User talk:The man in the mask

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, The man in the mask, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Oore (talk) 22:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Broom of the Cowdenknowes

Hello man in the mask, I read your note on the talk page of the above. Interviews can't really be cited as reliable sources, as required by Wikipedia policy, and citing the song as a reference for an article about the song is a bit flimsy too. You need to find some third-party sources, such as a book about folk songs, which you can cite as a source, for example the fact that it dates from the 17th century should be backed by a citation. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and WP:CITE.

As for your problem with the references, to use ref tags, you put the tags around the reference, as you did, but this should go after the fact that is being supported. Then, to get the reference to show up, you need to put {{reflist}} at the bottom of the article. Full details on using ref tags can be found at Wikipedia:Footnotes. Give me a shout if you get stuck with anything. Regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 11:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to the Novels WikiProject

Hi, and welcome to the Novels WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to fiction books often referred to as "Novels".

A few features that you might find helpful:

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the members, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! – Liveste (talk • edits) 23:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: coordinator

According to the newest newsletter, that would be me.  :) Not a problem at all, it was my first "election" as well, but unfortunately several things led to it not running too smoothly. Please do help out where you can, and feel free to take charge; if you're interested in creating and implementing new task forces, you could always begin a discussion at the general discussion forum. There's also a Job Center where you can sign up for various "tasks" concerning the project. I love the idea of a historical fiction taskforce, since that's one of my favorite genres, but you can start that even without being a so-called coordinator. If you have any questions, just let me know. María (habla conmigo) 20:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Eclipse

Since the major Plot Summary change and Reception addition to the Eclipse page, all I have reverted has been spacing issues, test edits/vandalism, and edits with poor wording and grammatical errors. The latter issue is partly my opinion, of course, but I after going through my latest edits just now I can't see how anyone would disagree that the present wording is preferable. I'm sorry that watching this article very closely and being one of its few consistent editors has lead you to believe that I'm trying to dominate. If you look closely, you should see that all I'm trying to do is preserve the integrity of the article. I will be more descriptive with my edit summaries, even though I did provide an explanation for all but my most recent revert, but I refuse to let the page go downhill because you think I monitor it too closely. Andrea (talk) 23:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't realize it was a bad thing to want to improve wording in Wikipedia articles. Contrary to what you seem to think, there is such a thing as poor wording that makes sense. I'm very surprised that I'm being questioned for changing what may be deemed "acceptable by Wikipedia's quality standards"; should we really strive to leave things at "acceptable"? Wikipedia's aim is to be an encyclopedia of the highest quality. I try very hard to makes articles such as the Eclipse one as good in quality and as professional as possible. I'm not saying the articles I focus on were all poorly worded before I came along; I think some great editors have done some excellent work on them. As well, I recognize that they are still far from perfect. I respect that you are trying to do what you think is best, but I put a lot of time and effort into these articles, so yes, I will get defensive when my intentions for doing so are questioned. I always try to be as open-minded as possible, but that should not include lowering any standards. Andrea (talk) 21:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] a-ha

Whats wrong with me editing the a-ha page. --Alive Would? Sun (talk) 20:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I responded to your warning to User:Alive Would? Sun. See here. Garion96 (talk) 19:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

A few points to your response on my talk.

  • If an editor makes many small edits to an article, you explain it to him that it is better to use preview more before saving. But you don't state it as a "warning" and warning about editcounts and misleading other editors is plainly ridiculous. No one is misleading editors by editcounts, and no one should care.
  • The identical contect part is just a content dispute. It is possible that a discography article has some identical content with the group's article. No warning necessary. A discussion about it, sure.
  • The most important part, neither one of those issues deserver the word blocking. Also, the user you warned is a new editor. See also Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers.

Garion96 (talk) 19:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)