User talk:People bios

Welcome to my talk page :)

I am new to wikipedia (I joined on July 6, 2010) and I am a second generation Korean American.

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( People bios (talk) 16:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC) ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:00, 7 July 2010 (UTC) Thanks for the info! I am new to this and I really appreciate the wiki community and all their support. People bios (talk) 02:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

~It just occurred to me that I was talking back to a bot. As you can see, I am painstakingly new at this. I am passionate about history, technology, and teaching, which is why I am on here. I love history, and am very excited to be a part of it in any way. I am going into teaching history, and hope to get a PhD in History, Education, or even Technology someday.

~I am also from the Facebook/MySpace generation, so as such, I plan on treating this whole site like a profile page for members. I think it wouldn't be bad for us to get to know one another, because the ones who do this for awhile are true historians and should be recognized as such (this is true for all admins, devoted editors, etc.). Historians also make it into history you know. I am really gaining a tremendous amount of respect for the Wikipedia community, and as such, I think it would be great for us to start being more direct about who we are.

Extended content

July 2010 Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Oneiros (talk) 19:59, 8 July 2010 (UTC) Thanks for the comment. Sorry, I didn't know. I will from now on.People bios (talk) 20:00, 8 July 2010 (UTC) Personal attacks You must stop this sort of behavior[1] immediately. Personal attacks, like the one you made against User:Xxanthippe, are totally unaccepotable and forbidden by the WP:NPA policy. If you do this sort of thing again, you will be reported to WP:AN/I and blocked from editing. Nsk92 (talk) 03:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC) @ People bios. In the course of this AfD debate you made a personal attack against me. After complaints from myself and others, you apologized for it and I thank you for that. I note, though, that here [2] you say "I just casually throw around my insults, personal attacks, and automated letters of complaints without discretion, and then I ask for forgiveness later." . If you persist in this approach to editing Wikipedia you will cause offence to a lot of people. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC). Xxanthippe (talk), I am not quite sure how to take this comment you left on my talk page. On the one hand, I am not sure if it is meant to be a joke, because the comment I left on Cunard's page was obviously said in jest (I was referring to his automated letter of complaint if you were paying attention to the thread). In context, it was clear to Cunard that I was not being serious and I did not mean offense. The whole thread of comments that were being left back and forth between us make that apparent, so I don't know how relevant your point can be here (if it is serious) since it is taken out of context and I do not know how you could misconstrue that. On the other hand, if you really think that it was said in sincerity, then I should mention that I am very sorry about the personal attack I made against you, and I hope you will understand that I am not trying to make enemies on Wikipedia. I am just trying to edit and contribute to it.People bios (talk) 08:09, 11 July 2010 (UTC) Whipping Tom Hi, Esther. Thank you for copyediting Whipping Tom. I noticed that you changed "colour" to "color". Per WP:ENGVAR, specifically MOS:TIES, this article should be written in British English instead of American English, so I have changed the spelling back to "colour". Best, Cunard (talk) 07:07, 9 July 2010 (UTC) Oh okay. I will leave those ones from now on.People bios (talk) 07:28, 9 July 2010 (UTC) Barnstar The Resilient Barnstar Hi, I thought I would give you this barnstar for you resilience and good humor. Editing Wikipedia can be difficult, especially for new comers, but you have displayed outstanding resilience, accepting constructive criticism and learning quickly. Despite having your first article nominated for deletion, you have taken it in stride and are quickly becoming a valuable contributor. I hope you continue to edit and look forward to working with you in the future. -- Leivick (talk) 22:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC) Comment: My first barnstar! Thank you :) I am really excited about making meaningful contributions to Wikipedia. It encompasses so many of my passions, from History, to English, to disseminating knowledge, to technology (I am obsessed with technology). Thank you for everything. I don't mind the attacks, and in many ways, I have truly come to appreciate everything that has happened because it made me understand so much more than I would have if this whole [AfD] had never happened.People bios (talk) 22:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC) Friendly Advice Mr. People bios: Greetings! I am pleased and relieved to see you are still on here and attempting to contribute despite your first article having become the topic of a fairly heated AfD. To that end, I'd like to offer some entirely unsolicited, hopefully useful advice. I noticed that you just added several very lengthy responses to DiverDave's Delete !vote. Now, bearing in mind that this is advice that I have a hard time following myself (if I were better at "letting it go" when a conversation veers off topic and into pointless argument, I'd have a much more peaceful Wiki-life!), I'd recommend against continuing to do that. There's a point at which the original author of an article being discussed at AfD can use so many words defending the article's notability that it almost proves the non-notability of the topic. Meaning: if it takes you 500 words to explain why something is notable, it's probably not notable. All that being said, the notability of Dr. Kim is a bit complex, so some length is to be expected in responses. But I'd avoid repeating your arguments (the admin who will close the discussion will review everything written in the AfD), and I'd avoid responding to every little point every person brings up on the AfD :). The notability of Dr. Kim rests entirely on whether or not the Korean-language newspapers will be accepted as reliable sources sufficient to confer notability, and not on whether or not DiverDave is consistent in his opinions, etc. Make sense? I hope you'll take this as entirely friendly, constructive criticism/advice. I appreciate your candor and character thus far and it's always good to see new editors trying to learn so much about Wikipedia so quickly. There's a ton to learn! I have been working with the encyclopedia off and on for four years now and I still run into new policies and guidelines on a weekly basis! ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 21:28, 12 July 2010 (UTC) Hi GinsengBomb ~ I agree. I was a bit torn as to whether or not I should even get back on here, even in an effort to delete the comments, because I realized I was getting really worked up about this whole thing. Either way, I really do appreciate all the time people are putting into this, mainly because I believe that this is something I am trying to learn from and I feel like this entire experience is sort of like going through Wikipedia boot camp (nothing like a good Afd Debate to get the quickest, most straightforward lesson on how to figure out the ways of Wikipedia.) Thank you for contributing and taking part. I apologize for diverging from the main issue at hand.People bios (talk) 00:14, 13 July 2010 (UTC) No apology is necessary. On the contrary, I think you are owed an apology for the treatment you have been subjected to by certain veteran editors. We have a policy here regarding not biting the newcomers -- a policy which has, in my opinion, been repeatedly violated by several editors in their dealings with you. Regardless, hang in there. So long as you continue to demonstrate aptitude for learning from and acknowledging your own mistakes (as you have done so far!), you'll find this "Wikipedia boot camp" you're in right now very productive :). ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 14:10, 13 July 2010 (UTC) Message from DiverDave Hello People bios, and thank you for your comments at your AfD. You are probably cringing at this moment, but please take three deep cleansing breaths: it's OK, this is just cyberspace and not the real world. However, by now I am sure you realize that there are many Wikipedians (like me, for example) who take this stuff quite seriously. As you have no doubt learned from my userpage, I have been involved with this project for about 2 years now. I am still a newbie; I have made my share of mistakes, and expect to make more in the future. I feel no need to defend the article I started about Richie Castellano, but please allow me to use it to illustrate a point. As of this writing, I have made 49 edits to this article compared to the 32 edits you have made on your Dr. Kenneth K. Kim article. You and I have both put a lot of work into our respective articles, and therefore have a significant interest in defending our efforts. However: if the Wikipedia community decides that my article is not worthy of Wikipedia, then it should and must be deleted. I will be very unhappy to see my hard work flushed down the toilet. But Wikipedia will have upheld its credibility, and I will have learned a valuable lesson from the process, and I will emerge as a better thinker and a better writer. Everybody wins! From what I can see, you are a better writer than I, but I have the (possible) advantage of having walked around on this planet for a few more years than you. You and I have much in common however: we care, and we try, and we feel we are improving with experience. The important thing is that we learn from our experiences, which makes us all better editors in the end. After a while, you will see that it is the journey and not the goal that is important here. You are going to do just fine, so please take my advice and: let the chips fall where they may with respect to your article please do not let this experience sour you with respect to Wikipedia. You are exactly the kind of person we need here: one who honestly and truly wants to do the right thing please continue to contribute to Wikipedia! Welcome, Comments First of all, welcome to Wikipedia and I'll say I think you have the potential to be a great contributor to this encyclopedia. I like and I usually do try to help newcomers with their first article. About your article, I googled this person and I came up with some conflicting info - Is this the person mentioned in your article? Here Thanks -  Burningview  ✉ 01:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC) Oh I almost forgot, if you are looking to get an outside opinion of your article, peer review - WP:PR is the place for that. It's really intended for higher quality articles, but I'm sure you can still submit your article and get advice on improvement.  Burningview  ✉ 01:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

DiverDave (talk) 05:15, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

DiverDave, I am really glad you left me this post. I am seriously really embarrassed by my behavior. I was really confused and uncertain when I first started, and I was trying to figure out what was and was not acceptable. I think I asked too many questions, and somewhere along the line, I also seemed to have pissed off a lot of people. Some of my questions seemed like attacks when they weren't, and the more questions I asked, the more upset some people seemed to get. I really do appreciate your response. I tried to delete the comments I left, but someone reverted the edit and I am still confused on the rules, so I left them. If you want help editing an article, I would be more than happy to try and help you either a) write it or b) look for sources/citations. I am really trying to learn from this more than anything else on what is and is not acceptable. People bios (talk) 05:29, 13 July 2010 (UTC) "you will see that it is the journey and not the goal that is important here" - I really like what you said here. It reminds me of one of my favorite quotes: "Happiness is a journey, not a destination."People bios (talk) 05:57, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

DiverDave, I really wanted to ask you a question, but I'm sort of afraid to because I'm afraid it'll get interpreted the wrong way. I don't know if it's possible, but if you could email me I'd really appreciate it. I think part of the problem is that this is so public, so I think when I question a lot it seems like I'm always trying to attack someone, when I'm just trying to get an answer sometimes.People bios (talk) 06:18, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello People bios. I am more than happy to help you in whatever way I can, though I do not know your email address. And please don't worry too much about hurting my feelings. I don't feel that you have attacked or threatened me in any way. DiverDave (talk) 05:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

thank you for being so understanding. My email should show up if you enable your email user function...I think. I'm actually not entirely sure how to do this. ❀ ℮ՏڂҺℯɼ ❤ ʗҺɑʈ εїз 07:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello, People bios. You have new messages at JamesBWatson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

hi

Hello, People bios. You have new messages at Suomi Finland 2009's talk page.
Message added 16:04, 18 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Speedy deletion nomination of Jaeson Ma

A tag has been placed on Jaeson Ma requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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. Shadowjams (talk) 08:43, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kenneth Kim

A tag has been placed on Kenneth Kim, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 20:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Alexandra Wallace (UCLA Student) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alexandra Wallace (UCLA Student) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexandra Wallace (UCLA Student) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.   -- Lear's Fool 08:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Kenneth Kim for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kenneth Kim is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Kim (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Randykitty (talk) 13:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Rhinoplasty Society

The article The Rhinoplasty Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced. Promotional. No evidence of notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rathfelder (talk) 22:37, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 11:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)