User talk:RT Wolf/Archive 2

Talkback
note that it is the logic not the number of votes which matter. since two new editors voted for keep, whose only contribution to wiki is keep for your article, you may be accused for WP:SOCK Vigyani (talk) 03:50, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Whoops. I just posted it on facebook earlier. Guess people saw the speedy deletion thing and got a bit excited. Um, anything I can do to fix that? I've taken down my facebook post until this gets sorted out. I'm sorry. I just seem to keep stepping in it... Thanks for your patience. -- RT Wolf (talk) 04:32, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * well you don't need to worry now. an admin has accepted your article :). But in the future please do not post speedy nomination notices on facebook. it is not allowed in wikipedia. Infact you can not also on wikipedia go to other editors (which you think may favor you) and ask them to look at the nomination. Remember it is the quality of arguments not the number of votes which matter. Now consider improving the article. Thanks for your contribution. I hope you like wikipedia and decide to stay. --Vigyani (talk) 04:39, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Will be more careful in the future! I really appreciate it. I've seen somewhat mean discussions on talk pages and was worried I'd just get banned for screwing up. I'll be sure not to post new pages on my facebook just in case they get contested. To clarify, an editor = anyone with an account or just anyone including anonymous editors? I'll remove the "votes" without discussion from the talk page. --RT Wolf (talk) 19:22, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

April 2013
[[

Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=|link=]] Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your comments. Please note that, on Wikipedia, consensus is determined by discussion, not voting, and it is the quality of the arguments that counts, not the number of people supporting a position. Consider reading Wikipedia's deletion policy for a brief overview of the deletion process. We hope that you decide to stay and contribute even more. Thank you! Vigyani (talk) 04:10, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Yea, makes sense. Science isn't done that way either. --RT Wolf (talk) 19:22, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Just learned about archiving talk pages. Since the speedy deletion discussion is over, I archived the "votes". Hope that's appropriate! --RT Wolf (talk) 19:33, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

your user page
I also advice to write your userpage in first person. i.e. instead of RT wolf is ...., I am....--Vigyani (talk) 04:42, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Done! --RT Wolf (talk) 19:22, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, RT Wolf! Thank you for your contributions. I am Vigyani and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Questions or type at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Vigyani (talk) 04:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article


 * Thanks! --RT Wolf (talk) 19:22, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome!
Dear RT Wolf, thanks for your contributions! Maybe you'd like your work (e.g., the article on relevance realisation) to meet Wikipedia's standards, so please take a look at WP:YFA! Kindly, 㓟 (talk) 10:36, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of John Vervaeke for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Vervaeke 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/John Vervaeke (2nd nomination) 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Mangoe (talk) 14:27, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Relevance realization for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Relevance realization 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/Relevance realization 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Mangoe (talk) 15:05, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rushk


The article Rushk has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No claim to notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Epeefleche (talk) 06:14, 23 August 2013 (UTC)