User talk:Richard



Hi, I'm. I'd like to personally welcome you and thank you for your contributions thus far. As you probably know, Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia collaboratively written entirely by volunteers. If you ever see anything that can be improved—be it correcting a typo or writing a new article—feel free to fix it yourself! Don't worry about making mistakes; one of the many editors will probably notice and quickly correct it. If you have any questions, just place the text  on your talk page, and an administrator will help you shortly. Alternatively, you could join the #wikipedia-en-help IRC channel, where dozens of friendly helpers await. You can find out more about the project here, but I won't bore you with statistics and rules. Just remember to be civil to other editors, to always cite your sources, and to write articles from a neutral point of view, and you should be good to go.

Wikipedia is a huge website; with nearly 3 million articles, it is the single biggest encyclopedia in the world. Additionally, there are thousands of policy and process pages, so it can be a bit overwhelming, even to experienced users. When I was new, I found the Tutorial particularly helpful. You might also want to check out the glossary. The Reference Desk serves as our library reference desk, where you can ask nearly any question imaginable.

The Featured Articles and Good Article pages are good places to look for some of our most well-written and comprehensive articles. On the other end of the spectrum, we have thousands of articles that require cleanup of some sort, so feel free to help out.

I hope you've found this advice helpful. Feel free to contact me for more information. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 18:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Regarding your recent restoration of speedy at Boin Lecture
Hello!!

Just FYI, if only or substantial author blanks the page then you need not restore speedy. You can tag the article with CSD G7.

Thank you and Happy editing!!!

Hitro  talk  19:59, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the reminder :) Richard (talk) 18:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Joe Calzaghe
Hi Richard, I saw that you removed the flag from the infobox on the Joe Calzaghe page. It is not only quite usual to have a nationality flag in the infobox of boxers' pages (e.g. Joe Louis, Sugar Ray Leonard, Steve Bendall, Robert Lloyd-Taylor, Ted "Kid" Lewis, Terry Marsh (boxer), Alan Minter, David Price (boxer), Frank Bruno, James J. Corbett, Steve Bendall, Robert Lloyd-Taylor, etc., etc.), it is unusual for there not to be a nationality flag in the infobox of boxers' pages. Do you intend to remove them all or would you prefer to self revert? Daicaregos (talk) 08:33, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes they should be all removed. Flags should not show the player's nationality in a non-sporting sense. I'm not sure how this trend started, but it is against Manuel of Style. Richard (talk) 01:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * As far as Wikiproject Boxing is concerned, there is no consensus regarding the use of flags in infoboxes see here. Bearing in mind that so many of the other boxer's pages show flags, it may be better to reinstate this one until a definitive decision has been made at the boxing project level. Cheers, Daicaregos (talk) 07:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There was also another similar discussion about flags in the infobox and they were using MoS as a reason for the flag usage. I do not believe they are aware that MoS does not allow for the flags to be used in the infobox. Regardless, if somewhere down the line you had a boxing article you wanted to promote to good or featured article status, they might ask for it to be removed. Richard (talk) 16:29, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Michael Gomez is one of 3 articles on boxers to have achieved WP:FA. It has a flag icon (Susianna Kentikian has dual nationality (so one flag would be inappropriate) and Simon Byrne has no infobox). As I say, it is quite usual to have a flag icon on the boxing pages. Check them out. Daicaregos (talk) 17:27, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm...well I guess if you want to revert my edit to Joe Calzaghe then you may go ahead, however the flags are against MoS and it would be crucial to have a discussion on this regarding the boxing participants. Richard (talk) 17:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I have put a note on the talk page. BTW, it is not just on the boxing articles that editors choose to use flag icons. For example, three out of the four swimming featured articles include nationality flags (Kevin O'Halloran; Sandra Morgan; and Faith Leech). Daicaregos (talk) 10:22, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Flags in boxing articles
While I understand your point, in this particular case the flags are being used to represent a "nationality" field, which falls in line with WP:FLAG's appropiate use, specifically this sentence: "They are useful in articles about international sporting events to show the representative nationality of players (which may differ from their legal nationalities)." While individuals may hold different nationalities et al. these are sportsmen and must be directly related to a certain country in order to represent it, and its certainly better to use the same format used in their respective sport. There is also another direct specification "Do not use flags to indicate locations of birth and death", but that section also states that "Flag icons should never be used in the birth and death information in a biographical article's introduction and/or infobox, as flags imply citizenship and/or nationality." which isn't the case here. These are my two cents, but consensus could work better than my opinion. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  21:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * After looking at it again, It clearly states that this is against MoS. Flags should never indicate the player's nationality in a non-sporting sense. It goes on to say that they should only indicate a sportsperson's national squad/team or sporting nationality. Obviously (unless were talking about the Olympics) boxers are not representing a country when they fight professional. Even then, the flags seem unnecessary since there nationality is already displayed. There is no need to stress the significance of their nationality. Richard (talk) 16:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I can tell you that my experience with dual citizens hasn't been particularly positive. So, its fair to note that you will get pressure from both sides if you go against the main reference (in this case, boxrec, which mimics the Olympic format for most AIBA boxers). The flags can be used once the nationality has been established, or at least that is the way that most of the promoted articles have been handled. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  21:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I'll just let the standard form of this stand. Richard (talk) 23:12, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Your request for rollback
After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! Tiptoety talk 16:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback may be removed at any time.

Arbitration
You are a party in a request for an Arbitration: Arbitration/Requests/Case --Rockstone (talk) 01:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Sigh. It's come to this.
 * For what it's worth, Richard, I believe that your actions and leadership in the renaming have been constructive a credit to the project. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 02:23, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey you guys are confusing me for another Richard. Richard (talk) 14:25, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Belated Thanks.
Peace. Arzel (talk) 04:01, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Smiley face murder theory
Thanks for participating at the RFC for this article in the past. Unfortunately, despite what was a clear consensus, the people trying to slant the article to the fringe view simply shopped around until they got enough other people to show up, and they are very aggressive about wanting the POV there. One of the arguments there is the typical "people used to think the sun revolved around the earth, and by your arguments we wouldn't have been allowed to say otherwise" silliness. There are also strong indications of at least one sockpuppet at work. If you cared about your input there it might help to come back and reiterate it. DreamGuy (talk) 00:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Hate to bug you again, but some extremely aggressive editors on this article are again ignoring previous comments as if they didn't happen at all. They also seem to be saying I made arguments I didn't and attack those, and then when people agree that those strawman arguments are wrong (of course they are, I didn't say them) they are trying to use this as an excuse to do wahtever they want. If you have the time to come back and weigh in again it'd be very helpful. DreamGuy (talk) 16:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
For wishing me a Happy Halloween. I initially thought you were another user that I have often worked with whose screen name is Richard. Why did you change your name from Juliancolton? I liked that name better. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know of this confusion so you might consider changing your name or the color of your name or something to distinguish you from the other "Richard". : )   Nancy Heise    talk  22:19, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I am not Juliancolton. I'm just Richard. Always been that way. Richard  ( talk ) 00:15, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I'm sorry, I see my mistake. Thank you for alerting me. I was looking at the first post on your talk page and did not read it through. However, there is still another Richard on Wikipedia whose signature looks a lot like yours. Font is different though. I just thought you might want to know that. See signature of user:Richardshusr.  Nancy Heise    talk  14:47, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Keith Nichol
Hello! Your submission of Keith Nichol at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:42, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
— Ed   (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Showtime2009 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Prolog (talk) 17:52, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Categorybrowsebaroneline
Template:Categorybrowsebaroneline has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. WOSlinker (talk) 19:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Spirituality
Portal:Spirituality, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Spirituality and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Spirituality during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 02:55, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for 2007 Groundhog Day tornado outbreak
2007 Groundhog Day tornado outbreak has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chess Eric  06:56, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:I Ching
Template:I Ching has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:17, 10 July 2023 (UTC)