User talk:Ejurgaite

Welcome!

Hello, Ejurgaite, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my New-Users' Talk Page.

---

Additional tips:

Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:

• If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
• If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
• Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
• You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
• You might want to add yourself to the New User Log
• If your first language isn't English, try Wikipedia:Contributing to articles outside your native language

Happy editing!

Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:33, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Jeff Cook Effect

Please don't revert changes to bring an article into Wikipedia style and correct English. We can work together ion this article, but not if you revert my work. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:33, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Bear with me. I'm new at this. I was making changes at the same time you were. When I was finished editting the article, I received a message that someone made changes and it didn't allow me to make mine, even though I was already working on it, so I just copied and pasted mine in. I didn't even read what your changes were, where they were or who wrote them. I just wanted my info to get in there too. But I looked at your additions, and they seem fine.

Thanks for helping me with this article. Ejurgaite 21:28, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK. Note, though, that when you get an edit conflict, pasting your version into the top box deletes all the other editor's work; it's a pain, but the thing to do is to interpolate your edits into the new version (and hope that it doesn't happen often). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:57, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Also, I do think the external links at the bottom should point to the pages where the articles on the Jeff Cook Effect are. This was one of the changes I had made earlir, not a revertion. If you see a problem with this change, let me know. Ejurgaite 21:33, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I understand you — have they ever not pointed to the external pages? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:57, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I just changed what page the external link pointed to. originally, they were pointed to the homepages of those sites. They now point directly to the articles. I am currently making changes to the article, adding external links from the other researchers' names, as there is nothing yet in Wikipedia on these people. Just so we don't run into that same problem again. In any case, from now on, I will not simply paste the content in as you requested. Ejurgaite 22:02, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Jeff Cook effect... again

I am in the process of removing the links and references to Jeff Cook Effect that you have inserted into Gravity, Pendulum, Exotic matter and possibly other articles that are based on real science. I don't recommend it, but if you must have references in these or other real science articles please make it very clear that the effect is total pseudoscience. I'm leaving your entries in Anti-gravity intact because that subject is traditionally somewhat pseudoscientific. --Teknic 02:50, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Teknic,

Mr. Cook has produced a number of experiments, photos, video clips and documents that follow very strict rules, as I have found, to standard scientific method. Also, others have witnessed the experiments and reproduced them on several different occasions. Be careful of changing valid scientific experiments into the pseudoscience realm if you are not first aware of such experiments. Please do not confuse the public on this issue. I agree that pseudoscience does nothing but hinder knowledge. However, this is really not the case here.

Ejurgaite 03:03, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Mr. Jurgaite, I would be pleased if we could come to a compromise on this issue. I'm willing to let the article lean slightly towards your point of view provided you do not<u\> link to it from any article based on real science (except anti-gravity).
  I see you've just started editing a few weeks ago, and all your edits have been regarding this "anti-gravity device". This makes it hard to judge whether or not you edit in good faith. I have backed up my edits with links to failed tests of the device. You say successful tests have been witnessed and reproduced, but out of the two links you provide one says that "Jeff seems to be the only person who can do this experiment", and the other says that the effects "are the result of high-amplitude magnetic field pulses" (it is well known that the plasma component of fire is magnetic). Please provide more documentation (preferably from sites that do not sell plans for the device). I hope you will find this acceptable as some wikipedians would not be quite so accommodating. --Teknic 04:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)