Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:29, 30 January 2007

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

• Be Bold!
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off
• Meet other new users
• Learn from others
• Play nicely with others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! — Lost 11:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Stub types and welcomebot research

Hi again... Well Misplaced Pages gets lots of new articles every day most of which are stubs. Unless they are correctly categorised, the stubs may just get lost. Adding a relevant stub tag automatically adds a relevant category to the article which helps when people with related interests come to work on the stubs.

Regarding the welcomebot research category, I think its a project by some people who are trying to gauge the editing patterns of new editors. You will get more details at the top of Category:WelcomeBotResearch, which you may have probably already seen. Let me know if any more help required. Cheers. — Lost 11:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your edit to Parallax:

Your recent edit to Parallax (diff) was reverted by automated bot. The edit was identified as adding either vandalism, link spam, or test edits to the page. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. If this revert was in error, please contact the bot operator. Thanks! // VoABot II 22:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

So the bot fails to spot the vandalism, but reverts me when I try to fix it? That's really not a lot of use, you know – Qxz 22:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

PediaPress

I was looking into your request to have the {{prod}}'ed article undeleted when you pulled the request. If you look at the deletion log, there was a PROD deletion, a WP:CSD#G11 deletion, and a garbage article deletion. Be aware 1) that the PROD'ed article was essentially identical to the CSD#G11 deletion, so the recreated article, if not significantly improved, may well be deleted again as advertising. I recommend either following the guidance at Misplaced Pages:Amnesia test about finding independent sources and seeing if you can create an article therefrom, or just converting the link on Misplaced Pages to a sentence explaining the business. GRBerry 06:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Citation templates

From Misplaced Pages:Template messages/Sources of articles#Citations of generic sources:

"The use of Citation templates is not required by WP:CITE and is neither encouraged nor discouraged by any other Misplaced Pages citation guidelines. They may be used at the discretion of individual editors, subject to agreement with the other editors on the article. Some editors find them helpful, while other editors find them annoying, particularly when used inline in the text. Because they are optional, editors should not change articles from one style to the other without consensus."

Emphasis mine – Qxz 23:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Why post this to my user talk page? Is it really necessary to smack me in the face with a WP page that tells me I'm somehow wrong about something? I never said that it's imperative that we do convert all references to that format, I'm saying that I believe we should do it. There's no need to come around just to tell me that I should have no right to say that (I do) when I haven't even made a big deal out of it yet. —msikma (user, talk) 06:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Robotchicken1886

Re your message: Call me an optimist. However, if he comes back, I will gladly extend the block for a longer or indefinite time. -- Gogo Dodo 19:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• WelcomeBotResearch