User talk:Nick cool

Welcome!
Hello, Nick cool, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! JarrahTree 04:19, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

 * I beg to differ from the reversion.
 * Glæd Gēol, merry Christmas and flavoursome frumenty.
 * Martin Arnold Nick_cool (talk) 05:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia isn't "neutral" between science and pseudoscience, but decidedly sides with science, see WP:PSCI. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:00, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Happy new year to you. I yet maintain that the reversion is less pertinent than my suggestion, but regret that I lack the energy to argue my case, so I'll have to let the reversion stand. Cheers, Martin Nick_cool (talk) 08:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Do I always like how the WP:RULES play out for every article? Not always. But I'm still bound to obey the WP:RULES. tgeorgescu (talk) 12:55, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Dear Drs,
 * If the Rules insist that Berlinki's article be written as it stands, then the Rules is an ass.
 * Cheers,
 * Martin Nick_cool (talk) 21:50, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe you will find the rules of Conservapedia more suitable for your POV. tgeorgescu (talk) 22:54, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No.
 * I have not investigated WP:RULES, but I would be surprised and disappointed if they insisted on such a misleading, tendentious and insulting article as the one which presently stands under the name 'David Berlinski'. Nick_cool (talk) 01:31, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
 * At Wikipedia, pseudoscience always gets short shrift. See WP:PSCI.
 * We can't really treat him the way you want.
 * "So when the Christian Right tries to tell you that evolutionists instinctively circle the wagons whenever anyone dares question the Darwinian status quo, you should ask yourself why Wright and Kimura got through, but Behe not. The answer is, I think, straightforward: Wright and Kimura knew what they were talking about." H. Allen Orr. tgeorgescu (talk)  04:35, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Youth Advocacy Centre


A tag has been placed on Youth Advocacy Centre, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Drmies (talk) 01:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)