User talk:Golfdude8000~enwiki

Image copyright problem with Image:19082.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:19082.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Melvyn Rubenfire[edit]

Wikipedia policy is generally not to use honorifics in article titles, but just the person's name. I think there are exceptions for nobility. But we don't have article titles such as General John Smith or Senator Mary Jones, just their names. The exception would be if there is more than one person with the same name, in which the honorific might be used to disambiguate that person from somebody else with the same name. Corvus cornix 21:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It got fixed, no problem. It wsn't an annoyance, just something that needed to get fixed. :) Corvus cornix 21:31, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles[edit]

The article needed a lot of work to be readable. I have no issues with the subject's notability. In fact, I am so certain that the subject is notable enough to have a decent article on Wikipedia, that I have asked one of our most competent editors to work on the article to bring it up to snuff.

I did ask in the edit summary if this was an older hospital, but, because you left no information for the reader to go on, I linked it to the current one. It should be linked to the major medical center, regardless.

Honorofics don't belong in articles--they simply make it look poorly written, as if someone did not care enough about the person to write the articel using correct style, or as if the article does not belong in Wikipedia.

Fellowships are awarded after residencies, and are very important designations of a medical doctor's training towards his speciality, they deserve to be mentioned in their proper place, where I put them.

If you can't be bothered to even read the corrections, don't come screaming on my talk page about them.

The article was very poorly written, your grandfather deserves better.

Please sign your posts by putting 4 tildas at the ends of the post. KP Botany 22:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tildas are the marks that look like wavey dashes "~" that are usually found on a keyboard to the left of the 1 and ! key. I want to see how Sinai connects directly to Sinai-Grace, so we can, if possible, link it. Don't worry about the article too much, your grandfather is clearly a notable American physician who can have a nice biography on Wikipedia. I have asked another editor who worked very well on an article about an African cardiovascular surgeon to spend some time on this article. It will take a while to get proper sources, but it will ultimately be a nice looking article.

I realize you are new, and I apologize, also, for forgetting how tough Wikipedia can be when you are new. One of my grandfather's is also very famous, and I love seeing stuff about him on the Internet. But there's a lot of misinformation about him on out there, and I don't like seeing that.

The article will be just fine, but give Acalamari enough time with it. Acalamari will get the correct information on the Sinai/Sinai-Grace. KP Botany 22:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a before and after shot of the last cardiac surgeon that Acalamari worked on (with help from others):

Before[1] After[2]

KP Botany 23:05, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you got the tildas right. And, yes, that's the best thing about Wikipedia: I write like crap and people with fantastic editing skills come by after me and edit everything I write to make it look fabulous. I still can't believe it. Hell, I want to take them to work with me, but they swear they only exist in cyber-space.

Yes, if the article belongs on Wikipedia, other editors will make it look nice. KP Botany 23:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Melvyn Rubenfire for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Melvyn Rubenfire is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melvyn Rubenfire until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ZimZalaBim ^talk 22:50, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed[edit]

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Golfdude8000. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Golfdude8000~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

00:14, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed[edit]

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

13:22, 22 April 2015 (UTC)