User talk:Averater

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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!--Mishae (talk) 17:33, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial


 * Thank you! - Averater (talk) 17:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Recruitment request (attempt at least)
Hello Averater ! I can see you are not new here (but 95%+ of your contributions are at another Wiki). I also studied your page there, and believe you very well could contribute also at this Wiki (- the "World Wide Wiki"). If you do so, in a fair degree or even more perhaps, you will (if you still havn't') experience a quite different (and at least in my mind better) culture and environment, here. We have a wider kind of freedom and tolerance here, provided the use of sufficient inline references are in order where requiered, NPOV and other matters which you already are acquainted with, I must presume. Leads of long articles ought to be a summary of it all, and slightly "teasing" in order to get the reader to go on reading. If possible should all references be done outside the lead (if and when the lead is a summary of a long well-sourced article). But what really differs are the use the talk-pages, and blocking of serious contributors are indeed very rare. Further, are the number of contributors so many, that mocking by self appointed elite-intellectuals in groups cannot exist. The "run home to daddy and tell"-factor can be totally ignored. (With this is meant, if you clearly take an advantageous position in a talk-page discussion, will your opponent not run to an administrator and ask for a blocking of you. And even if, no administrator will block anyone who appear to discuss an (any) issue seriously, as long as personal feelings are not expressed). The academical quality differ from article to article, but in general are the articles of higher standard and goes far deeper, usually that is. But improvements are rarely not called for at all. (Although the standard of especially scientific articles are among the very best). Also as collective, does this Wiki stand tall indeed. According to the metadata from Wikimedia could this part well be described as 180 times better here, compared to "home". Please see and compare. I write these lines solely due to your 400 points taken at university-level, within subjects as physics and other sciences. And I hope you want to improve and create articles also here, in a larger scale than previously. Lording over contributors as administrator, with your impressive home-page at an other Wiki, must in the long run be far less giving !? And I do not think you are responsible for the "tactic & culture" used at (our) home. Further your written English will improve automatically. No offense meant. (And you are allowed to use your accumulated edit-count over here as well) Honestly, Cheers Boeing720 (talk) 06:52, 2 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the invitation. I have thought of editing more here on EnWP but at the moment I have less spare time then usual and won't make any larger contributions. --Averater (talk) 17:19, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That's too bad. (from my point of view) Perhaps later ? I just want to assure you of one thing, if your English is good enough for reading, understanding, and speaking, the Google Translator is a quick help for misspellings. (for single words) And very fast one comes in to English writing as well. (if that's the reason). But it is better with some contributions than none. All the best, and good luck ! Boeing720 (talk) 00:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC)