User talk:Yetisyny

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


Hello, Yetisyny, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Wisteria Event Campground, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Acroterion (talk) 13:26, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for creating that article[edit]

Thanks Acroterion, I apologize for not understanding your policies better. Sorry about creating that article. I will try to learn more about Wikipedia policies in the future, especially if I ever create another article. I think I'll just mostly stick to improving existing articles, since that's what I'm good at, and your policies for what articles to include or exclude are overly complex and not explained very well on the pages describing those policies. Obviously you understand Wikipedia policies better than I do so I think I'll steer clear of creating any articles for now. I think I might look at the articles nominated for deletion so I can learn more about what NOT to do... I suppose you were right to delete that article I wrote according to the policies, since after I challenged its deletion, someone else who knows a lot about the policies explained why the article shouldn't have been created and was against Wikipedia's policies, and upheld the decision to delete it. I thought it was notable and met the other criteria, but I guess I was wrong, since I don't have much experience with Wikipedia's policies and find them quite confusing. At least I understand the policies for editing articles such as Neutral Point of View and having sources for everything. Sorry about all that business with me creating an article; I thought it was a good article I wrote and that it qualified under Wikipedia's criteria, but I'm willing to admit that I made a mistake and don't understand all your rules, and hope you folks aren't mad at me. Have a nice day and keep up the good work. --Yetisyny (talk) 18:40, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

User Page thingy[edit]

Please use {{user page|logo=(yes or no)|noindex=yes}} on all the user pages and user subpages. I found this user page by using Google.

What it looks like without the logo:

What it looks like with the logo:

I'll help you with putting it on this page:

P.S. Please use :, then ::, then :::, etc, if you want to reply to this section.
Original text
:Reply 1
::Reply 2
:::Reply 3
Original text

Reply 1
Reply 2
Reply 3

Please also use ~~~~.

P.S. Should I go through ALL THE SUBPAGES of User:Yetisyny and User talk:Yetisyny and add {{user page|logo=(yes or no)|noindex=yes}}?
Why are there a lot of spammy "userboxen"? Also, it's not "userboxen", it's "userboxes".
To me, I think you're the worst user I know.
I'm also deleting all the "userboxen" from your user page, if you don't mind. Please add a subpage called User:Yetisyny/UBX. — dargereldren T C G E R 22:47, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I have fixed my user page and gotten rid of all the userboxes. Please do not make any further edits to my user page or create any pages in my userspace; if you have further concerns, please post them here on the talk page rather than making edits of my user page or stuff like that. Have a nice day. --Yetisyny (talk) 15:55, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Dike v. dyke[edit]

Hi Yetisyny, you were right to make the change at Columbia (supercontinent), to be consistent with the rest of the article. However, please note that there are many pages out there that use 'dyke' rather than 'dike' to describe minor vertical intrusions, because that is the spelling in British English, which is used in most of the world outside the US, such as in sheeted dyke complex. Take a look at WP:ENGVAR, which provides reasonable guidance on when to use which spelling. Mikenorton (talk) 18:40, 19 February 2012 (UTC)


The underlines I put where present to point out the materials which needs to be verified, there not part of the writing style.

As btrfs User I never saw existence of this. I know wikipedia is not a user manual, but the releving materials should be at least checked by official source.2A02:8422:1191:6E00:56E6:FCFF:FEDB:2BBA (talk) 10:59, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia has templates to use to point out which information needs to be verified, plus you can also leave comments that are visible in the code of the article when you edit it, but aren't visible to people reading the page, and you can also point out issues on an article's talk page. I've never seen anyone underline the text in an article that they think needs to be fact-checked/verified. That is not a common practice here. Personally I think it looks confusing to someone reading an article who expects to see something that looks like an encyclopedia entry, and then certain text appears underlined for no apparent reason (the reason is not apparent to the person reading it). Anyway, my point is, instead of underlining, you should use templates that are for text that needs references, and put comments in the article that are only visible to people editing it, and post things on the talk pages of the articles to explain what you are doing to other people. Because your underlining thing, nobody else besides you knew what that meant, that it had to do with things that needed references. You have to communicate this kind of stuff to other people who edit the articles, but WITHOUT having the people who are just reading and NOT editing the articles catching on. It's kind of complicated to do that on a wiki, I'll admit. And your underlining idea was kind of creative, I'll give you that. But I think most people who saw the underlining were just baffled by it and had no idea what it meant. Anyway, I appreciate your dialogue with me on this and hope you take this into consideration. I doubt I will be editing that btrfs article again, but you seem interested in the subject, so please keep up the good work and consider other methods for communicating with other editors besides the underlining thing. Posting this here on my talk page, for instance, is a very useful way to communicate, you can try that with other people who edit that article too, works better than underlining. Anyway you should probably make a post to the talk page for the btrfs article and explain which bits need to be verified and all of that, so that other people who edit that page can help out with that and so we can all cooperate on this stuff. Thanks and keep up the good work. --Yetisyny (talk) 03:58, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I know that templates exists, but I don't how to use them and it is difficult to find that you need in wiki formating pages of wikimedia.2A02:8422:1191:6E00:56E6:FCFF:FEDB:2BBA (talk) 08:24, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Here, try these templates which relate to citing sources: Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles. You should find a lot of useful ones there. If you have any further questions, please ask them here: Wikipedia:Help desk. I don't spend a lot of time on Wikipedia so if you ask me questions I might not respond in a timely manner, plus I'm not an expert on Wikipedia or anything. The people at Wikipedia:Help desk know more about this stuff than I do, so if you have any more questions please ask them instead of me, since they'll probably have better answers. Also, if you place {{Help me}} "then your question" on your talk page, a volunteer will assist you there! --Yetisyny (talk) 15:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request[edit]

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I voted, based on the best knowledge available to me at this time about all the candidates. Your little reminder about this election was very helpful and I am thankful about being informed of matters such as this. Keep up the good work! --Yetisyny (talk) 09:08, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Yetisyny. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)