Frenchhousefantatic
Welcome Frenchhousefantatic!
| Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some common sense Do's and Don'ts:
|
| If you need further help, you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page, and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the 
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own private sandbox for use any time. Perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put
{{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.Your submission at Articles for creation
edit
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Ritchie333 (talk) 19:05, 29 July 2012 (UTC)Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!
edit
|
Hello! Frenchhousefantatic,
you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us!
|
I, and the rest of the hosts, would be more than happy to answer any questions you have! SarahStierch (talk) 22:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!
edit
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by NtheP (talk) 21:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).
Please fill out our brief Teahouse guest survey
editHello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages sometime in the last few months.
Click here to be taken to the survey site.
The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!
Happy editing,
Jonathan and Sarah, Teahouse hosts 02:14, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Esther
editHello there. I do have to say that the reason you gave when undoing the edit did not make sense to me. In addition, Wikipedia does not need extremely long plot detail adding. Wikipedia is not a fansite used to store all the going on of a soap character's fictional life. We keep plot updates concise.Rain the 1 18:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hell again. Congratulations on maintaining such an interesting job. However, that does not put you in a better position to edit Esther Bloom. You actually made the article worse rather than better. I am more than happy to start a discussion on the talk page; but I am fairly confident that other editors will not endorse your large plot updates [as already seems to be the case]. Per essay suggestions in WP:PLOTSUM and WP:PLOTSUMMARIZE [which are endorsed by the community] .. keep it concise. A consensus formed via editors of WP:SOAPS - Other participants in wikiprojects under the scope of ficitional characters often say the same thing. I disagree with everything you said. Fansites go into too much detail. If the reader wants more plot details, I would suggest they visit a fansite. This is not an FA article in question - so why bring that up? And let me tell you, if you think that a FAR looks for excessively long plot summarries when reviewing FACs ... think again.Rain the 1 18:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- You need to familiarise yourself with how things really work on here. Plenty of discussion has gone into citing sources - there is a standard - which I follow. I will not go against those because you do not agree. Personification is encouraged of the reporter is actually encouraged. Take it up with the rule, not the follower of the rule. No one is ignoring youur profession, I congratualed you on it - but it still does not give you a better handle on the ways of Wikipedia.Rain the 1 18:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 13
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laura Norton, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Unknown and Newcastle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Sue Perkins
editWhile some of your changes may have been improvements, a significant number of them added non-neutral language--things like "continues to have a long-standing", "notable appearances", "following the success", etc. Additionally, some of the changes introduced language that is too casual/flowery for an encyclopedia aricle, like "alongside friend and creative partner" and "whilst". If you're willing to go back in and fix those problems, I won't revert you, but with those included, they make the article significantly worse, in that they directly violate WP:NPOV. So, are you willing to fix those problems? Qwyrxian (talk) 14:13, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
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) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)