User talk:SoAuthentic

Hi there
Hi Peter, glad you're here, and I look forward to helping you this semester. Can you tell me some more about the class project and how you're planning on using Wikipedia? I see you've written some on Cyber Warfare, is that going to be your main topic?-- Patrick, o Ѻ ∞ 23:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

October 2010
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Cyber ShockWave. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. --Geniac (talk) 02:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Cyber ShockWave edits
Your article on cyber shockwave is pretty interesting overall and is well written in the "background" section as a start. I think you should really focus on your lead. I had to read it twice because it seems to jump around. This is a problem i am also dealing with on my article as well. It seems very important to lay down a very simple and to the point style sentence to gain interest right from the beginning. Also what helps is to think if someone only was reading the lead, what information would they leave with and would they understand? i hope this helps. Also this lead will help editors get interested and want to help. Legin-gross-drawkcab (talk) 02:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey, just a heads up. I see your trying to create a numbered list on the Cyber ShockWave article. All you need to do is start each line with "#". So "# Michael Chertoff" produces:


 * 1) Michael Chertoff
 * That should work better than individually numbering items.-- Patrick, o Ѻ ∞ 09:27, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * just judged your article ;), all best --Jan eissfeldt (talk) 18:16, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:42, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: Article Assessment
Yes, I'll look at your article tomorrow and reply here with some pointers for making it more Wikipeda-style. :) --Geniac (talk) 03:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

This article is clear, concise and descriptive. For a technology-topic article, it is relatively jargon-free. It has two relevant images. It has a good beginning; the Background section tells how it was set up. It has a good middle; the Participants and Roles and Simulation Attack sections describe who and what was involved. It has a good end; the Results section describes several findings of the test. I have no pointers to provide to you; this is an excellent article. --Geniac (talk) 05:06, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


 * You're welcome! Oh, two things I noticed later:
 * You have an image of a book cover as the main image. What is The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace and why is it relevant to the topic? It's not mentioned in the article. Was it written as a result of the wargame?
 * The Simulation Attack section starts, "One of the simulation attacks" and describes the mobile phone spyware. The next part of that section says, "In addition, the Cyber attack reportedly sparked a series of crises and provisions including:". Were the four items then listed a result of the mobile phone spyware, or were they other attacks involved in the simulation? The way this section is written, it's not entirely clear.
 * --Geniac (talk) 23:29, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Previewing
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Homeland Security Act, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. --Geniac (talk) 15:54, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: Numbering
The blank lines and title descriptions were breaking the autonumbering. There might be a more elegant way of doing it, but the quickest and easiest fix that retains the layout was to use manual numbering. --Geniac (talk) 01:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK nominations
Hi SoAuthentic, I've reviewed your nominations for DYK but unfortunately they are not eligible for inclusion at the moment, since the prose has not been 5x expanded during the last 10 days. If you can make them eligible I'll be happy to take another look at the articles. You may wish to install WP:DYKCHECK and consider making articles in a draft in the future if you want to submit to DYK. Happy editing SmartSE (talk) 01:21, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Syracuse University
I see that you have made a number of edits to the article. I have reorganized the article to comply with WikiProject Universities guidelines and have nominated it for a good article review. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 18:19, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The Syracuse University website history page says it was founded independently of Genesee College and that the city of Lima enjoined Genesee from moving to Syracuse. Previously the article said that the faculty, library and two secret societies moved from Genesee to Syracuse University.  I have changed the article to conform to the university website, but was wondering about your views. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 16:08, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The reviewer has made suggestions for improving the Syracuse University article, and I am in the process of meeting his concerns. Feel free to join in if you wish. Racepacket (talk) 20:58, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * In case you did not notice, the article passed its GA review. Congratulations. Racepacket (talk) 13:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you so much for improving the article Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict. It's now listed in the "What's hot" section of the Public Policy Initiative's leaderboard. Congratulations. --Fschulenburg (Public Policy) (talk) 03:46, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

CIVIC
Hi SoAuthentic. I undid the blanking of the Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict page. I was hoping you could explain why you blanked this page. If it is to do with my recent edits it would be better to discus them at the talk page. Regards AIR corn (talk) 20:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I see you have moved its contents to your User Page. If you are planning to work on it in your "userspace" that is fine. You have to leave the old page in the "main space" while you do this however. When you have finished you can replace the main space page with your new version. A lot of editors use sandboxes to develop articles. That makes it easier to work on multiple articles and won't clutter up your main userpage. If you want some more advice or some hints on developing the article send me a message at my talkpage. AIR corn (talk) 21:40, 14 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi! Aircorn is right that, in cases like this, the best route is to do the best we can to fix problems in the article.  But since it's based on published sources and is definitely an organization that has enough coverage to have a Wikipedia article, deleting or blanking it is probably not an option.  If you have any questions, or there's something that needs to be discussed privately, let me know and I'll do my best to help.  Cheers --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:09, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

ANI notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --FormerIP (talk) 01:24, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I hardly think that editing a WP:BLP and _then_ doing the research to support your edit is "no big deal", as you claim. That sort of editing, whether or not it's intended to be, is disruptive and could result in a lengthy block. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 01:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Juice Jam for deletion
The article Juice Jam is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Juice Jam 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. nn123645 (talk) 17:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Glad to see that you have stuck around
Hey, I am one of the Online Ambassadors from last term, and I saw some of your edits, and am glad that you have stuck around in the community. If you ever need any help or want advice, you can always ask me or your old Online Ambassador, Sadads (talk) 00:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Executive Order 13128
First off, I wanted to say I'm also glad to see how you've taken to editing after the Public Policy class. Its a new semester, and I have a new mentee, User:Woloshkm, who is working on this for her class project, and I wondered if you had any advice to share with her, either with regards to the particular article, or about editing in general. Keep in touch!-- Patrick, o Ѻ ∞ 19:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)