User talk:WorkingWik

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, WorkingWik! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 12:47, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Archiving citation[edit]

Hi! Thanks for fixing the dead link in Seismic wave. It's much preferred, however, to parse the original URL and the archive URL separately within the citation. In this case, the original URL was dead, even in archive.org's backups, so I'm glad you found a live one! There are parameters in {{cite}} that are specifically for archiving: archive-url, archive-date, and deadurl. The url field always contains the non-archived link, never the archival one. If it's still working, then set deadurl=no, and the template sets up that URL as the link to the source. If deadurl=yes, then the source link becomes the archival URL. But the original URL, whether dead or not, is always kept. I fixed this one, but no doubt you'll run across more. Thanks for looking out for these! — Gorthian (talk) 18:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jehovah's Witnesses[edit]

Hi. Your edit at Jehovah's Witnesses has been partially reverted, as the assertion that the Watch Tower Society is the official name for the religious denomination is not accurate, and it is particularly misleading to suggest that The Watch Tower Society reports a membership of 8.3 million. The sources you cited variously said that the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society are the official name of Jehovah's Witnesses, but they aren't even the same single corporation, the former being incorporated in Pennsylvania, and the latter being the name of a New York corporation as well as the name of a number of subsidiary corporations in various countries. Not only are the great majority of 'rank and file' JWs not members of the 'Society' (or of the subsidiary corporations), but even most 'elders' are not members of the corporations.--Jeffro77 (talk) 13:21, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]