section to the Roselawn article and added the link to the page regarding the crash? Please let me know. And003 (talk) 07:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it's terribly relevant to Roselawn. It has no real lasting effect on Roselawn today, and is almost more like something which would go in a [discouraged] "Trivia Section." That the crash would be "trivia" is not meant to trivialize the tradedy, pain, and loss of the passengers, their families, American stockholders... (genuinely)... but it really doesn't have much to say or add about Roselawn. I'd think it a whole lot more relevant in an article on commuter airline crashes in the US, or on lists of such crashes. On the other hand, if you have non-original-research citiations to articles on a lasting effect on the town, then that might by all means be different, IMHO. Xenophon777 (talk) 22:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

If you need further proof of American Eagle Flight 4184's relevance to Roselawn, you can find it in the following articles:
nwi.com: Crash Still Stings (Oct. 31, 2009)
nwi.com: Flight 4184 victims remembered, families praised (Nov. 1, 2009)
If this is enough proof, please let me know. And003 (talk) 04:39, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Gary Indiana/Miller Beach

I am posting here because I'm not sure if i can say this on that page...
Well then they would appear to be incorrect and if you cannot negotiate with the editor(s), try putting a source at the end of the sentence, and then if it is removed, then you have a reason to hand out a vandalism template (removing verified information/adding unsourced)(this should probably be a last resort). This template would probably work. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 03:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

• Many thanks... Xenophon777 (talk) 17:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

They tend to scare people, especially anon users. Good Luck. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 17:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:A7H OldSacTrail Marker Valpo.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:21, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 17:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of The Faster the Speed, the Bigger the Mess for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Faster the Speed, the Bigger the Mess 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/The Faster the Speed, the Bigger the Mess 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 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. st170e^talk 17:08, 14 May 2016 (UTC)