Here are some tips to help you get started:
- To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
- Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
- If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
- Follow the Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset
- Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
- Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
- Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!
CfD nomination of Category:Ancient temples
Category:Ancient temples, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. –Black Falcon (Talk) 19:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Please be Civil
Keep your supernatural explanations if you want, I don't oppose. However it's totally UNACCEPTABLE that in this article there are NO skeptical and scientific views about the alleged event. Anyway, skeptics DO have their say, as they exist and write lots of material (eg. Jesus Seminar) and their opinion SHOULD be presented. Now the whole thing looks extremely stupid: all naturalistic theories are being challenged, while the supernaturalistic one is left unchallenged. Be it that denying resurrection offends someone here, I don't care. It's ENCYCLOPEDIA and it means that TRUTH should be presented here. If truth is unknown, at least ALL quests for truth should be presented. Presence of some skeptical views on other pages about resurrection doesn't change the fact that this article is terribly lacking them or they are misrepresented (one or two lines about what skeptics "claim", as if tales of resureection were more probable than scientific inquires). Therefore article should NOT be deemend as NPOV. It's biased towards supernaturalism. ----Critto (talk) 16:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Please be civil, I'm not a Wikipedian, but I'm a wikiHowian, and even I know your behavior is unacceptable by the wiki standards. State your opinions if you want, but please state them civally. Thanks.
Your account will be renamed
23:12, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
11:47, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
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) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)