User talk:Deborah909
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Howdy
Welcome!
Hello, Deborah909, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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, 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!
---
Hi, Deborah. The stuff above is the standard welcome template.
I decided to introduce myself because we have some overlap (the Katrina People Finder and Digital Divide mailing list). I'm a relative Luddite and an irregular volunteer, with some experience in a nonrelated professional association.
I like your ideas and others on the Digital Divide mailing list. Maybe such ideas could be furthered more through a wiki. I have been wondering about whether a wiki site or some type of open-source database could be used well and more broadly for nonprofit type stuff, disasters in general, connecting communities, help and volunteers, etc. I think wikis have a lot of untapped potential.
I'm glad to help if I can, but my skills and time are limited. Maurreen (talk) 08:00, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Cyber-dissident
Hey, Deborah. In response to why your fledgling article was nominated for deletion...
(checks article history}
Yep, thought so. At the time it was nominated, it was, well, pretty much a bare-bones dictionary definition - as per the nominator's comment "dicdef" (which he misspelled as "decdif", but that's beside the point). When you're doing New Articles patrol (as I assume User:WCFrancis was doing), it's easy to become suspicious of articles that look so sparse and are created by newly-registered users. Because we get a lot of hoaxes disguised as bare-bones articles created by newly-registered users. Yours clearly wasn't a hoax, but it was bare-bones.
However, you've done a pretty good job at expanding it beyond that. Assuming it's not a neologism, a phrase that you yourself created just now to describe this very real practice, I'll vote that it be kept - and since it is a real, notable phenomenon, this may be the best name for it if it doesn't already have one.
That said, welcome to Wikipedia. DS 13:18, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Accidental techie
I nominated an article that you created, Accidental techie, for deletion. If you think that the article is salvagable, or that I'm mistaken, please comment on the deletion page. --Mareino 03:03, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hey -- it's me
Just wanted to say hi -- I've left Northeast Action, and am at the Massachusetts ACLU and doing some consulting on the side (CambridgeConsultingServices.com). Hope all is well!
Peace, BCorr|Брайен 03:02, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Talk:Boston Tea Party
Howdy, I noticed that you and I seem to post in one or two articles dealing with progressive issues in political science/sociology. There's currently a debate beginning in Boston Tea Party as to whether the article should include the category [1]. It meets definitions set in the articles Terrorism and Definition of terrorism, however, there are several self-proclaimed patriots who watch BTP who refuse to recognise the fact. The simple criteria for terrorism generally seem to be intimidation or destruction of property in order to change public policy or public opinion while a state of war has not yet been declared. Some users would rather use recent acts of terrorism as a yardstick, rather than using a firm definition, and hence lose their ability to discuss matters calmly. Would you be able to pop in to the Talk page and join in the discussion? Thanks much, samwaltz 05:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
