User talk:ResearchRave

{| style="width: 100%; background-color: #FFFFF0; border: 3px solid #E2725B; padding: 10px; margin-bottom: 8px; vertical-align: top;"
 * colspan=3 style="vertical-align:top" |
 * Be bold • Build consensus • Resolve disputes
 * Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette • Neutrality
 * No personal attacks •

Welcome, and please read below....

(memorize and practice)
The fundamental principles by which Wikipedia operates are summarized in the form of five "pillars":

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Religious significance Section and Additions 2010 Copiapo mining accident
Hi, Recently there have been many additions of a religious nature throughout the article that some editors feel is WP:UNDUE and WP:COATRACK. I started a section on the talk page to discuss it. I have been trying to selectively prune out the more obvious coatrack additions but I don't support section blanking. I suggest you participate on the talk page about the ongoing situation as I have a funny feeling it will become more heated. Veriss (talk) 00:57, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * hello. Thanks for your attention to this.  And yes I did notice that matter being brought out in the Talk page.   I thought that maybe it would resolve itself, get tweaked, with trimming, and more NPOV perhaps.     I think the section is probably valid, as there was definitely a significance or connection with religion and faith and spirituality.    Ala, one of the trapped miners himself being religious or a spiritual leader figure, and also one miner said that he never prayed before in his life, but he learned and got into heavy praying during those weeks in that deep mine, and also the religious paraphernalia.  etc....


 * The IP "96" summarily removed the whole thing, with no explanation.  Which arguably violates WP:VANDTYPES.  Hence why I undid it.  It was vandalism and wholesale blanking, with no comment or rationale, also in violation of WP:NOBLANKING, as that IP never discussed it on Talk, and did not even put an edit comment (against edit summary disputes), and the section has some merit, and is well-sourced and well-covered.  Though it could use some re-working.  Thanks again. ResearchRave (talk) 01:08, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi again, thank you for joining the discussion. I'm not very religious so look at the issue of discussing the role of the Catholic traditions from more of a social and academic view point then a spiritual one.  I think it should be discussed in the article but without the appearance of proselytizing, which could be difficult. Perhaps a workable solution can be crafted to satisfy both sides.  Thanks again.  Veriss (talk) 02:08, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm fine either way with the health minister thing. No worries.  Cheers, Veriss (talk) 02:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
I'm trying :) No doubt I will soon fall flat on my face!!x MissWizzy (talk) 10:03, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Text you pasted from a source without noting it was a quote on Andy Shaw
Hello. Please do not cut and paste text from other sources as you did with this edit on Andy Shaw (copied from his online bio) without using quotation marks or block quotes, or some other way to indicate that the words were copied. You copied the text without indicating that the new text was a quote, or even pointing to the source at the end of each copied sentence. This is a major violation of WP sourcing policy. Please read WP:QUOTE for more on how to quote sources. Thank you. Novaseminary (talk) 00:01, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

2010 Copiapó mining accident
Thank you for all your hard work! Veriss (talk) 00:37, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

2010 Copiapó mining accident Translator slavery!
Thank you from all of us! Veriss (talk) 02:40, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

2010 Copiapó mining accident timeline
Hey, check out this timeline a friend was helping me (guiding me) to make for the article in a sandbox: User:Veriss1/timeline. Let me know what you think of it. Veriss (talk) 03:00, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Borsa Bella Design Company


A tag has been placed on Borsa Bella Design Company requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  ttonyb (talk) 02:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Deletion tag has been contested, with comments in talk. Cheers. ResearchRave (talk) 02:58, 18 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Re-assessment
 * I'm thinking that there may be a point.  While this company has some notability (obviously), it may not be well-sourced enough.   Not enough to firmly establish notability.  There's just not that much information or references out there about this specific company.  And primary sources should only be used sparingly on WP articles, once notability is established.   This article has not done that, I feel.  So I withdraw my contesting of it. ResearchRave (talk) 04:31, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

File:San Jose Mina - Mision cumplida - screen capture.jpg listed for deletion
A file that Veriss uploaded or altered, File:San Jose Mina - Mision cumplida - screen capture.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Damiens .rf 13:44, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * For Your Information. Veriss (talk) 04:09, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

2010 Copiapó mining accident
I took the plunge and nominated it for GA this evening. We'll see how it goes. --Veriss (talk) 04:04, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)