User talk:FactChecker8506

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:22, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You should request a new user name[edit]

Hi! I hope you don't take this the wrong way.

I like everything I've seen of your contributions on Talk:Bart D. Ehrman, but when I first saw your username in the page history I thought you might be on the "other side". WP:NOTHERE pretty handily sums up how most long-term contributors would look at you with a username like "Press4truth"; it makes you look like someone who is here to push a specific agenda, and most Wikipedia accounts with "truth" in the name usually have a certain idea of what "truth" is than most good editors would. Changing it soon would be a good idea.

I would also recommend making more edits to other topic areas, as (should the current dispute go to any of the noticeboards, which I suspect it will) you might quickly find yourself being accused of being a WP:SPA.

Cheers!

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 05:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Hijiri88: Thanks. I know it's a terrible name. Probably impatient at the time trying to find a unused username! I will change it!

Hey. I agree with everything Hijiri said above (including about appreciating your stance at the article talk page), and I'm please to see you took his advice about changing your username. I'm just posting to support what Hijiri said in his last paragraph. While it's okay to be a single-purpose account, it's also something that many other editors will use against you in any arguments. One way to avoid this is to edit a number of articles related to your primary interest. So you might want to look into participating at textual criticism, New testament, Historicity of Jesus, History of Christianity and other such articles. Doing so shifts the impression other editors get from "SPA" to "Editor with an interest in this field of study". Also, if there are any television shows or movies you really enjoy, that is a great way to diversify your editing. I usually edit articles which touch upon fringe subjects and pseudoscience, but I also have quite a few edits at a few video game and book articles, and I used to participate mostly at the Graphics lab, taking requests for image editing (I don't anymore). Anyways, I wish you some happy editing! MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 14:00, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments. I understand this can be a concern. Hopefully, in the meantime--as I find more articles I feel comfortable editing--my comments on the Bart Ehrman page will be taken based on their own merit, not on what I have not done on other articles. FactChecker8506 (talk) 01:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So far, that is exactly the case. :) MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:26, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017[edit]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 21:04, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Magnolia677: Thanks, will do FactChecker8506 (talk) 21:09, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Traditional student has been accepted[edit]

Traditional student, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 04:24, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]