User talk:Chzz/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

You rock!

Thanks alot! Kwiki (talk) 07:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Ludvig

Hi, Thanks for the help on Ludvig Munk. The standards for citations have evovled quite a bit over the past 4 years and I thought I was doing pretty well by simply adding in line citations, so I've not paid close attention to the evolution. Your note served as a bit of a wake up and a tutorial.

Here's what I think I did:

• Removed most of the references which are in my library but are not available on Google Books or otherwise available on the net - leaving only those that I could find not alternate source for.
• Changed from Dansk biografisk leksikon to Norsk biografisk leksikon since the correct Dansk edition is not available on the net, but the Norsk one covers comparable material.
• Added Google Book links when I could find them. That turns out to be somewhat of a pain since Google Books only gives a small excerpt of the page for books still in copyright, and they don't always show the relevant material. This caused a few complications. For example I had to switch one of my Stagg references to another of his books that shows the relevant material on Google Books.
• Removed footnotes from the References & notes section and included them into the main text so as to simplify the references.

Would appreciate if you could go back, take a look, and either advise me what more is needed or if it has gotten there, lift the "This article needs additional citations for verification" tag.

Thanks - Williamborg (Bill) 04:00, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I appreciate the efforts. One very important thing, though; refs do not have to be on Google books, or even on the web; they just have to be verifiable. If you cite a book, with an ISBN or sufficient other details, that's absolutely fine. A link to an online view of the book is merely a 'convenience link'; nice, but by no means a requirement. As an example, last week someone cited a gravestone. No problems. In the end, the user chose to visit it and provide a photo - but that was totally optional. Verifiability means that it is possible to verify the info from a reliable source.

My point here is, don't worry about Google Books only showing a small portion of a book; if you have the book, then by all means cite facts from it.

I hope this clarifies a bit; I'll help in any way I can.

The article is certainly looking better, though.  Chzz  ►  04:17, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Appreciate the feed back - and pleased that references need not be on the web - that would rule out a number of useful published historic documents. I do have a bit of a challenge though - many older works and non-English language works also do not have ISBN - over half of my library fits in this category - so I presume that ISBN is nice, but not necessary.

Thanks again - Williamborg (Bill) 04:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, absolutely no problems there.

From WP:CITE;

Full citations for books typically include the following information:

• the name of the author or authors
• the title of the book
• the date of publication, and page numbers.
• The name of the publisher, city of publication, and ISBN are optional, although publisher is generally required for featured articles.

From WP:RS;

Academic and peer-reviewed publications are highly valued and usually the most reliable sources in areas where they are available, such as history, medicine and science.

Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  18:40, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey!

I saw you edited List of Super Nintendo Entertainment System emulators, and was wondering if you'd like to comment here. I'm proposing to merge the SNES emulators article into the List of video game console emulators, and possibly trim down and merge List of Nintendo Entertainment System emulators, too. I just don't really see why they're seperate from the rest of them. You input is appreciated! Thanks in advance.  :) Lychosis ^T/C 21:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Howdy. It was just a drive-by tidy-up job; however, I'll try to look in on that discussion when I get chance. Cheers!  Chzz  ►  23:20, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Lychosis ^T/C 23:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

By the by, do you think this is okay for a welcome for an anon? I tried to make it a little less impersonal, but are the emoticons a little much? Lychosis ^T/C 00:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

The following is, of course, IMHO;

I think it's fine; I like the smileys.

If you want to make it less impersonal, I suggest maybe, like User:Chzz/w, consider putting a little text before the white box (ie before <div...) so it looks like a 'normal' message typed by a real person, rather than a template. You could also use the name - e.g. "Hi, {{BASEPAGENAME}}" - that will substitute in the name of the user page you're editing.

Just my thoughts; it's a personal preference.  Chzz  ►  00:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

243 Ida FA nomination

Hey Chzz, Wronkiew and I have just nominated this article for FA status. Since you peer reviewed it, I thought you might like to know. Reyk _YO! 01:49, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

O_O fantastic, good luck! Will try to look in, as time permits; best of luck;  Chzz  ►  06:27, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: your message to me

After I saw the edit compared to my revert I kinda figured out it was some type of experiment. That's why I undid my edit. Thanks for not dropping the hammer on me. I would've understood if you had. Please believe my butting in was well intentioned. Accept my apologies. I'll check out the IRC eventually. As you can see I'm still learning. Tiderolls 02:58, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

No problems at all, in fact, I thank you for your diligence. Please call in any time, as I'm sure you'd be able to help us help.  Chzz  ►  06:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:24-tv-credits-anim.gif)

Thanks for uploading File:24-tv-credits-anim.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:05, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

IE says "Done, but with errors on page."

When I use Internet Explorer, it keeps saying "Done, but with errors on page.". Would you hazard a guess as to why? (I know many others use a different browser, incl. yourself I think.)

This explains that it's nothing much to worry about, but it nonetheless puzzles me.

I've noticed, for instance, that if I load up my Talk page, it initially just says "Done". However, if I then, say, hover over the "Vote now!" advert at the top, it changes to "Done, but with errors on page.". I can then restore the "Done", by hitting Refresh (F5) & waiting a few seconds.

I wonder if it's something as trivial as a "< b r >" with no matching '</ b r>' ? (I've put in dummy spaces, to make the < b r> visible.)

Thx in advance, Trafford09 (talk) 08:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I believe that that message indicates a 'script error', ie that IE (ooh) is unhappy about something in the scripting on the page. There's probably some minor syntax issue; it's easy to write code which 'works' but isn't 'correct', and explorer throws up such error messages. Lots of web scripting works, but isn't part of the W3C standards.

I strongly recommend using firefox instead of internet explodrer, because it's better . It's free, and lots of Wikipedia 'add-ons' (such as twinkle) will only work properly under ff.

P.S. To display 'code' in a message, enclose it in <nowiki> and </nowiki>. For example, <nowiki><br></nowiki> displays as <br>.

Cheers,  Chzz  ►  14:47, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Coming Soon (2008 film)

The article for Coming Soon (2008 film) has now been much improved. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 09:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

khawp khoon maak khrap  Chzz  ►  14:54, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

WildeUSA

Thank you Chzz for your helpful welcome note. I read every word and will follow appropriately. Thank you again! -chris —Preceding unsigned comment added by WildeUSA (talk • contribs) 17:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Just a couple of tips;

• When you write on a talk page, create a new section (button at the top), and put in a title.
• At the end of your message, 'sign' your name by putting ~~~~

Ask for help at any time - talk to us here.

Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  17:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

?

I don't know how to send out a message to everyone. --Thenachoman (talk) 20:58, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done in user talk  Chzz  ►  06:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Trout

		The Wet Trout Award
		I, The New Mikemoral (talk), have the honor of presenting you the Wet Trout Award for For slapping yourself on the IRC earlier. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 03:32, 17 April 2009 (UTC).

W00t, lovely, ty :-)  Chzz  ►  06:43, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Mysterious Editing Problems

Hey, just wanted to drop a note thanking you for helping me out with the mysterious editing problem! Sure wish we coulda gotten it figured out... I appreciate how you also got together the other people to help, too. Have a great day! Blessings, Filmcom (talk) 04:45, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

No worries; I got 'em by going to the right IRC channels, and asking nicely...knowing them helps. CU@IRC soon, I hope?  Chzz  ►  06:13, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

P.S. If you could try it without the Airport some time, I'd be very interested; I suspect it'll work fine, in which case we're looking at a hardware glitch; as that's another department, I can then forget about it without the nagging feeling that I never got to the bottom of it :-) Cheers,  Chzz  ►  14:57, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing, I'll try to connect on a different network as soon as I can, and let you know how it goes... Like I said on IRC, our nearest neighbor is 1/2 a mile away; I'll probably have to wait until tomorrow when I go into town to connect to WIFI there. Of course... If it's an Airport card firmware issue (as opposed to Airport Basestation), using a non-Airport network probably won't help (but at least we'd know that it's probably the airport card firmware). Filmcom (talk) 15:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, great, looking forward to it.  Chzz  ►  16:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

K, I tried editing from a different network not going through an Airport base-station... [Here's] what happened. So I'm thinking that if it's an Airport firmware issue, it's probably with the Airport card, since both the cards in the iMac (on which I first noticed the problem) and the MacBook (the second computer I was testing with, both on IRC and today) would have gotten the firmware update in between my break from editing (I only started having problems editing after that break). I'd be curious to find out if anymore Mac users are having the same problem, and what in the firmware update would be causing the problem, if that is indeed the source of the problem... -- Filmcom (talk) 21:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) Interesting. I couldn't see much on Google, so I think it's a pretty obscure problem. At least you can edit in confidence with HTTPS. Thanks for keeping me posted, and do let me know if you ever get to the bottom of it. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  21:27, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Fishing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Retiarius has a yellow block saying "Retiarius is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing.".

This seems a tad odd, given the topic. It's also got tags for categories "Unassessed Fishing articles | Unknown-importance Fishing articles | WikiProject Fishing articles".

I've not dabbled in Categories; what should we do? Cheers, Trafford09 (talk) 06:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:DONTBITE :-)

Definitely fishy. I imagine that this is a 'mistake', given that the previous edit does seem appropriate.

Therefore, I suggest removing the {{WPFISHING}} from the talk page, and leave a note on User talk:70.29.213.241 with a link to the diff showing that you removed it, because you don't think that it is an appropriate category for the article.

Note that the transcluded template, template:WPFISHING, includes the categorization you mentioned - thus removing that will fix the problems that you described.

 Chzz  ►  14:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Seems to be a bit of a fish theme going on here, eh? Reminds me of The Fish-Slapping Dance.  Chzz  ►  14:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done OK, ta - I've done as you suggested - removed the fishing cat. & put that note on user's Talk. (Monty Python - brings back memories. I liked Fawlty Towers the best.)

Heh, cool. I was just pondering a 'fishing cat' :-)  Chzz  ►  18:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Cookie from Voxfan

Voxfan (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

(AnotherNewbie957) (= Voxfan (talk · contribs))

Thanks!  Chzz  ►  18:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Archiving a talk page

I'd also suggest you might take a look at Archiving a talk page - this thing is huge :-)  Chzz  ►  16:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks! Yes, you are absolutely correct about that! I finally got around to cleaning up my Talk Page. That had been on my "back burner" for quite a while ... and I simply was never able to get to it. Thanks for the message, though. Much appreciated. As you will now see, my Talk Page has become much more manageable ... and far more "cleaned up". Thanks! (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC))

Hiya, as you've probably seen, I've taken the liberty of adding an index to your talk page, right at the top. What I've done is, created user:Joseph A. Spadaro/index, which contains a 'bit of code' to display all your subpages; then I've transcluded that page into a 'hidden section' at the top of your talk page; just click 'show' to reveal it.

I hope you'll find it useful; I just noticed that you had a number of sandboxes, and thought that this might help your navigation. Of course, it's your talk page, so feel free to undo my change if you don't like it.

One more tip; instead of copying stuff over when replying to messages, it keeps things simpler if you just reply to them wherever they are; for example, as I have done here.

If you do reply to a message from another user on your own talk page, it's then nice to 'let them know' that they have a new message. You can use a very simple template to do this; if you go to their page, create a new section (called 'talkback' or something), and put {{talkback|Joseph A. Spadaro}}, that will produce a message on their page, like the one I'd left for you.

Hope this makes sense; if you need help etc, leave me a note here, or talk to us live.

Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  01:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Help - how to let collaborators help with an article before "going live"

Hi! Sorry, but I've forgotten what you wanted me to put in the subject line and don't know my way around this thing very well yet... Anyway, is there a way to let others (specific others) see/edit a subpage that I'm working on before "publishing" it?

Also, if it's an easy answer, how do I go from subpage to "live" when it's ready? I'm sure I can find the answer to this one, so disregard if it's not a short answer!

Thanks! -s Rompecabezas (talk) 03:20, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

No problems!

• To ask others to look at an article you're working on, just go to their talk page, and leave them a message with the link, such as [[user:chzz/test]], which will display as user:chzz/test. For more on this, see WP:LINKING

• To create such a page, you just go to the page and click 'start this article' - for example, user:Rompecabezas/newpage < click that and create it, put something in and save. Job done. For more help, see WP:USERPAGE#How do I create a user subpage.

• When you're ready to make it 'live', you just edit your page, copy everything, go to the non-existent article, create it, and paste. It's usually a good idea to get someone to check over the page first; you could ask in WP:FEED, for example.

For help at any time, click here to talk to us live.

Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  03:28, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

That helps! Thanks again. - Rompecabezas (talk) 03:45, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

...and thanks for covering my butt! :) - Rompecabezas (talk) 03:49, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

No problems at all :-) We're all here to help out. As a new user, I wanted to jump in quick and get you off to a good start. Welcome aboard :-) And please - don't worry about making mistakes; we all do it, all the time - but everything can be 'undone'. I just didn't want you getting a big nasty 'Your article has been deleted', and thus being put off.

Best,  Chzz  ►  03:56, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cguinness (talk • contribs) 14:14, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey thankyou for the message. I would like to get to know wikipedia and contribute to it on a regular basis. Thanks

Dr. D H —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sciencekeeper (talk • contribs) 14:40, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

=Thanks

Thanks for your help and suggestions.

Atmamatma (talk) 17:57, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

{{talkback|Logan|you?}} Logan | Talk 18:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Cheers

Thanks for the AfD advice. Smartse (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle's warning levels

Hiya. A query for you, re Twinkle's warning levels.

Is Twinkle clever enough to select the appropriate warning level? How does it do so, & is it pretty accurate?

Thx in advance as usual, Trafford09 (talk) 11:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

No, you have to select it yourself.  Chzz  ►  12:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Done

 Done At least for the most part. [1] That's the test edit. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 01:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 01:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

You, Chzz, have just been awarded The New Mikemoral's generic barnstar in miniature. You can earn this award too for other generic things, just like Chzz did.

Oh, my goodness. Never thought I'd be here in my whole life, growin' up in TennesseeEastwood. I -- I want to say that Johnny Cashjimbo Wales and June CarterLarry Sanger had a wonderful tradition of honoring other artists and musicians and singerswikipedians. And I really feel that tradition tonight. It is very important and -- and I really feel it. So I want to thank Mike for this incredible honor.

I want to say thank you to so many people who helped me create this rolepage; everyone at #wikipedia-en-help, stwalkerster, PeterSymonds, killiondude, for halping me.

A very special thank you to User:The New Mikemoral who created the award, and also wrote this character, who is a real woman (or man), who has dignity and honor and fear and courage; and he/she's a real woman/man. And I really appreciate that. It was an incredible gift that you gave me, so thank you.

And T-Bone BurnettThehelpfulone for helping me realize my lifelong dream of being a country music singerwikipedian. Thank you, Thehelpfulone.

And I want to say thank you to Jimbo Wales who just put his heart and soul into this award. His commitment and passion for this character and for this performance was just remarkable, and I feel so lucky to have gone on this journey with you.

I'm so blessed to [not] have my family here tonight. And I just want to say thank you so much for everything, for being so proud of me. It didn't matter if I was making my bed or makin' a moviean artikel. They never hesitated to say how proudangry they were ofwith me, and that means so very much to a child. So, thank you, mom and dad.

I want to say thank you to my wonderful husbandpaperboy and my two childrencats -- who should be goin' to bed. And thank you for loving me so much and supporting me.

I want to say that my -- my grandmother was one of the biggest inspirations in my life. She taught me how to be a real womansuck eggs, to have strength and self-respect, and to never give those things away.

And those were a lot of qualities I saw in Jimbo Wales. And people used to ask Jimbo how -- how she was doin'. And she used to say, "I'm just tryin' to matter." And, I know what she means, you know. I'm just trying to matter and live a good life and make work that means something to somebody. And you have all made me feel that I might have accomplished that tonight. So, thank you so much for this honor.

 Chzz  ►  01:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Chzz, The New Mikemoral has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 02:02, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi!

It's really nice to get a message from you. I've largely resigned from editing Wikipedia, so hadn't been checking my messages carefully, so I missed your one-month-old message. Am extremely sorry about that. Have been doing well. Still use Wikipedia a lot for referencing. Hope everything's fine at your end, too.

You must have missed a barnstar I'd awarded you. Go to Polyclonal response as there's a suprise for you. TC.

—KetanPanchal^taLK 19:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I did get the barnstar, thanks :-) It'll be in my archives. Also, yeah, I checked out Polyclonal B cell response - GA, wow :-) Developed really well, eh?

So - I've been back a few months, and I've been extremely active on WP - involved in all kinds of stuff. Judging from your pages, I guess you got pretty involved, too?

Mostly, I help out others; pop in to the talk to us live thing - I'm usually there.

Nice to catch up :-) Hope you'll be around a bit more. Keep in touch.  Chzz  ►  21:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

(I understand about the cell-phone, and I'm sure you won't mind my moving your reply back to this section  Chzz  ►  16:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC))

Welcome back!

Hi! Nice to see you back. Yes, I'd got too involved with Wikipedia, in the sense my obsession with Wikipedia was preventing me from concentrating on my academic studies. Otherwise, I really look forward to getting involved with Wikipedia, again. It's nice you're out there to help people. Wikipedia is such a huge repository of knowledge that I've used, and I feel indebted to return something. That was the strongest reason I'd started contributing in the first place. Next time around when I resume contributing, I hope that'd be with greater expertise in my chosen subject, and command over English.

Till then, take care and happy editing!

PS: I've typed these messages from my cell phone, which supports very limited number of characters per message, so had to reply in a new section instead of followup of your previous message.

(Unsigned, from KC Panchal (talk · contribs) 09:48, 21 April 2009)

Yes, I fully understand what it is to be a Wikipediholic. A balance is needed :-) For the time being, I am in the fortunate position of having lots of time to dedicate to the project, so I'm making the most of it. I'm in constant awe over the nature of Wikipedia; despite the many problems, I think it's an incredible resource, and it gets better every minute.

Your English looks pretty damn good to me :-) I'm quite experienced in teaching English as a second language, so if you do ever have questions, feel free to ask me.

I look forward to speaking to you again soon.  Chzz  ►  16:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Templates

Hi Chzz. Thanks for your answer on my mentors (TheNewMikemoral) subpage. I actually posed this question, because Im not sure if I may ask a user to revert a revision he made in my article Jacob Aaron Westervelt. When I originally moved this article from my Sandbox to the public space, the mentioned templates "were allocated" to the relating section (see history of this article). For example the Template:Clipper ships was placed at the end of the section Westervelt clippers aso. The mentioned user (who actually is a very good copyeditor!), moved all templates at the bottom of the article. I know that most users do so and normally it makes sence (specially if an article is short). But actually my article has 60 kb and is very long, and I think it would be better (for the general view and the understanding of this article), if these templates are placed within the article. But I can not ask a more experienced user to revert an edit, if I have no guidelines I can refer to. What shall I do in such a case?--Rectilinium'♥' 08:56, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

• First, a quick point - it's best to avoid saying 'my article' - see WP:OWN.
• Re. {{Song about the Margaret Evans}} - I don't see why this is a template; surely it should be an article of its own, with an appropriate WP:LINKING wikilink from Jacob Aaron Westervelt.
• Personally, I think that {{Clipper ships}}, {{Ships built by Westervelt & Co.}} and {{PreConsolidationNYCMayors}} should go at the end of the article; having them within the article would be more cumbersome - however, this is merely my opinion.
• You are quite right to not revert the other editor without discussion. If you do wish to discuss it, the correct approach would be to start a discussion in Talk:Jacob Aaron Westervelt - create a new section there, state what you think should change, and why. Then, go to the other users talk page, and ask them to contribute to the discussion. You might also want to ask others to contribute - perhaps put a request on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships - again, a new section, and a short note asking for input. The more the merrier; hopefully 'we' (that is, all wikipedians) can then reach a WP:CONSENSUS and decide to make the changes or not.
• If a consensus cannot be reached, follow the dispute policy - which is not as ominous as it sounds; for example you might request a third opinion.
• The article looks very nice, very interesting. To develop it further, I suggest asking for a peer review.

Good luck in whatever you decide; if I can help more, please feel free to ask here, or talk to us live.  Chzz  ►  16:26, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the informations. I'll be waiting untill Ukexpat has finished the copy-editing. Then I'll be asking for the peer review. With kind regards --Rectilinium'♥' 19:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Qry

No rush, but here's another small query for you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trafford09 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Answered in User:Trafford09/Sandbox, as requested  Chzz  ►  17:23, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Welcome template

I like the welcome template you just put on User talk:Mwagner24, which one is that? (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 20:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

It's one of my own devising, user:chzz/w - feel free to 'nick it'.  Chzz  ►  20:33, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, it's great. I'll tweak it enough so that I don't have to give you credit if that's okay :) - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 21:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Heh; no problems; I don't own it :-)  Chzz  ►  21:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Help re blush

How did you get that little blushing face icon? is there a place where there are more face expressions? Thnx. --GandalftheWise (talk) 22:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I did a search, using mayflower.  Chzz  ►  22:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome

I almost left it. I thought you might get a kick out of it. However, common sense got the better of me....one of those rare occasions :) Tiderolls 23:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:BurningMUD.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:BurningMUD.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Adverts

hi, chzz

wassup?

i'd like to say thanks for hepling me and do u know how to put a advert on my page?

thanks, El-Pabloski (talk) 07:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. It all depends on what you mean by 'advert'; Wikipedia can't be used for advertising, even on your own user page - see Wikipedia:Spam. If you'd like to explain further, please edit this and reply below. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  07:28, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

no i mean like the adverts that people have on there page that are pre-licenced by wiki eg. nickelodien

El-Pabloski (talk) 07:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, no worries then :-) The ads are just pictures, using the 'animated GIF' format so they can change over time. Here's an example;

To put that on my page, I just put [[image:Qxz-ad148.gif‎]].

If there is an 'advert' like this somewhere, and you want it on your user page, just click on the as and take note of the name, then edit your page and put [[image:FILENAMEHERE.gif‎]].

Alternatively, let me know which project/areas you're interested in, and I'll see if I can find something. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  08:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for Welcome

Thanks for the welcome! Hollowinsideandout (talk) 08:38, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello CHzz

I wanted a little help. Obviously I am brand new here and want to start off on the right foot. There is a proposal to combine "holdall" and "duffel bag" and I wanted to advise against that, also I wanted to add to the "Holdall" entry that it is in fact a major uk website selling sports equipment Holdall.com

Have you any advice on how I should go about doing this?

Regards

Colin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colinalb (talk • contribs) 08:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I note that the merger was proposed with this edit in March 2008. As a whole year has passed, with no discussion, I've removed the tag; personally, I don't see any reason to merge - they're distinctive enough things. If anyone objects, they'll re-propose the merger, and it can be discussed on the article talk page.

As regards your second question, I'm afraid I can't give as positive an answer. We don't put links to company sites, unless it's an article about the company, in which case a single link to the company might be appropriate. Imagine if we listed every holdall retailer in the world - the article would be somewhat unwieldy. For more on this, see WP:EXTERNAL.

The only possibility is to request that an article is made about holdall.com - however, this is also fraught with difficulties - not least of which is establishing notability. If some reliable sources could be found to prove notability, then note that you should not create such an article yourself if you have a conflict of interest. For more on this, see WP:BFAQ and WP:BESTCOI.

In summary - my advice to all new users is, follow the suggestions in the welcome message to get the hang on things; don't create an article, oir dive into complex issues straight away.

I hope this helps, feel free to ask more, etc. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  09:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Arda Vandella Collins

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Arda Vandella Collins, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Unable to ascertain notability for the book re WP:BK, and thereby rendering the authors claim for notability invalid per WP:CREATIVE

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. CultureDrone (talk) 10:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: Carter

Thanks for that mate :). I will check it out forthwith in a LEGAL, ETHICAL AND RESPONSIBLE MANNER ROFLOFL. Ironholds (talk) 11:31, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Tea from a wizard

GandalftheWise (talk) has given you a cup of tea, for taking the time to weather a dispute. Thanks for staying calm and civil! Tea somehow promotes WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!

Spread the lovely, warm, refreshing goodness of tea by adding {{subst:WikiTea}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Cheers! GandalftheWise (talk) 18:41, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: Icon

Hi ChZZ, how did u get the icon for your name instead of this: El-Pabloski (talk) 08:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Pls Reply, El-Pabloski

Hi there. It's possible to customise your signature, and you can put 'code' in it to have different colours, etc. Pictures aren't allowed; hence, mine isn't an icon, it's just text characters with different colours.

You put the code in your preferences signature box, and checkmark the 'user raw signatures'; please note that it's fiddly, and easy to get it wrong, so it's best to best signing in a user sandbox area (such as User:El-Pabloski/test).

When using 'raw signatures' in your preferences, you need to manually include the links to your user and talk pages.

The code for mine is as follows;

<small><span style="border: 1px solid; background-color:darkblue;">[[User:Chzz|'''<span style="background-color:darkblue; color:#FFFFFF">  Chzz </span>''']][[User talk:Chzz|<span style="color:#00008B; background-color:yellow; border: 0px solid; "> ► </span>]]</span></small>

A simpler signature uses this;

<small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">[[User:Chzz|<b>Chzz</b>]] : [[User_talk:Chzz|<font style="color:#accC10;background:#0000fa;"> Chat </font>]] </span></small>

Which displays as Chzz :  Chat 

Note that you should always include your name (or part of it), a link to your user page and talk page.

Perhaps the easiest way to learn more is simply to look at other peoples signatures, by editing the page they've signed on, and looking at the code. For an example page with several, ahem, interesting signatures, see the April 1st Request for signatureship.

For much more info on this, see Wikipedia:SIGNATURE#Customizing_your_signature.

If you need any help with it, ask here or talk to us live.

Cheers,  Chzz  ►  09:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Like This For Example?

El-Pabloski : Chat

Nicely Done  Chzz  ►  15:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

You're very helpful. Thank you. Jkjambsj (talk) 16:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome; do not feed the trolls :-)  Chzz  ►  16:52, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Thanks. I was not aware that there was a template for this sort of thing. I shall read through it. Thanks for pointing this out to me. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC))

No problem :-) You can imagine how difficult it is - for example, someone trying to follow *this* conversation - when things get split across many talk pages. Often, conversations end up with bits on one users talk, bits on the other, bits on the article talk page, then bits on the ANI, etc. It gets terribly confusing.

So - some disagree, but I personally always answer wherever the question is asked - whether it be here, on my talk, like this - or on another users talk page, on an article page, etc.

Now - regarding templates - they are unbelievably powerful, and there are templates for just about anything you can think of. For example, I notice your contribs are about films; the Wikipedia:WikiProject Films has a template on their page, {{WPFILMS Sidebar}}. You could add that to your talk page or user page, and it would display like this;

To be more flash, you could put {{hidden|Movie talk|{{WPFILMS Sidebar}}}}, which would look like this;

Movie talk

Click on the 'show/hide' thing on the right. Note that in that 'code', {{hidden}} is a template...which calls on other templates, etc etc, like Russian dolls.

Understanding that helps understand the whole transclusion business, which is core to the mediawiki software.

I'm still learning, so good luck with that :-)  Chzz  ►  22:39, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Help User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz problem

Hi Chzz,

I'm so sorry to bothering you again but I seem to be unlucky.

If you wouldn't mind could you please have a look t article Jessicka. I think you'll see the article is sufficiently referenced.

I've tried to first discuss my problem in good faith with User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz here [2] and on my talk page here: [3] but he's decided to ignore me. After reading his talk page I see I'm not the only person having a problem with him.

Sadly, Hullaballoo has a reputation for trolling Wiki articles and deleting absolutely anything and everything that isn't cited to "his standards", rather than simply citing it himself, all the while continually invoking various Wikipedia policies to defend his agenda and making bad faith suggestions such as "you need to 'reread' such-and-such policy." I believe this is referred to as "gaming the system" (WP:GAME), and he is what we call a destructive, rather than constructive, editor. :(

Is there anything you can do? I'm really frustrated that my wife's article is continually vandalized by users like this. thank again, Xtian1313 (talk) 17:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. Sorry to hear you are frustrated, however, I'd have to back the other editor on this one. I like to think of myself as an inclusionist, but I do make two exceptions. One is BLP information without good sources, the other is in regard to spam articles. I won't quote policy - you've already heard all that; instead, I'll merely give you this quotation from Jimbo;

I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced.*

–Jimmy Wales

*Jimmy Wales (2006-05-16). "Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information". WikiEN-l electronic mailing list archive. Retrieved on 2009-04-08.

I don't agree with everything Mr Wales says, but in this case, I'm in full accord.

The problem can be solved easily though - if you explain on the talk page what info should be added, with reliable sources, then it can be put back.

Sorry I can't offer any more concrete help, but I do think that some of your comments to the other editor were attacking him/her, rather than addressing the actual dispute; please be very careful about that. You are perfectly entitled - indeed encouraged - to vigorously argue about the pros and cons of adding/removing information; however, comments directed at other editors will not be tolerated.

I sincerely hope this helps,  Chzz  ►  18:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Understood. Everything in the article is now sourced. The sources are easy to find.

I'm frustrated that anytime I address any issue with User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz they either A. Ignore me or B. deflect spouting policy.

"Anyone with a complaint should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity. A person with a complaint should be encouraged constantly to present problems in a constructive way in the open forum of the mailing list. Anyone who just complains without foundation, refusing to join the discussion, I am afraid I must simply reject and ignore. Consensus is a partnership between interested parties working positively for a common goal. I must not let the "squeaky wheel" be greased just for being a jerk."

I have tried to address several subjects with User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz in good faith. Is ok for me to ignore this user all together?

Xtian1313 (talk) 18:30, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. I'm really sorry that it has taken me so long to respond to this; I did look at the issue, and then realised it would need a bit of my time to fully understand what has been happening - I need to look at it in more detail. Unfortunately, I've been extremely busy with other things. I promise you that, if at all possible, I will find the time to work on this ASAP.

A brief note for now - no, it's not OK to ignore them; if a user makes any kind of personal attack, then that can be dealt with. I'm not making any kind of a judgement here; just saying that policies are important, and it's vital in discussion to stick to the topic, and not discuss people - that applies to every contributor.

More soon, once again my apologies for not being able to give more time to this yet.  Chzz  ►  17:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I now see that this issue is being handles by others, so I won't step in - unless you leave me a further message here. Best of luck,  Chzz  ►  01:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

A question

• Hello! I thought I might be back to participate here, but one Trusilver and one aggiebean, both in my opinion cowardly users who hide their identities because they have the technical know-how, have given me a good beating. I've just been reprimaded by Trusilver the Cabal-man like my parents never dreamt of doing. For what? Trying to participate on WikiMisery's Anna Anderson talk page. Look for yourself. Do you see personal attacks there, if my comments have not yet been erased? Do you see inappropriate entries there of any type? Yet Trusilver has the audacity to lecture me and threaten me privately, then tries tricking me, as many of you people do, into replying to him on the talk page-- so everyone can see what a schmuck I am and how I do deserve to be banned. I thought this would be therapeutic and helpful, I thought I had risen to the wiki occasion. A recent death in the family and my persistent illness moved me even more quickly to return to Wikipedia. And I have my handful of favourite pages, but I'm clearly not welcome at the page I mentioned. Is that fair? This is not anarchy! Hogwash! How about you do an official rules page about how this isn't a democratic process and isn't even a proper wiki? And please, this is for your reference, and I hope you'll find your own ways of improving things here, but do not waste my time by replying with inanities, insults or pretend-Mr. Spock-emotional rationality. Just food for thought for a stinking, unjust, bully-in-the-playground website that I hope meets its end soon. And that's no attck, personal or otherwise, that is my prayer. Now after all that you may be inclined to do me the favor I most want: BAN ME FROM THIS SITE. I cannot <<close>> my account here, so ban me. Do us all a favor, and you can tell Trusilver from me that he is one pompous ass I wouldn't hesitate to kick if it were within 50 yards of me.

• RevAntonio (talk) 18:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Accounts are not blocked at the users own request; you can, however, exercise your right to vanish if you wish. Best regards,  Chzz  ►  18:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Xtian1313

{{talk back}}|User_talk:KyleJustinD

My boyfriend Matthew Eilers told me you have helped him previously on this matter.

(unsigned, KyleJustinD (talk · contribs) 04:11, 25 April 2009)

As I understand it, from looking at the talk page etc, I believe that this matter is now being dealt with by others; therefore, to avoid confusion, I won't add anything further here.

If you do require anything specific from me, please ask me again, thanks,  Chzz  ►  01:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

thanks for your hlep. kyle KyleJustinD (talk) 19:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Blood of Angels

Thanks for the heads up. I did what I could (and rv what I thought was a vandal who deleted all the text), and cast my vote to Keep for what it's worth. Ebonyskye (talk) 04:13, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

• No, no vandal--just someone who thinks that writing on Wikipedia should follow Wikipedia guidelines, rules such as no original research, no fanpraise, etc. Drmies (talk) 04:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
• Somehow, I find it hard to believe that Drmies is just being a "good Wikipedian," when s/he states that this type of music is "dull" [4] and removes (from another article for Nox Arcana) referenced statements in print [5] and removes other statements altogether rather than making any attempt to find an online source. I did a Google search for the un-ref'd statements, and good refs came up on the first page.[6]. Drmies definitely has an issue with the singer on the album, or the band, or both. Drmies is not trying to constructively edit, s/he just keeps blanking whole paragraphs. A simple "cite needed" tag would have been better. Ebonyskye (talk) 06:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Chzz, sorry to have this out on your talk page. Ebonyskye, please don't spread lies. The first diff you refer to does not state "I think this is dull"--it merely offers a different (hypothetical) judgment (that's what "may" means in English), just as unverified as your "ethereal" and those other "descriptions" which you called "factual." The second diff does not point to statements verified by sources; every WP editor has the right to remove unverified material. The third diff, supposedly the result of your "research," does not even mention William Piotrokski--did you fail to notice that in your ethereal exuberance? I have removed the claim again. Oh, perhaps you'll indicate next time what it was that Piotrowski did for that documentary--did he direct it or did he get coffee for the director? Your game of notability by hearsay is not helping the pedia. BTW, you haven't yet thanked me for fixing the grammar of, and thus giving meaning to, that strange Billboard reference. Drmies (talk) 15:14, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Unsectioned thx for welcome

hi thanks alot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eveboo900 (talk • contribs) 15:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

thanks man! -wicker1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wicker1 (talk • contribs) 05:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

deleting article on me?

hello chzz, coming to you because you helpd me earlier. i asked my boyfriend if he could delete the article on here written about me so he asked a few friends and they said they didn't think he could, and to ask you. honestly i thought this article done on me by a few other people was cool awhile back but as i look more into everything that's happened lately, it does look like one bad apple really does spoil the bunch. when i say lately, i don't mean all the normal/necessary edits done to the article like that done by cleantime recently. i mean the unnecessary edits by revolving ips and usernames from day one. anyway...i thought it was neat but its becoming nonsense & really silly. i have done a few things in my life but dont feel like what ive done has been all that noteworthy nor do i have the need or want for everything i do to be on wikipedia/all over the net. i do try hard to do good in my life only because i want to help others, not to have myself propped up or have others do so. i especially do not have any sort of desire to be lumped into a category with people who shamelessly promote their every move in life on here. it seems quite obvious that many people do this and i don't want anything to do with a gaggle of very minor internet "celebs" & fame junkies. it seems like most of them haven't really done anything special, interesting, or noteworthy in their lives. in my opinion, it's kind of pathetic.

thanks for your help earlier, you were the most willing to help answer questions and i do appreciate it. can i remove the kyle justin/kyle hamm article or does someone else have to? thank you, kyle KyleJustinD (talk) 21:41, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

i suppose a different option would be to have it all redirected to the article on my band skeleteen. i dont really mind that there's an article on the band. either way as long as the personal article is gone. kyle —Preceding unsigned comment added by KyleJustinD (talk • contribs) 21:50, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. I assume you're talking about the article Kyle Justin. Well, if you want to nominate it for deletion, you could - see instructions in WP:AFD. I suspect, however, that such a nomination would fail; the article asserts notability, and has reasonable references. Therefore, I think that it won't be deleted. Just because it's about you doesn't mean you have the right to demand that it is removed; see WP:IDONTLIKEIT. If there are any specific facts that are incorrect, etc, and you can provide reliable sources to them, then feel free to make such suggestions on the article's discussion page (Talk:Kyle Justin).

Articles don't get removed for no reason - and a user requesting their removal, without any policy reasons, it not a sufficient justification.

Hope that makes sense? Cheers,  Chzz  ►  01:52, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

cat tree

Thanks for your response. When I expand the cat tree, I see this:

 [+] United States government attribution templates
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the World Factbook
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Federal Standard 1037C
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from MIL-STD-188
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the United States National Library of Medicine
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the National Cancer Institute Dictionary of Cancer Terms
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Library of Congress Country Studies
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the United States Department of State Background Notes
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the USGS Geographic Names Information System
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Air Force Historical Research Agency
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Naval Vessel Register
 [×] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the United States Library of Congress Country Studies
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from United States Marine Corps
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Naval Historical Center
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the National Park Service
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the National Institute of Standards and Technology

which is not alphabetical order. This is the same in both FF3 and IE6.

What I'd like to see is this:

 [+] United States government attribution templates
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from MIL-STD-188
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Air Force Historical Research Agency
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Federal Standard 1037C
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Library of Congress Country Studies
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the National Cancer Institute Dictionary of Cancer Terms
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the National Institute of Standards and Technology
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the National Park Service
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Naval Historical Center
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Naval Vessel Register
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the United States Department of State Background Notes
 [×] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the United States Library of Congress Country Studies
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the United States National Library of Medicine
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the USGS Geographic Names Information System
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the World Factbook
 [+] Wikipedia articles incorporating text from United States Marine Corps

Thanks —G716 <^T·_C> 22:36, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there; yes, I see what you mean. I've just spent a few hours looking into this - as I say, I'm not expert in the complexities of categorization. I've looked on mediawiki, and elsewhere; I've concluded, probably there is no simple answer. The only pages I see that manage to present such a format have manually put the cats in alpha order.

I think that the problem is the way the whole hierarchy thing works; you can view a tree of the example we've discussed using this tool. It's not a 'level' structure, so I think the question is more complex than it would appear.

I think, perhaps, it would be worth asking your question in Wikipedia talk:Categorization - I note that that is an active page, and would hope someone there might have more information.

I'm sorry I couldn't help more directly; good luck, please let me know if I can help any more, or indeed, if you get an answer. Best,  Chzz  ►  00:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

The headline is self explanatory. I remember setting that preference today, but i must have misread what it does. I thought that it would actually be sort-of like an addon for my browser. Again, thanks --Danitnt (talk) 03:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome buddy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Retracted (talk • contribs) 04:58, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for the introductory message. I'm just getting the hang of this but hopefully I'll be editing lots of articles with new sources in no time! --Markojohnson (talk) 05:01, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

cmune

hi chzz,

i just started out and want to get on the right note..

i was wondering if you could help elaborate on the "Non-notable; passing mentions in articles but no reliable source to assert notability. Was unable to locate any significant ghits"

are there links i should remove or add? and what are ghits? your assistance would be appreciated! thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sriramkri (talk • contribs) 07:07, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi. In order to assert notability, the article would need significant coverage in reliable sources, such as national newspaper articles. The guidelines on notability are in WP:N; WP:RS explains about reliable sources, and WP:V explains verifiability.

Sorry about the use of the abbreviation 'ghits', I meant Google Hits. I checked google news search, and couldn't find any significant coverage.

Also, as I mentioned, please read the business faq. Various guidelines on these matters strongly recommend that a company employee should not create an article on the company; there are alternative ways to proceed, as detailed in that guide. Another good essay on the topic is WP:BESTCOI.

Hope this is of some help; good luck,  Chzz  ►  07:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

thanks

got it. will dig for national level coverage. i have made edits to the site now, made it way simpler. would this suffice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sriramkri (talk • contribs) 07:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Please read through the policies, which explain why it is strongly recommended that you don't work on the article. Also, please remember to always sign your messages with ~~~~ at the end.

The best thing to do would be, follow the ideas and suggestions in the 'welcome' message. This includes learning more about editing, and getting involved in the project by working in other areas, to gain experience of the way things works, before considering creating an article.

Hope this helps,  Chzz  ►  07:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Manchester City

Please re-instate the semi-protection to the article, we are about to enter the transfer season when vandalism becomes more intense. The protection was added for good reason after several attempts at adding it on a temporary basis. This issue has been monitored several times in the past. If you think it should be removed, please discuss the merits before taking action. Also note that the first edits made to the article (which is a Featured Article BTW) have been considered vandalism and been reverted (note this was not by me). Paul  Bradbury 22:41, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. Sorry, hope you're not annoyed with my action. I did see the history, but I noted that it was over a year ago; the policy in general is that semi-protection is an unfortunate last-resort, as one of the pillars of Wikipedia is that anyone can edit. I do understand your concerns, but if we semi-protected all articles of this type, it would be a very different type of Encyclopaedia.

I would hope, therefore, that no administrator would reinstate semi-protection without good reason - ie persistent, ip-relateed vandalism.

The page will be closely monitored, and if it becomes a problem, I'll be the first to support semi.

Please note that, for example, the 'article of the day' is never semi-protected; there has been a lot of debate over these issues, but that is the current consensus.

...and, as I write this, I see it's a moot point - as the semi-protection has been reinstated, despite no editing from any anonymous ip's, and indeed no vandalism.

This makes me very sad; a new user joined our community, and I assumed good faith; El-Pabloski (talk · contribs) wanted to edit the article but was unable to do so because of the semi-protection. They made some edits, which - it would appear- were good edits. They were reverted as vandalism - please take a look at the revert, and see how this could possibly be construed as vandalism.

I'm deeply saddened by all of this. Regards,  Chzz  ►  16:57, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I am not annoyed that you have tried to un-protect an article, my issue is that you did so without discussion at the article in question. I can understand your point of view and I agree with the principle, the problem is that Manchester City at the moment is a very high profile football team which has a lot of incorrect media speculation around it. We are also heading into transfer season when this gets worse and IP vandalism becomes unmanageable without breaking the 3RR rule. The protection was put in place after several attempts to protect the article for short periods of time, then longer periods of time, eventually leading to indefinate.

I have looked at the edits and I don't see any good edits and some that to me appear to be straight vandalism (although please note I was not the one who reverted them as such). In order my take on them is.

* Added numerous templates to the beinning of the article that were not needed, I can see how this could be construed as a new editor getting it wrong, or as vandalism given the context of the other edits below.

* swapped chairman and manager around, this is a basic easily verifyable fact not in dispute, so I can only assume vandalism here.

* factually acurate but did not enhance the article and really a semantic argument based on the fact that Manchester United is in Trafford, a suburb and not part of the city limits of Manchester, similar to Chelsea not being in London (when for all intents and purposes it is).

* Changed season link, no real problem with this one, although to me it reads better the original way.

* Changed Michael Ball link to link to incorrect person, this appears to be vandalism as it is easily checked and no reason to do it.

* Changed Kelvin Etuhu from Nigerian to English, I can understand how this may have been a good faith edit, however it is incorrect.

* Removed on loan players and replaced with the word 'son'. This is blatant vandalism.

So please help me understand which edits made you think were good edits? This is not meant to be antogonistic, this is honestly how I saw those edits and I am confused as to how you can see them as something else, I am willing to listen and even change my opinion. Sincerely Paul  Bradbury 19:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Will reply to this soon; I've been giving the matter some thought, and it's raised some questions for me. More soon, apols for taking time over it.  Chzz  ►  04:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

no problem, I would appreciate your input Paul  Bradbury 08:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

NSDAP Wiki article

Hi, hope you receive this message Chzz, I am a new member here yes this is true. I signed up and modified the NSDAP article and added the reference to the originally written NSDAP articles that have been translated to English for non German. It seems that English is the most popular language to use in the world with more Chinese speaking it than their own languages. I don't know about it being Eurosceptic, I don't think the NSDAP would be offended at the time unless someone opposed it. This is real resourceful research not regurgitated stuff you usually get on the Internet, it came from Germany. I doubt you will be able to do research on the same level so therefore be able to conveniently pass it off as not even being original work of the NSDAP, isn't that a lot easier to do?. Shame... Did you not try contacting Greg at the website? He may be able to help with that and tell you if he is either pro or anti EU. I don't know what being pro or anti EU has to do for a writing requirement on a NSDAP piece. If you like you can ask me if I am pro or anti EU. Personally though I like to learn history before we do anything, not the versions that are rewritten over time but the actual dirt of the era otherwise it is just a fictional half truth tales at best. Just because the NSDAP wrote these documents does not mean we have to be Eurosceptic or anti EU in anyway nor does it mean we have to be a neo nazi to like any of it. I think we can both agree the EU has harmonised laws and rules for all of Europe that do work well.

Will you be attempting any research on the authenticity of these documents?

I appreciate the message though and could do with some help or pointers. Thanks

P.S. I know I may have truncated the Wiki article format by accident, not deliberately so. I think that these documents deserve an independent article in their own right so that this may be avoided in the future, I am sure the wiki writers would strongly oppose this though and move it into some fictional or conspiracy theorist section. Also if this talk back is in the wrong place please show me where it is meant to be.

I wrote this in UK - International English and not U.S. English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elfree (talk • contribs) 15:33, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I assume you are talking about this edit, which was reverted here? It wasn't me that reverted it; all I did was to leave you a 'welcome to wikipedia' message on your talk page.  Chzz  ►  15:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Fountain of Time GA and A-Class

This user helped promote Fountain of Time to good article status.

Thank you for taking the time to help me improve this article to WP:GA and WP:MILHIST A-Class status as I prepare it for WP:FAC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Ooh, tyvm. Keep me updated, anything I can do, etc. Cheers!  Chzz  ►  17:02, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

thanks for the welcome

However, if you had read my user page, you would have learned that this account is a SPA. But, thanks anyways LDS-SPA1000 (talk) 17:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the welcome, Chzz! Capgras (talk) 17:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

You apparently did not do a through search on Game Builders Academy when you pushed to have the article on Game Builders Academy deleted. The academy teaches classes at major eduacational institutions on Long Island and is mentioned on all of their websites, including: Hofstra University, State University of NY Stony Brook, Long Island University CW Post Campus, Molloy College, Dowling College, Queensborough Community College, East Woods School, St. John the Baptist High School, Little Flower School District, Westbury Public Schools, The Newton Institute. There are also articles about the academy that have appeared twice in Newsday and Cablevision is in the process of producing a one hour television special about the academy.

I suggest you use more then a cursory Google search when doing research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JHTaylorJr (talk • contribs) 23:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, when discussing articles etc, please provide a link, for example [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Game builders academy]] which shows up as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Game builders academy. (I managed to find this using the advanced search, but please remember that some of us work on hundreds of articles and queries every day).

Secondly, please remember to 'sign' all of your messages by putting ~~~~ on the end.

Now - regarding your comments, I certainly did more than a cursory google search; however, a lof of the websites of the places where the acadamy teaches will be primary sources, and therefore not suitable references. If you have references to newsday, then by all means provide them - I was unable to locate them for myself, hence my voting. Rather than complaining that I should search harder, perhaps you could have added the references to the article in the first place.

A cablevision article that has not yet appeared is not going to help; however, no information has been lost - you can easily ask for the article to be copied to your own area, where you could perhaps improve it to a standard that will be acceptable.

If I can assist any further, please do contact me again. I'm merely trying my hardest to improve the quality of wikipedia; I try to contribute to the consensus in 'Articles for deletion' as best I can, to help arrive at a consensus; it's a pity more people didn't contribute to that particular one, but I understand why - it is always a somewhat thankless task.

Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  03:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

what is this thoug

http://toolserver.org/~bjelleklang/pjirc/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by IncredibleTreasure (talk • contribs) 17:31, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Erm. It's a link to a java applet that lets you chat to wikipedians on the IRC network, to seek live help.

Please remember to sign your edits on talk pages, by putting ~~~~ at the end of each. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  09:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification Chzz.

Thanks for the clarification Chzz. And thank you for the welcome. I am not going to be able to get into the protocols of being a wikipedian over night. How do I find out who reverted it back and made the claim I was a Eurosceptic ranting?

If you happen to be passing by London some time perhaps anyone Interested could talk to the Mayor of London and discuss these facts, he know all about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elfree (talk • contribs) 18:11, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

(in reference to #NSDAP Wiki article, above]])

Go to the article and click 'History' - you can see every edit ever made, who made it, when, what they did etc. See WP:HISTORY. In this case, you;; see as line saying this;

08:38, 27 April 2009 DanielRigal (talk · contribs) m (54,888 bytes) (Undid revision 286353004 by Elfree (talk) eurosceptic ranting lacking any reliable source)

Please note, the best way to react to this is not to retalliate - instead, discuss the issue (not the person) with the user, politely, etc. You may consider their comment to be an attack, but to avoid unnecessary escalation, the best thing is often to ignore it.

Find a good verifiable reliable source, and add the info. Nobody can really argue with that. Although, in this specific case, there might not be one - therefore you might have to give up on adding that snippet.

Unfortunately, a personal conversation with Boris would not be a 'reliable source' - unless it's recorded and leaked to national media :-)

Hope that explains, cheers,  Chzz  ►  21:38, 28 April 2009 (UTC)