User talk:BhagyaMani/Archive 1

Hello BhagyaMani, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Happy editing! Nothing444 (talk) 14:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page
How you can help
Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Wiki Project Cats thanks you[edit]

Wiki Project Cats - well, me actually - would like to thank you for your recent diligent and persistent work on the Asian Golden Cat article. Not long ago, this was a scruffy little article with very little sourced information. Thanks to editors like you, it's coming along nicely. (And sooner or later, the Pardofelis/Catopuma issue will resolve itself.) Perhaps you'd consider joining Wiki Project Cats? In any event, thanks again. --Seduisant (talk) 20:37, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...[edit]

...for checking the ref on that claim about the himalayan wolf. I had been eying that for some time as suspicious and thought it should be checked. I'm interested in anything you have to say about the somewhat confusing situation of claims and counter-claims about this animal. Chrisrus (talk) 15:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...again for your contributions the article Himalayan Wolf.Chrisrus (talk) 16:53, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

""Chrisrus (talk) 23:08, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Useful material[edit]

You might find these useful:

Shyamal (talk) 07:09, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How wonderful !! Thanks a lot for these superb links, Shyamal !!!!! BhagyaMani (talk) 19:03, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Red panda[edit]

Thanks for all the work on this article. I just noticed that this edit changed the reflist from two-column to one. This change will not be visible in some browsers (IE and Opera don't know about columns yet), but most articles with this many references seem to use it (though I can't find a policy or recommendation on this). Did you change this on purpose? If so, I'd like to know the reasoning. If not, I will change it back to two columns (which will supposedly still go to a single column if the browser window is less than 30 em wide). Donlammers (talk) 12:23, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How nice of you to ask for my reasons : I check reflists, before I add any new source to see whether it is listed already. My screen doesn't show this long 2-column reflist completely without having to scroll forward to see all of the 1st column, and then backward and forward again to see the remaining entries of the 2nd column. So for me, a one-column list is more comfortable to overview. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 14:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, it's been a while since I worked with an article with refs scattered all over. Most of the articles I work on now I've converted to the refs being in the reflist, so I can scan through the edit box to see whether they are already there. I was about to propose switching this article when you started doing major editing, so I decided to wait. You can see a short article with this layout at Seattle Marine Aquarium. IMHO, it's not only easier to track refs, it's much easier to edit text without all that junk in the middle. Anyway, when someone is doing major edits is a bad time to make such changes. Donlammers (talk) 02:01, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead switching the article, if you still want to. In the articles I've started and in the stubs I've extended, I always used the References section to place the reflist template. Only in some articles I added a section Further reading or Literature for mostly books not cited, as in Chitwan National Park. Is it that what you meant ? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 15:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will. Right now I'm involved with some other stuff so it won't be immediate. Donlammers (talk) 01:42, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking[edit]

Please don't start edit warring, if you think I'm wrong then discuss it. Countries may be linked in many articles, but if you look at recent featured articles like Common Firecrest (lead and distribution sections), it is now good practice not to link continents and countries that are well known. Linking Europe is like linking table or country. If the article goes to GA or FA, the excessive links will probably be opposed anyway, thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]