Jump to content

User talk:Exuwon: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Cppcheck: new section
Line 110: Line 110:


Hi. As requested, I've restored the article. You can find it at [[User:Exuwon/Cppcheck]]. When the software becomes notable, feel free to move it back from [[User:Exuwon/Cppcheck]] to [[Cppcheck]]. —&nbsp;[[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 04:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. As requested, I've restored the article. You can find it at [[User:Exuwon/Cppcheck]]. When the software becomes notable, feel free to move it back from [[User:Exuwon/Cppcheck]] to [[Cppcheck]]. —&nbsp;[[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 04:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

== Use of templates for [[Planck units]] and such... ==


Hi Exuwon,

I realize that these are good faith edits, but when you changed the Planck units table in [[Natural units]] to the template, it affected the appearance of the article in a way that decreased consistency of format.

I am certainly not opposed to putting common information into templates and making use of the templates, but not at the expense of making the articles look worse. Then what's the point? If you can somehow use these templates in such a way that they do not compromize article quality, feel free. But don't make use of a tool, just because that tool exists, unless such use '''improves''' articles. [[Special:Contributions/64.223.106.185|64.223.106.185]] ([[User talk:64.223.106.185|talk]]) 16:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:50, 29 April 2010

Welcome temp

Hello Exuwon! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. The tips below should help you to get started. Best of luck! — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 13:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it isn't your lucky day cause this isn't a picture of me.
  • You don't need to read anything - anybody can edit; just go to an article and edit it. Be Bold, but please don't put silly stuff in - it will be removed very quickly, and will annoy people.
  • Ask for help. Talk to us live, or edit this page, put {{helpme}} and describe what help you need. Someone will reply very quickly - usually within a few minutes.
  • Edit existing articles, before you make your own. Look at some subjects that you know about, and see if you can make them a bit better. For example, Wikipedia:Cleanup#2009.
  • When you're ready, read about Your first article. It should be about something well-known, and it will need references.

Good luck with editing; please drop me a line some time on my own talk page.

If you are interested in Ukraine-related themes, you may want to check out the Ukraine Portal , particularly the Portal:Ukraine/New article announcements and Portal:Ukraine/Ukraine-related Wikipedia notice board. The New article announcements board is probably the most important and the most attended one. Please don't forget to announce there the new articles you create. Adding both boards to your watchlist is probably a good idea. You can also join WikiProject Ukraine, a tool to help perfect the Ukrainian related articles on the English Wikipedia. We would be glad to have you as a member of WikiProject Ukraine!


Want to know more?

I think it could be handy for you to browse through some of the links below so as to become more familiar with how Wikipedia works. If you need any help you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and another Wikipedian will show up shortly. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you're already loving Wikipedia and plan on becoming a Wikipedian you might consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor, just paste {{Adoptme}} into your userpage and you will gladly be adopted! You might also consider joining a WikiProject so as to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field.
Happy editing and once again, welcome to the fantastic world of Wikipedia!

Basics
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

The article Cppcheck has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unfinished software with no assertion of notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  Blanchardb -MeMyEarsMyMouth- timed 05:19, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cppcheck

Hi. As requested, I've restored the article. You can find it at User:Exuwon/Cppcheck. When the software becomes notable, feel free to move it back from User:Exuwon/Cppcheck to Cppcheck. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Use of templates for Planck units and such...

Hi Exuwon,

I realize that these are good faith edits, but when you changed the Planck units table in Natural units to the template, it affected the appearance of the article in a way that decreased consistency of format.

I am certainly not opposed to putting common information into templates and making use of the templates, but not at the expense of making the articles look worse. Then what's the point? If you can somehow use these templates in such a way that they do not compromize article quality, feel free. But don't make use of a tool, just because that tool exists, unless such use improves articles. 64.223.106.185 (talk) 16:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]