Welcome!

Hello, I am known Gears of War, I am a part of Wikipedia and I would like to welcome you to Wikipedia, here is some stuff you should know and some links to follow.

Wikipedia's official policies and guidelines can be summarized as five pillars that define the character of the project:

	Wikipedia is an encyclopedia incorporating elements of general encyclopedias, specialized encyclopedias, and almanacs. All articles must follow our no original research policy, and strive for verifiable accuracy: unreferenced material may be removed, so please provide references. Wikipedia is not the place to insert personal opinions, experiences, or arguments. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, an advertising platform, a vanity press, an experiment in anarchy or democracy, or a web directory. It is not a newspaper or a collection of source documents; these kinds of content should be contributed to the Wikimedia sister projects.
	Wikipedia has a neutral point of view, which means we strive for articles that advocate no single point of view. Sometimes this requires representing multiple points of view, presenting each point of view accurately, providing context for any given point of view, and presenting no one point of view as "the truth" or "the best view". It means citing verifiable, authoritative sources whenever possible, especially on controversial topics. When a conflict arises regarding neutrality, declare a cool-down period and tag the article as disputed, hammer out details on the talk page, and follow dispute resolution.
	Wikipedia is free content that anyone may edit. All text is available under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) and may be distributed or linked accordingly. Recognize that articles can be changed by anyone and no individual controls any specific article; therefore, any writing you contribute can be mercilessly edited and redistributed at will by the community. Do not infringe on copyright or submit work licensed in a way incompatible with the GFDL.
	Wikipedia has a code of conduct: Respect your fellow Wikipedians even when you may not agree with them. Be civil. Avoid conflicts of interest, personal attacks or sweeping generalizations. Find consensus, avoid edit wars, follow the three-revert rule, and remember that there are 6,931,739 articles on the English Wikipedia to work on and discuss. Act in good faith, never disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point, and assume good faith on the part of others. Be open and welcoming.
	Wikipedia does not have firm rules besides the five general principles presented here. Be bold in editing, moving, and modifying articles. Although it should be aimed for, perfection is not required. Do not worry about making mistakes. All prior versions of articles are kept, so there is no way that you can accidentally damage Wikipedia or irretrievably destroy content. Remember, whatever you write here will be preserved for posterity.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Gears Of War

• Introduction
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I have marked the article for deletion. Bytebear (talk) 17:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy Bebestbe.

Is there anything in particular I'm looking for at Allied submarine usage in the Pacific War? Nick Dowling looks to be doing an excellent job developing the article as is. Oberiko (talk) 03:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. It was more for a second view. Thanks for taking a look. Bebestbe (talk) 03:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is still obviously very much a work in progress. Everything, including the structure, is nothing but a proposal put forward by me at this stage, so edit away! Nick Dowling (talk) 11:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You marked problem set with the OR tag without explaining yourself. I find this odd because it's a 3 paragraph article with 11 citations from 6 sources, needless to say far more than the vast majority of articles. No article cites every sentence, so I have removed the tag. If there is anything that is particularly exigent to cite, please mark it with a {{fact}} tag.-Oreo Priest ^talk 07:06, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help with the above article. I really appreciate it. But could you do one favor? I would like you to help me reword this section. Please reply here. Thanks, RyRy5 (talk) 22:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ry. It's OK to copy that section from usgs.gov because works of the U.S. Federal Government are not copyrightable by Federal Law. If I have time, I'll try to reword it. Bebestbe (talk) 23:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I didn't notice that. :P But if you can, just reword it a little, just to be safe. Thanks. Oh, and welcome to wikipedia. -- RyRy5 (talk) 23:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Copyright status of work by the U.S. government. Actually, I think you stumbled on a sweet way to crank out Wikipedia articles. Just plunk down U.S. Federal Government generated text into a new Wikipedia article. Place a footnote at the end of each sentence, grab some free images, and you're done. I've seen the guys who write the U.S. Warship articles copy all the text out of U.S. Federal Government generated text. See Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating text from public domain works of the United States Government. I added Template:USGovernment to the article. Bebestbe (talk) 23:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess your right. Btw, Coalinga, California earthquake if being nominated to appear in the WP:DYK section on the mainpage. --RyRy5 (talk) 23:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The list isn't organised by geographic location, so it would take an inordinate amount of time to add them to List of cemeteries. If you can separate them out, it'd be a simple copy-and-paste job into the list (then sorting alphabetically by state, which can be done through Microsoft Word). - Dudesleeper / Talk 20:08, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to be honest, I learned something today as I have never heard of this term before. I would wager that I have some information on the topic buried away in some book though, so I will take a look for it when I get a chance. I am going to be away from editing for the remainder of the week though researching for writing in my regular life and then doing some chef type stuff, as such I won't get to it in time to help you for you DYK, wish I could help you sooner.--Chef Tanner (talk) 20:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A page you created, Greek choral music, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it redirects from an implausible misspelling.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thanks. StaticGull  Talk  14:19, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can do on the location photos for the movie. I might be able to get to some of them this weekend. The image of Blue Hole you put in the article is not the Blue Hole that was in the film. The Blue Hole in the film is said to be in Wimberley and is on Cypress Creek. The Blue Hole image in the article is near Georgetown and is on the San Gabriel River. -Regards Nv8200p talk 00:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 773 Irmintraud, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 10:58, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey B, your recent edits to Business (disambiguation) were reverted. Please read WP:MOSDAB for the appropriate style and formatting of disambiguation pages; specifically, that guideline reads: "On a page called 'Title', do not create entries merely because 'Title' is part of the name." Thanks! UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, I saw that you changed the page Business (disambiguation) back to list basically all articles that start with or contain the word business. So that you can hopefully understand more why the edits changing your edits were made, disambiguation pages do not need to include all pages that have the term being disambiguated int them - they should only list pages whose title can really be confused with the term. Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Partial_title_matches talks about this. This is why the page was returned to its previous version. If I can help to clarify this any more, please let me know, and/or please join in the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Disambiguation#Business_.28disambiguation.29. Providing we come to an understanding, we'll put the page back to the appropriate form. -- Natalya 14:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello--The redirect looks good, but I think the previous section title was more helpful. "Utility of money" is what someone might be interested in, and then the utility function stuff can come in the text.Cretog8 (talk) 16:52, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, feel free to change it how you think best. Just make sure the Money in the utility function redirect is changed as well. Bebestbe (talk) 17:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thanks for the reminder on the redirect, I would have missed that.Cretog8 (talk) 17:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about this as a stub? Bearian (talk) 22:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your speedy deletion tagging. For test pages, you should use G2 rather than G6 with a wording parameter. bibliomaniac15 22:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, impressive work on this article! One to go! --Oldak Quill 01:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Satanicide, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Daniel Case (talk) 17:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two in the same update ...

On 26 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Strawhead, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Daniel Case (talk) 17:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with facts from the articles Extinguishment, and Spring soup, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 11:39, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am declining all your speedy requests within the AfD space as these are clearly not test pages, but requests or expressions of opinion. Please review WP:CSD#G2 and feel free to ask me any questions on my talk page Fritzpoll (talk) 01:45, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same for WP:Pancakes! - if you feel strongly about it, take it to WP:MFD. G2 is not just an excuse to get rid of things that don't seem appropriate to you. Best wishes Fritzpoll (talk) 01:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged a lot of AfD talk pages and it appears that only some of my speedy requests within the AfD space were declined. I think you mean that the speedy requests that were declined were not test pages. In any event, I didn't get rid of things that didn't seem appropriate to me. Before jumping to conclusions, please consider discussioning the matter first. Bebestbe (talk) 03:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article subpersonalities, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 09:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Please let me know if this signature would be alright <span style="font: small-caps 15px times;">'''[[User:KC Panchal|<font color="#800080">—Ketan</font><font color="#000000">Panchal</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:KC Panchal|<font color="#2F4F4F">''<small>t</small>aL{{fs|3|K}}''</font>]]'''</sup></span>

Honestly, I've never seen my signature interfering with the surrounding text. And also, never received complaints. I'm very fond of this signature, but obviously don't want to inconvenience others, too. So, hoping to meet an effective compromise. Am writing to you, so I could get some feedback if this is also interfereing with the surrounding text.

PS: I use firefox with toolbar.

—KetanPanchal^taLK 10:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bebestebe. Thanks for your message. A subsequent edit to the article earlier today made the two sentences I mentioned make sense. I've moved the final two sentences around so I think the paragraph flows better. Major Bloodnok (talk) 19:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the image. Thanks. I will add other info as it arises.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was kind of afraid of that. That's how I did a partial update of the music entries at one point, but it was mind-numbingly time-consuming. I was hoping that there was an easier way. Maybe Betacommand's idea will pan out and make the process a lot less labor-intensive. Chubbles (talk) 23:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message - his name is Jürgen, like Jürgen Klinsmann. If you look at the link to Google News you provided, you can see that in 1979 the New York Times transcribed his name (more correctly) as Juergen Heuser. I wouldn't move the article - I've added the standard "ü" foreign language header instead. Nikai (talk) 13:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I see you have just marked a number of naming conventions as "proposals". Was there a community-wide decision concerning this? The one I was particularly thinking of was Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation/New York City Subway/Station naming convention. This convention has been stable for 10 months. The editors who worked on it regarded the issue as settled, and it has been widely implemented as written. Why, after all this time, was it "demoted" to a proposal? Marc Shepherd (talk) 20:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Naming conventions that are part of the official English Wikipedia policy Wikipedia:Naming conventions usually are not subpages of WikiProjects. Also, the general stations issue still seems to be not resolved at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (stations). If New York City Subway Station naming convention has received general consensus as English Wikipedia naming conventions, then there should be no issue in moving/copying it to something like Wikipedia:Naming conventions (New York City Subway stations). I've posted notes on the talk pages of two regulars at Wikipedia:Naming conventions Francis Schonken and Pmanderson to look over my recent categorization efforts. If I miscategorized "New York City Subway Station naming convention," then they likely would catch it. Bebestbe (talk) 20:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there -- I just wanted to let you know that I've expanded the article LoveLikeFire to 4.8x its original size, and commented back at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created/expanded on June 26. I don't mean to rush you, I just want to make sure that the nomination doesn't expire before getting looked at. Dylan (talk) 18:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:LionKingX.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:19, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome to do any work you like on categorization, but can you point me to the discussion that led to posting CAT:GEN and CAT:MOS as shortcuts to Wikipedia style guidelines instead of to General style guidelines? (feel free to reply here). - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 15:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dan. The CAT:GEN and CAT:MOS shortcuts on Category:General style guidelines haven't change. As for posting CAT:GEN and CAT:MOS shortcuts on Wikipedia style guidelines, that was a mistake which I was in the process of correction. Sorry for the confusion. Bebestbe (talk) 16:11, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the discussion that led to putting Wikipedia:WikiProject Manual of Style in the Wikipedia style guidelines cat? Are you putting other pages in the cat without discussion? - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 14:18, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to start conversations with accusuational tones. If you think it was a mistake, please just correct it. Bebestbe (talk) 14:24, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right, sorry. And by going through the whole cat, I found out the answer myself: the cat is not growing, so all is well. What I'm saying is that it's really frustrating when someone comes along and decides on their own without any discussion what's a style guideline and what's not; it creates a lot of work for the folks who keep an eye on style guidelines. You're more than welcome to keep thinking about this stuff, I hope you will; just talk about it somewhere first, okay? - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 14:27, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning the page in question: I've had it watchlisted for a long time, and it's dormant. When we were talking there, we didn't intend it as a place where other people would come to learn new style guidelines, we were trying to hash out how to deal with some difficult questions. Is there something on that page that you'd like to see as a style guideline? - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 14:30, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We're working towards the same goal. I've become frustrated at relying a style guideline only: to find out later that it did not receive consensus through Wikipedia proposals or other appropriate means. My interest is in keeping things from being identified as an official style guideline. I think if I place all non official style guidelines into categories other than the official style categories, then there would be less chance that someone would add their page to the official style guidelines. Is there a list that in fact represents official style guidelines (perhaps Template:Style? If so, I'll not edit those page until I discuss it with others at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Bebestbe (talk) 14:45, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To go to a slightly different subject, it is in many cases against proper etiquette to categorise pages in the userspace without consulting the editors concerned; people's user pages are considered more or less private space, and unsolicited major edits can be interpreted as intrusion. In my case, I request that you should revert your edits to my pages, as these constitute a small-scale experiment currently in hiatus and should not be categorised anywhere. Regards, Waltham, The Duke of 21:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! There's the Duke, I bet he can answer your question about Macedonia better than I can. To answer your question about the official list, there isn't one. People often create new style guidelines...WP:FILM created one a couple of months ago...and just because someone creates a new style guideline doesn't mean it's my job to run over there and tell them what I think, and I think a lot of people who keep up with style guidelines feel the same way. Live and let live. When it's brought to my attention that pages that call themselves style guidelines are in conflict, then I am happy to give my two cents. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 02:32, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting, Bebestbe; you forgot one, but I took care of that myself. Dan mentions a question about Macedonia... Why not? If I can help, I shall. Waltham, The Duke of 17:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. I've made a couple of potential improvements to the images you submitted for editing at the Wikipedia Graphics Lab. Would you mind dropping by and providing your opinion so the request may be satisfied and the images substituted into the article? Thanks vlad§inger ^tlk 04:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:GrapicoCan.PNG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 00:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For your excellent job on the Grapico article. I didn't imagine that I would become a B-Class article so fast-- iDosh!  talk? 14:47, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh man, IDosh beat me to it, I was going to toss the barnstar at ya. Great article, reads really well too, I think with some tweaking this could get to GA.--Chef Tanner (talk) 18:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you find those awesome vintage pictures?--Chef Tanner (talk) 04:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Grapico, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 09:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that this category you created is unpopulated (empty). In other words, no Wikipedia pages belong to it. If it remains unpopulated for four days, it may be deleted, without discussion, in accordance with Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#C1. I'm notifying you in case you wish to (re-)populate it by adding [[Category:Old requests for Brazil peer review]] to articles/categories that belong in it.

I blanked the category page. This will not, in itself, cause the category to be deleted. It serves to document (in the page history) that the category was empty at the time of blanking and also to alert other watchers that the category is in jeopardy. You are welcome to revert the blanking if you wish. However, doing so will not prevent deletion if the category remains empty.

If you created the category in error, or it is no longer needed, you can speed up the deletion process by tagging it with {{db-author}}.

--Stepheng3 (talk) 21:45, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... Care to update that? :) -- Cat ^chi? 22:37, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

You were the creator of Category:Style guidelines of WikiProjects.

I think at the time you created this category, guidelines were defined differently from how they are now; infact, i venture that they were not defined even for wikipedia's purposes at the time.

Can you put your input on the talk page of this category? The problems are that the category should either be deleted or renamed.Bernolákovčina (talk) 00:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:VanityFairApril1986Cover.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Thank you. Damiens.rf 15:52, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:StrawheadScriptPage.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Thank you. Damiens.rf 15:58, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to you because you have previously edited the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) page. There is currently a discussion that may result in a significant change to Wikipedia policy. Specifically, a consensus is being sought on if the policies of WP:UCN and WP:EN continues to be working policies for naming biographical articles, or if such policies have been replaced by a new status quo. This discussion is on-going at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English), and your comments would be appreciated. Dolovis (talk) 17:21, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Terra Research. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 24#Terra Research until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 122.60.46.122 (talk) 08:43, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia requests related to devices has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]