User talk:Hildanknight/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive. To post a new message to Hildanknight, please do so at Hildanknight's talk page, not this archive.

Welcome to Wikipedia[edit]

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here!

And oh yes, don't forget to check out Wikipedia:How to edit a page. This will give you all the information you need on Wikipedia formatting and edit interfaces. Remember, ask me on my talk page if you need anything or any help. See you around. -Jetman123 10:48, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Help request[edit]

Will any of my activities of editing Wikipedia while logged in open my Gmail inbox to floods of spam?

Only logged in Wikipedia users can send you an email, and that's only if you ticked "Enable e-mail from other users" in preferences.
When they send you an email they won't know your gmail address unless you reply.
If you send someone an email they will immediately know your email address.
Of course you should never reveal your email address on your talk/user page, since that may lead to spam.
I've used the Wikipedia email service for 12 months and haven't received an spam.
Does that answer you question?--Commander Keane 08:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, your answer helped a lot. Thanks! I'll take away that tick in my preferences then. Would you like a Gmail invite? J.L.W.S. The Special One 08:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that you will be spammed as a result of your involvement here. --Defenestrate 08:16, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

If that were the case, I would've been spammed ages ago. - 20px Flag of Ontario.svg Flag of Canada.svg nathanrdotcom (TCW) 02:54, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

RSS question[edit]

Are there RSS feeds for Wikipedia articles? If so, I can easily keep track of changes to my favourite articles straight from my Gmail inbox, with Gmail's new RSS subscription feature. If not, how do I suggest it to the people who run Wikipedia? RSS won't just help Gmail users who can subscribe to feeds in their inbox - anyone can subscribe to an RSS feed.

That was an awesome edit summary when you asked the RSS question! As you can see at Wikipedia:Syndication Wikipedia has three RSS feeds, but not for particular articles. That's the limit of my knowledge - for a better answer I recommend the Help desk. But I think it would be too much load for the servers to provide RSS for every article. You can make a feature request for something like this at bugzilla, but I'm not sure how viable this suggestion is. --Commander Keane 08:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
  • How do I upload a screenshot to Wikipedia?
  • Is it OK to provide links to original research under "References" or "External links", especially if the original research is important to the article?
You can upload an image using the "Upload file" button in the toolbox (under the search bar). Or go to Special:Upload. Screenshots may be copyright (if the software in copyright). To take a screenshot (in Windows at least) you press the Control & "Print screen" buttons (Alt + "Print Screen" will take a screenshot of your desktop) on your keyboard, then in mspaint go edit>paste. Then save as a jpeg.
All research is original, as far as I know. I think that's part of the definiton of research.

Defn of orig. research[edit]

What is Wikipedia's definition of "original research not allowed" then? If, for example, I have a website with "original research" that would be inappropriate for Wikipedia, is it OK to link to my website, as long as the "original research" is important/useful to the subject?

There's no need use {{helpme}} for the time being, since I will watching this page.--Commander Keane 12:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  • I hope you aren't the only Wikipedian helping! (just kidding)
Hopefully Wikipedia:No original research has some answers. We need to judge sources on their merit, case by case.--Commander Keane 09:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
The following statement in the link you provided suggests that I should get people to link to and support my website before listing it as a source in Wikipedia:

In order to avoid doing original research, and in order to help improve the quality of Wikipedia articles, it is essential that any primary-source material, as well as any generalization, analysis, synthesis, interpretation, or evaluation of information or data, has been published by a reputable third-party publication (that is, not self-published) that is available to readers either from a website (other than Wikipedia) or through a public library. It is very important to cite sources appropriately, so that readers can find your source and can satisfy themselves that Wikipedia has used the source correctly.

What about TV shows and games? Does NOR mean that in articles, I can't include information about a game which I obtained simply by playing it, or info about a show which I obtained simply by watching it?

Yes that's exactly what it means (although in practice the converse happens). We can't inlcude the info you have obtained from your experiences becasue it's not verifiable. --Commander Keane 10:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Hypotherical editing exmaple[edit]

Let's use a hypothetical example.

Let's say User A creates a page that says: 1 + 1 = 3. (which is obviously wrong - let's say he made a typo and didn't notice) He saves the page, and clicks "edit page", then goes off for a coffee break for 15 minutes.

10 minutes after User A leaves, User B spots the page, and corrects the page to say: 1 + 1 = 2.

When User A comes back from his coffee break, he does not know that User B edited his page. The Editing: still shows: 1 + 1 = 3. (and he either still doesn't notice the typo, or failed Maths in school)

So User A adds another line (which is correct) so the Edit: shows: 1 + 1 = 3 2 + 2 = 4 After he hits Save, what will the page say? Will User B's correction have any impact on the page?

(P.S. I know creating a page with 1 + 1 = 3 and 2 + 2 = 4 would be vandalism, but then again, it's a hypothetical example. If I added a paragraph to a page, with a typo, and someone corrected it, and I didn't notice, because it still doesn't show at the edit page, and I add another paragraph and hit save, will my changes be reflected?)

A good question - but don't worry the software hadles the situation very well. What you get is an edit conflict. When A goes to save his out-of-date version his edit won't be saved - an edit ocflict screen will tell him that someone has edited the page. You are certain to get one of these yourself, especially seens you show a keen interest in Wikipedia.--Commander Keane 09:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I got three of these in the past two days. Thanks for info --J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Dealing with errors in articles[edit]

Sometimes I know something is wrong in an article, but don't neccesarily know how to correct it. What would be the best way to alert other Wikipedians who will make a change which is definitely for the better? For example, Commander Keane made a miSspelling in his reply to my question. "Seens" could be either "since" or "seems", and I don't know which one he meant. Although in this case the correction would not be significant, this is again an example, and in a real article changes might be much more significant.

Hopefully the meaning I tried to convey was still apparent, despite the spelling error :)
The talk page is the first place to ask. I may also try to find a relevent WikiProject or notice board (eg WP:AWNB) to alert other editors. IRC is a good way to speak to experienced editors too (you could even join me in bootcamp by clicking here)--Commander Keane 10:03, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I was blocked for 3 hours, but the block was lifted 10 minutes after I discovered it. The reason given by Academic Challenger was "vandalism, shared IP". I don't know if any of my edits can be considered vandalism, or if anyone has hijacked my account. I would like more information on the reason for my ban. I will consider leaving Wikipedia to avoid harming its users. J.L.W.S. The Special One 11:04, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Please don't leave Wikipedia. If the blocking message was 'vandalism, shared IP', your username wasn't blocked, but the IP number you are using. Someone else, using the same IP, has probably been vandalising Wikipedia, and Academic Challenger apparently decided to block for that. So, it had nothing to do with you or your account, but with someone else using the same IP nummber (which is quite a common occurance, if you use AOL for instance). If it's a longer block, and you are hindered by it, send the blocking admin an email to explain that your account is blocked as 'collateral damage'. In most cases, the blocking admin will lift the block after receiving such an email. --JoanneB 11:12, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the information. So it isn't my fault? Someone was using the same IP to vandalize? I think Wikipedia should, in such cases, allow registered users to edit from that IP, as long as they are proven non-vandals. I won't leave Wikipedia.
I was blocked again yesterday, because my IP was used by a vandal named Craffe. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Some freak with username Freakofnurture blocked me again, with reason of "vandalism, shared IP". I have been blocked thrice in the last four days because others have used my IP to vandalize. This is getting disruptive. In addition, because of the timezone difference, I'm not sure what time my ban would be lifted (it would be better if they displayed "in X hours" instead of a time). It's ironic that I was banned just when I wanted to revert vandalism to the RuneScape article. Someone please revert it. I created an account to avoid such bans and misidentification, but apparently it does not help. Can I edit using the same account on my father's computer (which has a different IP)? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I have spoken to Freakofnurture and he has undone the block, so you should be able to edit. If you father's computer has a different IP you would be able to edit from that one. Even though the block is lifted now, the IP vandal is rather nasty and may have to be blocked again later. --Commander Keane 04:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure he has undone the block? I still get that "Your username or IP address has been blocked" message when I try to edit articles. Freakofnurture is allegedly a "rogue administrator" and there are F-words on his page. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:54, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Freakofnurture has responded on the bottom of this talk page. Pepsidrinka 05:05, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

{{unblock}}

I have been blocked again. My IP address was blocked by Mel Etitis for "persistent vandalism after long string of warnings and earlier blocks". My IP address is 202.156.6.54.
How do I know when I can edit again? Wikipedia time may not correspond to Singapore time. It is 18.44 here in Singapore.
Also, please sign at Wikipedia:Blocking_policy_proposal.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Unblocked. --Sam Blanning(talk) 14:10, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Is you question about reading the block log? Because {{helpme}} isn't used for blocks. To read the block log, you go to Special:Log. In the Title section put in "User:202.156.6.54". Assuming your preferences display local time (UTC+8, also my local time) it will say that a 24hr block was placed at 17:34, May 30, 2006. So the block will wear off tomorrow at 5:34pm.--Commander Keane 11:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


ARGH! Not again! My IP 202.156.6.54 is blocked for 24 hours! This means almost all Singaporeans can't edit! Divine (admin) intervention, please!

It should be unblocked now. --Pilot|guy 00:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments on new users log[edit]

Hi there. I read your comments on the new users log. It seems someone has already explained to you about the shared IP incident, and it's good to see you won't be leaving us.

The NOR rule is one of the more subjective rules at Wikipedia, what one person considers to be original research, another might not. I like to use references (where I can) when I edit, and that tends to not raise the issue of original research. I must admit, I haven't had too much issue with this so I can't help you out a lot.

As to your other question about editing userpages. Yes it is a very easy thing to do, but fortunately also very rare. The best advice is to put your userpage on your watchlist, so next time you log on and go to your watchlist, it will tell you that your userpage has been edited. Some people's userpages tend to be targeted more than others, this is mainly because those users are people who help to counter-vandalism, and angry vandals take out there anger on people's userpages. As you can see by my userpage's history, that is something that happens to me on a semi-regular basis. But you'll notice how quickly and easily that the vandalism gets reverted by somebody. Usually within a minute or so (not always). This is because there are always users who are watching out for vandalism, and using a program called CDVF, vandalism to a userpage is caught very quickly.

I hope that helps. Please feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. - Akamad 22:24, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Is there a way to protect my user page from vandalism then?
If you are receiving frequent and disruptive vandalism to your user page then an administrator can protect it. However, in most cases it's best just the warn the vandal. If you do need an admin to protect your userpage, you would do that at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.--Commander Keane 06:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Helpme request[edit]

Someone else added their name and e-mail address when editing a page (which was part of the encyclopedia, not a user page, etc.). I removed their name and e-mail address. Did I do the right thing? Does adding your name and e-mail address to an encyclopediac page violate any rule or guideline ? Or is it just bad form to do so?

P.S. The page was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henna

An editor's name and email address should never go in an article - you did the right thing. I'm sure there is a rule about this somewhere, but I can't find it. Try digging around the help pages if you like.--Commander Keane 11:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Is there a Wikipedia rules discussion page? Is there a Google Group for Wikipedians? Are discussion pages for Wikipedia articles for discussion of the article only, or is discussion on the article's topic allowed as well?

Article talk pages are really only for improivng the article (although you can digress a little bit). I'm not sure what a Google Group is, but socialising does happen in the WP:IRC channels. For example you could join me online now. Join the #wikipedia-bootcamp IRC channel or if you are new to IRC Click here to be connected. Other than that, all of Wikipedia seems to be directed at building the encyclopedia.--Commander Keane 12:10, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Google Groups is a free groups and mailing list service from Google that allows users to create their own groups for discussion on various topics. I wrote an article on it, and am cleaning up a section that appears like a help page (I wrote the article late at night). A Google group about Wikipedia would facilitate discussions about Wikipedia in general, discussions about topics in certain articles, and socializing between Wikipedians. If a Google group for Wikipedia exists, I would appreciate the link; if not, I will be willing to create a group for Wikipedians.
I don't think Wikipedia needs/wants to be affiliated with Google (a comercial company)--Commander Keane 15:00, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Good point, although a Wikipedia forum like a Google Group would be very useful for discussion about Wikipedia as a whole, and suggestions to Wikipedia, as well as discussion on topics and socialising. The threading in Google Groups is one of the main advantages over the wiki format and Yahoo! Groups. I asked Jimbo on his talk page - waiting for response.

How do I mark an article as “under construction”? How do I store changes I make to a Wikipedia article without actually changing the contents of the article? For example, if I was working on an article and halfway through had to go to sleep, I could store the changes and continue working on the article the next day, and actually submit the article once I have finished?

Once you save, the changes goes live (there is no way around it). You can put {{inuse}} at the top of the article to show you are working on it. Or work on a subpage, eg User:Hildanknight/Sandpit, and copy across once you have a version you are happy with.--Commander Keane 15:00, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

After writing a new article (such as http://en.wikipedia.org/GTalkr), how do I get Wikipedians to give me feedback on my article, so I can learn from my mistakes?

You could ask at the Newcomers help page. Or a relevent WikiProject page. When an article is good quality you can ask for Peer review.-Commander Keane 15:00, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I understand there is a page that listing bad ideas for new articles, but is there a page which suggests to new Wikipedians how to find good topics for new (and their first few) articles?

Various WikiProjects have ideas for new articles. Wikipedia:Requested articles also has some ideas. But there isn't something for exactly what you are asking (as far as I know).--Commander Keane 15:00, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

For me, I started by searching for articles on websites I use, and starting articles for websites which deserve articles but don’t have articles yet. I am also working on articles for famous Singapore TV shows and actors. In future, I will expand my horizons with articles offering local coverage on my interests, such as chess.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Chess might be have some ideas then, and Portal:Singapore.--Commander Keane 15:00, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

In Use[edit]

How do I mark an article as “under construction”? How do I store changes I make to a Wikipedia article without actually changing the contents of the article? For example, if I was working on an article and halfway through had to go to sleep, I could store the changes and continue working on the article the next day, and actually submit the article once I have finished?

Put the {{inuse}} template on your page or use your User:Hildanknight/Sandbox until it is ready. (Arundhati Bakshi (talkcontribs)) 15:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Review[edit]

After writing a new article (such as http://en.wikipedia.org/GTalkr), how do I get Wikipedians to give me feedback on my article, so I can learn from my mistakes?

Add {{peerreview}} to its talk pages or add it to the Article Improvement Drive to get feedback. (Arundhati Bakshi (talkcontribs)) 15:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
{{peerreview}} appears to be only for established articles. I will check out the Article Improvement Drive, but is this the best way to get feedback for new articles? Remember that feedback is to help me when writing my next articles (and improving articles, both mine and others).
I'm not sure if there is such a place to ask people to look over your article. I'll look into it.--Commander Keane 06:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Gmail article.[edit]

My feedback is: excellent work, except you can't really say 'Gmail is the best' because that's rather subjective. everything else is good! :) - 20px Flag of Ontario.svg Flag of Canada.svg nathanrdotcom (TCW) 02:53, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Google groups[edit]

Let me know when you're done editing the page and I'll make the images changes you're after. --OscarTheCattalk 12:54, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Find the rest of the Singapore community![edit]

Yeap, you can find us in these pages:

Do leave your name at the notice board, you can use the notice board talk page for suggestion, complaints, queries, help, ... whatever. Thanks again for making wikipedia your online abode! ;) --Vsion 04:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I definitely will do so, and contribute articles on local TV, movies and artistes, maybe local chess and soccer events/people/etc. How did you find me?
I found you editing in Chen Liping. Yes, we need your contribution! I'm new in answering "helpme", but let me try. :D --Vsion 04:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

How do people add tags like

Peer review A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed in order to get a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of this article.

that appear as text instead of a box? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Words enclosed in "{{" and "}}" are templates, you can find this template in Template:peerreview. More information on templates are found in Wikipedia:Template FAQ. --Vsion 04:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I understand templates, but what if I want to make the template text appear as-is, and not as a template? Like in HTML, we have the ampersand to allow people to include HTML tags as text on their page. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 05:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

You can use:
  • <nowiki>{{test}}</nowiki>, looks like: {{test}}. Or,
  • {{tl|test}}, looks like: {{test}}
--Commander Keane 06:28, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


What's the quickest way for non-sysops to revert vandalism, without having to copy and paste everything? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

You should do it by reverting, see Wikipedia:Revert for more information. --Vsion 04:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 05:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Finally, why do text after helpme requests (and text like "I removed their name and e-mail address.") appear in grey/black boxes?

Use a new line after the "helpme" tag. The text appear in grey boxes because of a "space" character infront of the sentence. --Vsion 04:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

(Removed the previous {{helpme}}. Please add one again if you need further assistance) —-- That Guy, From That Show! (talk) 2006-03-14 05:00Z

Thanks. I'm removing the spaces and adding new lines instead. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 05:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Some useful help-pages[edit]

Here are some pages that you may find useful:

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me at my talk page, or at the Help desk or Village Pump, or at Wikipedia talk:SGpedians' notice board, or use the "helpme" tag (which you know already, of course). Yes! there're plenty of ways to get help. :D

But above all, make sure you be bold when contributing, and have fun! --Vsion 05:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Trying not to bite the newcomer[edit]

Hi, I don't want you to get scared off by everyone aggressively reverting you on the Microsoft article. That article, and Wikipedia in general, are not the place for rabid advocacy on any subject, pro or con. I don't think M$ has any place whatsoever in the article, but via discussion you may get help from other editors to find an appropriate place to put that. I can rattle off dozens of given nicknames to Microsoft that are puns on the name - that doesn't make them encyclopedic material even if they are widely used. ta ta. SchmuckyTheCat 07:25, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, although M$ is the most widely used one. I will discuss where, if at all, M$ should be put. A company like Microsoft which receives so much criticsm should have anti-websites listed in the External Links of it's Wikipedia article. Even the Yahoo! and NeoPets articles have anti-sites listed in their External links. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 09:08, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
One of the highest ranking contributors was the IP address of M$'s external proxies...  :) Seriously I think there is a discussion of these names somewhere on WP. Rich Farmbrough 12:15 14 March 2006 (UTC).
Try this article Criticism of Microsoft. Rich Farmbrough 12:25 14 March 2006 (UTC).

Ways of idscussing WP[edit]

Here. Rich Farmbrough 12:31 14 March 2006 (UTC).

Would the following be considered as linkspam? 1. Let's say I am the webmaster of the top fansite in a particular MMORPG. When expanding the article for that MMORPG, I include a link to my fansite, since it's the top fansite for that MMORPG. 2. I own a Google Group for Wikipedia. I put the link to my group in the articles on Google Groups (I wrote that article) and Wikipedia, since the group is for Wikipedia discussion.

It is usually best not to link to your own site. In the first scenario, if it is the top fansite for the MMORPG, chances are someone else will objectively link to the article. In the second situation, it might be acceptable. Though in both situations, you may want to present your case within the articles talk page to see how the other editors feel, to try to prevent a conflict of interests. Pepsidrinka 05:03, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


Talk pages are public. Is there a private means of communication with other Wikipedians, within Wikipedia itself?


Is there a forum for Wikipedians? The wiki format is hardly usable for forums, because threading is impossible and it is easy to modify other user's posts. In addition, the forum could be used to discuss Wikipedia as a whole, offer suggestions to improve Wikipedia, get feedback on articles, get help on rules and things not covered on Wikipedia pages, socialise with other Wikipedians and discuss specific aspects of Wikipedia that do not have their own special Wikipedia pages. The advantages of Google Groups include message threading, and all posts are archived, so one can easily search for previously asked questions. If the Wikipedia community welcomes the idea, I will create and manage a Google Group together with Jimbo.


You can emial users. On an individual user page, there is a link within the toolbox (the white box on the left hand side underneath the "search" box) that says "E-mail this user." Only users who have enabled e-mail can be contacted. Pepsidrinka 04:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

We don't need more off-site discussion forks, too many of them as it is. If this is not you, please make up your mind which IP address you are using. — Mar. 15, '06 [05:00] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Google talk userbox[edit]

I'm not sure if there's any specific way to request a userbox. But I'd probably use the talk pages and see if someone can fulfill your request. --LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!> 03:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

But I've created it at {{User Google Talk}}

Jimbo Wales Google Groups and suggestions for new articles[edit]

Hello Hildankinight - welcome to Wikipedia. I like your idea of a Google Group for Wikipedia discussion. I have not used Google Groups but I will look into them.
Regarding your question about how to get suggestions for improving a new article you write, here are a few ideas you may wish to consider:

  1. Nominate your new page to appear in "Did You Know" - Template_talk:Did_you_know. There are rules for this - the article can't be a stub, and it has to be less than 5 days old...
  2. Find an existing article which is closely related, and where people are engaged in discussion and editing. In this case, perhaps Google would be an obvious choice, but also maybe e-mail or discussion forum. Any article that wikilinks to your article is probably a good candidate.
  3. See if there is a Wikipedia:Portal or Wikipedia:WikiProject related to your topic and post a note over at their discussion page.
  4. I think once you've been here a while, and you've met people with similar interests, it will be easy for you to pick out individual users who might help and to post a note on their Talk page.

I hope this is helpful. Once again, welcome to Wikipedia. Best, Johntex\talk 18:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Homerun[edit]

Hello again Hildankinight - how are you? How are things in Singapore? Fabulous city, I think. I see you took my advice to put your article at DYK. Unfortunately, I fear I was not specific enough in my advice.

One problem is that what you posted was probably too long. You can trim it down though and maybe it will be OK.

Also, what happens is the selected nominations get put to the Main Page of Wikipedia. Because of that, red-links are frowned upon in the short fact. You can still have red-links in the article, of course.

There are other criteria as well, such as how the article can't be too short, etc. The instructions are there at Template talk:Did you know. Another important instruction is that you have to bold the link that goes to your article.
You may want to look at some of the other nominated article and compare what sentence has been chosen for listing at DYK, and how it is formatted. For example, have a look at Jonathan Sessler and then look at the sentence nominated for Template talk:Did you know.

The reason I think this is a good way to get attention for your article is because the selected ones get featured on the Main Page, and that tends to generate traffic to your page.

I'm sorry by origininal advice was not more complete. Please let me know if you need more help. I have to go off-line now, but I will look at your new article myself this weekend and see if I have any suggestions. Best, Johntex\talk 04:32, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Hildanknight - I'm sorry Homerun did not make it through the DYK process. Your first formatting was not done according to the rules. I reformatted it, but by then the article was too old. New suggestions for DYK should really be submitted as soon as the article is created. That way, there is time to address any issues before they get too old. I'll still look at your article for you over the weekend. Best, Johntex\talk 16:57, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
That's fine with me - I only wanted feedback on my article, not to show it on the front page (especially if it's sub-standard). If there are better ways to get feedback, I would like to know of them. I am suggesting a Wikipedia special page for newcomers to post their articles and get feedback. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 03:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea. BTW, if you want to make sure people see your replies, you should put them on *their talk pages* (in this case, on my talk page). Otherwise, they won't know you have replied to them. Johntex\talk 03:07, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Gmail[edit]

Sorry, but I had to revert your changes to the Gmail article as their tone appeared to be biased in favour of Google - all articles on Wikipedia are required to be neutral. Cynical 08:48, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

How do you suggest I make those sentences less POV? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 03:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Homerun[edit]

Hi! I wonder, do you know if Americans can get a copy of HOMERUN?? I really love Children of Heaven and would like to see this movie as well! --Madangry 18:12, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Go to your local VCD/DVD shop and see if they sell any Homerun VCDs or DVDs. It's been more than 2 years since Homerun hit the silver screen. If your VCD/DVD store doesn't sell it, you might need to order online. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 03:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Helpme about NoScript extension[edit]

I recently installed the NoScript extension for Mozilla Firefox, and it appears to have affected the Wikipedia editing interface. For example, I no longer see any option for creating links (both internal and external). NoScript doesn't allow me to add en.wikipedia.org to my list of websites where scripting is allowed. What should I do? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:59, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Well the wikipedia user interface is enhanced by having scripting available, so you seem to have a few choices. (1) Stop using NoScript. (2) Ask the NoScript people for help. (3) Live without those enhancements. --pgk(talk) 14:07, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I understand that Wikipedia is not for advertising. However, is it OK to advertise Wikipedia articles within Wikipedia? If so, what is the best way to do it? There are many good-faith reasons for doing so. For example, I recently created the Wikipedia: Article Feedback Desk to meet a need for Wikipedians. However, the project appears dead. I hope that by advertising this page, other Wikipedians can post feedback on my articles and post their own articles for feedback, and hopefully it will become an integral feature of Wikipedia, which I will become famous for starting. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:59, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Id' start by visiting the village pump and mention the existance of it in the appropriate section there, you might get some useful feedback as to if it will be useful or if something else similar already exists etc. --pgk(talk) 14:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Use of helpme tag[edit]

Please don't place the helpme tag on other peoples talk pages as you did with Jimbo Wales, if you want to ask someone a question on their talk page just ask it, placing helpme causes one of the people monitoring the tags to see it, not the user whose page you have posted it on. Similarly don't place the tag within a heading like == {{helpme}} == this doesn't doesn't format correctly and looks a mess. Thanks --pgk(talk) 15:06, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Nice[edit]

Nice comment on Jimbo Wale's talk page! I agree with you wholeheartedly. The ed17 17:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC) (talk)

PR for Neopets[edit]

Hi. I have moved the peer review template onto the talk page of this article for you, per standard practice. Cheers, Sam Korn (smoddy) 10:37, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

First make sure what you think is true before you comment[edit]

Doreme1248(in Chinese wikipedia known as Ilovehk1248) kept adding information based on bias of Falungong into Chinese Wikipedia, so he got blocked. In my opinion, Doreme1248 deserves what he got. I am one of the administrators and also a bureaucrat in the Chinese Wikipedia, and I am from Taiwan, no relationship with the Chinese government or Chinese Communist Party. This matter is totally not related to any censorship from the PRC government. Pubuhan took his action after discussed with several administrators in an online chatting room with no objection. Please don't get mislead by Doreme1248.--zh:User:Theodoranian 18:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Article Feedback Desk[edit]

I've replied to your {{helpme}}: Wikipedia talk:Article Feedback Desk Tangotango 08:14, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Can I construct my user page to look like an article on myself?[edit]

I realize that after several months of editing Wikipedia, I still have not created my user page. I have this idea to make my user page look like an article about myself, thus referring to myself in the third person. For example, the introductory paragraph on my user page might read "Hildanknight is a 14-year-old male Singaporean who contributes to the English Wikipedia.", the "article" (actually my user page) would be split into sections similar to Wikipedia articles, and would conclude with links to my websites and websites I frequent. The "article" will make it explicitly obvious that it is a userpage (using a notice, userboxes, etc.) and not an actual Wikipedia article. However, I know that vanity articles are condemned on Wikipedia, so would this violate Wikipedia policy? Please note, I am not creating an article about myself in the article namespace - the "article" will actually be my userpage, appearing under the userpage namespace. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 11:40, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Hildanknight, I don't think that would be a problem. Some other Wikipedians have done the same, although they have their biography on a separate section of their user page (at User:Hildanknight/Biography, for example). Good luck with your user page! Tangotango 10:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks 9^9^9^9^9 times! (That's 6.0968348545274111207523550072452e+6260) --J.L.W.S. The Special One 11:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
You might want to read What can I not have on my user page? --Fasten 11:06, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
The link does not cover user pages that look like vanity articles. It does mention, however, that my userpage should not contain excessive content that is unrelated to Wikipedia. My userpage, even if written like an article about myself, will follow this rule. Although it will definitely contain information about my life outside Wikipedia, a substantial amount of information on my user page will still pertain to my activities on Wikipedia, such as pages I am working on, past pages, and such. There will be a considerable number of userboxes, many Wikipedia related. The question is whether my user page can have a layout and format similar to an article about myself and my activities on Wikipedia, provided it does not violate any other policy. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 11:40, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


How do I award User:Tangotango a barnstar for his extensive help with my new idea Wikipedia:Requests for feedback (formerly Article Feedback Desk) and answering some of my queries regarding Wikipedia policy, to encourage him to further support Wikipedia:Requests for feedback and give feedback on my articles on Google Groups and Homerun? (User:Commander Keane also deserves a barnstar for making me feel welcome on Wikipedia and tirelessly answering my queries.) --J.L.W.S. The Special One 11:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

See the page WP:BARNSTAR that shows you those out there and the code you need to put on the userpage to get it to show up. --pgk(talk) 11:24, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Hey Hildanknight, thank you very much for your barnstar! It's always great to hear that someone liked what I did on Wikipedia, and I feel very much compelled to continue supporting Wikipedia:Requests for feedback! :) If there's anything else I can help you with, please do feel free to ask. Again, many thanks! -- Tangotango 12:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. I awarded you the barnstar because I felt you deserved it for your exceptional effort. Enjoy your barnstar! (I hope someone will give me a barnstar one day, perhaps for introducing RFF.) You can continue supporting WP:RFF by giving feedback on my two articles which I posted there (Google Groups and Homerun), helping me advertise RFF, and participating in discussions about RFF on it's talk page. All the best to your life, both in and out of Wikipedia! --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Image to link to Wikipedia on my blog[edit]

I have recently created a list of "sites I consider cool" on my blog. Wikipedia is going to be in the list. Is there an image of the Wikipedia logo I can use as the linking image in the list? The top-left image somehow can't be saved to disk - the option doesn't appear in Firefox or Opera, although it appears for other images - when that is exactly the image I want! --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:53, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

You can download the logo directly at [1]. Hope this helps! -- Tangotango 13:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again! You really deserve that barnstar - I have added some suggestions for supporting RFF above. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Requests for feedback[edit]

Since many people seem to be confusing the page with the help desk and/or the New contributors' help page, I propose the changing of the introduction (the header) of the Requests for feedback page to make it clearer. My proposal can be seen here. I hope you can join in the discussion. Cheers, Tangotango 09:39, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I've commented on your two articles now. (They were surprisingly good for articles that have just been started). Please remember to take a look at my proposal above and say whether you support it too, please :) Thanks. Cheers, Tangotango 13:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Number of Wikipedia accounts.[edit]

What is the number of registered accounts on the English Wikipedia?

Currently 1,334,401, according to Special:Statistics. Cheers, Tangotango 10:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Point[edit]

The edit you made here looks like disruption of Wikipedia to prove a point. Please don't do that. If you have issues with WP:V, there are better ways to address them. Friday (talk) 14:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any better suggestions for addressing the issues? I posted my issues on the policy's talk page. Please read it. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
I saw it. Posting on the talk page is a much better option. Friday (talk) 14:58, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

You vandalized Wikipedia:Verifiability. Again. Please don't do that. -- Curps 05:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Reverting[edit]

Please be careful when reverting vandalism, as you did to Gmail – you accidently re-added the unsourced claim that Gmail is the best webmail provider. Cheers --Pak21 13:51, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, you're now obviously doing this deliberately. Please stop reinserting your unreferenced personal opinion that Gmail is the best webmail provider into the Gmail article, or you are liable to earn yourself another block, both for the PoV material and for the use of misleading edit summaries. --Pak21 08:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Helpme usage[edit]

User:Hildanknight, never use {{helpme}} again, ever. Use the Help desk or other means. Thank you.--Commander Keane 08:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

You ought to note that this comment of yours could earn you a block from the stricter admins, without you actually committing the offence. Just put {{unblock}} onto this page if you find yourself caught by a block to the IP. It cannot be helped; ask Starhub if they provide static IPs. NSLE (T+C) at 09:32 UTC (2006-06-03)

Another thing: people DO use Singnet, stop grouping the whole of Singapore as Starhub users. Also, you're now on a 24-hour block for the two edits specified in your block reason. NSLE (T+C) at 09:35 UTC (2006-06-03)
OK. I'm just frustrated with being unable to edit a quarter of the time due to the block to 202.156.6.54, as well as other issues I am facing on Wikipedia (see Talk:MSN_Groups). I was about to revert my vandalism to Zpb52's page after receiving your message, as well as realizing he wasn't an admin and thus couldn't block. I don't think I'll contest this block - it wouldn't help anyway. I'll spend the 24 hours on other sites and planning my contributions to Wikipedia after my block expires. I think such incidents could turn legimate editors into vandals. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 09:51, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

RE: WikiProject[edit]

Hi, I believed writing my reply here will be better as this is more personal. I'm the same age as you, don't worry, stay civil, learn from your mistakes. You don't need to cite sources for most things, but anything you write must adhere to the NPOV policy and must be verifiable, or else true. Do join us on IRC or add me on MSN (address is at my talk page). You may like to ask me any questions if you have doubts. --Terence Ong 13:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks for your response. I'm glad to know another Singaporean editor my age. Hopefully we can collaborate to improve Singapore-related articles and therefore become Wikifriends. I added you in Google Talk. I will bear in mind what you wrote. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I'm 14 too! Nice to meet you! If you use IRC do tell me so I can set your access on the channel (not compulsory). Thank you!-- 贡献 Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 03:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Chelsea F.C.[edit]

Hi. I noticed you nominated (and then re-nominated) Chelsea F.C. as a good article, but it was turned down for being too unstable. I've been doing a fair bit of work on the article for a while now and unfortunately you nominated it just as I had completely revamped the history section. Vandalism aside, the content of the page is normally quite stable and it should be okay when it comes up for nomination again. Cheers. SteveO 14:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Failure[edit]

I've noticed you have a penchant for vandalism. You continually edit the page failure, deleting the article and using it as a redirect to George W. Bush. Knock it off. 138.162.5.9 13:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to failure, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. . NSLE (T+C) at 13:19 UTC (2006-06-08)
Let me warn you personally, rather than using a templatised message for this: you are running VERY CLOSE to a very long block. Please stop vandalising. NSLE (T+C) at 13:22 UTC (2006-06-08)

GA count[edit]

I do not forget to update the count, there is a bot that does it for us so I don't do it at all. Thanks Lincher 22:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

WikiThanks.png Hi Hildanknight, thank you for voting in my RFA which failed eventually at a result of (91/51/8). I do not plan to run for adminship until a later date. Once again, I would like to thank you for voting. --Terence Ong (talk | contribs) 03:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

School proxy[edit]

My school's IP address is 166.121.37.9. It appears to be permenantly blocked. I want to get my schoolmates to sign up for Wikipedia after a talk in the computer lab. That won't happen if the IP is blocked!

Semi-Protection[edit]

Unless you are an admin, adding sprotect to a page will do no good. J.J.Sagnella 12:12, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Could you please semi-protect the RuneScape article, if you are an admin? Also, please do not un-protect it (once it is semi-protected), and leave a notice warning admins not to un-protect it. The moment it gets unprotected, it will get tons of vandalism. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 12:18, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

RE:Are you using Firefox with Google Toolbar?[edit]

Hm, I'm using Firefox but I don't have the Google Toolbar at all. Sorry about that anyways. --Phoenix Hacker 18:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

I'm an IP. And guess what-I've never been blocked before. I've never been warned for doing anything wrong. I've never insulted another user. I've never vandalised. I've also never registered, as I'm sure you've noticed. 69.145.123.171 Hello! Monday, July 3, 2006, 19:50 (UTC)

And your statements mean nothing if you do not realise the difference between a single static IP, a shared organisation IP, and a dynamic IP. Your experience does not relate to this users experience. Ansell 23:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Exactly. Try using an IP address that is shared by the whole of Singapore. User talk:202.156.6.54 is full of warnings - in fact, there are 3 archives of warnings! Have you ever been blocked because someone using your IP vandalises? How about every day? For the sake of letting anonymous users edit, some incompetent admins keep unprotecting the RuneScape article, and opening the article to floods of anonymous vandals. Why don't those admins understand that the semi-protection is there to prevent tons of vandalism to the article; that when it's semi-protected, there is hardly any vandalism, and the registered users who really wish to contribute can do so in peace without running into hundreds of childish vandals who don't bother to register to vandalize? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 02:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I do in fact realize the difference between the three. I'm not retarted just because I don't have a username. In fact, sometimes I think I see more than you registered types do because of that. You may have decided to register before editing, but Wikipedia would die if it wasn't for anons. No one would register and no one would edit. I know I never would have touched a single page because I would have thought that there was some catch involved. Some kind of string attatched that would eventually cost me money. Without anons, Wikipedia is just another encyclopedia. End of story. 69.145.123.171 Hello! Sunday, August 13, 2006, 04:38 (UTC)
Oh, and by the way: those that want to vandalise will. Registering won't stop them. --172.193.206.104 04:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

School IP[edit]

Your school IP is an open proxy and is vulnerable to being used as a zombie computer. As such, I has to be permanently blocked. Oh yes, please use {{unblock}} to get yourself unblocked if your IP gets blocked. Thanks. If you need help just ask me.--Tdxiang 09:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)