User talk:Jenhawk777

A year ago ...
"What do you mean,; I can´t rewrite; the entire article!?"
	... you were recipient; no. 1915 of Precious,; a prize of QAI!

↓ Jump to bottom of page ↓

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by when more than 10 sections are present.

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

(I have relocated these very precious kindnesses from others to the top of my talkpage, so they will never be lost or forgotten. I am very grateful for each one.)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For your well-chosen words at Talk:Christian ethics. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:15, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Phenomenal job on History of Christian thought on persecution and tolerance! Your deep grasp of the scholarly literature and your tireless commitment to addressing my large number of comments and generally improving the article is very impressive! Thank you for all your hard work! DocFreeman24 (talk) 14:46, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For your diligence at Biblical criticism and elsewhere. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:56, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your praises played by Moop Mama, more on my talk, or the Main page ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Friendship Barnstar
		Thank you again for your kind comments and friendly gesture. You are a fine example of a Kindness Campaign member. History DMZ ^{(talk)+(ping)} 04:09, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Feel free to take over the 'Gerda's newsletter' idea. I'm going to re-focus on maybe starting a Kindness Campaign newsletter :)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		You definitely deserve this for your work on History of Christian thought on persecution and tolerance! HouseBlaster (talk) 17:47, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

miss you --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

		The Christianity Barnstar
		You deserve this for your herculean efforts to improve Biblical criticism and respond to the comments at its recent FAC. As Gog mentioned in the closing note, with some additional work it will have a good chance at passing next time around. {{u\|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:04, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fruits

Ovinus has given you a bowl of peaches! This delicious fruit promotes WikiLove and has hopefully made your day juicier. Spread peachiness and WikiLove by giving someone else some peaches, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, by adding {{subst:Peach}} to their talk page with a friendly message!

Was thinking of you and your work earlier, Jen. Thanks for everything and I hope you have a good day! I certainly will be... today is a dim light at the end of this year-long tunnel. Warmly, Ovinus (talk) 13:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Christianity Barnstar
		Dear Jenhawk777, I award you The Christianity Barnstar for all your hard work in WikiProject Christianity-related articles, especially your recent creation of Evolutionary theodicy. Keep up the good work! Your efforts are making a difference here! With regards, Anupam^Talk 04:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you Jenhawk777 for the message that you left on Gerda's page for me. Truly, the volunteers of these huge projects like WP, LibriVox, DP cannot go the extra mile without people like Gerda and you, who inject fresh energy into the volunteers. The kind words are our only salary, and fortunately we all can pay each other a lot. :) Qapisce (talk) 10:57, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A superior barnstar for you!

		The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
		For all the time and effort you have put in — across thousands of edits — to markedly improve numerous articles related to Christianity all these years. The magnitude of the positive impact you have had with regard to Wikipedia's coverage of academic topics related to Christianity is unprecedented; I cannot think of any other editor who has worked so rigorously and improved those topics to the extent that you have. You are a phenomenal editor and your work is awe-inspiring. Thank you for all that you do! — The Most Comfortable Chair 21:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This has touched me so deeply I almost cried. Thank you so, so very much. Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:29, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For tireless and invaluable efforts on creating and improving Christianity-related pages. Avilich (talk) 12:10, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not the first you receive, but the first I ever hand out. Avilich (talk) 12:10, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Avilich Bless your heart! Thank you so much! This is very kind of you and I appreciate it. Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:10, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing of Conversion to Christianity

The content now reads as a proper Wikipedia article as well. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 10:50, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ActivelyDisinterested Bless you! Thank you! I so deeply appreciate you and all your work. You are still the one I will reach out to when I have a problem, but you have taught me a lot, and this article was just too much to ask someone else to do for me. I would have enjoyed banging my head against a wall more, but hey, I followed your example and got it done. I put it up for peer review and others suggested adding back a theology section which I am beginning work on today. Thank you again. You are a great blessing. Jenhawk777 (talk) 15:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For excellent work on Theodosius I and Massacre of Thessalonica Richard Keatinge (talk) 21:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Earl Bailly

New article, what do you think? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's wonderful! I love it! Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Love that picture, he looks like a classic moviestar. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's really interesting too. You are so good at new content. You amaze me. Where do you get these ideas? Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You know that saying about what great writers do? In this case, a rep of Lunenburg Art Gallery Society appeared on Commons, asking about uploading, because they wanted to make "a page". They also commented that they were angling for some funding, but that a requirement for them to get it was a WP-article about Bailly. Which of course meant they would have to deal with WP:PAID. After looking around a little on who Bailly was, I offered my help. I mean, this guy is what our dear pedia is for. All hail the WP-library! And archive.org, of course. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:14, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Incredible. Just incredible. Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In other news, a dog I started a WP-article about met a king:[1] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:23, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Kapnonian (12:02, 13 July 2024)

Hello! I am a new editor hoping to join the ranks of great wikipedia editors. I am just wondering how you stay motivated to edit? Would love to hear your thoughts. Thanks --Kapnonian (talk) 12:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome! I write on things that interest me. I enjoy research. I enjoy learning new things, and I simply like to write. I wanted to be a PhD and didn't finish, so I enjoy this opportunity to research, write and publish. I think about how many people are influenced by Wikipedia. I have a commitment to quality and neutrality and get offended by articles that are biased. I am in a bit of a downturn right now as a matter of fact, so maybe you can help re-inspire me! Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Freedopack (13:04, 16 July 2024)

How can I create a new article --Freedopack (talk) 13:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go here: Help:Your first article Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from OrionSSWikis (16:15, 16 July 2024)

Hello, how do you make fictional electoral maps as I am interested in doing that for alternate history. --OrionSSWikis (talk) 16:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has no provision for this that I know of. We write encyclopedia articles using published sources. That's it. Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Epic mycologist (04:48, 17 July 2024)

If i want to create an article about a newly discovered species, but there is no article about its genus or species, should i create articles for both?

Epic mycologist I apologize. I thought I answered this the other day and somehow it got lost instead. I'm unsure exactly what happened, but it probably has something to do with router problems I've been having. Fixed now I hope.

Anyway, you can do either or both as you see fit. What will determine what you choose will be the available secondary sources. Wikipedia tends to lag behind on the newest news because we can only write about topics that have sufficient quality secondary sources. It usually takes awhile for those to be published. So I am guessing a newly discovered species might not have sufficient coverage for a whole article of its own. Do the research and let that guide you. Remember, no blogs or personal opinions. Good luck. Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Danny5784 (14:19, 18 July 2024)

Hi, I have a question. How can I put a table in my page? --Danny5784 (talk) 14:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Try this one first: Help:Table. If it isn't sufficient, follow the links for additional details. Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Light of Christ gospel center (05:50, 20 July 2024)

Hello please how do I publish an article --Light of Christ gospel center (talk) 05:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll copypaste this I just wrote on my own talkpage:

Hello! Making an acceptable WP-article without knowing how to edit WP is hard. A common advice is to "just" edit for a while first, to try to get a hang of this place.

That said, your first hurdle is "Can a WP-article about your chosen subject be written at all?" Start with reading WP:BACKWARD. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!", move on to WP:YFA. If your choice of topic fails WP:N, the article will not be accepted. If you decide to go ahead, you need to learn how to add references correctly, WP:TUTORIAL can help with that. This is crucial, and I can't stress that enough. If you intend to write about a living person, read WP:BLP. If you intend to write about yourself (WP:COI), the short advice is "don't."

As an example, when I start drafting an article, I begin something like this: [2]. Get the sources in there, then re-read them, then start adding text, citing as you go along. Hope this helps some. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:46, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:37, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Ukchauffeurforce (21:06, 20 July 2024)

hi i would like to add my companies profile on wikipedia --Ukchauffeurforce (talk) 21:07, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, unless you can find a reason why your company qualifies as a notable topic, and unless you can find an adequate number of good quality secondary sources who have written about your company that you can reference - you can't. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a place for advertising. You need a blog or a podcast for that. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from InquisitiveALot (21:01, 22 July 2024)

Hello Jenhawk. I worked on a new page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ramallah_Friends_Meeting_(Quakers) It has been declined twice and I am not exactly sure why. I have used creditable sources, including books and university papers. Yet people say that the sources are inadequate. Thank you in advance for any help you might offer. --InquisitiveALot (talk) 21:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. I have been on an unplugged week. I will look at it and get back to you. Give me a couple of days. Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:36, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know and thank you in advance. Hope that it was a good 'unplugged' week. InquisitiveALot (talk) 18:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

InquisitiveALot Okay, I went and took a look, and the objections stated are legitimate by Wikipedia standards. These are WP standards: [[3]]. The problem is that you only have four sources, and one of them is a master's thesis. I went to Google scholar, typed in Ramallah Friends meeting, and found a few other more scholarly sources that would probably be usable. I recommend what the other reviewers have already recommended: this article needs more and better sources. I also recommend adding something on why this is a notable enough topic to be included on Wikipedia. Perhaps you might consider adding this content to Ramallah Friends School - if they are connected in any way. That would skip over the problems of publication as a new article.Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thorough response.

I have added further sources as well as further in-line references to the draft. Concerning adding it to the Ramallah Friends School, despite having a common early history, I do not believe that it would be proper or accurate to have them connected via one article.

You said to add why it would be a notable topic. Where would I add such an explanation?

One thing I am confused about is how there are many articles on Wikipedia which are just 1 or 2 sentences and lack any sources or references. (As I have been trying to add references to some of those articles when able.) InquisitiveALot (talk) 12:21, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, happy to help. Some established editor has probably created those short articles with the hope someone else will come along and do the work for them on a topic they think is important enough to be here but not important enough for them to take the time to do properly. Some editors like to have a list of articles they created without being concerned about quality. How that happens is simply that they have created and published without going through the approval process that first articles require. Those two-sentence articles should be nominated for deletion imo, even though they don't really fit the criteria described here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion because they can be fixed through normal editing. It's still pretty cheesy, and lazy, and if you can fix them, and are willing to do so, please do. If not, nominating them for AfD is certainly reasonable - imo. As to notability, put it in comments to the reviewers after checking this Wikipedia:Notability which mainly says there needs to be adequate sources. Good luck. My first article was turned down - twice I think - before finally being published. Don't get discouraged. It happens to nearly everyone. The idea is to learn what WP looks for in a good article, and knowing that will make you a better editor for every article hereafter. Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the detailed reply and explanation. Have a wonderful week. InquisitiveALot (talk) 20:57, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]