User talk:Preciousjfm

Welcome!
Hello, Preciousjfm, 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 recent edits to the page Evolution has not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other 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. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

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! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified 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 need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. Doug Weller (talk) 14:35, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kumaraho
Hello Preciousjfm,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Kumaraho for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Le Sanglier des Ardennes (talk) 22:12, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Kumaraho
Hi Preciousjfm,

Can you find a reputable reference for your information? And try to set it out like other botanical pages. Thanks,Le Sanglier des Ardennes (talk) 22:28, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Recent edit to Kumaraho
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Kumaraho, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 22:33, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Page
Hi Preciousjfm,

I see you are quoting from the website http://www.tiritirimatangi.org.nz/kumarahou. It is fine to use pages for information if you reference them, but this text has been removed as it is an unreferenced direct text shift. Thanks, Le Sanglier des Ardennes (talk) 22:48, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Apologies
Hi Preciousjfm,

Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm sorry your article got deleted while you were trying to work on it. I’ve built it back, in the style of other botanical articles, and please feel free to add/change any information there – but do try and reference. Do you have an image of the plant? I couldn’t find one that wasn’t copyrighted.

Good luck, Le Sanglier des Ardennes (talk) 02:03, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Preciousjfm, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!
 The Adventure

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi Preciousjfm! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 07:43, Friday, October 30, 2015 (UTC)

Hi again
Do you want to have a look at the page as I've edited it, and tell me what you think? Any new info or images would be lovely. Thanks, Le Sanglier des Ardennes (talk) 02:08, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I can get a image of it for wiki we have lots near here reciousjfmPreciousjfm (talk)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi Preciousjfm! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 07:44, Saturday, October 31, 2015 (UTC)

October 2015
Hello, I'm Widr. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Evolution because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Widr (talk) 10:55, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Widr (talk) 11:06, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

what it was not a spam website

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Geological history of Earth. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Amortias (T)(C) 11:10, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Creation–evolution controversy, you may be blocked from editing. Amortias (T)(C) 11:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 31)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Preciousjfm/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:Preciousjfm/sandbox Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KylieTastic&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:Preciousjfm/sandbox reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 12:18, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Preciousjfm/sandbox


A tag has been placed on User:Preciousjfm/sandbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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 removed 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 deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Fiddle  Faddle  12:18, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

You absolutely must stop adding your personal views to articles
If you look at the new welcome message, you may understand why. Our articles are not to be based on our own thoughts, beliefs, experiences, knowledge, etc but upon what reliable sources say about a subject - see the links in the welcome message. And to be blunt, Wikipedia is a mainstream encyclopedia. We present others points of view to be sure, but you may be happier at CreationWiki. I'd say the same thing that was adding their own views on any other subject repeatedly to articles. Doug Weller (talk) 14:40, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Did you take the reliable source of the bible in the topic of the History of the Earth you only have an evolutionists perspective. Preciousjfm Preciousjfm (talk) 19:07, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The Bible is not a reliable historical source because it does not meet the standard criteria of source reliability used by historians. Theroadislong (talk) 19:11, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link, as you did at Evolution. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines.--Mr Fink (talk) 15:24, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi again
Hi Preciousjfm. It would be lovely if you could upload a picture of Pomaderris kumeraho.

You seem to be getting into some trouble over your trying to edit Creation-evolution pages, inserting your own views.

I can see what you're trying to do, but you've got to understand that Wikipedia does not let anyone state their personal views like that; the pages must be unbiased and explain all viewpoints from a neutral stand. Unfortunately, lots of them don’t do this, and have a distinctly pro-evolution bias, which is not justified in the scientific community, but it is just as bad to make them pro-Creation. The Creation–evolution controversy page is discussing the actual argument that is going on, and there is no need for you to say which side you agree with anyway.

Getting blocked won't help, so maybe step back for a while, and perhaps you'll find ways to more fairly express the facts - it does annoy me too sometimes when I find evolution expressed as absolute on the science pages - not as the theory it is. But the final idea is not to have the pages presenting a Christian outlook, because the world at large does not; instead Wikipedia should offer all opinions to the reader, which would be a good thing all told. Good luck and God bless, Le Sanglier des Ardennes (talk) 22:04, 1 November 2015 (UTC)


 * P.s. Instead of using CMI, a mere website/magasine, maybe try the peer-reviewed Journal of Creation. That is a proper source that can't be decently objected to. Le Sanglier des Ardennes (talk) 22:46, 1 November 2015 (UTC)