User talk:Woland37

This user may have left Wikipedia. Woland37 has not edited Wikipedia since 3 June 2012. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

speedy deleted? Click here

before leaving a message to find out why.

expressions and propositions in tautologies

I want to add the following to the article but there is a dispute concerning it please resolve: Please discuss at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tautology_(rhetoric)

The Pragmatics or context with 'unmarried bachelor' by the user would determine whether it is a tautology or language verbosity. In an academic setting such as a peer reviewed journal propositions are put forward in an attempt at deriving an independent explanation for an observation. Tautologies in such a setting would be a tautological proposition and unacceptable. Tautological expressions used in an informal setting such as a sports event with its associated colloquial speech is acceptable because of the pragmatics with it. The dividing line between a tautological proposition and expression is pragmatics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.208.48.160 (talk) 07:23, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review of "Natural selection"

As part of the

GA review sweeps process (see:Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps, a project devoted to re-reviewing Good Articles listed before August 26, 2007), the article Natural selection has been re-reviewed. I have placed the article on hold until sufficient citations can be added to the article. If an editor has not expressed interest in improving the article within seven days, the article will be delisted as a Good Article. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 04:35, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

lets work it out

copy paste the firs grammatical mistake. Ok? 76.16.176.166 (talk) 16:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its really not salvageable at this point. I have no clear idea of what you are trying to express. The language barrier is a real problem in your edits. Perhaps try to save your edits someplace else before trying to add them.--Woland (talk) 16:36, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all ? Lets try in small increments OK? 76.16.176.166 (talk) 16:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So do how we can together work on finding the best way to structure the text? You didn't provide me any factual information. Why did you reverted all structured sources ? Are you going to provide me any meaningful information? 76.16.176.166 (talk) 17:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is you level of expertise in molecular genetic ?

As I said, I can't provide you with factual information because it is nigh impossible to understand the intent of your edits or to even comprehend what they are saying in the article itself. This is (at this point) less of a content issue and more of a simple comprehension issue. Your edits simply are not understandable. No reader of English is going to be able to read and understand the article. As our audience is an English speaking/reading one it is imperative that it be readable (at the absolute least). --Woland (talk) 17:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

check now now is very easy language and easy to edit

76.16.176.166 (talk) 19:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is not an improvement. Please revert your edits. Why in the hell are you changing the word hypothesis into evolution? It simply makes no sense.

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not

autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages

.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious

Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here

.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards,

Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Evans hugo

A tag has been placed on

criteria for speedy deletion

, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

here. Cabayi (talk) 07:47, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply

]