User talk:Chocolateboy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome to the CC

Multi-licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike License versions 1.0 and 2.0
I agree to multi-license my text contributions, unless otherwise stated, under the GFDL and the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license version 1.0 and version 2.0. Please be aware that other contributors might not do the same, so if you want to use my contributions under the Creative Commons terms, please check the CC dual-license and Multi-licensing guides.

[edit] Archives

[edit] Lads

Hey, why did you delete the lads thing? Its not really something you can source, unless I made a website and then wrote up a thing about lads on it, which is kinda cheating... It was all accurate. I forgot to mention "eshays," but apart from that its pretty true and so on. Anyway. Yeah. whatever.

--nbk

Hi. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:No original research.
chocolateboy 11:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seinfeld

Seinfeld discussion moved to User talk:Chocolateboy/Seinfeld.

[edit] Logical Quotation

I'm just getting started in Wikipedia. I think it would be fun to be a Wikipedian someday, as I do have some skills I can offer. I majored in history in college and was an award-winning newspaper reporter well-versed in the Associated Press writing style. I also possess strong grammar, spelling and punctuation skills. It drives me nuts to see writers in American English slide a quote mark inside a period or comma (when quote marks can only slide inside colons or semicolons). See http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp. However, I am not at all familiar with Wikipedia, the writing codes and just about everything else needed to write, edit or review. Any tips? Any thoughts? Any edits?

Hi there.
Thanks for your edits. Unfortunately, I've had to revert those that change the quotation style from "logical" to "illogical" quotation. This has been debated many times and the consensus is that we use logical quotation on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Quotation marks (and here ;-).
chocolateboy 18:56, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips. I'll do some reading on the punctuation that you mentioned. If that's the wikipedia syle I'll just have to deal, right? Thanks again for the help. Appendophobia 03:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually I don't think Wikipedia has come to a clear consensus on punctuation involving quotation marks. I read the writing guide style book as well as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_marks. I see no grammatical or historical basis for using the "logical" punctuation style of commas and periods outside quote marks. I guess I'll have to agree to disagree. I do understand Wikipedia is international and UK writers would state my punctuation style is in the wrong. I still plan to use Wikipedia often for reading and learning purposes, but I won't plan on doing any writing. I won't be able to write using incorrect punctuation in my own original articles or edits. Appendophobia 06:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi. You mentioned the Quotation mark article on my talk page. Obviously a Wikipedia article is distinct from a Wikipedia Manual of Style guideline. My own view is that what you describe as the "UK" style is also the "hacker" style and (according to the CMS) the style preferred in technical contexts; and the "US" style is an artifact that has everything to do with obsolete typographical limitations and nothing of the logic one associates with, say, US corrections of UK orthographical inconsistencies.
Either way, I hope you will continue to edit and contribute here.
chocolateboy 13:31, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia

Hi, I hope this isn't canvassing but I was wondering if you would be interested in this Wikipedia:WikiProject Trivia and Popular Culture. If not, could you share this link with editors you think may be interested. Thanks Ozmaweezer 13:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Netfirms

I saw (and responded to) your posting on the spam white list. If you're having trouble with particular spammers I wanted to invite you over to WikiProject Spam. Some of the regulars there are great investigators and it's often useful to have help, or just an extra set of eyes, when tracking down and thwarting spammers. -- SiobhanHansa 16:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Netfirms

I recently updated the Netfirms entry. Do you have any suggestions for further improvements? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jess Taylor (talk • contribs) 16:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Scally

An article that you have been involved in editing, Scally, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scally (2nd nomination). Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 18:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Christophe beck screenshot.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Christophe beck screenshot.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Loaded (magazine)

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Loaded (magazine), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 20:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel awards and nominations

I have nominated Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel awards and nominations, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel awards and nominations. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Collectonian (talk) 21:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FAR

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV series) has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)