|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
- 1 Link you reqested
- 2 Conservation
- 3 Writely
- 4 removing warnings
- 5 Would you please review my first entry?
- 6 Major changes to an article?
- 7 MyWikiBiz discussion
- 8 August Esperanza Newsletter
- 9 Sorry
- 10 Your Fish Articles ~ An award for your work!
- 11 heh
- 12 Hi there.
- 13 Thanks
- 14 Ideas, ideas
- 15 RE: *ahem* it's a fish, not a bird...
- 16 Your edit to List of WWE Championship reigns by length
- 17 Budgerigar image
- 18 Thanks...
- 19 thanks from KL
- 20 For you:
- 21 AWB
- 22 Thanks
- 23 Userbox move
- 24 AWB
- 25 Confused.
- 26 Bill Reyes
- 27 Police Brutality
- 28 Thank you!
- 29 September Esperanza Newsletter
- 30 Catholicism
- 31 AfD
- 32 Metadate
Link you reqested
Link to Tom Martino Critisism From Westword More Trouble for Trouble Shooter Tom Martino link http://www.westword.com/Issues/2006-06-01/news/message.html
thank you soo much for your welcome. it feels good to know that u have sum 1 to trun to. u also commented on tht conservation thing.....thnks for tht to. y cant all the other ppl as sweet as u! thnks again
Could I please get an invite to Writely?
-JG (James guss)
e-mail removed for privacy
- Sorry, I don't have any invites. I asked for one on the Science Reference Desk some time back when someone offered, but I don't have any to give at this point. --Ginkgo100 talk · contribs 00:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
I was recently reading your comments on a user's talk page to whom I had given a warning. You told him that removing warnings even once the discussion was over was illegal. I was wondering if I could remove it, since i gave it in the first place, because after a lengthy discussion the user has accepted my comments, completely redrafted his edit, made it not POV and thus enriched the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mikakasumov (talk • contribs) .
- Well, first of all, nothing is "illegal" on Wikipedia except for copyright violations and slander. It can be "bad Wikiquette" or, worse, against policy. The former can get you enemies; the latter can get you in trouble with admins. From my reading, removing warnings on one's own talk page is considered vandalism, and rightly so in my opinion, at least in general. You can read the links I posted on his talk page. As for your question, I'd say the warner can certainly remove a warning if the problem has been rectified, though I've no idea what policy might say on the issue. The issue is with people removing their own warnings, which is sort of like tearing up a traffic ticket -- the cop can do that, but not the speeder! --Ginkgo100 talk · contribs · e@ 20:18, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Would you please review my first entry?
When you have some time, would you take a look at my first Wikipedia article on Don Repella?
I'll be adding some more to it *if* I can get Don to give me some details, specifically his controversial work when he was a grad student at UC Boulder.
Thanks again for all the help :)
Coyotewrw 23:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- As a biography stub, I think it is a great effort. Good job with the image licensing. I made a few tweaks of my own. However, I do have one big concern. The article cites no source for the information presented there. WP:V and WP:OR require that nothing appear in Wikipedia unless it is first published elsewhere. I admit I didn't read the whole OpEdNews piece; if the biographical information is in there, you should list it as a reference rather than just an external link. Otherwise, try to find any published source (a newspaper, journal, university publication, even a brochure) to use as a source. See WP:CITE and WP:RS.
- I also have one smaller concern, which is that I am not sure what this sentence means: "In recent years his work can be seen in public venues as billboards and as blogs and happenings on the Internet." Do you mean that there are blogs discussing his work? That he illustrates blogs or designs their layout? Also, I have an additional question: in which galleries or art museums, if any, can his work be found?
- Please be aware, too, that some editors are more fussy than I am about article content. See WP:BIO. I strongly advise you to make sure the article includes enough information to pass these guidelines, because another editor may very well nominate the article for deletion. Also read WP:BLP closely, as this is official policy.
- Whew, I referred you to do a lot of reading! A biography of a living person may be the most difficult type of article to write, and you've made it your first project. It may seem daunting, but as you move around Wikipedia more you'll internalize a lot of it. Thanks again for your contributions. --Ginkgo100 talk · contribs · e@ 20:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Major changes to an article?
Thanks for the warm welcome! I looked through the various tutorials, FAQs and help articles. Maybe I'm not looking in the right place, but my specific question is the ettiquette for making significant additions/changes to an article. Should I post the proposed changes in the article's talk page? Should I modify one small section a week and wait for comments?
The goal is just to bring Northern Michigan University's article inline with other colleges in Wikipedia. I'm not planning to write brochure copy :) AnneStark 17:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- I looked up the history of Northern Michigan University and it doesn't appear there are any editors who have a significant number of recent contributions, so you probably won't be stepping on any toes. The specifics of Wikiquette aren't written in stone, but I would say it's okay to just go ahead and make the changes, citing sources, and briefly explain what you're doing and why on the talk page. --Ginkgo100 talk · contribs · e@ 18:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
August Esperanza Newsletter
Sorry about editing. I was just having fun and testing it out to see if it works. I will never do i again unless i have something to contribute —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk • contribs) .
That's okay. Since you removed at least some of your edits yourself, it did look like a "test" or experiment. In the future, you can do whatever you like in the sandbox. --Ginkgo100 talk · contribs · e@ 03:21, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Your Fish Articles ~ An award for your work!
|The Original Barnstar|
|I bestow this barnstar on Ginkgo100 for her wonderful articles about fish and her contributions to fish related articles. Great work! Jam01 07:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)|
I just checked out that Phil Goldstein book for an updated Denver grid section/page, but it looks like you beat me to it. Good job on it by way. Vertigo700 00:03, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I bought it some time ago, but just found it again while cleaning up for a yard sale. It won't be for sale, btw. Very good book. Feel free to add to the article. --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 03:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I do apologise for my immaturity, I just thought it would be funny to see something vulgar about my hometown on wikipedia. Having seen it come to fruition... it's not actually that funny.
- Not only not funny, it didn't last very long! You are welcome to contribute (meaningfully) to Wikipedia, though. Ask me if you have any questions! --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 23:01, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar. It was only a few maps, but thanks a lot. I plan on doing as many as i can. Cheers--chris_huh 23:25, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey, how's it goin' Ginkgo100? I had a couple ideas I wanted to bounce off another editor to see what they thought: you’re the editor. Here's what’s going on in my head:
First; I was looking at the Bill Ritter (politician) article a little while ago and thinking it was a little dull. You scored that good shot of Ritter at the CDC, and that's about all the color we've got. So, I stopped by Ritter's campaign site (http://www.ritterforgovernor.com) and found a great screenshot off KUSA of the latest poll numbers (drop by and take a look if you can). I thought maybe this might be worth uploading (if applicable; didn't check yet) and using in the Ritter article and Colorado gubernatorial election, 2006. What do you think?
In a related thought, I stumbled upon the video of the Ritter/Beauprez debates from Aug. 11 (Here's a link ). Other articles I've read have contained video, but this one might be a little to long (any thoughts?) and may not be material appropriate or applicable to upload onto Wikipedia.
Second, I'm going to plunge into a clean-up effort that looks a little challenging over at National Western Stock Show (take a look and you'll see what I mean). If you can, and you like what's one of my favorite events in Denver, drop by the article and help me out a little.
- I'll look over your post in a few days, but for right now I regret I am taking a short Wiki-break due to bronchitis. I actually logged on just to post this on my user page and saw I had new messages! When I feel a little better I'm sure all my Wiki-thusiasm will be back and I'll jump into the saddle again. --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 02:19, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well, fortunately bronchitis is a short-lived affliction, and I am already feeling better. I'm going to try to adapt the poll data into a Wiki table for Bill Ritter (politician) -- if I succeed I can put it on the other candidates' articles, too. And I'll check out the stock show article after that. Cheers! --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 19:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
RE: *ahem* it's a fish, not a bird...
Ha, ha. Thanks for fixing that and not being too hard on me with the edit summary! Trevor Saline 19:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for the disambig link. Sorry if that edit summary came across as critical; I didn't mean it that way -- it just brought a smile to my face. In a good way. --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 20:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Your edit to List of WWE Championship reigns by length
Thank you for experimenting with the page List of WWE Championship reigns by length on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. TJ Spyke 21:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Don't know how I missed this one... but I was clearly reverting vandalism, not causing it (diff). --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 22:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I think that is the best taxobox image uploaded so far! The quality of the photograph is excellent and it's a natural-colored bird. Thanks for finding it and posting it there. --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 19:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks - but I wish that I could take the credit for it. Someone else uploaded it and added it to the top of the article. I just saw the pic and thought "Hey! That looks cool!" and put it in the box... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box 00:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, I was just giving credit where it was due. =) --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 17:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thanks from KL
Hello Ginkgo100, Thanks for your help around my yesterday question about my contributions and anonym position. I am getting understand the system. Best regards from Kohlasz 06:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Ginkgo100. Lotsa axe grinders here with lotsa axes to grind. Me - I think it's fun. -Olompali
- I fixed all the links, so I am reverting back. Cheers! --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 04:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks... all I had to do was close AWB and reopen it. Silly me! --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 03:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm pretty much new to the idea of creating a new wiki entry. My attempt at it with Detroit-style_pizza just a fledgling attempt. I am more used to editing than creating a new entry. What would you suggest as a start to make my article better? KingMob 18:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- The short answer is, start with How to right a good article. Here's the long answer:
- First of all make sure you are familiar with the three Wikipedia content policies: neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research. Also read citing sources and reliable sources. That's a lot of reading, I know! But it's the foundation for quality editing. Also it's probably a good idea to read the notability guidelines. Although this is not policy, many editors treat it as such. (My opinion is here.)
- From that foundation, you can research your topic. Include information in paraphrase so you don't violate copyright, cite every fact you include, and don't upload any image unless it is covered by a free license.
- For some specific suggestions, you could go into the history of Detroit style pizza and its cultural importance, as well as describing it, how it is similar to other styles, how it is different, regional variations. It may be a challenging subject because everything has to be previously published, but news articles and local history books might be good sources.
- Good luck!
I had to revert an edit by Bill Reyes on seizure. Looking at his brief history, his other two edits have also required reverting. I see that you welcomed him and, from your history, you appear to be familiar with anti-vandalism procedure. I'm not that familiar with this area. I think Bill needs a gentle note to remind him what Wikipedia is for, and not for. It might appear more friendly if it came from you. Colin°Talk 08:17, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note. I checked his contributions and all three appear to be good faith edits, not true vandalism. I think he really does care about sexy coelocanths and seizure dog breeds. I believe some editors have a steeper "learning curve" than others when it comes to making quality edits. For now, since he seems to have stopped at three edits, I'm going to leave him alone and hope he reads the links in the welcome message, but you might want to keep an eye on his contribs to make sure he "gets it." We were all new once, after all! --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 21:40, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Update to message at User_talk:Atomaton#Thanks_for_help_on_police_brutality —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Atomaton (talk • contribs) 00:54, 17 September 2006.
Thank you for the smily you left on my talk page, I really appreciate it. Just when I needed it, thank you! (Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out how to get my signature in the template ;-)) Regards, Signaturebrendel 06:26, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I hoped it would begin to balance some of the vulgar things said toward you. By the way, the template only works right if you subst it. I cleaned it up. =) --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 13:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
September Esperanza Newsletter
What I added was completely true. nothing has been done to prevent further abuse. Haychooall 18:59, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
- First, on Wikipedia it is not enough that a statement, particularly on a controversial topic, be true; it must also be verified. Please cite your source. On contentious topics especially, additions like this should first be discussed on the talk page. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Second, I argue that the statement was not true; the American Conference of Catholic Bishops has done a lot of work to prevent further abuse. --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 19:44, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, as you participated in the RfC for American (ethnic group), I thought I'd let you know bout the AfD concerning that article. You can see my reasoning on the deletion page, the article is OR if expanded and features info that is already mentioned elsewhere. Just thought, I'd let you know :-) Regards, Signaturebrendel 20:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
I didn't know that it was under a different name..... --Pupster21 12:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)