JohnSawyer

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, JohnSawyer, 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
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username 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! Cirt (talk) 08:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Grammar

I wanted to know that with this edit, you have "but" and "which" next to each other. It seems that only one or the other should be there. Which is the proper one that you thought should be in the sentence? Ottava Rima (talk) 04:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Haha, okay. :) What I was aiming for was that I figured you meant to replace "but" with "which" but didn't. However, it wasn't clear so I had to ask. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:07, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

History of Freemasonry article

Thanks for the additons... but it would be helpful if you would cite a source along with the added text. Blueboar (talk) 17:15, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Have a happy holiday. Good luck around here. Enjoy yourself. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 04:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Marie Antoinette

John Sawyer, please go to Marie Antoinette discussion page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Marie_Antoinette, where I left a comment at The return of "Let them eat cake". Best regards, Frania W. (talk) 22:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Nomination of Comparison of CECB units for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Comparison of CECB units 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/Comparison of CECB units 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. --Gh87 (talk) 21:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Your additions on Prometheus article.

Dear John,

Thank you for your contribution on Prometheus article, but I'd like to inform you a bit that your additions make the plot summary exceeds 700 words. It's now 752 words already. I cannot speak for everyone, but in order for it to maintain good article status, someone is bound to cut some of your additions and some excessive details. I'd like to convince you a bit on changing some of your edits.

"Later, a medical scan reveals that Shaw, despite having had sex with Holloway only ten hours prior, for the first time since the crew was revived from stasis, is pregnant with something that has reached a three-month stage of development."

This paragraph. The key of it is not the sex just ten-hours prior that indicates the impossibility of her pregnancy. It's that she's sterile. ("I can't create life. What does that say about me?") Without mentioning that she's sterile, even if you say that she had sex, ten hours prior, her pregnancy could have been a result of having sex before getting into the stasis. Without closing the hole by saying that she's sterile, the interpretation is left open. And we also have the word count to consider. So I'm going to edit it back into "Later, a medical scan reveals that Shaw, despite being sterile, is pregnant with an alien offspring." Or someone is bound to. I'd like to tell you before hand.

"The team takes the Engineer's head, encased in an exoskeleton-like helmet, back to Prometheus to perform analysis."

In this sentence, I would really suggest you reduce the word count. We can say "The team takes the Engineer's head back to perform analysis." It says the same thing with much less word. The helmet is inconsequential, even with the helmet, they could just split it and do the DNA test anyway. The result is the same. They ran DNA test and discover that it matches humans'.

"Shaw, fearing the worst, uses an automated surgery table to extract and subdue what emerges: a squid-like creature."

This one, the tone is quite dramatic, but Wikipedia is neutral. I'd suggest something like "Shaw, fearing the worst, uses an automated surgery table to extract and subdue the squid-like fetus." It's not exactly the old version, but something of yours with less words. This keeps Shaw's emotion intact while converying the same thing.

"Fifield, who has been mutated by the dark liquid, approaches Prometheus, where he attacks the hangar bay and kills several crew members before he is killed."

The "approaches Prometheus" is a bit redundant. Again, we have word count to consider. It is already implied when he attacks and kills members of the crew that he must be here in person. Burying his action in a modifier clause, a modifier in which you describe a place, will reduce the seeming significance of it too. I would strongly suggests you keep the old version. "Fifield, who has been mutated by the dark liquid, attacks the hangar bay and kills several crew members before he is killed."

"Weyland and a team return to the structure, where David awakens the Engineer."

In this sentence, there's no need to tell that he awakens the Engineer, because in the next sentence, he decapitates Weyland and kills his entire team. So that means it's already clear that he must be awake, alive and kicking by then.

"David speaks to the Engineer, who responds by decapitating him and killing Weyland and his team, except for Shaw, who escapes the spacecraft as the Engineer activates it."

This sentence is not so good from a reader's perspective. It's very long and contains a modifier within a modifier clause. It's not a very good writing. We can just break it up so it's more comfortable to read. And saying "Shaw escapes the spacecraft as the Engineer activates it" has already told readers that she's present, but not killed. We can really do with less word and an easier to read sentence. So I really suggest you keep it the way it was: "David speaks to the Engineer, who responds by decapitating him and killing Weyland and his team. Shaw escapes the spacecraft as the Engineer activates it."

I hope this explains why your contribution might be reverted or editted later, and I hope you won't be offended when that happens. Anthonydraco (talk) 07:55, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for understanding. I'll do it. It's still early here. Anthonydraco (talk) 08:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, JohnSawyer. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, JohnSawyer. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, JohnSawyer. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)