User talk:Rob Zako
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Welcome to the Wikipedia!
Welcome to the Wikipedia, Rob Zako! And thanks for the suggestion over on the Wikipedia:Requested moves page. Hope you enjoy editing here and becoming a Wikipedian! Here are a few perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Wikipedia experience:
- Take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial and Manual of Style.
- When you have time, you can peruse The five pillars of Wikipedia, and assume good faith, but keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
- Always keep the notion of NPOV in mind, be respectful of others' POV, and remember your perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
- If you need any help, post your question at the Help Desk.
- Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!
And some odds and ends: Boilerplate text, Brilliant prose, Cite your sources, Civility, Conflict resolution, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Pages needing attention, Peer review, Policy Library, Utilities, Verifiability, Village pump, Wikiquette, and you can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes: ~~~~.
Best of luck, Rob Zako, and most importantly, have fun! Ombudsman 05:32, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RE: James Kim
Its not at all vandalism, its a content dispute. You do not have consensus to continue to bloat the article. There was already a serious debate over whether or not the timeline was even appropriate to the article. Changing it to be twice as long as before does not help the article or help the debate.--Crossmr 07:22, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
- You'll also find that leaving inappropriate warnings, for which that was not can be seen as both harassment and vandalism.--Crossmr 07:25, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
- If you notice, I left the disputed timeline in the article while the debate for consensus went on. In the interest of consensus, I've previously filed a Request for Comment to draw more editors in, and I've now just nominated it for a peer review to hopefully draw in more editors to give us a better picture. I'm also going to list it on Wikiproject: Biography. I have no problem leaving the original timeline in place until a consensus is reached as long as you can agree to leave it as it is and not expand it to such a focus grabbing size. I think that is certainly a fair compromise until we get some more outside perspective on it. To which end I've restored the original timeline as a sign of good faith that you have the article's best interests in mind as I do.--Crossmr 07:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
