User:Alan De Smet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Gary Gygax photo
Since Wired linked here, I should briefly note, the image of Gary Gygax that I took is available here under a Creative Commons license. You'll need to review the license yourself, but since it pretty much just asks for credit it should work for almost any purpose. You can find the image and licensing information here. It's available as large as 1536 by 2048.
[edit] Introduction
Alan De Smet is a bipedal land mammal.
If you were really bored, you might visit Alan De Smet's home page.
Everything from this point forward is pretty much just notes and useful links I use myself; you probably have more interesting things to look at. Of course, feel free to post on my talk page.
[edit] Useful Templates
Javascript tools for filling in common templates. Includes a "web cite" tool
[edit] Edit Summaries
[edit] No Linking on LARP List
Edit Summary text for List of live action role-playing groups:
No external links on this page. See [[Talk:List of live action role-playing groups|Talk]] for how to appropriately add an external link to your favorite group.
[edit] Other Citation Template
[edit] Things that make me weep for Wikipedia
There is a regrettably large number of editors who have decided that deleting things is more valuable than creating things. Sure, we need standards to keep Wikipedia from growing into a mass of fancruft and uncited garbage. However, one should at least feel guilty about deleting sincere contributions. This is made worse because defending articles from deletion is hard. Reading and working on Articles for Deletion reviews is soul-sucking work. As a result, people who are actively trying to improve Wikipedia by adding content stay away, since it's a time sink that detracts from doing good. So the deletion discussions are dominated by people biased toward deletion. Of course, having valid content deleted because it doesn't meet some petty deletion-biased bureauocrat's intepretation of the guidelines is massively frustrating, driving away potential editors. It makes editors think their time will be wasted; a belief with at least some elements of truth. Thankfully Wikipedia muddles on anyway, but it's not as great as it can be.
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dwellers of the Forbidden City - Apparently multiple third party reviews sometimes isn't quite notable enough. Ignoring that the guideline itself says, "A book is generally notable if it verifiably meets through reliable sources, one or more of the following criteria: 1. The book has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the book itself, with at least some of these works serving a general audience. This includes published works in all forms, such as ... reviews." In the process, the bureauocrats drove away a good user who made thousands of good edits over the past few years.
[edit] Utility Links
- User:Alan De Smet/monobook.css - Otherwise I'm going to forget it's there.
- Wikipedia:Possible copyright infringements
- Wikipedia:Wikipedia maintenance
- Category:Articles that need to be wikified
Links from User:Snoyes's welcome message on my discussion page
- Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers
- Wikipedia:How to edit a page
- Wikipedia:How to write a great article
- Wikipedia:Naming conventions
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style
- Wikipedia:Help
- Wikipedia:village pump
- Wikipedia:Wikipedians!
Tip: you can sign your name with ~~~~
[edit] To do list
- User:Alan De Smet/Template/Scratch - scratch space for experimenting with templates.
- User:Alan De Smet/Template Testing
- User:Alan De Smet/Ascender Corporation
- User:Alan De Smet/Gen Con Table
[edit] To done list
[edit] On advertising
I'm not a big fan of advertising, but Wikipedia would strongly benefit from more revenue. Advertising would solve the problem almost instantly. So long as the advertisements are automated, devoid of human intervention, (as Google's ads are) there should be no risk advertising harming the editorial content.
