User talk:Simoncursitor
Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:
- Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try Wikipedia:How to edit a page.
- To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes).
- You can experiment in the test area.
- You can get help at the Help Desk
- Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Wikipedia:Five pillars, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Civility, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:How to write a great article
I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at Wikipedia:New user log.
-- utcursch | talk to me
Contains TalkPage material from 2005, 2006 and 2007
School of medicine
[edit]Perhaps my comment here might interest you. -- Hoary (talk) 02:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Numb3rs merge
[edit]Could you elaborate some more about your comment? I'm not sure I understand. Basically, my thought was that the list of characters was mostly redundant to information in the main article. 70.22.154.184 (talk) 19:52, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not understanding your post on my talk page. Do you favor a merge or no? 70.22.154.184 (talk) 19:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
September 2008
[edit]
This is your only warning.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Wasilla Assembly of God, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Specifically, you reverted text calling Muthee a witch hunter and persecutor, when this editor has already pointed out the BLP nature of these edits. Jclemens (talk) 16:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- May I refer you to a quote from your talk page :: "I don't object to being overruled, since it seems like my interpretation of consensus may not be universal". -- Simon Cursitor (talk) 07:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- That was uttered in the context of a Good Article review. WP:BLP is a non-negotiable policy. Would you find it helpful for me to explain the difference between the two? Jclemens (talk) 12:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Not really, sicne you have already decided to ban me from Wiki. -- Simon Cursitor (talk) 07:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- That was uttered in the context of a Good Article review. WP:BLP is a non-negotiable policy. Would you find it helpful for me to explain the difference between the two? Jclemens (talk) 12:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- May I refer you to a quote from your talk page :: "I don't object to being overruled, since it seems like my interpretation of consensus may not be universal". -- Simon Cursitor (talk) 07:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Profanity in articles versus profanity on Talk pages
[edit]Hi, Simon, it's me, Aexus from the Eve Online article and its Talk page. I understand that you'd prefer the profanity on the article's Talk page removed. You are correct in that there's no need to write something that can be considered "offensive, profane, or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers" as WP:PROFANE puts it. The profanity guideline, however, covers only articles and explicitly not Talk pages. There have been similar discussions about whether or not profanity on Talk pages is a violation. For example on the WP:PROFANE Talk page editors have asked about that in January and May of 2007. The concensus is that Talk pages are governed by WP:CIVILITY and not by WP:PROFANE. While discussing an ungulate's testicles in an article would likely violate a guideline, doing so on a Talk page is fine as long as editors keep the civility guideline in mind and for example do not attack each other personally.
It's your personal preference to keep the Eve Online Talk page without the sentence in question. Since I've written it, I can delete it if I see fit. I've done just that. Next time you feel the need to delete profanity from a Talk page that doesn't violate the civility guideline, consider posting on the respective editor's Talk page first. They may disagree with you but they may very well agree. I do think that you achieve more the more you commnunicate.
-- Aexus (talk) 14:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Need your help saving this, now, thanks. -74.242.254.148 (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
There's a new AfD nomination for an article you've previously discussed. Please stop by to voice your opinions again. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 11:22, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Page remaining in your user space
[edit]You have a page at User:Simoncursitor/TMM which has not been touched in years, and appears to now qualify as a WP:FAKEARTICLE; could you please delete it, per guidelines? --Nat Gertler (talk) 18:23, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
MfD nomination of User:Simoncursitor/TMM
[edit]User:Simoncursitor/TMM, 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:Simoncursitor/TMM and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Simoncursitor/TMM 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. Nat Gertler (talk) 15:08, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
From my user page:: Oh, by the way, there is no Cabal in Wikipaedia. Honest, guv.
Peter Wray
[edit]Hi, I was hoping you'd take a look at the Peter Wray article and let me know what you think. It's pretty ridiculous right now. It absolutely reads like advertisement for him (how many times do we need to call him unique when we're trying to maintain NPOV?) and someone is reverting now only fixes but anything negative said about his recent activities.Hexrei2 (talk) 21:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- This is, frankly, nothing to do with me :: certainly I claim no expertise that would entitle me to edit the article, or to comment on other editors' work. -- Simon Cursitor (talk)
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) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Simoncursitor. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Simoncursitor. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)