User talk:Frontiersanders

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Frontiersanders, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Fiddle Faddle 16:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Frontiersanders, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Hi Frontiersanders! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Technical 13 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:40, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delinking Telexfree[edit]

I would say you are 80% complete with the task of delinking. There remain some items that are at least double linked (directors, for example), and you might consider whether these people are of sufficient notability to have red links anyway for their first instance. If they would qualify for an article at some point then they are, if not, then not. I have no opinion on their inherent notability, this is for others, you, to consider.

Anywhere there is an inline link to a web site, please consider how to handle that differently. If Fred is a director of XCorp, use an XCorp page as a reference to Fred's directorship, even if it is a primary source, provided it does confirm Fred's status. Consider applying {{Primary-source-inline}} yourself after the closing </ref> tag. This guides others to the need to improve referencing.

The idea is to link to all relevant things, but only to relevant things, and to make the reader's journey easier through the article.

Even though I normally reply in my own talk page I felt you would find a reply here easier to discover. Fiddle Faddle 09:42, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your input, I'm still learning how to edit with this open source template. But I think I can handle the "directors" overlinking. When I'm done with this, can I be the one to remove the "issue notice" or that is done by someone else?--Frontiersanders (talk) 09:54, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are very few templates we may not remove ourselves. They tend to be restricted to deletion templates, and some of those anyone may remove with sufficient justification, too. When you are truly satisfied then you may remove it. Other editors may have different views. WHat I can tell you is that I will leave this to you entirely. I have no intention of further participation in the article. So do your very best job and recognise that even our best job is capable of improvement, often by ourselves, often by others. Fiddle Faddle 13:04, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the help and info!--Frontiersanders (talk) 06:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 06:53, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan[edit]

Orphan applies to other articles not linking to that article. It is not the measure of how much goes out, but how much goes in. The article is essentially isolated with no incoming links. That's all. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 07:00, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand it now! Sorry, I'm new to wikipedia. I'll see how I can work on it. Thanks!--Frontiersanders (talk) 07:03, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Comparing telexfree and badminton tournament logos.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Comparing telexfree and badminton tournament logos.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Fiddle Faddle 11:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I had to nominate this for deletion. I think you will see why after you read WP:SYNTH. There is a lot to learn here, and we can't help folk learn it much faster than we do. Fiddle Faddle 11:40, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm at this moment writing in the discussion about it. Please wait for me to finish formatting the paragraphs... :)--Frontiersanders (talk) 11:54, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Never a problem. As I am sure you know, we have to be wholly precise. I formatted your element there so we can all see the references. What I will do now is to allow the discussion to run its course. It needs wiser eyes than mine. Fiddle Faddle 12:11, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I actually didn't even know I could edit the description of the image after uploading. I still have lots to learn over here. We all wikipedians appreciate your thoroughfulness, which helps us improve this encyclopaedia!--Frontiersanders (talk) 12:27, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see I think there is still a discussion to be held, but that discussion has changed character. Note, please, that on the file's page you have not justified its use on each of the articles. Each claim of fair use must be a separate claim, even if it duplicates most of the other one(s) present. You will need to add that rationale. I suggest duplicating and editing that which is already present. Without that the image does fail our Fair Use criteria. Isn;t there a lot to learn? It's like having a job. Fiddle Faddle 12:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand well what you meant, I think I did that. Lets see if it's enough.--Frontiersanders (talk) 13:30, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strange as it may seem, this is what the rules say is required. Yes, you have achieved it. I have made a minor tidying edit. Fiddle Faddle 14:54, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]