User talk:Serendipodous/User talk:Serendipodous archive 2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Evolution/Solar System
Hi, yep, I'm still intending to make that change, I'm just really busy at the moment. I feel kinda guilty when I edit something else in the meantime, but I need to spend some time to put the two side-by-side and see what needs moving across/replacing. I hope to get it done soonish but it is on my to-do list, promise! Spiral Wave 00:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Edit summaries
When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.
Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. John Reaves 09:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reply
Okay, I see you point. It's just that this program shows that you only leave summaries for 11% of you major edits and 9% of your minor edits. That's pretty low, and I would wager that all of those edits haven't been insignificant. (P.S. - Feel free to delete the warning now, I just wanted to make sure you weren't going to ignore it.) John Reaves 09:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fools Guild and Fools' Guild confusion
Your changes to the Fools Guild page and your new article about the Discworld Guild have created a world of confusion. The Fools Guild (http://www.foolsguild.org) has discussed the use of the apostrophe and has chosen not to use it. It is sometimes spelled as Fooles Guild but never with the apostrophe. Moving the Fools Guild page to Fools' Guild and then moving the article that you created to Fools' Guild (Discworld) is confusing. It changes the history of all the edits to each of the pages.
I think that the pages should be changed back to their original places and spellings and to include the reference to the other page at the top of each article. I hope that you can revert your changes as I am not sure that I could do it without problems. Kember 01:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Solar System sub-headings
Serendipodous: I've tested out a way of keeping sub-headings for the planets, while still reducing the size of the TOC. (That seemed to be the concern on the FA talk page.) Anyways, there's a note at Talk:Solar System; if the changes don't work for you, no problem - although it does seem odd to highlight Ceres/Pluto/Eris/Sedna while not doing the same for the planets. Thoughts? --Ckatzchatspy 10:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Solar System - FA notes
Hello... sorry it took a moment to reply - busy day. With regards to the review, I would suggest treating it like an extension of the consensus model - see what sort of feedback comes in, then combine/discuss it and proceed from there. Otherwise, you'll end up reacting to Ideogram's notes, then to the next person's notes, and so on, each set of notes being based on a different article. Better to have a range of input based on the same source, so that any conflicting suggestions can be worked through. (Given that the article is in the FA process, I should probably be discussing my ideas at the FA page rather than just through the edit summaries... my bad!) --Ckatzchatspy 19:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re:Resizing
I resized all the images for consistency. There is no set policy, but it is recommended here: Wikipedia:Image use policy#Rules of thumb #11 In general, there is no need to specify thumbnail size. Users can select their ideal size in preferences. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Your GA nomination of Solar System
The article Solar System you nominated as a good article has passed 
, see Talk:Solar System for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations.--JEF 16:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
