Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Tutorial (historical)/Talk pages: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 70: Line 70:


:::I comment your comment. [[User:Bigdawgs9|bigdawgs9]] 00:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:::I comment your comment. [[User:Bigdawgs9|bigdawgs9]] 00:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

:::::Comment [[User:ImranRamji|ImranRamji]] 01:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


== Annotation ==
== Annotation ==

Revision as of 01:01, 2 October 2007

This page is currently under construction.

Trying a sample discussion: "an example of a well-formatted discussion" seems as neither a source nor a result.

I'm not sure that it is good to put (not source) identations with source bullet points (at the same line). Possibly it would be better to write it like this:

: # [[Wikipedia:User page|ElefantLuvr]] 01:22, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Or like this:

  1. ElefantLuvr 01:22, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

--New user, Vikasatkin 15:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC) -- New user, Zerrot 18:42, 13 August 2007 (PST)[reply]

I don't believe it! 66.131.107.160 01:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • lies
  1. republican
  2. democratic

Overall, these tutorials seem pretty good to me. --Eddiehu 23:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try that date stamp again! --Eddiehu 23:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Third time's the charm --Eddiehu 23:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

here we go again --Eddiehu 23:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PST or bust! --Eddiehu 23:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but what does PST mean? Pacific Std Time? UKoch 14:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, this is almost programming! BTLOMS 09:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with myself for the following reasons: 09:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

  1. I'm usually correct
  2. I think I'm usually correct
  3. I may be usually correct
  4. I could possibly be correct
  5. Yeah
    1. ?
    2. ...
      1. ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by JBrenn (talkcontribs) 05:51, August 30, 2007 (UTC) The preceding msg was posted by Autobot without my express written consent JBrenn 05:56, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well sir, I think you are never correct and I have this and this to show you Nribeiro 00:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder how much it will rain this month Ekross 16:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indenting

Good for the following reasons
  1. helps with clarity
  • easy to read
  • better understanding
  1. Visually pleasing
  2. Makes Wikipedia better! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.19.195.78 (talk) 18:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second discussion

I will now talk with myself.--Cube lurker 21:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I will not.--Cube lurker 21:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am here briefly but not for long Ideologeme 08:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will go soon Ideologeme 08:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck! ~user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 16:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
VERY VERY good luck 143.166.226.43 20:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get it 22:40, 7 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.244.236.58 (talk)

Interesting, very interesting indeed 66.217.176.6 05:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also want to comment something 194.121.90.163 08:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting —Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.133.0.14 (talk) 10:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, you say? Well, if you say so [1]--BrendanJWood 00:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree; this is enormously interesting. Maybe. I'm not positive. (Paixpirate 23:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I comment your comment. bigdawgs9 00:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ImranRamji 01:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Annotation

Don't mean to intrude, but these are terribly wrong:

  • translation
  • second translation
  • third translation
    • third and a half translation

Shouldn't it be made better and better by us? Rudzielec 13:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It should certainly be

Gill.premdeep 06:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Sabrage 10:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think I think, Therefore I might possibly be.--Chrismclegless 15:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

huh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.212.225.205 (talk) 19:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think i will forget to indent

I know how to indent now
but i will probably forget later Vins0131 03:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is fun Awesome and beyond58.165.60.3 09:55, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi t —Preceding unsigned comment added by SNVURDAK SERVAI (talkcontribs) 18:57, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indenting

First Example
Second
Third


indenting is useful
  1. as is numbering (ImranRamji)

Numbering and Bullets

  1. This is my example
  2. I am creating an example:
  • as practice
  • for a class assignment
    1. for class credit


Japonte08 22:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]