User talk:Skyhook1

Welcome!

Hello, Skyhook1, 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 name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, 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! BatteryIncluded (talk) 13:28, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Skyhook1, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Skyhook1! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ryan Vesey (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:42, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Space Elevator, small bites.

Hello. I reverted your changes to Space Elevator, but I don't want you to be pissed off about it (please!). It's just that there were a lot of changes at once. Some were okay, some were "off-topic POV". It's often easier to just flip back the whole thing in such cases. If you want to reinstate some of it, it might be better to make little changes at a time. The "good stuff" can then be "approved" more easily (by it's not being changed) and the "less good" stuff can be refined more easily in the smaller bites. The other advantage of "small bites" is that the changes are more visible to other editors and they're less likely to be confused and then revert out of frustration. Moblecl (talk) 18:33, 18 January 2014 (UTC)undefined[reply]

Reply to your Articles for Creation Help Desk question on Orbiting skyhooks

Hello, Skyhook1! I'm Anon126. I have replied to your question on the Articles for Creation Help Desk about Orbiting skyhooks.
You can read it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Orbiting skyhooks. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 22:33, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Anon126! Thank you so much for your input and suggestions! I have reduced the number of links in the "See Also" section and have added the information you suggested to the references. If any other thoughts/suggestions/ideas on how I can improve it come to mind please let me know. Skyhook1 (talk) 03:07, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC Orbiting skyhooks was accepted

Orbiting skyhooks, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:30, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Skyhooks and Mars

While I share your enthusiasm for skyhooks, you've been placing skyhook links in many articles where they're just not relevant. For example Mars One, which uses conventional rockets and has never been anything to do with skyhooks. If you're going to do this you'll have to find reliable third party sources that show that skyhooks are relevant to the particular articles. andy (talk) 11:35, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Andy, There is a section in the Skyhook (structure) article called 'A Possible Earth-Mars Transportation System' that is about going to Mars. Since Mars One is about going to Mars I thought that adding a link in the 'See Also' section about another way of going to Mars was relevant. But I also do not mean to cause any upsets. I am new to this and when my Skyhook article was accepted it contained a note saying that it needed to be linked to other articles. That is what I have been doing. So if you still think the link is not relevant please feel free to remove it and you have my apologies for any upset. Have a great day. Skyhook1 (talk) 19:10, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS, In Tools/What links here there is quite a list of links that do not appear to be related to Skyhooks. When examined they are due to Skyhook (structure) or Orbiting Skyhooks being listed in a template that is in that article. While I have added Orbiting Skyhooks (pre-merger) and Skyhook (structure) (post-merger) to a couple of templates, many of those links predate the merger of Orbiting Skyhooks with Skyhook (structure). Skyhook1 (talk) 21:41, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A kind reminder that Wikipedia is a collective effort. Your reverts of all edits by other users have brought about the obvious outcome: you've started the deletion process of the article. You must be open to use feedback in this environment, and you must understand and implement the WP:Five pillars of Wikipedia. When any editor requests inline citations, as I did, deleting all the {{CN}} template request is never useful to improve the article.

If you have questions on how to format correctly the article or insert inline references, ask for help, use the tutorial, or use the search function. At minimum, please review these basic guidelines:

Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 13:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for Orbiting skyhooks#Merger proposal

An article that you have been involved in editing, Orbiting skyhooks#Merger proposal, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going to the article and clicking on the (Discuss) link at the top of the article, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. BatteryIncluded (talk) 14:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would ask that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Skyhook (structure). Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Your comment to Roger (Dodger67): "You have made it clear, you own Wikipedia. Congratulations!" appears to not assume good faith on the part of Dodger67. None of us "own" Wikipedia, and I don't believe that is what the editors you have been involved with are doing, at all. Rather, they were merely endeavoring to build a quality encyclopedia, using the guidelines and policies the community has developed over the years. Cheers. N2e (talk) 16:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC) N2e (talk) 16:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest policy

Hello, Skyhook1. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. --Ronz (talk) 16:10, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. BatteryIncluded (talk) 03:01, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts, as detailed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Skyhook1/Archive. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:45, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]