User talk:Jamhaw

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Jamhaw, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here are a few 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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me or a helper Commander Keane on our talk page. Again, welcome!

If you want to tell me something or if you just want to say hi, leave your message under the Talk Section of | My Talk Page

Anonymous anonymous 17:12, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] April May

Some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article April May may not be sufficiently well-known to merit articles of their own. The Wikipedia community welcomes newcomers, and encourages them to become Wikipedians. On Wikipedia, each user is entitled to a user page in which they can describe themselves, and this article's content may be incorporated into that page. However, to merit inclusion in the encyclopedia proper, a subject must be notable. We encourage you to write or improve articles on notable subjects. TigerShark 18:33, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chilly Beach

Jamhaw, there is no point in having a bunch of redlinks to non articles. Also, the link for "abby" doesn't go to that character, but to something else entirely. You cannot add a brief bit of text about the character "abby" in an article about another movie. The Abby article isn't a disambiguation page. IrishGuy 17:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signing your replies

Please remember to sign your replies on talk pages with four tildes. (~~~~)ddcc 04:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] I am not Homer

As they say in the movies, "oh be-have". Seriously, though, we are trying to write an encyclopedia here, so don't make joke edits. Some readers looking for a serious article might not find them amusing. Remember, millions of people read Wikipedia, so we have to take what we do a bit seriously here. If you'd like to experiment with editing, try the sandbox, where you can write whatever you want (as long as it's not offensive).

[edit] Maple Shorts

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  17:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Where do you get the idea that it was a test it was the very begining of a new article! Jamhaw 18:10, 2 June 2006 (UTC)jamhaw

Can you expand it at all? Why is it notable? It was deleted because the article failed to answer this question. I have categorised the article and cleaned up the spelling errors.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  18:36, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

It would be eSY to expand you may notice that I just remade the article and it is even bigger and it would be far larger if I had not had to remake it and if other people start writing more to it it is even bigger it only existed for approximtley ten seconds before you deleted it so give me a break. As for notability it's more notable than some to my knowedge it's the only time shorts made by kids have been on puplic televison. Is there even a limit to how many articles wikipedia can have? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamhaw (talk • contribs).

The have been no further edits to this article since I tagged it for expansion and notability. Your defence of the article by generalising on weaker articles doesn't demonstrate the notability of the subject. Do you have a reference for your belief that this is the first time short films made by children have been shown on Canadian public television? If you do then this can be the claim for notability. This is the basic question that every editor should be able to answer when starting an article on Wikipedia - why is this subject notable? Every article should originate from this answer.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  19:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

There have been more I wrote them you deleted the article and the new article is bigger. Also IS THERE ANY LIMIT TO ARTICLES ON WIKIPEDIA. If there is then we should delete a large number of articles possibly including this one it is more notable than quite a few if you have problems with small articles I would suggest looking at StarCraft,StarWars, and other things which have massive amounts of articles on things that don't appear in the movies books or anything but fan magizines but they deserve an article because they exist. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamhaw (talk • contribs).

The edit history on the article indicates otherwise. You can see what the theorectical limits to Wikipedia are on this page. I'm only asking one question, why is this programme notable? Pointing to other articles rather than answering this question is a logical fallacy. I am not going to hound you on this matter as I have no axe to grind and am no pedant.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  20:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

It's not that notable when compared to world war 2 but I think it is notable enough to get an article. Jamhaw 20:10, 2 June 2006 (UTC)jamhaw

OK, why? Notability isn't relative - the subject of an article is, or should be, notable in-and-of itself. I'm not telling you off about this. Do me a favour - if you can't answer "Because..." to the why question then please let us close this correspondance as it is getting nowhere.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  20:20, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New articles

When creating new articles, please don't save the first draft until it is complete enough to obviously comply with the Wikipedia:Notability criteria. If it isn't possible for someone with no previous knowledge to understand what the article is about and why it is notable, then the article may be deleted. Deletion does not preclude you from writing a new article at the same title that does satisfy these guidelines, so just take your time and write a good one the first time. An example of a great first draft is an article I wrote on Power Pete. It is much longer than necessary for an initial edit, but proper format, wikilinks, references and any relevant external links are all things that an article should have. —WAvegetarian•(talk) 20:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry that you were left in the dark about that. In the future, when you get to a page that doesn't exist/has been deleted (like StarCraft Ghost: Nova), the message that displays includes a link to the deletion log. This will tell you who deleted it and what their reasoning was. I just found a better example of a book stub for you: The Madness of King George (book). It hasn't been edited since I wrote it other than someone changing the stub tag, but it is an exmaple of a good short article. In general, mass publication books are included, but they should have the author, ISBN, publisher, publication date, etc. as well as a brief description. I find that when starting new articles it is easier to write the articles in a word processing program and then copy&paste them into Wikipedia. —WAvegetarian•(talk) 20:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Hammer of Kharas

Hello! As far as I know, there is a Dragonlance sourcebook about the recovery. I do not remember a released book explaining that, though. As for the neutral dragons, I have only heard fan rules about the gem dragons. I noticed that the In Search of Dragons sourcebook preview says something about neutral dragons, but I don't have it. I will ask some other guys to see what they think. You could ask in the Dragon (Dungeons & Dragons) talk page if there are such neutral dragons. -- ReyBrujo 20:36, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, at the end of Stormblade the group realizes that the Hammer of Kharas is hidden in a tomb (cannot remember if it was Kharas's or Duncan's tomb), and decide to go after it. But the travel through the tomb and the finding has never been explained, other than in sourcebooks (again, as far as I remember). -- ReyBrujo 15:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] StarCraft boxes

No, I did not put the boxes there, but they are on the page, at the end of the "Trivia" section. User:Nismojoe is the person you want to talk to. howcheng {chat} 15:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About WarCraft

I don't know why the prior article was deleted; I didn't see anything in the deletion log. What was the exact title of the article?

At any rate, it's a good idea not to create articles with no content. If you want to create draft articles, you can do so in your userspace, such as at User:Jamhaw/WarCraft (film), and the copy the content into article space when it ready to stand on its own. Not much is needed for an article to stand on its own, something like

WarCraft is an upcoming movie based on the video game WarCraft

along with a link to imdb.com or some other reliable source establishing that this is for real, will save you from a {{db-empty}}. Also, very short articles should be tagged with an appropriate stub template; in your case, {{film-stub}}.

Hope that helps!

--EngineerScotty 18:45, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Because this article was a recreation of deleted material (see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warcraft (film)), I tagged it for speedy deletion. (Where, incidentally, the consensus was that such an article was crystal balling.) I suggest you just reference the prees release concerning the movie rights of Warcraft at Warcraft, Warcraft Universe & Blizzard Entertainment. -- Scientizzle 16:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I have responded to your comment here. -- Scientizzle 20:23, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good work mate

I agree with your opinion for some criticism on the tomorrow series. me (user: f 22) and (user: dfrg.msc) have been fighting for a unbiases WP: NOV in the tomorrow series. but scottie loves the book and will not let us.

join us and we can destroy them!

F 22 07:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page Dragonlance: Dragons of Autumn Twilight (film) on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Sfacets 06:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] something

Look up redundant in
Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

don't like my link to sloppy well either you fix it like you want it or stop deleting it we have to have the link there. Jamhaw 19:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC)jamhaw

What are you talking about?
Im talking about the Wheel of Time (video game)Jamhaw 20:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)jamhaw
As explained in my edit summary, I removed a redundant link.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/a/m/User_talk%7EJamhaw_3204.html"