User talk:Vsmith

Please note - rules of the game! I usually answer comments & questions on this page rather than on your talk (unless initiated there) to keep the conversation thread together. I am aware that some wikiers do things differently so let me know if you expect a reply on your page and maybe it'll happen :-)

fast facts

They are for people whodont have time to read the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.105.160 (talk) 04:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External link list of beaches

Although Onbeach.com is a commercial website, it also offers complete information of all the beaches in the Caribbean, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. This site offers information on the stucture of the sand, how clean the beaches are, what the facilities on and around the beaches are and whether or not the water is clear. The list of beaches on wikipedia is incomplete and doesn't offer as much information, or pictures for that matter, as onbeach.com does. Suus1982 (talk) 08:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you find a Wikipedia article to be incomplete or lacking, the proper course of action is to improve the article by adding appropriate content. So work to improve rather than by spamming with commercial external links, especially if you are associated with those sites. Thank you, Vsmith (talk) 10:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iguazu Falls external link

I've been despamming Iguazu Falls for some months now and have little tolerance for b.s. links, but I'm inclined to think the one you reverted today — [1] — doesn't qualify as spam. I'm not suggesting it be added again (it's not very well-written and provides no significant new information) but it has no advertising and is certainly legitimately on-topic. The ip of whoever added it has a bad history, but it looks like this edit was well-intentioned. Please forgive me if this seems like nitpicking; I just hate to see the term "spam" applied with too broad a brush. Rivertorch (talk) 21:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spam includes added ext. links with little additional info or relevance - usually added by anon in an attempt to increase their fav site's hit count or just pushing their site or their fav sites. Whether we call it spam or not, there was no reason to keep it per WP:EL. Broad-brushing away :-) Cheers. Vsmith (talk) 01:12, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I don't disagree with your removal of the link. Maybe I'm overcautious in my use of the word, but apparently I am not alone: WP:Spam, for instance, doesn't apply in this case. (As you noted, WP:EL does.) Anyway, it just seemed a tiny bit like crying wolf or something. Thanks for your good work here. Rivertorch (talk) 03:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

generating content box

Hi I could not figure out how to generate content box at the top which most wiki sites seems to have like the one you have at the top in this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabs003 (talk • contribs) 04:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A table of contents is automatically generated by Wikipedia when more than three section headers are present - see WP:TOC.

Vsmith (talk) 10:36, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the editing and also the links Rabin (talk) 02:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Galápagos Islands task force

Hi Vsmith. In view of your significant contributions to the article Galápagos Islands, I thought that you might be interested in visiting the new task force, Galápagos Islands task force. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 21:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Busy

Currently busy w/ tornado damage recovery - back to it later. Vsmith (talk) 19:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK - not so busy now. Vsmith (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the help. How long have you been on here? Also, does it matter if I'm young? ~Becca -aka Nerdy and proud- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerdy and proud (talk • contribs) 22:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Been playing here since July '04. Age doesn't matter - just be sure to add verifiable content and cite your sources. Cheers - Vsmith (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for tackling GET

Thanks for your continuing work on the Expanding/Growing Earth pages. I knew that there were serious POV issues that really needed to be handled there, but it wasn't my area of expertise. The only thing I know about it is that the question of where the new matter comes from has not been satisfactorily answered IMHO and I've seen more than a few geologists' opinions on the issue in different fora on the 'net. I feel much better knowing an expert of geology and wiki is keeping an eye on things.

Thanks again :) Aunt Entropy (talk) 23:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are we havin' fun yet? Hey, easy on that expert stuff - might go to my head :-) Keep watching, I expect howls of objection soon. Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 23:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whole-Earth decompression dynamics

Kindly describe your basis for nominating "Whole-Earth decompression dynamics" for deletion.````

Archives