KennethSides

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

Many thanks for your welcome message. I look forward to contributing to one of the best sites on the internet.--Dizzdoinitagain (talk) 15:28, 5 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

• 1 Welcome
• 2 A barnstar for you!
• 3 Thank You!
• 4 Birmingham Science and Invention
• 5 Feedback Dashboard task force
• 6 Welcoming problematic editors
• 7 Question
• 8 Response to Kenneth from my talk page
• 9 Newbie biting and Feedback Dashboard
• 10 Message from Harryhi270
• 11 A barnstar for you!
• 12 Reply from DrCruse
• 13 Thanks!
• 14 A barnstar for you!
• 15 Link to feedback
• 16 Gold Dome...again
• 17 Peter J Mikhail
• 18 MfD nomination of User talk:Ubidos419

Thank you so much! I'm trying to help out in the little ways I can. I'm learning by watching a lot. KennethSides (talk) 22:14, 3 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank You so much Kennethsides! You have helped me settle in to Wikipedia so quickly, I know it's short but I just wanted to say Thank You!

Harryhi270 (talk) 23:56, 9 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

P.S What do you think of my new User and Talk page? Harryhi270 (talk) 23:56, 9 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello there, I see you've added a notice to the above page claiming that sources need to be cited. I have been working to ensure the content is as factual and close to the truth as possible. I have been doing this by providing links to reliable web sources, and also by researching book hence these sources are also cited on the page.

There are many facts which I do not source, this is mainly because the main articles linked to from anchor text are already cited on the official Wikipedia page. The idea behind this is to cut down on a page full of citation links/numbers.

I have removed the notice for now, please use the discussion page to highlight which parts you think are unreliable and I will look into it further. Before you do this please click through to each main article (if one exists) and double check the sources are not cited there first.

Thank you. Old Bess (talk) 11:29, 6 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

p.s. The page is still work in progress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Old Bess (talk • contribs) 11:30, 6 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi KennethSides,

I noticed you replied to some feedback from the new Feedback Dashboard feature – you might be interested in the task force Steven Walling and I just created for this purpose: Wikipedia:Feedback Dashboard. Thanks for diving in on your own and helping the newbies, and I hope you'll sign up! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 23:41, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please don't 'welcome' editors who have vandalised a page, as you did here. Thanks. RashersTierney (talk) 01:48, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello KennethSides, Thanks for posting on my talk page to welcome me. Why am I not an autoconfirmed Wikipedia editor yet? I would like to continue contributing to Wikipedia with images, etc., by taking advantage of the expanded privileges. Thanks. Bnewburn (talk) 04:41, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

{copied from Bnewburn talk page)

Hi Bnewburn,

Here's the answer to your question, quoted from Wikipedia:User access levels:[1]

Autoconfirmed status is checked every time a user performs a restricted action: it is then granted automatically by the software. The precise requirements for autoconfirmed status vary according to circumstances: for most users on English Wiki accounts the following must (usually) take place: that they are both more than four days old and have made at least 10 edits are considered autoconfirmed. . . . (read on to learn more)

Also, if you click on "Manage your global account" under Preferences, you will automatically be registered on all the wikipedia account where your name is not already in use.

Best wishes,

KennethSides (talk) 19:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Kenneth, My apologies in advance if is this not the correct format or form to answer your above statements. Actually, the "vandalism" is removal of material that has no business being on wiki as it does not contribute factual information in a fair and unbiased manner. I would ask, as a representative of the Gold Dome, for you to please read through the material that has been repeatedly removed from the Gold Dome Wikipedia, and let me know if I am in error in simply removing the defamatory commentary and should instead pursue other means of having the page cleared of this material. ~Lori Zwermann, Wordizm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wordizm (talk • contribs) 22:03, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

My apologies to you if I am wrong about the material removed. I do have some suggestions to make about how to get your information in the Gold Dome. I suggest that you discuss on the article's talk page Talk:Gold Dome the information you want to add (or remove) and the sources for that information, like newspaper or other unbiased sources. (As you know, you must provide verification (WP:V and WP:RS)). Personal information isn't enough. If no one disagrees, or if there is consensus that you are right, you can change the article.

I'm willing to help you out in any way I can. Please let me know how I can help out.

Best wishes,

KennethSides (talk) 22:34, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello, an IP Adress put a banner saying I was ban sorry to bother!

• Thank you so very much. I am so happy seeing you have fun! KennethSides (talk) 00:04, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the suggestion about switching to monobook, but I was referring to the edit interface (the one which reads: Bold, Italic, embedding files, signature, link, advanced, special characters, help, cite). It used to be different, and I found the original version easier to use and navigate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrCruse (talk • contribs) 01:35, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your help. I guess I'll just need to get used to the new UI. --DrCruse (talk) 21:23, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

thanks for the note on my talk page, i do appreciate it! Dotbrodu (talk) 23:01, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

• Thank you so much! And just when I was getting a little discouraged. Much appreciated! Best wishes, KennethSides (talk) 23:11, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey Kenneth. Sorry for the confusion. The project stuff is all there, I just changed the page names per a merge suggestion from a couple people. I added a clearer link to Wikipedia:New editor feedback, and you can always just type "Special:FeedbackDashboard" into the search box to go directly there. The list of participants and instructions are now located here. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 00:26, 11 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! I had no idea how to get there! KennethSides (talk) 00:40, 11 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Kenneth. User DrIreneLam has been banned so the newest edit comes from user name Sonicboom99 who I'm fairly certain is the same individual. I think this edit isn't quite as defamatory but it's still biased and doesn't seem pertinent to the article about the historic building. If you get a chance can you look it over and advise please? I like the Gold Dome an awful lot and my knee jerk reaction is that someone is spoiling the zen.Wordizm (talk) 03:53, 11 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

(answered on Worizm's talk page[2] KennethSides (talk) 14:40, 11 November 2011 (UTC))Reply

This person, Marco Safwat always tries to delete facts from this page, Qnet ltd, as he is trying advertise this company, as one of its IRs who tries to advertise his company, by just Copying its Profile information from its Website. I'm asking for an action as he's keeping deleting facts and posting his company's profile. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterjmikhail (talk • contribs) 14:21, 11 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

(answered on User talk:Peterjmikhail [3] KennethSides (talk) 15:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC) )Reply

And on a related note:

User talk:Ubidos419, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Ubidos419 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User talk:Ubidos419 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 20:03, 4 November 2014 (UTC)Reply