Welcome!

Hello, Otterpops, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Welcome to the League of Copyeditors![edit]

Thanks for joining. Please see the project page for general instructions and announcements, including details of our February participation drive. Again, welcome! BuddingJournalist 03:06, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog

Templates[edit]

Citations[1]

Needs references
{{references|date=April 2024}}

Being copy edited
{{inuse}}

Needs proofread
remove {{copyedit}} tag and request proofread at Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors/proofreading and also (on bottom of Discussion Page)

==Copyedit==
{{WP:LoCE
|{{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}
|~~~~
}}

Needs translation at source material
{{tlx|translation|SOURCE}}
{{translation|SOURCE}}

Not worldwide view
{{globalize}}

Needs an expert
{{expert}}
{{Expert|date=March 2009}}

Discussion[edit]

add picture[edit]

I frankly doubt it adds much to the article, but if you really want it, add
[[Image:Einstein paper money.jpg|thumb|right|222px|A 5 [[Israeli pound]] note from 1968 with the portrait of Einstein.]]
ahead of the paragraph you want even with the top of the image. --teb728 23:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

a sandbox of your own[edit]

If you wanted a sandbox of your own which isn't either your user page or your talk page then you can make a subpage called Otterpops/Sandbox here: index.php?title=User:Otterpops/Sandbox&action=edit Random Passer-by 19:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

A redlink indicates only that noone has made an initial edit yet, at that page. Some editors never edit their userpage (meaning the link stays red), which confuses the hell out the rest of us! The best way to check someone's time here is click "user contributions" in the toolbox (bottom of sidebar), and then click "oldest", to see when they started and where/how often they tend to edit.

Yeah, getting mad doesnt help anyone; I'll point you towards yet another meta-essay, Wikipedia:The world will not end tomorrow, and warn you that I'm often as intrigued by the community here, as what they produce! (hence have read, and will tend to linkdrop, dozens of essays ;)

Relatedly, you mentioned above that you want to "get good at this, also faster". I'll just add a very gentle warning, that the more heavily you invest yourself in the site, the faster you'll discover Wikistress and need a Wikibreak! I've been reading and puttering here for a few hours a day, for over a year, and still only know the tip of the iceberg regarding styleguides/processes/etc.

As for the specific situation; well you certainly picked a complicated place to start! The best general advise is to follow the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution process, or if it becomes heated then the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. There are too many diffs for me to examine details, but my first instinct would be to listen to teb728, simply because s/he appears to be a longterm active editor, both at that article and elsewhere. I'd also look at any recently Featured articles, for examples to follow.

Hope that helps. --Quiddity 20:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Linkdrop, invented as i wrote it, meant to imply 'namedrop'. ;)

Many old-timers here will communicate in acronyms (for which we have Wikipedia:WTF? OMG! TMD TLA. ARG!!), and tend to only link to policies/guidelines/examples. Some people write linkless prose, others over-link almost every word, and still others will hide link targets with a pipe| for devious or contextual reasons. (That's mostly just in talkpages, where anyone can write however they prefer to. In articles we have Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)#Overlinking and underlinking: what's the best ratio? to refer to/argue over!) I try not to deluge anyone (especially newcomers) with links, and to only link to things that are actually worth reading.

As a contrast, some people send newcomers to Wikipedia:Starter toolset, which completely horrifies me! (it's out-of-date too, don't even try to make sense of it) --Quiddity 23:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome - great energy - pace[edit]

Hi Otterpops and (belated) welcome to WikiPedia. I greatly admire you energy in copy-editing but would respectfully suggests that you pace yourself a bit. It's not a great idea on a major article like Albert Einstein to do so many edits at once. None of us has anything like a monopoly of wisdom and doing c55 of the last 100 edits is, forgive me, overdoing it IMHO. It would also be good to use the talk page in a way that people can see what is happening, eg six entries entitled "Copyedit" give fellow-editors no idea what the entries are about :-). I hope you don't mind these comments: I made lots of mistakes when I started editing and we all learn from each other. Best wishes. NBeale 07:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Otterpops and thanks for your kind reply. Please may I reiterate. Since my message yesterday you have made a further c.55(!) edits on the Albert Einstein article!! Very few of them are flagged as "minor" and as a result it is almost impossible to see what is going on. Furthermore wholesale changes to the reference system should be done with consensus rather than "executive decision". I'm very sorry but I have reverted to yesterday's version. Please proceed by consensus and limit yourself to at most 10 edits per article per day. I have never seen anyone make so many edits on an article at one go and it makes it pretty well impossible to collaborate effectively with other Editors. More haste, less speed methinks. NBeale 07:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Einstein ethnic identity[edit]

Dear otterpops

The nazis said ,once upon the time, that only an arian or ethnic German could be a citizen of the third rich.Einstein, like many other prominent Jewish scienticts, was expelled from Germany since he wasnt an ethnic German. When you says "ethnic" you mean that it acctually was his historical origin-and it wasnt...In the same way, you wouldnt refer to any German citizen which is of a Turkish ancestry as an "ethnic German" I would ask you to understand that Jewishness is not only a matter of relligion , but it also an ethnic group as well -in any aspect you choose to test it :from history to biology.I deleted the "German" from the Albert Einstein ethnic clause -and I hope it will stay like that.--Gilisa 07:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-i need help[edit]

Dear otterpops, if you followd my last discussions i had with TEB728 on Einstein tallk page and on my comments to him (not only there but also in my tallk page and in his tallk page) you might get the impression that he is trying to shut we by using the Wikipedia rules as aweapon even where he have no good reason to do so. Yes, i had some mistakes when i used the "Caps" or when i used in a writing manner which could seem too personaly-but i admit it might look bad and so i stoped it.In my last comment on the tallk page of Einstein i wrote that the quastions that TEB728 used seem to me provoctive.TEB wrote me that he didnt understand my English , but it dosnt interfir him with blaming me again of beeing personal and puting a warning on my tallk page.To me it looks like a very dirty game against new user with limited English.I need your help on this-since it seems that TEB728 doing every thing he can to make me, at the end, beeing block from Wikipedia.if you can Help me or at least to bridge between as so i dont have to suffer from this treatment - i will be greatfull. Best --Gilisa 08:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dates[edit]

Lots of arguments, for years!

Basically, full dates should be linked: this allows a user to set their preferences (Special:Preferences Date and time) to display dates in their local format (March 19 2007, or 19 March 2007, etc) (nothing to do with the user's web-browser program. purely wiki). Per WP:DATES#Dates containing a month and a day. The developers are currently working on a way for this to work automagically (without the [[bracket]] links needed).

However, on a separate but related point, some editors like having every bare year linked, whilst others think this is overlinking and generally not contextually relevant. Hence the arguing. See WP:DATES#Partial dates and WP:CONTEXT#Dates (and hundreds of threads in the talkpage archives of each...)

Personally, I only ever link the full dates, and often unlink bare years (particularly if they're in the last few decades, as those are the most overlinked). You can do whatever you prefer (until someone starts arguing with you, at which point you need to find a rationale!) Ahem. --Quiddity 18:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assassins[edit]

Hi Otterpops, Thank you for your work on Albert Einstein. It must be a real relief to you to work on an article like Assassins that you can complete so quickly. Let me tell you so that you’ll know the next time you do a musical: The script of a musical is called the “book.” So Weidman is the author of the musical rather than a separate book. Also as explained here, Gilbert’s “idea” is only tenuously responsible for the result. I reverted you to correct this. (I hope you don’t mind my looking over your shoulder.) --teb728 00:28, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JChat[edit]

Thanks for responding so fast :) --Ashfire908 19:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Malorie Blackman[edit]

I'll reply to you on my talk page to keep the conversation in one place but this goes here. Thank you so much. Random Passer-by 15:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		Awarded for your transformative work on the articles about highly notable author Malorie Blackman. Random Passer-by 15:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with your move[edit]

I hope it all goes as smoothly as possible. Random Passer-by (talk) 17:04, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shiva articles[edit]

Namaste. I have begun a revamp of the article on Shiva and just noticed that you are working along similar lines on History_of_Evolution_of_Saivism. How can we best coordinate work on these two articles in parallel? Buddhipriya 22:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

League of Copyeditors roll call[edit]

Greetings from the League of Copyeditors. Your name is listed on our members page, but we are unsure how many of the people listed there are still active contributors to the League's activities. If you are still interested in participating in the work of the League, please follow the instructions at the members page to add your name to the active members list. Once you have done that, you might want to familiarise yourself with the new requests system, which has replaced the old /proofreading subpage. As the old system is now deprecated, the main efforts of the League should be to clear the substantial backlog which still exists there.
The League's services are in as high demand as ever, as evinced by the increasing backlog on our requests pages, both old and new. While FA and GA reviewers regularly praise the League's contributions to reviewed articles, we remain perennially understaffed. Fulfilling requests to polish the prose of Wikipedia's highest-profile articles is a way that editors can make a very noticeable difference to the appearance of the encyclopedia. On behalf of the League, if you do consider yourself to have left, I hope you will consider rejoining; if you consider yourself inactive, I hope you will consider returning to respond to just one request per week, or as many as you can manage. Merry Christmas and happy editing, The League of Copyeditors.

Melon‑Bot (STOP!) 18:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Albert Einstein[edit]

I noticed you have made a lot of contributions to the Albert Einstein article. I just submitted it to be a featured article again and I wanted to invite you to help me get it back up to FA status.--Kumioko (talk) 02:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]