|Editing of this page by new or unregistered users is currently disabled.
See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you cannot edit this page and you wish to make a change, you can request unprotection, log in, or create an account.
A barnstar for you!
|The Graphic Designer's Barnstar|
|Thank you for setting the foundations in aiding me for improving the page Kuwait Astronomical Society! Exximos (talk) 20:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)|
Hi, are you sure it is appropriate to make an article with the stage name as title and make the real name a redirect to that article, instead of the other way around? So you have actually an article about a name and not a person, but the article contains all the information about the person. Sounds wrong to me. Wouldn't it be better to use 'Leah Smith' as title? When I created the article about Raising Appalachia I was thinking hard and long if there is enough info about the sisters (especially Leah, as she sings also solo) outside of the Raising Appalachia group for an individual article. Unfortunately I didn't think so and there is little new info apart from the Raising Appalachia connection.
I also have to ask you, where you see the advantage of linking inline references first to an extra Note section and than from there to the Reference section (using sfn) instead if directly from the inline ref numbers to the references (using ref)??? Seems to me this wastes space on the page and makes it more complicated for readers to get to a reference. Isn't the sfn template mainly useful if one reference is used several times in an article (I might be wrong as I didn't know that template before and just quickly read it's description)? Optimale Gu 08:16, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, in this case, per WP:COMMONNAME. She actually goes by Leah Song in general, and the majority of articles about and I think all the interviews, the bio on her own site and pretty much everything refers to her as Song rather than Smith. Of course, with a last name like Smith it's hard to do a valid comparison using Google search. Skyerise (talk) 14:09, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- As for the citation style, the creator of the article gets to determine it (see WP:CITEVAR). I find that it is much, much easier to build an article from scratch using Harvard-style referencing. Sorry if it's not what you prefer. Skyerise (talk) 14:12, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Ada Lovelace archives
Hey Skyerise, I recently set up archiving for Talk:Ada Lovelace, but I didn't realize that using the monthly archiving system was going to create such a mess (lots of tiny archive pages instead of a few large archive pages). I was hoping to redo it with a simple sequential archive and then delete the monthly archives. What do you think? Kaldari (talk) 21:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
- I think monthly is fine. They are searchable, right? So people can find what they are looking for regardless of the structure. It doesn't look like you are an admin on EN so it creates a lot of deletion work. If I'm mistaken and you can do the deletions yourself, then I guess go ahead, but I don't see the problem....
- As for reason I am not an admin? I have received a lot of harassment from IP editors. I mean a lot. Don't really want to have a higher profile as it attracts more attention and I'd probably get in trouble for just stomping any such IP harassers with tools rather than following process. Have no patience for them and think we shouldn't even allow IP editing. Skyerise (talk) 21:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
- That's sad to hear, but not surprising. If you experience more harassment, you may want to consider emailing someone on Wikipedia:Admins willing to make difficult blocks. If you don't know anyone on that list, I recommend User:FloNight. She's super helpful. Cheers! Kaldari (talk) 02:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, yeah, sometimes I do paid editing. Despite the fact that I am legit about creating cited, non-promotional articles, I don't expect I would be successful at an admin bid because of it, even if I wanted to be an admin. Skyerise (talk) 21:56, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello! A couple of weeks ago, you should have received an email from me with a link to a form to complete to receive access to RIPM. If you did not receive the email, please let me know. Otherwise, please complete this form as soon as possible so we can process your request. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, I did get the email. I'l complete the form tomorrow. Things suddenly got very busy and I wasn't able to attend to it, but they have calmed down... Skyerise (talk) 01:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)