User talk:Ace PhD

Welcome!

Hello, Ace PhD, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dougweller (talk) 04:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Religious belief‎[edit]

You really do need to read WP:NPOV, WP:VERIFY and WP:NOR before you continue editing this article. Many new users do not understand that Wikipedia has its own policies and guidelines that it asks editors to follow (took me a whle to digest some of them myself). Among other things, we are neutral about religions and will not suggest that any religion has the truth or that others are false. Or that events whose historicity is disputed are historical facts. We also have boards where issues involving our policies can be discussed, such as WP:NPOVN, WP:NORN, etc. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 04:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012[edit]

Hello, I'm Tgeairn. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Young Earth creationism, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Tgeairn (talk) 04:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. I notice that you added some content to a Wikipedia article that appears to be a minority or fringe viewpoint. Unfortunately, this edit appears to give undue weight to this minority viewpoint, and has been reverted. To maintain a neutral point of view, an idea that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea. Feel free to use the article's talk page to discuss this, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 05:03, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A summary of site guidelines others have already tried to explain[edit]

"Truth" is not the criteria for inclusion, verifiability is.
We do not publish original thought nor original research. We're not a blog, we're not here to promote any ideology.
Always cite a source for any new information. When adding this information to articles, using <ref>reference tags like this</ref>, containing the name of the source, the author, page number, publisher or web address (if applicable).
Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards. User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided. Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources. Real scholarship actually does not say what understanding of the world is "true," but only with what there is evidence for. In the case of science, this evidence must ultimately start with physical evidence. In the case of religion, this means only reporting what has been written and not taking any stance on doctrine.

Ian.thomson (talk) 03:25, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Ace PhD. You have new messages at Tgeairn's talk page.
Message added 06:30, 19 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Tgeairn (talk) 06:30, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

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 ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or 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 they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:51, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I am new to this and didn't know how to sign, nor that a signature was necessary. I will use the 4 tildas next time. Maybe I'll try it right here and see if it works. (Ace PhD (talk) 16:21, 19 October 2012 (UTC))[reply]