User talk:RyanKoppelman

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:


 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:


 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: &#x7e;&#x7e;&#x7e;&#x7e;.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkSoul 02:23, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

50 bands
The article "Fifty Bands to see before you die" is not appropriate for Wikipedia, as it can never be written with a neutral point of view. Also, the article you created doesn't even fit the title. It has been deleted again, please don't recreate it. Academic Challenger 02:32, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to recreate this nonsense article you may be blocked from editing. Academic Challenger 02:35, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Easy Killer. This is not a nonsense article. It is an often referred to list. It is not my list of Bands. This list is referred to over and over again in many articles about the Bands. If you want me to stop, I will. But, I disagree with your characterization.RyanKoppelman 02:38, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm very sorry for not treating you well. All your other edits seemed to be fine, so I should have known that there was more to that article than I thought. My suggestion would be not to save any article until you are done writing it. The way that article was, it looked just like a random list of bands that you made up, and only someone familiar with the list already would have known the difference. One way to remind yourself of what you have edited is to use the show preview button before saving. Again, I am very sorry for the confusion and inconvenience. I and many other administrators have grown used to deleting anything that looks like nonsense on site because we really do get a lot of articles that can only be interpreted as nonsense. I now understand that the 50 bands article should probably be in the encyclopedia, so if you recreate it with a description of why it is famous like you put on your and my talk pages, I will certainly not delete it again. Keep in mind that some people are opposed to these types of lists, so they may list it on Votes for deletion where the community will vote on whether or not to keep it for five days. I will certainly not be the one to list it though, and I may even vote to keep it. I hope that this incident will not discourage you from contributing to Wikipedia. Academic Challenger 07:19, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Hello, RyanKoppelman. One way to avoid this problem – which many of us runs across while we're still learning the ropes – is to flesh out the details of the article as best you can before submitting its initial form. For this, I find the "show preview" button to be my savior from the deletionists. :) I hope this helps! – ClockworkSoul 14:22, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you both. I apologize for being so frothy at the mouth. I was a little frustrated. I realize my original page looked like nonsense at first and understand the well-intended purpose behind deleting it. When I recreated it, I made sure I had it close to final form before I posted it. That is obviously a better practice for a whole host of reasons. I was basically playing in the sand there on the live page. My apologies for that. This was a good lesson for me in both page drafting and community interaction. Thanks for your thoughtful responses. Keep up the good work. Hope we cross paths again. RyanKoppelman 16:26, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Stephan Kinsella
Don't read too much into Stephan Kinsella being added as notable patent attorney. Google returns 205 hits for "Stephan Kinsella" "patent attorney""'  and 19,000 for "Stephan Kinsella" .  That's all and IMHO that's sufficient. If the section "notable patent attorneys" becomes too big, we can still create a proper article List of patent attorneys with all notable ones. --Edcolins 14:44, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * I have repaired your nomination of the article in question to VfD (things are a bit tricky for a renomination). You may wish to go and cast your vote. I, personally, would advise that you keep it much briefer and to the point than the author's current comment (which he may have removed by the time you get there). It would also be wise to make clear that you are the nominator. -Splash 18:40, 19 July 2005 (UTC)