User talk:Ahears

= Ahears = Ahears 01:31, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello, Ahears, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

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 have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome!  GB fan  talk 23:47, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Service (repair)


The article Service (repair) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Per WP:NOTDIC

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 20:42, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Adding Talkback stuff
Ok, there are alot of edit I made that you rolled back and I am wanting to add the information however I obviously didn't format it correctly to be added to this database. What do I need to know about posting the information so that it will be accepted?

Talkback
Terrillja talk  01:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Editing article "Agent : Agents in espionage.
Editing Article "Agent": Agents in Espionage.

I have edited the "agent" article but only to have it deleted. I was not finished and can cite other sources not in a job description however my sources a verifiable and literally define the field of expertise for the definition of "agent". How can I re-enter this information into this database without having it removed due to to much content in a citation (as was the cause for deletion)? Should I remove the citation(s) or is it my source(s)? The Administrator was unclear as to what was wrong with how it was written other that the references are too big and the some of the source data was actually a job listing...but a job listing that was directly relevant and also from the pioneers in the field of Agent handling. I was also not finished with my citation(s). The atricle is actually less reliable now that the article has been rolled back. Help please.

Ahears 18:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * If you're referring to Agent handling, you can get a complete article history by clicking the "View history" link at the top of the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agent_handling&action=history


 * From there, you can view earlier versions of the article and retrieve the text that you originally added.


 * If you're having a persistent disagreement with an editor on that article, I recommend going to Talk:Agent handling and having a discussion there first about what needs to be done to resolve the dispute. Tim Pierce (talk) 18:59, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Evasive answers don't help...No, I'm referring to the article: Agent. Section: Agents in Espionage. I need a little extra advise revising the article. I am the origional editor...please find someone who knows what their doing and reads this post before you respond.I apologize for the "abrasiveness" but I don't need the "run around". Also you may need to read the article after I wrote it and then let me know how to proceed. I need to know several things such as if I need to simply leave the citation at the origional source or add it to the reference in the article (this was not accepted). Ahears 21:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I am sorry that my answers seemed evasive. You said "I have edited the "agent" article but only to have it deleted," but I could not find any article you have worked on that has been deleted, so I took my best guess as to which of your recent contributions you were talking about.  Clearly I misunderstood.  I am glad that you found an editor to help you. Tim Pierce (talk) 00:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Ref. Agent and this specific revert.


 * Working on this; more in a minute  Chzz  ►  22:01, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't need the link. I need to know how to revise the article I wrote so that it will be accepted. I was rejected because of the large citations and source of the citation. I wan't to know how to correct this (the sources are reliable) because the Administrator didn't agree with the way I wrote it dispite it obvious verifiability. Heres what I wrote (although it is not finished and needs more citations): Compare history: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agent&action=historysubmit&diff=360193860&oldid=360184082 and the actual article I wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agent&oldid=360184082. Please look at the 36 reverted edits as I need to know how to correct the article for resubmission. Thank you.


 * Ahears 22:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I know you didn't need the link. We did - so I put it there, while I worked on things...


 * The material that you added was not really suitable for a disambiguation page; I think that is the problem. A disambig is supposed to be a very brief list of topics - a single line for each entry. See WP:MOSDAB.


 * Instead, the material should be added to the appropriate articles - such as, for example, Espionage - or, you could even change the redirect 'secret agent' into a real article.


 * You can edit the old version to copy your work, but do not save it there or it will reintroduce the edits.


 * You could also, if you wish, ask for more clarification from the person who removed it - that is,.


 * Cheers,  Chzz  ►  22:13, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * So simply relocating the material from the disambigiation page to the main article should clear up some of the discrepency? I'll give it a try. This also explains why it all wasn't deleted leaving some of the article in tact. It didn't make alot of sense to me to delete such a strong article at first. Thanks.


 * Ahears 22:18, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm pretty sure that's why they removed it; their edit summary says, "Not the purpose of a disambig page".  Chzz  ►  22:59, 11 May 2010 (UTC)