This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jerzy (talk | contribs) at 19:22, 7 November 2005 (Titled people on LoPbN). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 19:22, 7 November 2005 by Jerzy (talk | contribs) (Titled people on LoPbN)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Welcome from Acetic Acid/Ryan
Welcome to Misplaced Pages, Avalon! My name is Ryan, aka Acetic Acid. I noticed that you were new and haven't received any messages yet. I just wanted to see how you were doing. Misplaced Pages can be a little intimidating at first, since it uses different formatting than other sites that use HTML and CSS. In the long run, though, you'll find that the WikiSyntax is a lot easier and faster than those other ways. Here are a few links to get you started:
- How to edit a page
- Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
There are a lot of policies and guides to read, but I highly recommend reading over those first. If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Please be sure to sign your name on Talk Pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, along with a link to your user page. This way, others know when you left a message and how to find you. It's easier than having to type out your name, right? :)
I hope you enjoy contributing to Misplaced Pages. We can use all the help we can get! Have a nice day. Sincerely, Ryan. 12:44, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
Answer to request for help
- I'd be more than happy to help. Don't hesitate to ask. :P Ryan 12:51, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
Can I change factual inaccuracies?
- Good evening/morning. You can change it. You might want to put in the edit summary "See talk page" and explain it a bit on the talk page. You also probably should put one of the source right next to it, like this:
- So and so was killed at this battle. Source here
- Unfortunately, there is no spellchecker at this time. That's why copyediting is so important. Wikiquette can be found here. Take care. Ryan 10:16, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Welcome from Cyberjunkie
Howdy Avalon. As a fellow Australian, I'd like to welcome you and let you know about the Australian community on Misplaced Pages. Be sure to check out Australian resources, like The Australia Wikiportal, Australian Wikipedians' Notice Board (AWDB), Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight, New Australian Articles and Australian stub articles. You can also list yourself at Australian Wikipedians. If you have any questions, you can post a question on AWNB or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome, and happy editing, --Cyberjunkie | Talk 11:01, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
RE: What to do?
Hi Avalon. When one comes across an article that appears to be un-encyclopædic or un-intelligible, it should be proposed for deletion. This is done under a process called Vfd or Votes for deletion. Only articles and some Misplaced Pages-space pages are deleted under Vfd. Templates, images and categories are deleted via Tfd, Ifd and Cfd respectively. Some pages qualify for speedy deletion, including inappropriate or vanity articles. However, it is best to use that process only if you are familiar with what qualifies for speedy deletion.
Deletion can be quite an emotive issue on Misplaced Pages as it can only be carried out by Administrators and is in most cases irreversible. At present, Vfd is having quite a polarising effect, with Wikipedians forming "like-minded" groups such as the Inclusionists, the Deletionists and the Mergists. Generally, I shy away from Vfd lest I become involved in one of the more controversial deletions. I typically only voice my opinion on Australia-related Vfd's. However, don't let this perturb you. The great majority of deletions pass without even a smidgen of discontent.
But I digress. To get back to your query, I have nominated Kayserispor for deletion (see Misplaced Pages:Pages for deletion/Kayserispor to vote). It might have qualified for speedy deletion, but foreign language pages on this English Misplaced Pages are best put to Vfd with the hope that someone can translate them.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 09:00, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
- Looking at my watchlist, it seems my explanation of Misplaced Pages deletion procedures was un-necessary: I see you've voted several times already ;-). Happy editing, --Cyberjunkie | Talk 09:25, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
RE: Question
See Misplaced Pages:Revert. Go to the page history, click on the date of the version you wish to revert to, once loaded "edit this page" and save. --Cyberjunkie | Talk 03:34, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
District attorney
Thanks for putting the DPP link in the District attorney article. I don't go around thanking people for every good edit, but this one was particularly useful, cheers. While I'm here, I don't quite understand your "6 generations" comment on your userpage. I assume you have a British accent, so peole ask you how long you have been in Australia, how are you claiming this 6 generations? --Commander Keane 16:30, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for clearing that joke up for me.--Commander Keane 06:07, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Re: Request for Help
Hello, I'm reasonably new to Misplaced Pages and I'd like to ask you a question.
You wrote/made(?) the Category: Orders of knighthood in Jan 05. I think it ought to be divided into sub-categories by nation. Two questions:
- What do you think?
- Fully agree Saga City 08:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- How do I do it?
Thank you Avalon 00:42, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- I only know the one way, and it may not be the approved way as I find the guidance pages here almost incomprehensible, however as it works I'll set it out:
- Find an order of knighthood for country XYZ and put it into a category called Orders of knighthood of XYZ. As the category does not (yet) exist it will be red-linked. Click on the red-link and create the new category in the same way as you create new . Your new category's entry may minimally include only 2 categories itself namely Orders of knighthood by nation and XYX. At the first time Orders of knighthood by nation will itself be redlinked. All you need to do is create that as a category is put Category:Orders of knighthood into it to link it the one I created back in January.
By the way, I'd only been contributing to Misplaced Pages for about six weeks then, so don't let being new discourage you. I did some sorting out the categories for awards and decorations and this was part of it.
Let me know it works (or doesn't work) Saga City 08:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Sir, defend your honour!!
I am appalled at your claim: "Australians are so supine you can do anything to them." I challenge you to a duel at 40 paces. You have choice of weapons. Maybe the Misplaced Pages:Meetup/Melbourne would be the appropriate venue.
I also notice that you "practice" law. Is that the accepted spelling of the verb "practise" in Australian legal circles these days, or are you simply lying down like a good supine Australian and letting the Americans walk all over you, or are you too apathetically Australian to know or care about the difference, or ... (please insert alternative explanations here). Cheers JackofOz 07:17, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
- Just go that page and add your name to the date(s) on which you're available. Hopefully a consensus will soon emerge. Or, more likely, somebody will suggest a particular date, and all the rest of us will just roll over and say "OK, fine by me, see you there". Whatever works. JackofOz 08:00, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Titled people on LoPbN
Thank you for your diligent efforts at adding titles like Lord and Sir in LoPbN. Sometimes such a title is the quickest way for a user to be sure which among similarly named persons they are after.
On the other hand, it is in general important to realize that the list, like many of those on WP, exists for the purpose of navigation rather than information. It is a list of people with biographical articles (or for whom there is a reasonable hope of bios being added). It is absolutely not a reference for information on the correct forms of names. (That worthwhile info has its proper place in WP: primary name for a person is part or all of the title of their bio, and other correct names, and erroneous but common ones, appear in the body of a good bio, where there is plenty of room for information on how good or bad those versions are.)
In particular, in a LoPbN entry, the piped version (what is to the right of the vertical-line character inside the link markup) of a name that includes a surname must have the parts of the name in the order used for alphabetizing that entry. A dramatic case could be Jim ap John, who could well have (since the use of "ap" is so little understood) three entries:
- ap John, Jim among the Ap names
- Jim ap John among the Ji names
- John, Jim ap among the Jo names
Which versions of the name are right or wrong is completely irrelevant to LoPbN: they are there solely to get both the expert reader and the clueless ones to the article, where everything can be made clear without its explication getting in the way of the navigational task.
Your edit of the At names, like many (at the least) of your LoPbN contributions miss this point.
"*Richard, Lord Attenborough" may not appear among people named "Att..." thru "Atw..." bcz that version of his name makes him a person named "Ric...". (Tho, BTS, that version of his name cannot appear on Template:Lopbn-l1, bcz anyone misguided enough to look up a modern title-bearer that way will quickly see that we do not let such formality interfere with access, and take the obvious stop of looking under "Att...".)
A little less disruptively, "*Attenborough, Sir David" should be "*Attenborough, David, Sir", for the same reason that no one will look for him under D or S: the surname is indipsensible in identifying him; the next step is not to separate the knighted Attenboroughs from hoi polloi, but Davids from all other given names, and then finally the Sir Davids from the other Davids. "Attenborough, Sir David" is harmless as to its effect on that page, but it is unacceptably harmful in undercutting the confidence that Sir David Jones will be found before, and not after, Samuel Jones.
As i say, though, there's no question in my mind that the information you're adding is good; i don't want to discourage you. Thanks.
--Jerzy•t 19:22, 7 November 2005 (UTC)