User talk:Java7837/Archive003

i have 500 edits

Better late than never; welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, Java7837/Archive003, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck or looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Help Desk, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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, or ask the people around you for help -- good Wikipedians don't bite the newcomers. Keep an open mind and listen for advice, but don't hesitate to be bold when editing!

If you'd like to respond to this message, or ask any questions, feel free to leave a message at my talk page!

Once you've become a more experienced Wikipedian, you may wish to take a moment to visit these pages:

Best of luck to you, and happy editing!

– Luna Santin (talk) 21:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who joined Wikipedia in 2007

Hi there. I saw you created Category:Wikipedians who joined Wikipedia in 2007. There was actually a consensus to delete these types of categories here, since it was determined not to help the encyclopedia. I am deleting this category per that discussion. If you have any questions feel free to ask them on my talk page. Thanks for understanding! VegaDark 05:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have created the category again. I am deleting this category once again per the discussion linked above, please do not re-create categories that have been deleted as a result of a discussion. Thanks, VegaDark 02:38, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish view of the Davidic Line

There's no Jewish view in that article because, in my opinion, that messianic concept has been hijacked by non-Jews to advance their particular, and peculiar, agendas.

A crisp, clear, Talmudic presentation should go far in taking the wind out of these groups' sails. Care to take a shot?

Oh, please sign you posts with the four tildes ~~~~. Thanks, MARussellPESE 13:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category

The Category:Bahá'í texts is already a subcat of of both Category:Abrahamic texts and Category:Religious texts and thus it is not needed to include both those cats in all the pages. It's actually bad practice to do so, see WP:CAT. -- Jeff3000 00:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for extra comment on your categorization at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Extra_categorization. Regards, -- Jeff3000 01:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My gosh I just got your message ok I will only add abrahamic to abrahamic and if religious text is not abrahamic put under religious ok --Java7837 01:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry for the confusion. What you should do is check if a category that is already on the page is already a subcategory of the category you want to add. Only if it isn't then you should add the cat. I would also advise you to go back and fix all the other pages that you add extra cats to. Regards, -- Jeff3000 01:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For example, in Book of Abraham, you added the Category:Abrahamic texts category, even though that page is under the Category:Pearl of Great Price (Mormonism) which is underneath Category:Latter Day Saint texts which is itself under Category:Abrahamic texts. So there was no need to add the extra cat. The categorization process is used to structure the pages in a logical fashion, and by including a page twice under the same tree works against that. Regards, -- Jeff3000 01:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It took me over an hour, but I've cleaned up your added categories. When adding categories, please check that categories don't already exist which are subcatgories of the categories you are adding. It defeats the whole purpose of a categorization system. -- Jeff3000 02:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff is correct; that's how our category system is supposed to work. If a category would have several hundreds of items, we divide them over subcategories instead. See WP:CAT and related guidelines if you're interested. >Radiant< 12:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

I removed the RfA that you added for yourself here [1], because the RfA application does not currently exist. If you wish to apply for adminship, you should complete the RfA application first before transcluding it into the main RfA page. See Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship for details. -- Gogo Dodo 05:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your attempt to self-nom for RfA

I see you tried to list yourself for adminship at WP:RFA. Two things.

You did not follow the proper procedure at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/nominate, so your nomination was removed as malformed.
You are a fairly new editor and would probably not have a very good chance of passing a RfA at this time. Please read Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship to understand what will be expected before you try again.

If you have any questions, pop me a message. —Dgies^t c 05:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categorization

Not sure if you have my talk page watchlisted so please see my response. —Dgies^t c 23:32, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. In the future, please sign your messages by typing ~~~~