User talk:Carmeld1

Welcome to the Wikipedia
I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:


 * Tutorial
 * Help desk
 * Foundation issues
 * Policy Library

For more information click  here . You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~.



Sam Spade 23:02, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

virtual university proposals

 * Userfy. Wikipedia articles are not intended to be a "brainstorming nucleus," as the article says it is. carmeld1 03:19, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * who says so? every article is just that - that's the nice difference to established/ old fashion / stuck organs like Encarta and Britannnica, and it is the reason for the amazing growth and popularity - we are just trying to address some of the critics and add some new ventures for academic usability - the "news" section is also not typical for an encyclopedia - we just want to promote / propose an academic track and hope to attract faculty and students - nobody forces you to read or contribute to this ;-) - Uwe Kils 12:44, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

The bible
Firstly let me say that I am sorry to have to bother you.

Secondly, I wish to let you know that a recent VFD that you took part in has closed. The result was that 32 people voted to keep all individual bible verses as seperate articles, and 34 voted that they shouldn't (2 abstensions, and 3 votes for both). This is considered by standard policy not to be a consensus decision (although the closing admin stated that it was a consensus to keep them).

Thirdly, the subject has now been put to a survey, so that it may remain open until there is a clear consensus for what appears to be a difficult issue to resolve. You may wish to take part in this survey, and record a similar vote to the one you made at the VFD there. The survey is available at Bible verses.

18:31, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Bible Vote
Hate to trouble you again, but a category on Bible verses was recently added, 'A vast minority', and it seems that your vote probably would have gone there had it been there when you voted. Almafeta 17:25, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

consensus
The Authentic Matthew VFD has closed. The results were
 * Delete - 21 (58%)
 * Keep - 11 (31%)
 * Merge - 4 (11%)

This was declared to have been no consensus, and therefore a new VFD has been opened at Votes for deletion/Authentic Matthew (consensus).

Would you be prepared to re-add your vote there? ( ! | ? | * ) 09:45, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Authentic Matthew the sequel
The POV that was in Authentic Matthew, an article you voted to delete, before it was NPOVed has been re-created at a new article - see Votes for deletion/The Original Gospel of Matthew. ( ! | ? | * ) 20:23, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Your input is requested
at Articles for deletion/Roflcopter (again). — Phil Welch 22:58, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Systemwars.com
Hi. You voted to delete Systemwars.com and it was deleted. However, Tony Sidaway has decided that your vote and the consensus that agreed with you was insufficient. He has recreated the article in violation of policy and relisted it for deletion at Articles for deletion/Systemwars.com (second version). Please take a look. - T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  15:47, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Articles For Deletion
Hi, a while ago you made some comments about the presence of bible-verse articles, and/or source texts of the bible, and you may therefore be interested in related new discussions:
 * A discussion about 200 articles, one each for the first 200 verses of Matthew - Centralized discussion/200 verses of Matthew
 * A discussion about 18 articles, one each for the first 18 verses of John 20 - Centralized discussion/Verses of John 20
 * A discussion about whether or not the entire text of a whole bible chapter should be contained in the 6 articles concerning those specific chapters - Centralized discussion/Whole bible chapter text.

--Victim of signature fascism | Don't forget to vote in the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee elections 18:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)