User talk:Serenity id

Welcome to Wikipedia!!![edit]

Hello Serenity id! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. You may also push the signature button

located above the edit window. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! -- LittleOldMe 16:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects
Getting your info out there
Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Policy Library

Getting Help
New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions
Getting along
Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution
Getting technical
Cleaning up vandalism Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Please note[edit]

That the discussion about problem articles - really should go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Indonesia first - and a wait of a fw days before doing anything - as some editors are not daily editors but perhaps only once or twice a week on editing - expecting instant responses from any editors in this project lacks WP:AGF Satu Suro 04:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cover CHIP 08 2008 reguler.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Cover CHIP 08 2008 reguler.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media 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. J Milburn (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So? It's non-free, and must be used in accordance with our non-free content guidelines. J Milburn (talk) 16:37, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you are asking me. The image is not strictly required- the article would be fine without it, everything useful that it tells/shows us could be given in free text. Please review the non-free content guidelines, or explain why you believe that this image is needed. J Milburn (talk) 16:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are not 'my' standards. I'm not sure how many times I will have to link this, but please review the non-free content guidelines before uploading any more non-free media. The image is not showing anything that freely licensed text could not, and so it is easily replaceable. If you can show me why the image is needed, with reference to Wikipedia's standards, then I will happily change my mind. J Milburn (talk) 16:47, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is a list of types of images which may be appropriate for use on Wikipedia- note that, at the start of that section, it says "Some copyrighted images may be used on Wikipedia, providing they meet both the legal criteria for fair use, and Wikipedia's own guidelines for non-free content. Copyrighted images that reasonably can be replaced by free/libre images are not suitable for Wikipedia." (emphasis mine) It is not a list of types of non-free material that can be used as if they are free. J Milburn (talk) 16:53, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revo[edit]

There has already been an article that was deleted - this one looks like lasting though - however if you are going to create and edit articles in wp english regularly - you must get used to putting project tags - specially due to the living persons issue - it helps to have articles within the project included by tagging! Satu Suro 12:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please either ask for help or check your english carefully - some of the sentences in the Indonesia Wikipedia article are not normal english! Satu Suro 15:38, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Left a note on your talk page. --Chriswaterguy talk 00:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise for any misunderstandings I may have created, however I do not see any point in being that pointed about a typo or misunderstanding - best to get back to the editor who makes such a claim and not get too upset - the whole point of talk pages is to clarify - not get all precious about something. There are other ways of respinding to others mistakes.

In the message above I had meant to put English Wikipedia, Indonesia Project - re the the Indonesia Wikipedia

article.

Satu Suro 06:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About that lawyer thing...[edit]

Happy to help you not make disagreements into world war 3, but this is not carte blanche to offend everyone on Wikipedia ;-). --Chriswaterguy talk 01:19, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry[edit]

But if you make a mistake on the article about Revo or Indonesian Wikipedia - someone will either correct the mistake or come to your talk page and ask you about it. I cannot help that in any way, nor can chris or anyone else - you must understand that Wikipedia is not a place where everyone is always nice and friendly - even if you ask others to help you from being visited, that is not how this place works

All that aside I cannot understand why a simple observation about an article can get so drawn out.

Please have a very good and prosperous new year Satu Suro 05:22, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also as it was not carefully explained in my short hand language and not helpful manner.

There already had been an article about Revo about a year ago but it was put up for WP:AFD and was deleted.

It is important to know that, as it was considered that he was not notable. It is always worth knowing if you are creating an article about someone who has already had an article - but it was deleted.

If you have a problem - always best to communicate direct - adding other people in can easily increase the misunderstandings to the point that too many people and too many misunderstandings can be quite unhelpful. Satu Suro 05:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The other point as I have had some online communication with Revo ( over a year or so) - it would be good to see an article up and staying on wikipedia and not being challenged in anyway. Satu Suro 05:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We've had our joke...[edit]

...so I'd actually be a more comfortable if my "legal services" were not advertised on your talk page :-). --Chriswaterguy talk 16:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, agreed. Understood. (serenity)

Proposed deletion of Systematic[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Systematic, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

WP is not a dictionary, and Wikitionary already has definitions of "Systematic"

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. PamD (talk) 10:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you moved the band and then over-wrote the redirect which led to them: if you do anything like that again please remember to add a "hatnote" to redirect readers to the article you have moved, as otherwise it becomes unfindable. PamD (talk) 10:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To explain: previously, "Systematic" was the article about the band. You moved that article to a new title"Systematic (band)", which created an automatic "redirect" so that anyone searching on "systematic" would have been pointed to the band. But you then over-wrote that with your new article. You should have added a "hatnote", a note at the top of the page, to refer readers to the article for the band. I hope that makes sense now? It's not particularly challenging technically to add a hatnote, but it's a mistake to cut off an article so that it can't be found, as you did to the band.
As for "Systematic": it's an adjective. On its own it cannot be "actually part of epistemology/ science " as you say. "Systematic xxxx", where xxxx is some noun or phrase, might well be a part of epistemology and a useful article (though the word "systematic" doesn't occur in the Epistemology article). But you can't have an adjective as an article name (the name of the band is different, of course, as a proper noun): see Wikipedia:Naming conventions where it says "Redirect adjectives to nouns: Convention: Adjectives (such as democratic) should redirect to nouns (in this case, democracy)". You might find there is already a relevant article if you look at All pages with titles beginning with System or All pages with titles beginning with Systematic. Hope that helps. PamD (talk) 23:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?[edit]

The large paragraph in Indonesian wikipedia about Indonesian language is unnecessary - why did you put it in? It hardly relates to the article at all - all that was needed was a link or two to other articles about that if at all Satu Suro 05:48, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thank you, Serentiy id, for the image contribution to the WP:GA article, Truth in Numbers?. Much appreciated! Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:49, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lontar foundation training participants has been nominated for renaming[edit]

Category:Lontar foundation training participants 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. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:57, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Global Handwashing Day (emblem).jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Global Handwashing Day (emblem).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]