You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.
If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
Hi Paragon. I have tried to cite things in the past, and another user kept erasing it and telling me it was vandalism and that it wasn't cited correctly. I tried at least 3 times to do it right. Then he banned me for 6 months after I told him he was wrong because I had proof. So I've decided that I am too dumb to cite correctly and hope that others will see my un-cited addition and decide to add to it. That way, people can slowly grow Wikipedia together, hand in friendly hand, like a bee colony building a hive. I don't know the exact rules in Wiki, but I've read up some of them, and from the many articles I've viewed I can see there are quite a few articles that are listed as lacking in citations, need clean up, etc. What's your take on this notion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.95.75 (talk) 06:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the best thing for this situation is just a little disambiguation on the top of the page. It links to Trenton's page without putting right in the middle of the article. As for your block, immediately trying to re-do something that someone reverts is against one of wikipedia's biggest rules; however, no one expects you to know everything. If you see something that needs cleaning up, be bold! Also, what was your account that got blocked? I'd love to see what happened. Paragon1232119:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article User talk:DarthLeppard, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at [[Talk:User talk:DarthLeppard|its talk page]]. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 23:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can I invite you to particpate in our new assessment drive? It's strictly for experienced editors and has a degree of friendly competition built-in. It involves re-evaluating around 3500 Milhist B-Class articles to ensure they match our new criteria. As ever, we're offering a range of awards as our way of expressing our thanks. The drive doesn't start until 18:00 (UTC) on March 10 but you can sign up in advance here. It would be great if you can spare the time, --ROGER DAVIEStalk05:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
However that's not the kind of thing I was talking about. religious communism talks about a type of communism. I was referring to how idea (a) intersects with idea (b) - in this case religion and communism as examples. My argument is that WP will grow, and has huge scope for growth, in new articles describing multiple topics.
Nice to know there's someone listening out there, though.
Milhist's new drive – Tag & Assess 2008 – goes live on April 25 and you are cordially invited to participate. This time, the task is housekeeping. As ever, there are awards galore, plus there's a bit of friendly competition built-in, with a race for bronze, silver and gold wikis! You can sign up, in advance, here. I look forward to seeing you on the drive page! All the best, --ROGER DAVIEStalk13:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I was talking about. You can make it spell-check your edit summaries too by right-clicking the textbox and clicking "Spell check this field". —Remember the dot(talk)22:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that you expressed an interest in message box standardisation over at the Village pump. As you know we have now made the {{imbox}} and {{cambox}}. But before we can deploy these new message box standards we could need some more editors adding their opinions over at the talk pages of those meta-templates. And you might have some good points that we haven't thought of yet.
Paragon12321, just a note of appreciation for your recent support of my request for adminship, which ended successfully with 112 supports, 2 opposes, and 1 neutral. If there's something I've realized during my RFA process this last week, it's that adminship is primarily about trust. I will strive to honour that trust in my future interactions with the community. Many thanks!Gatoclass (talk) 06:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a fancy box like the above, but thanks from me too! I appreciated the support and the comments and hope to live up to it all! --Slp1 (talk) 21:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Paragon, I nominate this line, from one of your responses on the RefDesk:Science page, as a Quote of the Day. Since no such award actually exists, what this really means is that I laughed out loud when I read it!
Generally, no one dies if a biologist makes a mistake.
Thanks for not getting caught up in the whole userbox thing :). I'll most likely reapply in 4-6 months; for now i've decided i'll only use twinkle for friendly welcoming messages; since i'm going to try and dabble in article creation everything can be done by hand. Thanks again! Ironholds20:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Paragon12321, it is with deep awareness of the responsibility conferred by your trust that I am honored to report that in part to your support, my request for adminship passed (87/14/6). I deeply value the trust you and the Wikipedia community have in me, and I will embark on a new segment of my Wikipedia career by putting my new tools to work to benefit the entire community. My best to you, Happyme22 (talk) 04:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Look I feel people try to be disingenous when they say exact text of law isn't kosher. For articles and areas that are chronically underserviced - it is a vital first step. I am sure that the expansion of specific sections will come in due time. Secondly, I think the British Colonial Act is an essential part of Wikipedia and not Wikisource. Wikipedia will carry obvious and critical statements of law (both criteria are met) that will be further embellished in due course. (Why such excruciating stringency over minor overlaps - which will always exist, and should exist for efficiency for the reader.) By blanching that first step, you are doing grievous harm to building such chronically underserviced areas. Lastly - law enforcement (that is what you are doing) is always discretionary. If you are of the opinion that this mild waste doesn't injure Wikipedia in a significant way but perhaps charts a way for further significant contributions in the area, you can stop riding the high horse for a little bit. Enforcement zealots are either idiots or ideologues, and you don't seem either. See the article/law in context and decide in an informed manner. I would strongly recommend that you restate the article. Varuag_doos —Preceding undated comment was added at 01:13, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Antagonist Perpetrated Aggression is the APA Tactical System, registered at the Copyright Office, Library of Congress, Washington DC as well as the Republic of China's Ministry of the Interior Office of Copyright. APA is a classified national Force Response methodology. It was developed for the exclusive use of National SWAT Teams, Tactical Support and Combined Operations under the authorization of the Interior Ministry and as initiated by the National Security Bureau in 1985 to coincide with the start of National Tactical Training. This is a documented and published fact written in detail by the well known writer and journalist Keith Strandberg for the May 1988 edition of SWAT Magazine and I have referenced the article by external link. As well, though my work is thoroughly documented I am only at liberty to disclose archival news media and a portion of formal review by senior government leader at the Ministry Training Base which I have added an external link to as well.
Mr. Ralph D. Sawyer is perhaps the best known translator of the Art of War, a senior fellow at the Institute of Strategic Studies and considered to be one of the leading experts on Chinese military past and present. His new book is called the Tao of Deception and has a thorough introduction of me with a short Foreword which I wrote on his behalf in the Chinese edition now being sold in the Far East (Taiwan, China, Singapore and Hong Kong). His work is well read and thoroughly published. He is a respected authority on military topics. He was my student and can be contacted should you feel a need to verify any statement I make.
This system is not well known but an estimated 50,000 officers have been trained under its process and my personal supervision. APA is not a martial art nor is it a fighting style; however the APA Tactical Team won the group Gold Medal in the 1990 World Martial Arts Competition. I do not teach publicly and am only involved with federal level agencies. I am an American born in Dansville N.Y. and the only person who has official authorization and certification as Chief Instructor of the elite-most Terror Interdiction Teams and their instructors on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. I would be happy to provide complete official certification Please be aware that APA is provided to government agencies free of charge or licensing restriction as is the enormous time and research.
In this light I am submitting this summary as a formal request for Wikipedia editors and administrator to accept an article with the title Antagonist Perpetrated Aggression and not to relentlessly pursue deletion
Here are some important facts about Antagonist Perpetrated Aggression.
•APA is the only Combat system selected by the National Police Administration for SWAT
•APA was developed from the ground-up under authority of the Interior Ministry
•APA is the only System of Simultaneous Counterattack proven in the field.
•APA was taught to every Department, County and Precinct Instructor is taught relevant APA.
•APA provides a full spectrum of Tactical Skills, developed by Chief Instructor Chris Mar including:
a. the complete Close Quarters Combat methodology,
b. Hand to Hand Extraction,
c. Tactical Riot and Crowd Control,
d. Tactical Baton, Handcuffing,
e. Search and Transport,
f. Lock Flow Control, and
g. Close VIP Security
Units taught by Chief inst. Mar and the APA Instructor’s team.
•Starting 1985 through 2000 APA Tactical CQC was taught to
a. approximately 5000 SWAT Team members and
b. 40,000 other active officers’ police including
c. riot divisions,
d.; diplomatic security,
c. and Spec Ops.
From 2000-2008 APA training is maintained by SWAT Teams.
a. As well members of Jordanian internal Security,
b. Saudi Special Forces Officers Malawian Royal Guard,
c. Tactical Support
d. Rapid Deployment teams were
APA highlights.
Chief Instructor Chris Mar develops APA Tactical Riot coinciding with the ending of 38 years of Martial Law
The APA process calls for a total ban on dispersed munitions such as tear gas and rubber bullets,
chemically treated water, high velocity bean bags and nets in order to avoid remote alienation and dehumanization
APA’s Non-Escalation Policy and Adanved Tactical Combat skills results in Taiwan’s peaceful street protests
Thank you for your consideration;
Yes, it was me. I've been looking for new ways to contribute to the project besides new page patrol, RC patrol, and the occasional RefDesk edit (as if I wasn't gnomish enough anyway). If been trying new areas, possibly as a lead up to admin-coaching, and I think that working in account creation will help me establish myself in the community. Paragon12321 (talk) 01:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. I have approved your request. You may now access the tool here. Before you do so, please read the tool's guide to familiarize yourself with the process. You may also want to join #wikipedia-en-accounts on irc and/or the mailing list. Keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse may result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for your participating in the account creation process. Alexfusco501:14, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've granted you accountcreator rights, so you will no longer hit a limit. Bear in mind that it only removes the limit, and cannot bypass the anti-spoofing measures (for similar or inappropriate usernames, for example). Such requests will still have to be handled by administrators. Thanks for helping out! PeterSymonds(talk)18:22, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much indeed for your help with and commitment to Tag & Assess 2008. May I please trouble you to comment at the post-drive workshop? Your feedback will help us to improve the next drive. Thanks in advance, --ROGER DAVIEStalk10:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your return and considerate advice. I will make all sure to support the article with verifiable third party reference. Please note to clarify the number of tactical units I personally trained from 1985 through 2005 was as follows over 25 divisions of Taiwan Special Tactics approximately 5000 officers, plus receiving instruction in relevant APA Tactical Combat Protocol included Security Officers of the 1st through 7th Battalions which are Riot teams, Diplomatic Security, Government VIP Close Security, Coast Guard, Tactical Support, Special Operations, Rapid Deployment , County Instructors and National Police Agency National instructors - over 500; totaling over 40,000 active officers, plus members of the PRC PLA Armed Military Police Counterterrorist Instructors and other units over 120 elite operations and head instructors bringing the total number of National Defense, Combined Operations and Internal Security to over 50,000 which were taught by myself and 3 different generations of about 100 APA Tactical Assistant Instructors.
I will make the time to establish an appropriate format for the article. Thanks again. Chris Mar Chrismar (talk) 21:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
Rollback can be used to revert vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
Rollback may be removed at any time.
If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! PeterSymonds(talk)23:58, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Paragon12321, I wish to say thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 82 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I will do my best to live up to your expectations. I would especially like to thank Rlevse for nominating me and Wizardman for co-nominating me. — JGHowestalk - 19 August 2008
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thanks for lightening the mood with your funny and insightful support comment. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 02:07, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've cancelled your accountcreator flag as you don't seem to be using it. (See WP:RPE for details of when this flag may be withdrawn.) If you need it again and are going to use it, let me know. Stifle (talk) 16:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bradley Jay until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Innisfree987 (talk) 16:19, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
One Stripe (200 articles)
Two Stripes (400 articles)
Three Stripes (600 articles)
Chevrons (1000 articles)
Golden Wiki First place
One Stripe (200 articles)
Two Stripes (400 articles)
Three Stripes (600 articles)
Tireless Contributor Barnstar (1000 articles)
Chevrons (2000 articles)
Working Man's Barnstar (3000 articles)
Barnstar of Diligence (4000 articles)
Third place overall
Second place overall
First place overall
