Welcome!

Hello, TimNelson/Archive1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If 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. Again, welcome!  -- Longhair | Talk 11:10, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't understand your "most specific principle" in moving categories around in the Sciences. If I click on Science from the main page, I would expect to find Astronomy or Physics, and won't even think to look in "Natural Sciences". I hope you will rectify this. The purpose of categories is to help users find things, there is no absolute truth here. dml 2 July 2005 13:16 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Categorization, and do a search for Queen Elizabeth; it's in that paragraph. That's where I got this principle from, and assumed that that was what people wanted done.

Part of the problem to my mind is that when I say Science, I'm thinking of theoretical natural science (where applied natural science is to me engineering, and I call Social Science "Human Systems", but I think I'm the only one to do so). So in that respect, I agree with you. However, I based all my recategorisation on the following presuppositions:

* Most Specific Category principle

* That the blurb at the top of the Science category was correct (ie. we're dividing between Natural and Social sciences)

I'm happy to discuss those presuppositions, though. Maybe a solution would be to extend the discussion of Natural and Social sciences at the top of the page, saying something like "Natural sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, and astronomy..... Social sciences such as economics, politics, psychology, sociology, and anthropology.....". Would that work for you? TimNelson 9 July 2005 11:38 (UTC)

Yes, I put it in the header of the category page. I still think the category:natural sciences should be deprecated, as should category:physical sciences in favor of a larger and better category:science dml 12:00, 15 July 2005 (UTC) reply

(Moved this talk to the discussion page for Superinflation cycle)

(Moved to Talk:Dress code (Western))

Hi. Is there any chance we could get Pearle to run for Wikiversity too? I put a request in on v:Wikiversity:Request_custodian_action, but no-one there seems to be capable of doing this.

Thanks, TimNelson 08:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Anyone is free to copy the source code and make a clone under their own control. Personally, I don't have enough free time to expand the scope of the original bot's operations. Much of Pearle's functionality involves refiling things tagged for cleanup. Taking a look around Wikiversity, it seems like there's Category:Pages needing cleanup after Import, and not much else, so maybe it's not all that necessary yet. Though perhaps the category-moving code would be useful even on such a young project.

I also got your e-mail about Pearle code improvements. Probably good suggestions, but I don't really have time to start playing with code that is working OK for now. -- Beland 04:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Casual chic

Request noted, but does it mean anything other that "smart casual"? Any ideas or suggestions? IXIA 22:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Have now added something on this at Chic: A-L. IXIA 17:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC) reply

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, TimNelson! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bmembers\.aol\.com\/.+, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 05:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, TimNelson! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bmembers\.aol\.com\/.+, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 10:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Tim, I've been trying to track down Geerhardus Vos' middle name. The only listing of it that I've found anywhere is here on Wikipedia's page for him. When I saw that you had added the middle name, I was hoping you might be able to confirm that this is indeed that case and (if possible) share where you got your information. Feel free to e-mail me at mga318 AT yahoo DOTCOM. Thanks! -Mike Aubrey