User talk:Yuusha

Welcome!

Hello, Yuusha, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Luksuh 19:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology of USA

Although I don't deny that your Amerike hypothesis is a theory, it is not THE mainstream theory. Per WP:Truth you need very strong evidence to introduce non-mainstream theories.
The provide reference is not such very strong evidence. If you look up WP:reliable you will see that besides scientific research the policy explicitly mentions: "Reliable non-academic sources may also be used, particularly material from reputable mainstream publications". USAtoday is such a publication, the website from Norman Gover Graphic Design and Production Consultancy is not. Hence the claim is not properly referenced according to Wikipedia.
If you consider the article on the Americas you will notice that the Amerike hypothesis does attention in that article. With Undue weigth is meant that in the article about the country the whole naming of continent is relatively minor and should not get too much attention. Non-mainstream theories should therefore not be mentioned at that place.
This is fairly complex, but all about keeping the articles readable. Please look around a bit and try to familiarise yourself some more in the policies before engaging in the kind of aggressive reversions, which can easily get into an edit war. Best wishes Arnoutf (talk) 18:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 18:15, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 1439 (Skelmersdale) Squadron

The article 1439 (Skelmersdale) Squadron has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Individual cadet squadrons are not notable

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MilborneOne (talk) 20:41, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 1439 (Skelmersdale) Squadron for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1439 (Skelmersdale) Squadron 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/1439 (Skelmersdale) Squadron 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. MilborneOne (talk) 23:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was part way through rewriting and renaming the page when I lost all I was doing and had to start again. I have very limited experience with wiki so please bear with me. I am broadening the scope of the page so it is not deleted. Yuusha (talk) 23:026, 25 February 2012 (GMT)