Welcome!
Hello, ObiBinks, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Manual of Style
- Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
- If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! - The Filmaker 00:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Episode III trivia section
editHi, I was the prime editor in the Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith article's nomination for featured article status. I've noticed that you keep adding the trivia section back into the article and don't seem to understand why it's been deleted. The simple reason is that trivia sections are just miscellaneous items that are not notable enough to be kept on Wikipedia. Now I'm all for having as much information on the Wikipedia as possible, I'm an inclusionist, but pointing out that Anakin's scar is missing from the DVD Poster or what Natalie Portman's name was on the call sheet is just not useful information. Another pain with Trivia sections is that they are extremely hard to reference (which is a requirement among featured articles), and is the main reason why the section is constantly deleted. Because of this, trivia sections are generally frowned upon, especially for featured articles. I'll run through it one more time to see if there is anything that can be merged into the other sections. But in the future, if you want to edit the page to add information, you'll have to cite your source, otherwise it will be reverted as a lot of Star Wars fans protect the article since it is the only Star Wars featured article on the English Wikipedia. ;) The Filmaker 17:50, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. Another reason not to add the entire section from a previous version is that it is extremely redundant within the article. Much of the information in the section, I merged into the other sections in order to preserve it. The Filmaker 17:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- All you need to do to respond is post here in your talk page below this message, click the "edit this page" button at the top and type in the exact way you would to edit an article only do so in order to respond to me. I'll keep checking this page for your response so don't worry about posting on my talk page. Also, sign all of your messages with four "~" keys in order for you time and date information to appear (as customary). :) The Filmaker 05:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. I really appreciate your telling me. I was not aware that maintaining "featured article" status was that important. While I disagree, I fully respect and will adhere to it now. Ab00t the wording, it's not so much that he paraphrased the original, as much as he drew from the original series and made a connection. Anyway, that doesn't matter that much. Once again, I really appreciate your telling me, and, if it's not too much trouble, and only when you get the time and want to, could you run me through a wiki for dummies type thing? Thanks either way. ObiBinks 00:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- And if nothing else, could you please tell me at least how to get to other people's talk pages? Thanks =) ObiBinks 00:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- All you have to do when it comes to other people's talk pages is click on their names and then click the "discussion" button at the top, the same applies to articles you might want to edit in order discuss the article in detail with other users. I'm going to place a manual of sorts that I was given when I first started (not sure whether it was automated or given to me by another kind player). The Filmaker 00:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Also, I'm actually going to remove the last edit I made on the "paraphrasing" of the title, since your last rationale reminded me of why it wasn't there in the first place. The idea of the title referencing Return of the Jedi falls under the category of "References to the original trilogy", which in turn has it's own page which does point out the connection. So it's all good. :) The Filmaker 00:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Meh. If it were just me, I would mention it because it is something I would want to know if I were reading about Star Wars ROTS. You could have everything be in seperate sub-sections and then have bare minimum of basic data. However, we choose to put information in that, while it can be, and probably is covered in other sections, we deem important enough to be seen straight up. I am not saying that the Revenge of the Jedi stuff necessarily is, but I just wanted to mention that.
- If I wanted to contact someone, how would I get to his/her talk page? ObiBinks 01:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- "All you have to do when it comes to other people's talk pages is click on their names and then click the "discussion" button at the top, the same applies to articles you might want to edit in order discuss the article in detail with other users." The Filmaker 02:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Awesome =)
- Thanks again =) ObiBinks 03:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- "All you have to do when it comes to other people's talk pages is click on their names and then click the "discussion" button at the top, the same applies to articles you might want to edit in order discuss the article in detail with other users." The Filmaker 02:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Also, I'm actually going to remove the last edit I made on the "paraphrasing" of the title, since your last rationale reminded me of why it wasn't there in the first place. The idea of the title referencing Return of the Jedi falls under the category of "References to the original trilogy", which in turn has it's own page which does point out the connection. So it's all good. :) The Filmaker 00:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. I really appreciate your telling me. I was not aware that maintaining "featured article" status was that important. While I disagree, I fully respect and will adhere to it now. Ab00t the wording, it's not so much that he paraphrased the original, as much as he drew from the original series and made a connection. Anyway, that doesn't matter that much. Once again, I really appreciate your telling me, and, if it's not too much trouble, and only when you get the time and want to, could you run me through a wiki for dummies type thing? Thanks either way. ObiBinks 00:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- All you need to do to respond is post here in your talk page below this message, click the "edit this page" button at the top and type in the exact way you would to edit an article only do so in order to respond to me. I'll keep checking this page for your response so don't worry about posting on my talk page. Also, sign all of your messages with four "~" keys in order for you time and date information to appear (as customary). :) The Filmaker 05:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging for Image:ME as a south park dude.JPG
edit
Thanks for uploading Image:ME as a south park dude.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:04, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Permission
editAbout asking the owner for permission, the problem is that Wikipedia policy excludes using images "by permission" (counterintuitive as that may sound), because Wikipedia content has to be free content that anyone can reuse for any purpose. If you have permission to use something on Wikipedia, that doesn't translate into permission for anyone to reuse it for any purpose. It's frustrating, I know -- I discovered South Park Studios myself about a year ago and have a "self portrait" I was tempted to upload, but I realized I can't because there's no way to make it compatible with Wikipedia policy. Angr (talk) 03:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, so how do I get rid of what I have uploaded?--ObiBinks 18:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Also, would I be allowed to have a link to that picture on my profile?--ObiBinks 21:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
The way to get rid of an image you've uploaded is to put {{db-owner}} on it. An admin will come along soon (usually within a few hours) and delete it. And if you have that image on a different website, yes, you can link to it from your user page. Angr (talk) 21:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)