Welcome!
Hello, Jpvandijk, 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!
MaenK.A.
Talk
08:41, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
You might prefer to not show ur email, or to change its format:
Experience editors can write you an email on Wikipedia, if your option allows it (they do not need to know your email first). It is better to edit logged on ;) -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 18:13, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
First let me define the problem:
Maybe we can use the geodynamics pages as a test case to create a solution. Possibilities:
Jpvandijk ( talk) 09:12, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Are u sure with "Keith Runcorn in a paper in 1956" ??? Can't find a ref. -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 16:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I'll look it up and insert it tomorrow. The page is really accellarating! Compliments! Jpvandijk ( talk) 16:24, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
U worked more ;) Never mind u had the ref later on, sorry. -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 19:42, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
"Now each reference is double; as a "sfn note", as a "Harv". Looks good, we can trace also the amount of time each paper is referenced." Not good... Sysops/Admins won't like it, I'm afraid. -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 16:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Well, if there is another way to trace the amount of times the same reference is cited in the text, its welcome. But with the Harvard system I' didn't see an alternative. Is there a place where "sfn" usage is explained? Jpvandijk ( talk) 14:16, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Ebollizione, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a foreign language article that was copied and pasted from another Wikimedia project, or was transwikied out to another project. Please see Wikipedia:Translation to learn about requests for, and coordination of, translations from foreign-language Wikipedias into English.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
ZhongHan
(Email)
15:26, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
I perfectly agree the page should be deleted it was placed there by error.
Vsmith spread some citation needed tags again on Plate tectonics#Gravity related driving forces. Do u have something at hand, or do we have to search?
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)Please do not add song lyrics to Wikipedia, like you did at " I Only Have Eyes for You" back in January. They are almost always copyright violations; see the first part of Wikipedia:Lyrics and poetry. Graham 87 03:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Graham, I suspected that actually, as I didn't find any lyrics of any song in Wikipedia.
-- Jpvandijk ( talk) 17:05, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
In May 2010 you added a good detailed geology section to Calabria. However, the numerous Harvard reference links (e.g. (Argand, 1916; Boccaletti and Guazzone, 1972)) without a corresponding entry in the reference section is problematic. These, especially the important "mile¬stones" ... list of a dozen or so Harvard tags need amplification with full reference details -- else they should be chopped as rather useless filler. Possibly add a "Bibliography" section below the ref section where these are expanded. Vsmith ( talk) 14:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
No problem you are right I didn't have time for this I'll correct it this morning straight away. ( Jpvandijk ( talk) 07:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC))
Actually I'll fix this now also in the other pages in the other languages dealing with the same arguments. Jpvandijk ( talk) 07:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Radio Caroline, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Klaatu ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:57, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Ok fixed it. -- Jpvandijk ( talk) 09:50, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Sorry Chris I never read these comments. Send me your mail to [email protected] and I will send the pdf. the first one is not available online, the second one is available only through scientific confidential author - to - author mailing (because of copyright: otherwise you should buy it from Elsevier) and the third one is actually online in the Dutch library system but the copy is awfull, so I better send you as I usually do a high resolution pdf copy. -- Jpvandijk ( talk) 12:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Enzina Fuschini, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Trocadero ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:23, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
I've replied to you at length on the article's talk page but, in brief, my question about the notability is nothing to do with the earlier vandalism: I think it's a legitimate question and a debate worth having? 82.71.0.229 ( talk) 21:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments and for helping out dear user Bwilkins. But actually I would suggest to delete instead of redirecting, so remove the bullet from my (left) foot.
I agree that the process is available for reading. it is though, not at all objective and clear, nor substantial, nor rich of arguments. It is just a serious of empty phrases without any argumentation. There is a clear difference between a statement and an argument, hopefuly also in the English language. And I am just advising Wikipedia; be aware that personally I could care less of what is posted on one website in Internet or another after all. It's all part of evaluating how much time each of us should invest and for that I would also advise other editors to think twice. See my comments on transparency of editors, Wikipedia policy, future and difference between science and non-science.
Oh could you please help me finding the place where the information I carefully gathered and made available to Wikipedia was merged?
-- Jpvandijk ( talk) 12:00, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the info Bwilkins, well let's give Wikipedia some time to think it over, that's better.
There is by the way nothing of all my work merged in this redirect. I would have seen it.
Anyway, after all, all this initial vandalism by Gerry Rafferty family members, mobbing and offensive talking both in Wikipedia (all now invisible for the public by this intelligent redirect move) and other net blogs, and discussion about deleting the page is just because there was a link to Gerry Rafferty on the furthermore rich page about Enzina Fuschini, which the British public has difficulty to cope with: If it would not have been there, I am convinced the page would have been accepted with pleasure by Wikipedia. A pity that not all of the episodes are available to be read by the public; they are sure interesting to analyse. But I respect that Wikipedia has to defend itself; it was actually in fact quite embarrassing to see how the website was being used, all this cross linking and desperate editing of pages.
Once again a reason to think well about what is objectiveness, what is Wikipedia all about, how it should evolve, what is it's possible future, and who is actually managing it. For me it was an interesting experiment, very propaedeutic, and a case history that can be investigated upon in the future. After the discussions I participated upon on Wikipedia policies, it was important for me to understand how Wikipedia is still related to old fashioned feelings and where the human aspect can still be detected; prejudice towards different nationalities, defence of family, religion, class, etc. In that sense it doesn’t differ so much from science, art, media and all other incredible human manifestations and why should it. Generating an enormous amount of procedures and rules, we did the same in science since long but it actually doesn’t help a lot.
Anyway let’s keep it up, lot of (more interesting) work to do here in WP.
-- Jpvandijk ( talk) 12:49, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I retract my comments. -- Jpvandijk ( talk) 13:11, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I have no intention to offend anybody or attribute actions to living people. I in fact refered to an already deleted user which used the name of living people. If you prefer I can edit or delete my comments from this page. -- Jpvandijk ( talk) 13:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
And you are perfectly right: If you take a look at the discussion on the EF page, if still visible for you, you will notice that I myself made clear to another editor that the two (living people and the WP user with the same name) should not be confused, exactly because the editor I discussed with automatically supposed that these were one and the same. Sorry to have fallen in the same trap. I absolutely regret it, excuse myself and withdraw my words. -- Jpvandijk ( talk) 13:20, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
-- Jpvandijk ( talk) 13:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
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)
14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Jpvandijk. 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. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Jpvandijk. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Jam Nation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://realworldrecords.com/artist/408/jam-nation/ and https://realworldrecords.com/releases/jam-nation/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Gyrofrog (talk) 23:25, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)