User talk:Twooars

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!


Contents

[edit] Contemporary Personalities of Velama Caste

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Contemporary Personalities of Velama Caste, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.  V60 VTalk · VDemolitions 19:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summaries

This is a great reason for edit summaries - they tell other editors what you are doing. A lot of people vandalize Wikipedia by erasing huge chunks of content, so when many editors see huge chunks of content disappearing with no explanation, they think vandalism. So firstly, use edit summaries. Also, you may want to explain yourself on the talk page, so other editors know what you are doing. Hope that helps, and if you have any other questions, feel free to ask me! Natalie 19:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Sections are almost never deleted from the history, because that would violate the GNU Free Documentation License, which is the license Wikipedia is published under. In a few isolated cases, a revision may be removed such as if the revision contains non-public personal information, particularly of a minor. If you feel like the information you're trying to move shouldn't be on Wikipedia at all, I would propose removing it on the talk page and see what other people think. Moving it to another page actually makes it more likely it will hang around unnoticed. Natalie 19:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] fantasy wikiproject

There is no fantasy WikiProject; the closest things are Wikipedia:WikiProject Fictional series and Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels, along with a fair number of more specific projects for specific fantasy series/franchises/universes.--ragesoss 22:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, anyone is welcome. That's the case with any WikiProject on Wikipedia.--ragesoss 22:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An Invite to join Novels WikiProject

Hi, you are cordially invited to join the Novels WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to fiction books often referred to as "Novels". We make no length distinction so all narrative prose fiction is of interest. This includes Novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories. Articles about the works themselves and the forms and genres.
As you have shown an interest in Requiem for the Conqueror we thought you might like to take an interest in this well established WikiProject.
We look forward to welcoming you to the project! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

It maybe that we can look at starting a Fantasy task force if interest is there for one! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] copyrights

I'm a really bad person to ask about copyright law, because I don't know too much about it. The Wikipedia:Help desk might have an answer for you, or you could try posting {{helpme}} on you user page with your question, and someone who understands more about copyright will hopefully come along and answer your question. Sorry I don't know the answer! Natalie 16:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images: Fair use and copyright issues

This is all a moot point. There are plenty here who take a far more cautious view but in my view and most would believe that the use of covers to illustrate is true "Fair use" and should be usable in book articles. We prefer the 1st edition cover as that is the significant publishing event. Also the us of own scans is prefered as the image itself is of your creation. This should be stated on the image upload details. However all scans used from website should be cited and acknowledged. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to Novels WikiProject

Hi, and welcome to the Novels WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to fiction books often referred to as "Novels".

A few features that you might find helpful:

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the members, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comment on Velama

Hi, just thought I'd let you know of an edit I made to the page, and of comments I have left on it's talk page. Thanks, Sdsouza 22:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Book infoboxes

Hi, What exactly do the 'Preceded by' and 'followed by' fields in the book infoboxes mean? Do we have to fill the fields only when the book is a part of a series? Or are they in the context of the author's publishing history (eg. 'preceded by' meaning the work published immediately before)?... I am asking this because I have seen infoboxes being filled both ways and it is confusing..

Yes it is (there is a little history to this that I won't bore you with). It appears to be ambiguous in name what the fields are for. However personally think the use as publishing sequence in unworkable (having used them that way in the past myself). I now recommend that we exclusively work towards in "series sequence". However there is a huge stock of articles that work another way. This is a personal view but the instructions that have been agreed on the template:Infobox Book are written that way. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Book article Original research

Also, about the plot synopses and 'themes' sections in book related articles: most of them border on or are obviously WP:OR. Is that allowed? I remember reading something on self-referencing (?)... whats the policy here?

This is a difficult one and many editors differ wildly over such issues. I personally think that a middle course is to allow use of the text as main reference, but with as little by way of personal bias evident as possible. i.e. no superlatives, compliments, value judgemens etc. This should be mainly the case for "plot introduction" and particularly "plot summary" sections. By the time we get to "major themes" we are really beginning to look at issues of judgement calls and these should be from third party verifiable (ie. referenced) source. By and large novel articles are pretty dreadful in terms of the level of referencing and in-line citations; if you can help in this respect please do. A real need. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN format

Bear in mind that the format for ISBN use is ISBN 0425038386 or ISBN 978-0425038383 - pure and simple - just thought that would help. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Your help

Regarding your article on BLV, the usual wikipedia practice is to give the link to a reference right next to a claim or statement, using the [1] tag. This adds a superscripted number there and the name of the reference is added to the "References" subsection automatically. This is more convenient and looks more professional than adding ** to the end of the statement/claim. This was why I added the [citation needed] tags. No offense intended. :) TwoOars (T | C) 05:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Twooars I didnot know this tag. But I glad to learn to use ist. thank you very much and I am not at all offended but very glad to learn something useful. I hope successfully! ThanksElisabeth Rieping 23:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)--

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Elisabeth_Rieping"

[edit] Velama

Thanks for your support on the talk page. I have begun the clean up by deleting the unencyclopedic lists. Hope you'll join in in the process. Abecedare 03:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Thanks

You are most welcome ! -- No Guru 21:24, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Monifieth High School

I've spent ages editing and maintaining the page and therefore its very irritating you slap on a clean up tag, scorning all my work without giving a reason--RMC1989 19:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No vandalism

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. DVD Coaster 20:17, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it was not vandalism. But i was not sure at first, unreferenced statements like that attract attention. How are we to know that it was Trevor who got these articles to FA status? Please refer WP:A for Wikipedia's policy on citing sources. TwoOars (T | C) 20:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
But I did assume bad faith on your part and i did not mention the reason in the edit summary when i reverted. I apologise for that. TwoOars (T | C) 20:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/w/o/User_talk%7ETwooars_3a8e.html"