User talk:Smelialichu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please pardon any gross errors I might make regarding language and intent of the work you are doing in regard to the EB 11, but I happened to run across this project you mention while researching some info regarding an episode of the Twilight Zone. I happen to own a copy of the 11th Edition of the EB and would be happy to be of assistance in providing any quotes or interpretation related to the work you are doing. I haven't the faintest idea how your research and episode 51 of the TZ might be related, but I find the fact that they turned up together in a search intriguing. Have a fantastic 2004.

Walt. TUROK2000

BTW, nice work in video game section. Cheers! --maveric149

Could you wikify the EB1911 entries a bit more before placing them into Wikipedia? Better copyediting and NPOVing would also be nice. Not everybody enjoys trying to translate Victorian prose and bias. Thanks! --mav

You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica for some hints on using the grand old encylopedia. Ortolan88
Hello again. Check the changes I made to Henry Balnaves. You may want to watch the EB1911 a little more closely. Ortolan88
Not a "mess" by any means. It is hard to see those problems sometimes. I do think long paragraphs are hard for readers, but that may be a bias from a lifetime of journalism and technical writing where long paras are taboo because of that belief. Id finds it quite easy to break up the EB1911. To my eye, their paragraphs have more than one topic sentence. Ortolan88
I am a great believer in using the EB1911, mainly because I have owned it and loved it for years in hard copy. Not everybody has the patience to try to use it properly. I have been trying to come in politely and assist in updating articles from it. I like the list you posted on my talk page. I agree that the guidelines in Wikipedia:1911 Encyclopedia Britannica are comparatively vague. You are welcome to update them, since I believe your suggestions are good, or, if you like, I will add to them, since your suggestions are based, in part, on my edits. I wrote the guidelines after plowing through Richard Francis Burton, but I think they could do with some improvement. I don't "own" them, so you can change them if you like, or, if you are loath to do so, I will be glad to stand in for you. I absolutely don't want to discourage you.Ortolan88

Hi Smelialichu. Did you read Talk:Baldwin I of Romania? Scipius 17:19 Nov 6, 2002 (UTC)

Wikifiying Arthur James Balfour looks like it was a lot of work. However we tend only link the first occurrence of a term in an article unless the occurrences are separated by a large visual distance or are in very different sections (table vs. body vs. introduction/overview para). Doing so is also less tedious. --mav

Hi, I've been looking at your articles for the various episodes of The Twilight Zone. I've got no complaint about the content, and since they are each independent stories there is justification to have them in separate articles. That being said I do have a couple of concerns.

  1. There has been a preference in the past to discourage sub-pages as characterized by the "/" character. That much could be corrected by simply using the format [The Twilight Zone, Episode Title].
  2. I also wonder whether the separate lists for each season could be combined into a single list. With some 10,000 bytes it that is still a manageable size.

Eclecticology 20:55 Nov 28, 2002 (UTC)

Nice work on the eb1911 ports! --mav

Hi Alex

Just thought I ought to mention that not ALL self-links are unwanted - you removed one in List of musical topics that was wanted and its presence was requested on the Talk page. I think there are a few in maths topics which make this clear - something to do with keeping an eye on updates? It's not clear to me how this whole issue works (in fact I thought I'd raise it in the village pump some time), but thought I should mention it to you anway. Regards Nevilley 11:33 Dec 26, 2002 (UTC)

Update - queried this in Wikipedia:Village_pump Nevilley 11:52 Dec 26, 2002 (UTC)

Hi Alex, thanks for your reply to this. The discussion has gone to the Village Pump and it will be interesting to see if a coherent policy will come out of it! :) All good wishes, Neville -- Nevilley 13:08 Dec 26, 2002 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Twilight Zone episode stubs

See the Village pump --mav 07:30, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)



[edit] Use of quoted passages, especially in entertainment bios.

Hello, as a member of the bio Wikiproject, I wondered if you might have something to add to the - above named - discussion at the village pump?

Regards --bodnotbod 20:28, May 3, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

[edit] I would like to help with EB

How do I get started and how do I know where others have left off? Is there a master index in Wikipedia yet of the EB entries so we can wee which links are still red and need to be transcribed? If there isn't a master index, should we be creating one? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/m/e/User_talk%7ESmelialichu_cc42.html"