# User talk:SidP

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 19:11, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

## Punctuation, HTML character entities

Before you do mass edits of punctuation and other style issues, please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style and its related articles. English style issues are a point of heated contention in Wikipedia's global audience, so we've spent tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands of people-hours crafting style policies that can accomodate the conflicting standards that exist not only between countries, but even between school systems and publishers within each country.

Specifically, please note that WP's policy on punctuation and quotes splits the difference between American and British usage by using "double quotes" for quoting, but placing punctuation outside the quotes unless it is actually part of the quoted text. Also, Wikipedia uses Unicode characters, so please don't use HTML character entities (like &ndash; and &mdash;) unless the character is not a common Unicode character. Edit windows have a convenient set of clickable Unicode characters below the Save/Preview/Show changes buttons to make text insertion easy. Thank you for your cooperation. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 10:21, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Jeff, thanks for the guidance. It's really the best way to learn these matters in Wikipedia (though less efficient for others). I must admit, however, that my misinformed activities regarding dashes is taken directly from Wikipedia's own style directives. As for comma placement, I am still not clear on what specifically I did that you refer to. Usually I keep the comma outside a quote that would not be a part of language (such as a title). Otherwise, I hardly ever make a correction on this issue because I know there are multiple accepted styles. Feel free to set me straight. Thanks again for your help. SidP 19:04, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Please forgive me for not citing the specific edit that caused me to comment. I normally include the links to make my points clear, but my failure this time, combined with your rapid editing, made it rather challenging to identify the article I had a problem with. I was thinking specifically of your otherwise excellent edit [1] to Firefly (TV series). The particular problems I saw were moving a comma inside a quoted phrase ("Earth that was"), and unnecessarily changing Unicode en-dashes (–) into their equivalent HTML character entities (&ndash;).
I also didn't provide specific links to the relevant policies, Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Quotation marks and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dashes). Taking another look at them, I can see the potential confusion with the dash policy at least, because it currently is somewhat unclear about the use of character entities. On the one hand, it says (in "Dashes and hyphens used on Wikipedia" to "use the HTML entity &mdash;, which the MediaWiki engine automatically converts into a numeric entity in the rendered HTML". On the other hand, in the intro section of the article, in bold, it says "Now that Wikipedia uses UTF-8, these can be entered directly into the article markup. To enter an em dash after your cursor, for instance, you can click the "—" link below the edit box". The confusion probably comes from someone adding the bold statement, once Wikipedia switched to UTF-8, without bothering to update the remaining text to reflect this change. (Worse, the first statement is now in error, as the MediaWiki engine now converts &ndash; to a UTF-8 character, not a numeric entity.) I've posted a note on the dash-policy talk page to ask that they update it. Again, I apologize for the lack of details. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 11:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

## Hello

Hello, I was just wiki-surfing and I came across some of your work. I noticed that you have 9,573 edits with 9,381 of those in the mainspace. Have you ever thought of being an admin?--Sallicio${\displaystyle \color {Red}\oplus }$ 05:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Basically, you would just clean up after others messes (e.g, deleting pages that don't fall within standards, maintaining the integrity of the site (providing guidance for newcomers, warnings of uncivil behavior, dealing with users that utilize sockpuppets or meat puppets, and (as a last resort) blocking those users for gross negligence of wiki-policies. It's not a promotion, per se, it just helps keep the site respectable. But be warned that the Request for Adminship (RfA) can be a lot like having people constantly throwing pebbles at you whilst you remain nice with a smile. Check out some of these RfA's. Let me know, and I will nominate you!--Sallicio${\displaystyle \color {Red}\oplus }$ 19:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem, whenever you would like "the mop" (as it is called), I will make the nomination! Cheers!--Sallicio${\displaystyle \color {Red}\oplus }$ 20:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

## Pizza Fusion

Thanks, I have no idea why I made it with quotation marks, and I couldn't figure out how to merge them.--Hawkian (talk) 17:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

## Dorothy Sloop

Hi, SidP. Just wanted to thank you for your edits to this page. It was one of the first pages I created, and I think it benefits from the changes you made. Thanks again. Zephyrnthesky (talk) 00:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

## You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron

I notice some of your templates on your user page, and I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever to Wikipedia, you may find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia.

Ikip (talk) 19:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

## Proposed deletion of The J. Peterman Company

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The J. Peterman Company, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

No evidence of importance or notability of subject.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the `{{dated prod}}` notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. magnius (talk) 13:23, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

## thanks for your input to IEPA

Earlypsychosis (talk) 19:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

my major interest and first article on early psychosis could do with a copy edit !! (see my user page user box re my deficits in spelling and copyediting). Let me know if I can do anything for you - maybe finding sources and referencing for science and health articles. cheers Earlypsychosis (talk) 22:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 The Copyeditor's Barnstar outstanding copy editing Earlypsychosis (talk) 04:06, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

## List of fraternities and sororities in the Philippines

All of the changes that you made to the page were fine, except for the correction of spelling of REGION. It really is mispelled that way. Go to http://iregister.sec.gov.ph/MainServlet , type in Sigma Alpha Epsilon for the Company Name and click the radio button for starts with the given phrase, and click search. I'm changing it back, and adding [sic]Naraht (talk) 18:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

My apologies if my message seemed harsh. My reason for explaining it exactly was not to indicate that you should at this point, but rather to show that I actually had a source, odd as it may be. Frankly, I'm happy that someone with an account more than two dozen edits actually edited the page. Most of those who edit it, don't bother to register and instead either add or pump up their Greek Letter Org. Could you take a look at the pages in the [[Category: Alpha Phi Omega]]?Naraht (talk) 01:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

## new page! case management (mental health)

can you look at this please Earlypsychosis (talk) 00:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

## this needs extensive copy editing !!

Hearing Voices Movement Earlypsychosis (talk) 01:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

## Clive Revill

I saw that you edited Clive Revill. He is a good actor and worthy of an article in WP. However, since he is an old man, I fear that the notability guidelines may preclude him. I am discussing on the Wikipedia talk:Notability (people) page about possible optional objective criteria. The usual subjective criteria would remain. However, if Clive Revill were ever threatened with deletion, having objective criteria may save him. After all, he is an old man whom young teenagers probably haven't heard of and wouldn't mind killing him off Wikipedia.

People familiar with Clive Revill's work know that he has been in many, many films and in theatre. If there were an optional objective criteria, say, noting that acting in more than 25 films is an optional criteria to establish notability, then Clive Revill would be assured its rightful place in this encyclopedia. What are your thoughts? User F203 (talk) 20:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

## Copyeditors barnstar

 The Copyeditor's Barnstar For some excellent copy-editing work! œ™ 03:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

## Glenn Beck

I saw that you changed some wikilinks of locations at the Glenn Beck page. Example Everett, Washington -> Everett, Washington. I was doing an FA and someone more familiar with the guideline said this was called "chain linking" and that it is called "chain linking" and the city is to be linked since it is more specific. It is a relatively minor tweak so I was wondering if you know if one of the tow of you were incorrect per the style guidelines or is it a preference thing? I couldn't find a rule one way r he other but see the merit in both.Cptnono (talk) 06:08, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Funny enough it came up on the help desk, too. Please see Wikipedia:Help desk#Guideline for location wikilinks if you have an answer. I assume this has come up before so hopefully a guideline saying one way or the other is available, Thanks.Cptnono (talk) 10:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

on the Barenaked Ladies page where record labels are listed I had added the word "Records" after "Desperation", as the record label is Desperation Records (http://www.last.fm/label/Desperation+Records). Am I missing something? :-) Ttwiv (talk) 05:53, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure why you're asking me about this, however, I viewed the sentences involved and rewrote them.--SidP (talk) 07:32, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

## Rufus May new page

if you have time, I could use your copy editing skills on this new page. thanks Earlypsychosis (talk) 09:41, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

thank you Earlypsychosis (talk) 04:34, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

## You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:09, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

## Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

• This permission does not give you any special status or authority
• Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
• You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
• If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 18:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

## Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was `true`. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to `false` in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

## Invitation to take part in a study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to Main Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 03:45, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

## Fair use rationale for File:Iceman lightwave.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Iceman lightwave.gif. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 15:17, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

## Chardon High School shooting

Thank you for your help on Chardon High School shooting. I had some issues with some of you edits, however. First of all it is not appropriate terms such as Chardon Healing Fund to be in bold. It is appropriate for it to be linked in red, like it was, because it set it up to be a future wikilink. It is also appropriate for there to be external links to the churches where they event have been held since article on those churches are unlikely to ever be developed. I cannot automatically reverse these edits, because you did them while I was editing so I am an going to do them manually. That means I have to double my effort. I have put a lot into this article and I respectfully request that you use care with your edits. Thanks a lot.--Ishtar456 (talk) 23:20, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I must disagree. There is no reason to believe that such a fund will ever have its own article. It is specifically derived from the shooting and therefore it is significant within its context. This is why I have given it a minor status as it will not have major status such as a section and certainly not an article. As for the external links, you should reasonably assume that a person can use search engines and the text of the article to find community relations and current community information. Please realize what Wikipedia is, and what Wikipedia is not. As for your concerns about my edits being done while yours are being done, I suggest you make smaller time periods between edits to prevent this problem.--SidP (talk) 23:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I really hope we do not have an edit war going on. I was not criticizing you for editing while I was editing, it just happened. I can only work at the speed that I can work at. I would not want to make quick reckless edits. I do not know what how much the integrity of the article means to you, but I have put a lot into it and have nominated it for DYK. Do you think that I am asking a lot to request that you back off? And if you see a glaring violation of wikipedia rules, could you point it out to me rather than plunge in and reverse my hard work? Can you direct me to the rule that says it is okay to bold random names and phrases? Thanks --Ishtar456 (talk) 23:39, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Your lack of regard for others is troubling. Why should you be the sole determiner of how to handle anything in the article? I have never been involved in an "edit war" but clearly you seem to be especially focused on specific subjects whereas I am usually involved in the mere improvement of an article. As it appears we both have special interest in this article, I do not see how we cannot manage to work together. If you look at the work that I've done on the article, it's not trivial nor is it fleeting. Please reconsider your tone and your self-appointed authority.--SidP (talk) 23:44, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I did not mean to take on any tone. I did not mean to be anything but polite. Tone it difficult to gauge in writing. I guess between writing the article and reversing all the IP edits that said people who were not dead were made me feel a little invested. If you do not answer anything else, can you please point me to anything on wikipedia that uses bold print the way you are using it in this artilce? Thanks--Ishtar456 (talk) 23:52, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

## UNT

Thanks for your recent edits on the University of North Texas. I've been sort of planning an attack on that page for a while now, but it was hard to know where to begin. Your edits will be a great help when I finally get around to revamping the article (it needs it, badly). Thanks again, Runfellow (talk) 03:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

## WikiProject Record Production invites you to join

Greetings SidP
You appear interested in record production Record Production is interested in you
We hope you will join our WikiProject and with EzSign, it really is simple to join. Use the link below to create your signup page, and then save the page. That's all it takes, and I hope you will join. In any regard, thanks for your efforts to improve this topic. They haven't gone unnoticed.

76Strat String da Broke da (talk) 23:49, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

## Proposed deletion of Victor (2009 film)

The article Victor (2009 film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the `{{proposed deletion/dated}}` notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing `{{proposed deletion/dated}}` will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TexasAndroid (talk) 14:22, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

article improved as a result.--SidP

## Z for Zachariah summary

Hi. Seeing your notice, I shortened the summary quite a bit. Please check it again and remove the notice if it is concise enough, or let me know why it still seems too detailed. Thanks. Seoulseeker (talk) 22:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. I've complied with your wishes in response to your good faith efforts.--SidP (talk) 00:28, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

## Nomination of Welker White for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Welker White is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Welker White until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Coretheapple (talk) 15:24, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

## Talkback

Hello, SidP. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Newspaperarchive.com.
Message added 16:04, 9 November 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 16:04, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Ping. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:06, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

## ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

## History of China

I really appreciated the seriousness and scope of your recent edits. Thanks for making Wikipedia a better source of information. HouseOfChange (talk) 05:38, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

If you are interested, I left you a message on my talk page, recommending a look at the biography of Jack Ma. HouseOfChange (talk) 04:18, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

## Speedy deletion nomination of Society of Makeup Artists

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Society of Makeup Artists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. — kashmiri TALK 08:00, 29 May 2016 (UTC)