Welcome!

Hello, Danopticon, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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)) before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! -- Visviva 11:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fellow Shimerian, or just someone with an interest? In either case, good to have you aboard. -- Visviva 11:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can't imagine there would be any problem with Shimerians editing the article. Most college and university articles are primarily looked after by people with some connection to the institution (alums, staff, disgruntled former employees and students, etc.) In any event, Shimerians are the last folks I can imagine being guilty of anything resembling meatpuppetry. For a review of the issues that could be involved, though, see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Happy editing! I'm not around much these days, but send me an email if there's anything I can help with.

PS. Unless my memory is playing tricks on me, "Shimerian" was the most common term in use from 94 to 98, when I was there. I've heard "Shimerite" from 80s alumnoids, though.

PPS. Note that non-published archival materials are not valid sources on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Archives as sources for some background on that. However, any published material that is in those dusty old archives is fair game ... and barring substantial losses since I last stalked the basement of 438, there is quite a bit of such material.

PPPS. If by any chance you can find an authoritative source for the third-highest-PhD-rate claim, the Shimerian Wikipedians of the world will be forever in your debt. Cheers, -- Visviva (talk) 11:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and by the way, congrats on your (I trust) impending graduation. -- Visviva (talk) 11:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This guy's page is really cool. David G Brault (talk) 22:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks

This user helped promote Shimer College to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:46, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello :). Welcome to the discussions about global warming and climate change! I believe you've added some insights that weren't published before. Allow me to make a couple of suggestions and give a brief history of the discussion to bring you up to speed. Please ignore these comments if you don't find them useful.

Some tips to navigate stormy waters

• Be aware that you don't write a WP:WALLOFTEXT. The longer a contribution, the less likely people will engage.
• Be aware of the tensions. Climate change is a topic many people feel strongly about. To make sure we can reach consensus and change our minds when provided with good argumentation, it's essential we WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH and be friendly with each other. You might consider avoiding loaded language like fad in section titles.

Some history you might find interesting

• The move to climate change (general concept) was done recently. Before and during the move, I cut out a lot of (a) news, (b) climate skeptic talking points (c) detailed stuff about current climate change (d) errors. Removing the details about current climate change was done to comply with old consensus, and was discussed on the talk page.
• I advocated for the term climatic change and climate changes as a title for CC (gencon) but wasn't able to find consensus for those terms. You're free to try again, as consensus was only found AGAINST the previous title. I'd wait a bit till things have cooled down here.
• Variants of the term anthropogenic global warming have been proposed in Talk:Global_warming#Subsection:_Table_to_help_gauge_consensus. They got very little support. From that discussion we decided to only discuss the two most hopeful contenders for a potential rename. In the table below you can see various arguments against these titles.
• In Talk:Climate_change_(general_concept)#Merge_alternative(s) I detail why a merge into climatology doesn't work.

I hope that is helpful. Also keep in mind to discuss suggestions that are only about climate change (general concept) on that page. The discussions here are long enough as it is. I'll try to react to all of your points bearing on the current discussion soon. Please bear with me! Femke Nijsse (talk) 17:56, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Just a note to point out that one of your recent posts, the one inside J. Johnson's section on Talk:Global warming, should be placed in the "General discussion" section immediately following J. Johnson's entry (not inside his section itself), per guidelines expressed in this inaugural edit. Also note that there is a 400-word limit to your own section, though longer posts can be placed in the "General discussion" area(s).
• Separately, I think you will have much better results on Wikipedia if you write briefly and concisely. —RCraig09 (talk) 18:09, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]