User talk:Rbmiller6

Hello, Rbmiller6, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Introduction

5 The five pillars of Wikipedia

How to edit a page

Help

Tips

How to write a great article

Simplified Manual of Style

Fun stuff...

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! MifterBot I ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 21:11, 27 May 2013 (UTC) Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 05:16, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. Nick⁠—⁠^Contact/_Contribs 04:21, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please note that even superfluous documentation is now added to the entry "R. Baxter Miller," an essay that I have periodically edited and updated but only after some benevolent, anonymous contributor initiated it. I, of course, am not the originating source. One day I just happened to come across the thing. And I'm not sure why the "disputer" thinks that someone who has over twenty-eight pages of Google web hits is unimportant, but what's about logic here anyway? Obviously, I'm not that important to HIM, but then he's not even a literary critic. Can we please get back to sane writings and competent scholars? I hope that this is the end of this "dispute," which never made any sense to me, except that some grad student in another school here had an ax to grind and lied about a reputation that took forty-one years to build. I do apologize for being upset, but perhaps authors will understand.

Thank you all for listening. ~Ron Miller Please help me with...

Rbmiller6 (talk) 15:58, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion ongoing about whether or not the article about you should exist or not. Even if it gets deleted, it doesn't reflect on how important you are as a person. It just means that, for the time being at least, you don't qualify for an article. This reflects on the policies of Wikipedia, and what the Wikipedian community want to include here, and not on you.

You'll have to realize many people want to take advantage of the fact that Wikipedia ranks highly in Google searches. I'm assuming you aren't, but needless to say, Wikipedia can be strict on who (or what!) gets an article because of that. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 16:25, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Further clarification regarding the challenged entry "R. Baxter Miller"

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

This is actually a chat response since I'm confused where to list it.

1) In 2014 the appointment of R. Baxter Miller as Donald L. Hollowell Professor was confirmed unanimously by the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. That is fact. 2) BLACK AMERICAN POETS BETWEEN WORLDS, 1940-1960)sold nearly 2,000 copies during its first two years of publication, and the inside cover of the 1988 paperback edition of the 1986 hard copy recognizes itself as the fifth printing in 2 years. (As the dissertation author in Education may know, many specialist books are printed in only 500 copy editions.)A generation later, a Professor at Penn wrote to the Janer review committee at Georgia that there has never been anything else like that book. That BLACK AMERICAN POETS was an "academic bestseller" is a fact. 3) It is most arrogant and inappropriate for an aspirant to authority in Education to pass judgement on the distinguished record of a literary critic. Rather, the number of Google and Bing hits on the name may signify the real impact. 4) Really, I have no more time to spend on this.

Please help me with...

Rbmiller6 (talk) 13:41, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe list the first two points at the AfD discussion. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 16:26, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]