User talk:Mz7

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to my talk page. You can contact me here.

Replies: Sometimes, I will reply on your talk page; if I do this, I will link the diff to my reply here. However, sometimes, in order to keep the discussion in one place, I will reply here, and I'll use either {{ping}} or {{talkback}} or both to inform you of the reply.

Looking for your message? Most talk pages on Wikipedia are organized in chronological order, meaning newer messages will appear at the bottom of the page. I archive my talk page periodically. When messages are archived, you can find them in the archive box to the right. If you want to restart the discussion, don't do so on the archive page; instead, start a new thread here.

Click here to start a new message

Crystal Clear app clock.svg It is approximately 4:39 PM where this user lives. (Eastern Time Zone)


A big problem[edit]

Since I'm still a bit lost here, and you really know your way around all this stuff, I figured I'd see what your thoughts are on this.

There's a user that has really gotten my dander up. I rewrote an entire plot of an article the best way I knew how. It took 45 minutes, and then I see it completely removed for the reason that it "wasn't succinct". I went to the user who removed my edit, said it took "blood, sweat, and tears" to make, and that it would have been easier on me if they'd just removed the passages that bothered them instead of the entire edit, so I asked him what part of it he found too long-winded. Now, when I made the edit I had a problem with my log in, (I think the password was entered wrong or something, so my post appeared as an IP.) Instead of answering my question, this user yelled at me for saying "blood, sweat and tears" and for posting as an IP. I told him I didn't do that on purpose, and that "blood, sweat and tears," was not exaggerating, that it just meant it wasn't a minor edit. I told him I didn't want to make waves with him. He spoke as if he took "blood, sweat and tears" literally, he told me "you should know how to log in by now" and he said he refused to say anything more to me, and justified this by saying "[it's] due to comments you've made to other users." I have never been blocked for any comments I've made to other users. I'm now left with two questions. 1) Should I just revert the page to my version since this user refuses to speak to me? And 2) isn't this user violating some sort of civility policy or something? Thank you. - CharlieBrown25 (talk) 01:47, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello User:CharlieBrown25. I do not typically insert myself into content disputes where I am not involved, so I would rather give you advice on general principles as an outsider than take sides or otherwise engage myself in the dispute. I know it can be frustrating to see a good amount of your time you volunteered to Wikipedia be undone by one click of another user's button—trust me when I say it's happened to all of us (including me) at least once, and I've witnessed it many times. I like the way Wikipedia:Five pillars describes it: "Since all editors freely license their work to the public, no editor owns an article and any contributions can and will be mercilessly edited and redistributed" (emphasis is mine). Other editors and especially our readers don't typically care how much time we volunteer, only that what we contribute is up to standard and in line with our policies and guidelines. Be prepared to accept this.
I strongly advise against just reverting the page to your preferred version. Doing so leads to edit warring, which is highly disruptive. Instead, talk with the other editor or to other contributors to the article on that article's talk page. I would also advise being cautious about accusing the other editing of incivility (like you did with this edit)—it can sometimes be taken as a personal attack. Remember, "comment on content, not on the contributor," and assume good faith. Being frank or straightforward about an issue is not necessarily uncivil. While there's no policy against logging out to edit, I would probably make sure you're logged in for all your Wikipedia editing to avoid confusion like what happened. If the user is refusing to talk to you, try apologizing for what they thought you did. I took a quick look at your contribution history, and I think the best way forward is to try rewriting the plot again, but this time with a goal of making it shorter, not longer. Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 02:38, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
You're one of the few people I've come across who definitely has much good sense. It's a breath of fresh air. It's certainly nice to hear someone say "best of luck".
Frankly, I'm not sure what they think I did wrong, they chastised me for using a metaphor, said I ought to know how to log in, and are refused to talk to me on the basis of previous posts to other editors. Since I haven't been blocked for any comment I've ever made, I don't even know what I'm apologizing for. - CharlieBrown25 (talk) 05:05, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
@CharlieBrown25: I'm sorry for the delay in responding. I took a look at the discussion you had with MarnetteD, and what I think they want to see is a plot that is shorter in length. The current length of the plot section for Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer (TV special) is unproportionately large in comparison to the other sections of the article, so what you need to do is rewrite the plot, but cut out details that aren't absolutely necessary for an overall understanding of the basic plot of the story. The edit you originally made actually increased the length of the plot, hence why they wanted you to make it more "succinct". With regards to the other conflict, I'm pretty sure it's because you said "Let's keep this civil," implying that their comment wasn't civil. Remember what I said: be cautious about accusing other editors of incivility, as doing so is sometimes taken as an argument against the person and not the actual issue, and that can lead to understandable bitterness. Just because an editor disagrees with you frankly doesn't mean they are not respecting you (and accusing them of not respecting you certainly won't make them respect you more). In any case, I think they have all moved on, so I would move on past the conflict too. I would encourage you to go ahead and try to WP:BOLDly rewrite the plot again (keeping in mind the idea of cutting out unnecessary details). If it gets reverted again, that's when you want to reattempt discussion—see Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Mz7 (talk) 03:05, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
A pleasure as always speaking with you. I think I speak for Czar, and probably others when I say: I hereby award you the unofficial imaginary "King Solomon of Wikipedia" award, for outstanding wikipedia wisdom.
And I'll certainly take your paradoxical advice to remove the passage that your my favorite user on wikipedia, thereby affirming that your my favorite user, sort of defeating the purpose, but at the same time... Oh, My head's spinning! Thanks for the help – CharlieBrown25 (talk) 01:32, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
@CharlieBrown25: If you think I'm your favorite user, just let me know personally. No need to advertise it as the first thing people see when they click on your username, is what I mean. Cheers, Mz7 (talk) 02:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

AfD Karel Martens[edit]

At the time when you first left that message on my talk page I was in the middle of doing something else, so I just added a short answer . Later I checked again, and found that you were absolutely correct about the "speedy" and the "relist" (I must have been very tired to close a relisted discussion as "speedy keep"). Thanks for pointing out my mistake, which enabled me to correct the closure statement. Kraxler (talk) 18:17, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

@Kraxler: No, I totally understand. See you around, Mz7 (talk) 02:56, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

L.A. Noire (2011 video game)[edit]

That's what I intended, yes. I was bitten by the new interface for creating pages with the Visual Editor. Thanks for fixing my mistake. Diego (talk) 07:13, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Face-smile.svg You're welcome! Mz7 (talk) 03:37, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Help needed in editing...[edit]

Mz7

Please consider personally editing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Performance_fabrics

I urgently need help

Regards rajiv sharma 17:24, 22 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RAJIVVASUDEV (talkcontribs)

Hello RAJIVVASUDEV. I will shortly take a look at the draft and see what advice or help I can give. —Mz7 (talk) 19:26, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Thankyou so much for the help and acceptance[edit]

I sincerely thankyou for all the help.I will keep on improving the article and make it more informative and useful for the readers. thanks again rajiv sharma 03:38, 23 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RAJIVVASUDEV (talkcontribs)

need your help to guide to put citations and picture gallery in Performance fabrics[edit]

Dear Mz7, Greetings of the day! i sincerely thanks for helping me in the earlier case as this is mine first article i need your guidelines to put citations and picture gallery so that Performance fabric would be more informative and educative page for the textile industry. i have added some external links please check if they are ok? believe me this is the newest concept in textiles and this page can create awareness to the students and industry. thanks in anticipation. rajiv sharma 06:16, 24 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RAJIVVASUDEV (talkcontribs)

Hi again, RAJIVVASUDEV. I would really recommend giving the page Help:Referencing for beginners a read—it has a lot of great information about how to add formatted citations to your article. Watch the videos there if you can. One thing I've noticed is that you add references in <ref> tags, but you pile all of them up at the bottom of the page. The <ref> tags are actually supposed to indicate inline citations, or citations that appears in the body of the text. As such, the <ref> tags need to be in the actual body of the article, not listed at the bottom. See how I've done it in the "Characteristics" section of the performance fabric article.
With regards to adding a picture gallery, I would first make sure you understand the Wikipedia policy on pictures. One of our five pillars is that "Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute." As such, we strongly prefer images that are freely distributable, meaning we take copyrights very seriously. We want pictures that are either 1) made available under an acceptable free license or 2) in the public domain (free of copyright restriction). If you find an image on the Wikimedia Commons, then the image will almost always be permissible for use on Wikipedia. On occasion, Wikipedia does allow fully copyrighted images to be displayed, but this is generally done only for things like corporate logos on article about the company they represent, or an image of a fictional character on an article about that character.
The full policy for the use of images in general can be read at Wikipedia:Image use policy, for non-free content see Wikipedia:Non-free content. If you need help adding an image that is already uploaded to Wikipedia, check out our picture tutorial. If you need help uploading an image that isn't already on Wikipedia, I recommend our File Upload Wizard. Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 18:02, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

thanks for the guidelines[edit]

Dear Sir, Good morning to you thanks for the prompt reply and the guidelines,i will follow the same. warm regards rajiv sharma 02:27, 25 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RAJIVVASUDEV (talkcontribs)

As per guidelines citation is done for Performance fabrics[edit]

Dear Mz7, Good Morning to you! thanks for your encouragement and guiding me.i have done citation as required. May i ask you to spare some time and confirm if they are ok? Please GUIDE HOW I CAN IMPROVE THE SAME FURTHER. Thanks rajiv sharma 06:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RAJIVVASUDEV (talkcontribs)

RAJIVVASUDEV, thanks for adding references, but you need to watch your tone when you write encyclopedia articles. The purpose is to inform the reader about the details of performance fabrics—it is not to try to persuade them to buy performance fabrics or change their opinion of them or something. Avoid asking rhetorical questions and avoid using second-person pronouns such as "you". Doing so is contrary to the formal, businesslike tone on Wikipedia, and it makes the article sound more like a personal essay than an encyclopedia entry. Also, I might add that we generally prefer secondary sources—such as news or magazine articles, books—and discourage the excessive use of primary sources. Mz7 (talk) 19:51, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

i will definitely follow the same[edit]

Dear Sir, This is first time i am trying to write a full article that is why i am doing and asking everytime for the corrections from you. appreciate your patience and bearing with me. i shall definitely follow the instructions and corrections. GOOd Day thanks and regards rajiv sharma 03:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

@RAJIVVASUDEV: I totally understand. Just to let you know, school has started for me, so I might not be as active as I have been. If you need further help, try asking a question at the Teahouse—it's a friendly place for newer editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. I help out over there once in a while. You will probably actually receive a wider range of input than what I've been giving you. However, you are always free to talk to me directly here if you wish. Don't forget to properly sign your posts on Wikipedia discussion pages (such as this one)—to do so, type four tildes (~~~~) after your message. A signature should include at least a link to your own user talk page, for ease of access, and the time and date. Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 03:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Hmm. Since you've been adding a timestamp after your message, it leads me to wonder whether you've unwittingly customized your signature without adding a link to your user talk page. If you have gone through your preferences and modified your signature, make sure to uncheck the box that says "treat the above as wiki markup" or add a link in the customized signature to your talk page in wiki markup. See Help:Cheatsheet for help on wiki markup, if you need it. Mz7 (talk) 03:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

thanks for your contribs...[edit]

Dear Editor, my sincere thanks for your contribution to get my article better. best regards Rajiv Sharma (talk) 14:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

@RAJIVVASUDEV: Face-smile.svg You're welcome! Mz7 (talk) 02:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar

Thank you for your contributions to the Performance fabrics page! P.S Can you spare some more time editing the page ,Also, you are a wonderful editor ! Themessengerofknowledge (talk) 15:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Rajiv Sharma (talk) 16:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

@Themessengerofknowledge: You're welcome, and thanks a lot for the barnstar! I'll see what I can do, but as said above, I'm starting to get a little busy with the school year starting. Mz7 (talk) 02:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

How to delete an article?[edit]

How do you delete an article? Just want that one article deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomebroboy1 (talkcontribs) 20:22, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello Awesomebroboy1. Normally, when the author of a page requests deletion of an article—either explicitly or by removing all of the content the page—an administrator will speedily delete the page under section G7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. However, this is only done when you, as the author, are the only contributor of the all substantial content in the article. Unfortunately, another editor, The sigman (talk · contribs), has also contributed significantly to the page, so we also need his OK as well in order to qualify for speedy deletion. This is done because the other authors might not want the article deleted as you do. Other deletion processes exist, however; another editor has proposed the article for deletion under the proposed deletion process. If no other editor objects to deletion in 7 days, the article will be deleted. If you have any further questions feel free to ask me again, or consider asking at the Teahouse, which is a friendly environment for questions about Wikipedia. Regards, Mz7 (talk) 20:36, 4 September 2015 (UTC)