User talk:Boab

How to...

A source with two authors can be cited like this:

<ref name="HuttonWaspshott_1994">{{harvnb|Hutton|Waspshott|1994}}.</nowiki> results in:
Hutton & Waspshott 1994.

The same format can also be used for three authors etc.:

<ref name="HuttonWaspshottGreen_1994">{{harvnb|Hutton|Waspshott|Green|1994}}.</ref> results in:
Hutton, Waspshott & Green 1994.

When referring to a specific passage, then a page number needs to be provided:

<ref name="HuttonWaspshott_1994_45">{{harvnb|Hutton|Waspshott|1994|p=45}}.</ref> results in:
Hutton & Waspshott 1994, p. 45.

Or to a page range:

<ref name="HuttonWaspshott_1994_45_50">{{harvnb|Hutton|Waspshott|1994|pp=45-50}}.</ref> results in:
Hutton & Waspshott 1994, pp. 45-50.

Or to several different pages that each back up what is being cited:

<ref name="HuttonWaspshott_1994_10_12_14">{{harvnb|Hutton|Waspshott|1994|pp=10,12,14}}.</ref> results in:
Hutton & Waspshott 1994, pp. 10,12,14.

Or to a whole chapter:

<ref name="HuttonWaspshott_1994_ch3">{{harvnb|Hutton|Waspshott|1994|loc=chap. 3}}.</ref> results in:
Hutton & Waspshott 1994, chap. 3.

Or to a picture:

<ref name="HuttonWaspshott_1994_plX">{{harvnb|Hutton|Waspshott|1994|loc=plate X}}.</ref> results in:
Hutton & Waspshott 1994, plate X.

Other things you might wish to keep in mind are:

There should be no whitespace between the preceding word and the <ref ...>
The citation ends with a '.'
The name= attribute in the <ref ...> tag denotes the name of the reference; it does not summarize the context in which the reference appears. All <ref>s that refer to the same citation must have the same name= otherwise the article will end up with duplicate or triplicate references to the same work.
Not a policy on WP, but something you might wish to follow anyway (because it is standard academic practice), for electronic sources that have no page/para numbers, count and then cite the number of the paragraph in which the passage/statement being referred to appears.

I hope that helps. -- 09:59, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Freddie Mercury. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. Gscshoyru 20:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Freddie Mercury. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Gscshoyru 21:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Freddie Mercury. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Citing sources does not support "generally disliked," ok? You need someone who's made that analysis, and cite it to say it. Gscshoyru 21:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freddie Mercury

Hi there! I see you've done most of the great edits to the Freddie Mercury article. Great job! However, I have noticed two citation needed spots...do you know of any good sources to research to cite those two statements? I really don't want to see the article fail the GA criteria over those two statements. Regards, FamicomJL 02:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Passed Freddie Mercury into Good article status. Good work! SriMesh | talk 04:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freddie Mercury's GA passing

Hey there! Good work on getting the Freddie Mercury article to pass. Here's a userbox proclaiming your contributions to the article. You can proudly wear it on your userpage. :)

This user helped promote Freddie Mercury to good article status.

My regards! FamicomJL 21:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freddie

Thanks man. :) Yeah, I've been trying to watch it. The NPOV is going to be the biggest issue, so make sure to revert anything that sounds weaselish, or isn't backed by a reliable source. The article is pretty much Featured Article Candidate ready as we speak, but the one problem I see that could make it fail is people sneaking in junk... So just keep finding good sources, information, and more, and the article should be okay. :D Freddie is my favorite singer of all time (Love Queen as well...). FamicomJL 23:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply, I was away all day yesterday. We would have to find a non-copyrighted image. So that unfortunately means that the only two choices we have right now are ugly Freddie image #1 (The Germany one), and ugly Freddie image #2 (The one that is currently being used right now). And for the dates on references, they mean the bibliography section. Any articles that you found on the web, are ones where you have to add the date you retrived it. You can just add today's date for each one, that'll make it all easier. You also have to watch out for very hard to notice vandalism. Like when someone makes a VERY weasel-ish/peacock-ish term. I do very much heavily agree that the article is pretty much a Featured Article. In fact, all it needs is for the biblography section's internet articles to have the date they were retrieved, and it can easily pass. And even if people oppose the vote, they usually say why, and we can correct them as soon as we can, and they can maybe change their vote. Good luck man. :D FamicomJL 14:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FamicomJL, In that case, I will have to add some fake dates on there. It seems pretty dumb, but we should probably comply. Do you think that the bad picture will be an issue as well? I was hoping that maybe someone would come up with something. By the way, I am actually a girl. Everyone assumes that I am a dude, I guess since I am aggressive and rude. Freddie is also my favorite singer ever, and I am glad that we agree on the criticism issues. Thanks for monitoring the article over the last week or so as well. I was REALLY with some things. I noticed that they were trying to take out the "Controvesy with Rock Music Critics" thing yet again. We will have to be really careful about that. At one point, I did not notice that it had been deleted for about 1 month. Boab (talk) 00:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... Oops! I didn't know you replied on your own talk page! Sorry... I was wondering why I got no response. :P I feel dumb now. And I've noticed someone put up a new Freddie image. It's nice and all, but there's no copyright tag. Heck, I'm not even sure we're able to even add an image like that to the article, are we? I hope we can, the other two were just god-awful. And my apologies on the guy/girl thing. I tend to call everyone "man" and "dude", just my kind of cheap style. :P But that's cool. I've been still monitoring the Freddie article, reverting vandalism and such. I hope it can be a Featured Article soon. I think maybe like 5-10 more references would make it pass easily. Right now I'm sure it would pass, but you can never go wrong with tons of references, hmm? My regards, and apologies for not noticing that you replied on your own talk page instead of mine! FamicomJL (talk) 03:12, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Famicom! I agree with the idea that people seem to be impressed with lots of references, which is not always a great thing. Feel free to add whatever you want. I also love the beautiful photo that is up there now. Hopefully it can stay there without any of those copyright issues that I don't understand. The only other thing that I can think of for improvements would again be to add retrieval dates. Man, I do not want to go back and do that! Well, thanks for the help. Boab (talk) 04:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the current (And good image) of Freddie keeps getting deleted, and returning. If we can get a good fair use policy for that image, it could even stay. It's too bad no one took a good picture of Freddie, on their own, from a concert. Imagine how much easier it would be? Catch ya around! :D FamicomJL (talk) 23:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Since you have worked very hard on the Freddie Mercury page, I recommend that you vote about whether the nice image should be kept. Here is where you can vote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2008_January_21#Image:Piano_fm.png. I have read about the issue, and I personally see no problem with it whatsoever. I thought that you should have a say here as well. Boab (talk) 02:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have found a bit more of a decent alternative, that is MUCH easier on the eyes. We simply need to find the right copyright tags for the piano image, for it to be kept. The problem is, I don't know what tags are needed, and what fair use tags are to be applied. The one I linked to in the Freddie page can be uploaded over the current horrid one that keeps getting added back. It's still bad, but nicer than the other one. FamicomJL (talk) 05:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Freddie Mercury has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. · AndonicO ^Hail! 00:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. · AndonicO ^Hail! 00:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]