I am around, just to let people know. I am not active at this time, as I have little to add these days other than American football stuff. Dwmyers (talk)
Hi there, and welcome. Thanks for your great contributions! AxelBoldt 23:24 Sep 26, 2002 (UTC)
Hello there Dwmyers, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page and experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. BTW, I second the above praise. Great work! Cheers! --maveric149
Hi. I notice you've been doing a lot of good work on various elements lately. Can I talk you into having a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements, where an attempt is being made at creating a standardised format for element pages? If you're not interested, no problem, we'll incorporate your material when we get round to those elements, but I just thought I'd draw your attention to it. --Bth
(in response to your comment on my talk page) Ah, fair enough. I confess I'd missed the overarching goal to what you were doing. Just thought I'd point you in the direction of it; some of it is fairly boring scutwork though (making the table, particularly). Interesting stuff on s, p, d, f, etc. on Talk:electron configuration -- I'd never heard that before. Hopefully one of us will get time to research it properly soon and put it into the article. --Bth
--- Nice work on the new element articles! Sadly I haven't had as much time for those lately I as would like. --mav
There is a problem with the placement of elements 71 and 103 that I've mentioned at talk:periodic table. --mav
Nothing I wrote to you was offensive. I see you're one of those people who only like to keep praise on their Talk pages. How egotistical. NOw that you may take as offensive. RickK 02:01, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a communal effort. Even so, there is a certain manual of style. And there are some who prefer to dump new material and others, like myself, who prefer to make things look pretty, although I've also written my share of new articles. I did nothing to offend you other than to make a couple of recommendations to help you to be more collegial. I see that collegiality is not your style. Well, then, perhaps Wikipedia is not the right place for you. You do not own articles. No one does. Every has the right, and the responsibility, to make things better. And nowhere do you ask me not to "inject" myself here. Having said that, I'll move on, but don't expect me to let you make a fool of yourself. RickK 01:01, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
If, on the other hand, you're going to talk about articles and content, then I have no objection to what you do or say. But I am not here to talk about me, or you, understand? That you've wasted so much time on this says to me that I'm not the problem here. You are. And I'll be delighted to drop this and have you just go away, and do your stuff inside the 'pedia, and let me do mine. Dwmyers 01:44, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Hi Dwmyers. I'm contacting you because I read and appreciate the work you did on the Old Testament section of Dating the Bible. It was a good job, starting with very little useful stuff. Since you seem to be familiar with scholarly views of the OT, I wonder if you would mind having a look at Old Testament views of women? I rewrote it because it was in desperate need, but a lot of what I wrote was based on very skimpy references. Please make any comments you see fit.
Thanks for your help. DJ Clayworth 14:56, 10 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the compliment. I don't get many of them! 168... 20:56, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)