User talk:Athanasius1

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome!

Hello, Athanasius1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

You've done some good work already, I see. Always happy to have another valuable editor around! John Carter (talk) 14:39, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NCNOLT sourcing

Do you want to take a quick swing through and see if there are any refs that really shouldn't be there? I'm at work, so I shouldn't take the time for a thorough review before Natty's block expires.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responded at talk page. Athanasius • Quicumque vult 10:39, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just threw in a request for editor assistance here, perhaps not with any well-thought out idea of what I was asking for; it's more of a cri de coeur in narrative form, resulting from accumulated frustration I suppose. I'd appreciate any words of wisdom or useful commentary you may have (whichever way they may cut). Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 17:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Someone suggested posting a query at WT:IPNA, so I did that. Here. I'll be interested to see what shakes out. As I said there, I don't much care how the thing finally looks so long as a few competent and knowledgeable Wikipedia editors conclude that it's okay. JohnInDC (talk) 19:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editor Assistance/Requests

Please don't overuse the "stuck" tag. That shouldn't be used more than once in probably a hundred taggings - usually another tag will work. For instance, the "Sciencewatcher" section can be tagged "unresolved" or even "answered" since we did give the guy advice, and the "telepathy" section is a clear "answered" or even "resolved," per Mendaliv's answer. Thanks! Fleetflame 23:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WP:SFD

Hi Athanasius1 -looks like you completely misunderstood the nominations I made at WP:SFD - please check the reply there. Grutness...wha? 01:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

s'alright - you weren't the only editor to be fooled, so it was probably my method of nomination that was at least partly to blame. Grutness...wha? 04:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Landover Baptist Church‎;

Thanks for looksing anyhow. --Carlaude:Talk 21:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Project 86

Hey guy, that user Schwabette done those thing again (remove sourced information).

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Project_86&action=history

If you can, report it to the admins speaking that it was done again. My english is poor, sorry. Bye. (JoaquimMetalhead (talk) 02:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Hi, Athanasius1. Thanks for your participation here and your intervention here. NB these two IP editors have a long track record of problematic behaviour. For reference, please see here, here (old WQA re 64.107.xx.xxx), here, here, and here. I'm (still) not interested in a pissing contest with either or both of them; my interest and intent is the gradual improvement of articles. (and I certainly won't be replying to 12.73.xx.xxx' latest accusations at EAR; there seems little I could say that would improve matters any). —Scheinwerfermann T·C19:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please not the discussion that was attempted with what's his name long ago on this subject. Only result was no change, a worse-off article, and his removable of citations [1]. His rebuttal seems to be that 'people don't agree with his viewpoint so they must be bad people'. And who exactly is archiving these discussions to bury his hostility and unwillingness to do anything more than post long-winded non-responses?

Ford FE discussion

hey, you want discussion on the Ford FE page, well I'm trying to discuss. But as usual, the other guy doesn't want to discuss/be satisfied. Thanks for no help on this issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.159.130 (talk) 01:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for help

I am will shortly be posting to WP:AN with the request below. Any support would be appreciated.

Request to WP:AN

"I would like to take the article History of logic to FA. I have already sought input from a number of contributors and have cleared up the issues raised (I am sure there are more). I wrote nearly all of the article using different accounts, as follows:

I would like to continue this work but I am frustrated by the zealous activity of User:Fram who keeps making significant reverts, and blocking accounts wherever he suspects the work of a 'banned user'. (Fram claims s/he doesn't understand "the people who feel that content is more important than anything else").

Can I please be left in peace with the present account to complete this work. 'History of logic' is a flagship article for Wikipedia, and is an argument against those enemies who claim that nothing serious can ever be accomplished by the project". Logic Historian (talk) 09:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re Bart Sells His Soul

Hi, the old version of Bart Sells His Soul is much better because Bart gives the congregation the tune for the hymn "In the Garden of Eden" but lyrics by "I. Ron Butterfly", i.e. the psychedelic rock band Iron Butterfly, whose epic song "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida", is a parody of guess what? --Philcha (talk) 19:37, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Added to WP:MISS

Entry for this user made in WP:MISS: Missing Wikipedians

Gone, but not forgotten. Get in touch... Mediation4u (talk) 09:18, 2 August 2011 (UTC) editing is fun[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Athanasius1/Sandbox

User:Athanasius1/Sandbox, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Athanasius1/Sandbox and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Athanasius1/Sandbox 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. Magioladitis (talk) 14:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Deltopia for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Deltopia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deltopia 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Quidster4040 (talk) 15:46, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]