Hampshire Hipster

Welcome Hampshire Hipster!

Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are 48,399,970 registered users!

Hello, Hampshire Hipster. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions! I'm W.carter, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.

Some pages of helpful information to get you started:   Introduction to Wikipedia   The five pillars of Wikipedia   Editing tutorial   How to edit a page   Simplified Manual of Style   The basics of Wikicode   How to develop an article   How to create an article   Help pages   What Wikipedia is not

Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:   Do be bold   Do assume good faith   Do be civil   Do keep cool!   Do maintain a neutral point of view   Don't spam   Don't infringe copyright   Don't edit where you have a conflict of interest   Don't commit vandalism   Don't get blocked

If you need further help, you can:   Ask a question

or you can:   Get help at the Teahouse

or even:   Ask an experienced editor to "adopt" you

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:   Fight vandalism   Be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome   Help contribute to articles

Perform maintenance tasks   Become a member of a project that interests you   Help design new templates

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.

The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!
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.

Sincerely, w.carter-Talk 14:14, 5 April 2015 (UTC)   (Leave me a message)

• Español
• Deutsch
• Français
• Italiano
• עברית
• Русский
• 日本語
• Polski
• فارسی

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Hampshire Hipster. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by w.carter-Talk 14:31, 5 April 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

How to alert other editors

When someone is posting on your talk page you get an automatic notification. That notification is a red square followed by a long yellow box (for most browsers and settings). In all other cases you have to alert the other editor in some way, either by "ping" or by mentioning them in a link. This will result in just the red box notification on that users pages. So even if you respond on your talk page you still have to alert the editor you are addressing. If you want to get hold of me you write {{ping|W.carter}} resulting in @W.carter: or [[User:W.carter|W.carter]] resulting in W.carter and sign with the four "squiggles" ~~~~ at the end and hit "Save". There are some more, but these are the basics. And when you ask something on someone's talk page, you also create a new section so your question don't get entangled in some other conversation. If you are having a conversation with another user on some page, it is also customary to add that page to your Watchlist in case someone in the discussion forgets to alert.

The policy is to leave an answer on the same page as the question, keep the conversation intact unless there is some reason for moving it elsewhere. Like complicated questions at the Teahouse can be continued on the appropriate talk page. w.carter-Talk 15:21, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Your article

I saw that your draft had got some help from a first rate editor here on the WP (Fuhghettaboutit). Congrats, that means you are doing something very right. :) w.carter-Talk 14:54, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!! And Editor (Fuhghettaboutit) was EXTREMELY helpful!! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 15:00, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

You have a sense of humor, that is good! Have a cookie.

Ok, the title of the article will not change when you put the submit-code on the page, it will be changed when/if it is accepted. This will be done by the reviewer. I also mention Fuhghettaboutit here so that they will get notified and see your thanks. The article needs to be provided with links. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking. You need to link the major things in the article the first time they are mentioned. The references could also do with a polish Wikistyle. You can read how to fix them in Help:Referencing for beginners.

I will be away for a while now, but feel free to ask more if you want to, but first place that code on the page. There is a long queue of drafts waiting for a review, so get in line as fast as you can. See ya', w.carter-Talk 15:20, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

And please don't blank texts at the Teahouse, all discussions are archived. I have reverted your edit there. w.carter-Talk 15:27, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Yikes!! I'm really sorry! (Ooops... I thought I was being helpful de-cluttering.) :) Hampshire Hipster (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much w.carter-Talk for all your help and patience. I'm a lifelong journalist/magazine editor and this process is fascinating and takes some learning. But I'll be better next time, in part thanks to you! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 16:44, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

No problem, my pleasure! Ah!! So that is where your skills come from. :) It is much more fun and rewarding to help someone who actually can write and only needs help with the Wikicoding. I have now moved the article from your sandbox to the Draft space at Draft:Steven Schoenberg, which is one more step towards the main. It will also allow other editors to help you get the article ship shape for the launch into the main. You are making good progress here, we really need editors like you! w.carter-Talk 16:51, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you W.carter! Very much appreciated!! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 16:54, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I have now cleaned out your sandbox so that you can start a new article in it whenever you feel like it. Also, if you just write something on your user page and thereby creating it, the color of your signature will turn from "newbie-red" to "editor-blue". I think it's time for that. Just click on your red name and a page will open. ;) w.carter-Talk 17:18, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Userpage

Bravo, you are now officially a Wikipedia editor. But ... that page is not for writing articles, that page is for saying something about your work here at the Wikipedia. (Look at some other user pages and you will see, don't make the very common mistake that you can write an article about yourself here. Sorry.) Articles goes in your sandbox. Here are some tips for your page:

For making your user page look nice, see: Wikipedia:User page design center. You can also "clone/borrow/steal" the code from someone else's user page. Just ensure that you change it enough that it does not look like you are trying to impersonate the other user. Wikipedia:User pages is a good guide as to what kind of things are appropriate in user space. And when you use the work someone else has created, in the edit summary please attribute the work to them by naming the user you copied the content from. If you want to add userboxes you can start here: Wikipedia:Userboxes. There are also many, many customized userboxes floating around on user pages in the Wikipedia, if you find one you fancy just copy the code from the page. If you are further interested in defining yourself and your style there is also the Wikipedia:WikiFauna. - w.carter-Talk 21:58, 5 April 2015 (UTC) (the one watching over you for now, making sure you don't get into trouble. ^^)

Awesome... And thank you W.carter for watching over me! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 23:54, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. Just don't use someone's special signature when you mention them. That makes it look as if that person had written that themselves, that is akin to "forging" someone's signature here. Best, w.carter-Talk 06:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Linking

When you link to other articles, make sure you click on the link and see where you end up in that link. Some words can have different meanings and you have to make it clear which one of those you mean. Many of the links you made end up at so called "disambiguation pages" like Zoom, CAP21, NOVA, Children's Book Council. You have to clarify those by "piping" the links. See Wikipedia:Piped link. There are also links that end up at a redirected page, like Children's Television Workshop and Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. A good practice when writing a new article is to minimize such links by piping them as well. You should also write the whole name of places like Westport, Connecticut and not Westport, CT. You should also be consistent. You wrote Scott Joplin (the whole name) but only Rachmaninoff, Mozart, etc.

I have fixed the existing links for you. Take a look at the changes and you'll see what I mean. You can see just the changes by clicking on the "View History" of the draft and then at the "prev" in front of the edit line. Trying to fix NOVA proved such a tangled thing, that I decided to leave it unlinked! Same with POV. It is also high time you started leaving Edit Summaries for your edits. These are also visible on the "View History" page and in Watchlists. Such summaries should be left at every edit you make. I know that you know how to "thank" so you have found the "View History" page. ;)

For what more words to link, you can take a look at similar articles like John Williams and Howard Shore and see how they are linked and made. The sections of the draft could do with some untangling and rearranging to make the article more encyclopedic. End of this lesson. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 07:01, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Wow! you did a lot in there! I am most grateful... and I am learning! And you are a good teacher!! When you say "untangling," what does that mean? Thank you, again!  :) Hampshire Hipster (talk) Hampshire Hipster (talk) 15:50, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

For starters, most articles have clear "Biography" section at the top. Here the biography facts are interwoven mostly in the "Selected discography" section. Such a section should only include the discography, not torn ligaments etc. And the list in the middle of the "Carreer" section would be better placed at the end of the article among the other lists, to keep the text intact. This is the encyclopedia way, and I know it differs from the way articles are written in magazines where you should mix things up to keep the reader interested. w.carter-Talk 16:17, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, again... I'll work on the "untangling" in the next day or so. Again, thanks for all the good advice and patience. (I'd be honored to send you one of Steven's CDs when we're all finished. :) Hampshire Hipster (talk) 19:46, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind thought. But no. That could be considered payed editing = not good. I'm really only doing what was done for me as a newbie here and paying it forward. This is how things are done here. Who knows, in a year or so maybe you will help some bewildered new editor here. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 20:15, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Totally makes sense! I'm just very grateful for all the time and energy you've put into helping me so far. I've had many many writers over the years whom I've worked with in my magazine editing career, so I appreciate your help all the more! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 20:36, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

More stuff

I made a quick scan for existing articles where Schoenberg is mentioned and came away with some films: An Act of Conscience, Monica & David and Hamburger: The Motion Picture that you might want to mention somewhere in the article. These may not be his masterpieces, but it goes down very well with the WP if a new article shows that existing articles are already connected to it.

To comment on what you wrote in your previous post: Do not confuse me with real writers (the kind you have dealt with before ^^). I am far from it, but I have picked up a thing or three here at the WP. During our conversation here I also helped usher in another new article from the Teahouse to the main Harley Gaber. Very satisfying to get another piece of this great puzzle in place.

Btw, you don't happen to know someone who might be willing to donate a picture for this article? In that case the photo should be uploaded at this site, it is the repository for all media files on the WP. But anything uploaded there must be released under a free license, so no grabbing a pic just from the Internet. Good night, w.carter-Talk 22:33, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I will get a photo with permission and upload it tonight, thanks! And yes, An Act of Conscience and Monica & David are now linked in the article. Hamburger is not by this Steven Schoenberg. I'm going to work on tidying up the intro per your suggestion tomorrow. Thanks again!!! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 23:55, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

About the photo. Unfortunately it has been tagged as a possible copyright violation. In order for it to be uploaded and kept at the Commons, the copyright holder must upload it and give up that copyright to the Wikimedia Foundation, since all material here is free for anyone to use. That is why it is called "donate a photo". Blame the United States' copyright laws! These have to be observed, and that is the worst vipers nest you'll ever encounter, making it very hard to come by pictures for articles sometimes. You have written that the photographer is the copyright holder of the photo and that makes it unacceptable here. Sorry. Many of the photos here are therefore not very high quality ones. Photos of celebrities and noted persons are often just a shot taken by a fan or staffer at an event or at the office, and uploaded. Once a person is dead, the copyright laws change but are no less tricky. w.carter-Talk 08:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

So the photo I submitted is owned by Steven Schoenberg and is one of the pictures he uses on his website. He paid for it. I only filled in the photographer's name because I thought it was asked for in the form. (As an editor, I'm very literal :) But if my putting the copyright symbol in is causing a problem, I can submit another picture. But this one is totally owned by Steven himself. 24.179.120.123 (talk) 13:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I just submited another picture of Steven Schoenberg that has no copyright restrictions. Thanks, again! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 14:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Great! Because "Wiki-technically" Steven Schoenberg himself is the owner of the copyright of that pic, and only he can upload it and donate it to the WP. So many thanks for a problem-free pic. I don't know how many headaches these copyright things have given me ... :-/ Another, very experienced editor here has put it like this:

"Wiki-addicted? Judge for yourself... - I know more about copyright law than I ever thought I'd need to. More, in fact, than I ever thought a copyright lawyer would need to."

I have added categories to the pic and will place it in the article. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 15:12, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Excellent... most grateful! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 15:26, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi there! I notice that some of the items I have thanked look like they want to be thanked again, as if I hadn't hit "thank" the first time. Am I doing something wrong? Hampshire Hipster (talk) 15:02, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

That sounds weird... I thought that it only was possible to thank once, but I received a whole bunch of thanks when I logged on. (Maybe there's a bug in the system.) :) About that, you really don't have to thank for every edit! If we were not cooperating (sort of) on this project, one thank per day is quite enough. :) But since we are both involved in getting this article on the road, there really is no need for thanks at all during the work. We'll shake hands on a job well done when we are finished, that is all that is needed. Best, w.carter-Talk 18:11, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Makes sense... I'll limit my thanks, though I am very thankful! :) Hampshire Hipster (talk) 18:16, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Caption

Another question: How do I caption the photo? It was taken after a concert in 2012, but I'll have to find my notes to know exactly when. Thanks! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 20:03, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Just making a break here since the section was becoming very long. You replace the "Here" I wrote by the | caption = with a caption. :)

I've started to fix the references (making them "full") and I'm going through the links and formatting. But now it's time for bed. Good Night! ;) w.carter-Talk 22:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Ooops... So I went into the references and attempted to fix formatting for 15, 27, 28, 29, and 30. They look okay now (I think), but I realize I haven't used to correct formatting codes. I hope I'm not making more work for you, and aren't sure whether I should continue. Hampshire Hipster (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

After tweaking those five references, I stopped, fearing I might be driving you crazy... I hope I'm not. You have been SO incredibly helpful... Hampshire Hipster (talk) 14:50, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

No way you are driving me crazy, the bar for that is sooo much higher than this. The best way to get the references right and in right order is to use a code called "Templates". A template is something written inside curley brackets {{}} that arrange things Wikistyle using an imbedded help program. If you just fill out one of those, it does not matter in which order you put the different facts (or parameters as they are called here) the help program will arrange everything in the right way. There are a bunch of these, and you choose which one is best suited for your source. Here are some:

• Template:Cite book
• Template:Cite web
• Template:Cite news

There is a help page that explains about these at Help:Referencing for beginners with citation templates. You could also take a look at the general help page for references: Help:Referencing for beginners where an explanation for using the refToolbar (a simple way of using these "Templates") is given. Don't worry, I'll help you sort out the refs, you will get how to make those eventually. There are so many new things hurled at you right now, take a deep breath and focus on getting the text right. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 15:00, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

• If you look at these two examples you will see what I mean, the order does not matter, they both result in the same thing:

<ref>{{cite book|title=Keith Jarrett: The Man and His Music|first=Ian|last=Carr|page=114|publisher=[[Da Capo Press]]|date=1 March 1992|isbn=0-306-80478-6}}</ref>

<ref>{{cite book|last=Carr|first=Ian|title=Keith Jarrett: The Man and His Music|publisher=[[Da Capo Press]]|date=1 March 1992|page=114|isbn=0-306-80478-6}}</ref>

References

Plus you don't have to think about what to put in italics or in brackets, etc. the program sorts all that out if you just feed it the information. Btw, it was good that you figured out that things in references can be linked too. If you have an author who has an article of their own, you can add the parameter |author-link1= to the code. No [[]] are needed then. For the example above it will look like this:

<ref>{{cite book|title=Keith Jarrett: The Man and His Music|first=Ian|last=Carr|author-link1=Ian Carr|page=114|publisher=[[Da Capo Press]]|date=1 March 1992|isbn=0-306-80478-6}}</ref>

References

You see the linked name even if it is written last name first. w.carter-Talk 15:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Wow... There is so much to learn! Thank you again! As my daughter would say, "You are a gem." Hampshire Hipster (talk) 20:51, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Caps

Good job on getting those refs the right way!! You are learning fast. So, about the names of articles and links to them. This is not a self evident thing here, I'm sorry to say. Most articles pay no attention to if you write the name of them with a capital letter at the beginning, example: Composer composer, the link end up at the same article anyhow. Most of the time it is the same with plural: piano pianos, but if you try the same with composers you end up at Lists of composers. Click on the links and see where you end up. Names of magazines, songs, books, and the like usually have to be written in the exact same way that the name of the article is written, otherwise your link will end up at some other place, or even worse to a page with several items with the same name. Such was the case with down beat. The title of the article about the magazine is spelled Down Beat. Click on both links to see where you end up and you'll see the difference. In this case I think that the logo of the magazine may be with no caps, and the article may be a bit behind in the update of the spelling. So if you want to please everyone you "pipe" such a link, like this: [[Down Beat|down beat]] resulting in down beat. This way you get the correct link and the updated spelling.

In short: Click on links and see where you end up.

And if you are thinking that I click on every link you make just to see if they are right ... No. ;) There are a lot of help program that we can use here at the Wikipedia, most of us who have been here a while use them. But you have to get acquainted with the code and the editing before you can start to use them, and you need to know your way around computers. So when you look at an article, you see black text with blue links. When I look at the same text, any fault, "broken" link or messy reference is displayed in different colors or with highlighted notes, making it very easy for me to spot mistakes. There, I've revealed my "super powers". ;) Cheers, w.carter-Talk 15:34, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks! And I should've caught the correct Down Beat nomenclature. Again. high praise to you for all of your continuing help! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 16:55, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

You are always welcome. I may just have the courage to ask you for a favor here at the Wikipedia, should you want to help out with other things here while, or after, your article is done. w.carter-Talk 17:53, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi there! I am pretty busy these day, but I'm all ears... Please ask! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 14:16, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, here goes ... By now it must be pretty obvious that English is not my first language. I'm Swedish, living on the island of Gotland, a place roughly the size and shape of Long Island. Anyway, I mix up small words (at, on, in, etc.) and sometimes get words and grammar wrong. So whenever I create an article, I have to ask someone with English as their native language to read through the article and correct my worst mistakes before the article is accepted into the main. I have some editors here I can bug with this, but it wouldn't hurt to give them a break now and then. Is this something I could ask you? Right now I'm working on an article about the main museum here on the island Draft:Gotland Museum. It'll be ready soon and will have to be corrected. Best, w.carter-Talk 15:07, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

It wasn't obvious at all to me that English isn't your first language. You always come across as extremely articulate! And I am a lifelong editor by trade, and editing (and writing) have been an important part of my work since the 1970s, working as an editor for Disney for the past 15 years of my career. That said, I'd be happy to read your article(s) from time to time for grammar and clarity. But obviously, I'm just not ready for any challenging coding :) Just let me know when... (And of course I might have technical questions from a Wikipedia standpoint.) Thanks for asking! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 15:26, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you sooo much! That would be great! Don't worry about the code-things, the code is a language I know very well being a bit of a nerd.(That part also goes back to the 70s.) This is one of the things I like about the WP, articles are always a team effort where each editor contribute with their own expertise. I will get back to you on this. You too are gem! w.carter-Talk 15:46, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I'd be honored to help out! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 16:16, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

You so deserve a nice cup of tea for your tenacity and willingness to learn. (These little virtual treats are for deserving editors. A bit of informality on an otherwise rather serious site.) w.carter-Talk 15:40, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Steven Schoenberg (April 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Darylgolden was: You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Steven Schoenberg and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 04:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello! Teahouse, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 04:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Steven Schoenberg has been accepted

Steven Schoenberg, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-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 may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• 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!

Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 08:20, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations on your first article!

	A glass of champagne for you!
	Celebrating your first article with a well-deserved glass of bubbly! You have done a great job, learned a lot during the process and never given up. Cheers! w.carter-Talk 08:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for all your patience and help!! Hampshire Hipster (talk) 14:03, 28 April 2015 (UTC)