User talk:Namagah26

Welcome!

Hello, Namagah26, 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: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Ian.thomson (talk) 23:53, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Nomination of Adjudication of the Bright and Morning Star versus Lucifer for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adjudication of the Bright and Morning Star versus Lucifer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Adjudication of the Bright and Morning Star versus Lucifer until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. AstroCog (talk) 21:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

A summary of some guidelines you may find useful

 * "Truth" is not the criteria for inclusion, verifiability is.
 * Always cite a source for any new information. When adding this information to articles, using, containing the name of the source, the author, page number, publisher or web address (if applicable).
 * We do not publish original thought nor original research. We're not a blog, we're not here to promote any ideology - You need to work on this.  Please use more secondary sources.
 * Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards.  User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided.  Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
 * Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources.  Real scholarship actually does not say what understanding of the world is "true," but only with what there is evidence for.  In the case of science, this evidence must ultimately start with physical evidence.  In the case of religion, this means only reporting what has been written and not taking any stance on doctrine. You need to quit saying "this is revealed," but use more neutral language such as "The Urantia book claims that..."  Use etic language, not emic language.

Ian.thomson (talk) 23:53, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, (Namagah26 (talk) 21:02, 12 October 2011 (UTC))

Nomination of Caligastia for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Caligastia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Caligastia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dougweller (talk) 06:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC)