User:CliffC/Help

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a Wikipedia user page.

This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CliffC/Help.

Contents
Common Quail
Common Quail

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

[edit] Handy links




[edit] Borrowed (from user Ewulp) bookmarks

[edit] Handy rules

[edit] Handy edit summary phrases

  • copyedit [ and ... ]
  • revert unexplained change of content
  • rv unexplained deletions. If you are unable or unwilling to explain your thought processes, please do not delete material from wikipedia.
  • rv good faith edit, superfluous
  • out of place
  • not pertinent
  • rm entry of unclear notability
  • switching back to the simple English word that everyone understands
  • remove unsourced statement
  • removing unsourced and unintegrated material, see WP:V and WP:TRIVIA
  • remove imprecise statement (for when it's really crazy)
  • remove irrelevant {or distracting) information (or link)
  • remove unencyclopedic additions ( irreparably ungrammatical or misspelled )
  • remove incomplete edit ( by 24.13.nn.nn )
  • remove unhelpful additions
  • remove unnecessary elaboration
  • remove material not directly associated with article's subject ( xxxx )
  • remove trivia, there is no point in cataloging every time FLW's name is mentioned in passing
  • remove unsubstantiated claim
  • rv suspected linkspam; external videos are not linked inline, and may not be welcome in External Links
  • remove addition; no evidence of notability for Firstname Lastname to WP:BIO standards
  • remove two more Parkers without articles supporting their notability
  • tagging {{Notability}}; may indeed be notable but this isn't asserted by WP:Reliable sources
  • remove poorly sourced material per WP:RS & WP:BLP
  • remove blog item per WP:RS (self-published source)
  • remove material quoting non-notable subject per WP:NOTE
  • remove assertions based on self-published sources per WP:RS (Fady Bahig)
  • remove irrelevant (possibly true but non-cited, could be true, doesn't matter) edit by 68.113.nn.nn
  • remove potentially libelous unsourced addition (NN person added to list of Mafia members/associates)
  • massive revert, the last editor's edits add nothing but improperly sourced, POV and coatrackish content
  • reverting known vandal, edit might have been constructive but why take a chance
  • not disputing this, just asking for a source
  • This is not a newspaper. Such information quickly becomes dated

[edit] How to do cites

<ref name= "NYT_yyyy-mm-dd"> {{ cite news
| url=
| title=
| last=
| first=
| date= [[yyyy-mm-dd]]
| publisher= [[The New York Times]]
| quote=
| accessdate= 2008-01-dd }}</ref>

  • Cite web site[3]

<ref name= "name">{{cite web
| url=
| title=
| last=
| first=
| publisher=
| quote=
| accessdate= 2008-01-dd }}</ref>

<ref name="name">{{cite book
| title=
| last=
| first=
| publisher= [[Random House]]
| date= yyyy
| pages=
| quote=
| isbn= 0-394-55263-6 }}</ref>

  • Cite online book (? - WiP)[5]
  • ...has been called "the most remarkable achievement in baseball history".[6]
  • Cite video or DVD[7]

[edit] How cited references appear

  1. ^ Fainaru, Steve. "Silver Stars Affirm One Unit's Mettle", Washington Post, 2005-06-26. Retrieved on 2007-03-03. 
  2. ^ Gaudin, Sharon. "California Man Gets 6-Year Sentence For Phishing", InformationWeek, 12 June 2007. Retrieved on 2007-07-01. "newspaper quote goes here" 
  3. ^ Ocala/Marion County Visitors & Convention Bureau. Retrieved on 2006-04-30. “web quote goes here”
  4. ^ Merola, Mario (1988). Big City D.A.. Random House, 7-27. ISBN 0-394-55263-6. “book quote goes here” 
  5. ^ Merola, Mario. Big City D.A. (online excerpt). 
  6. ^ CNN/SI, The Longest Hitting Streak in History, 17 July 1961
  7. ^ Mumia Abu-Jamal. Mumia Abu-Jamal: A Case for Reasonable Doubt? [DVD of HBO TV Special]. London, UK: Otmoor Productions.

[edit] Official multi-level warnings

[edit] Vanity / conflict of interest

( à la quoting the works of Fady Bahig )

What to type What it makes
{{subst:uw-coi|Article}} If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Article, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
  1. editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
  3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
    and you must always:
  4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you.

[edit] British to American & vice-versa

What to type What it makes
{{subst:uw-lang|Article}} In a recent edit to the page Article, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For subjects exclusively related to Britain (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to other English-speaking countries, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the appropriate variety of English used there. If it is an international topic, use the same form of English the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to the other, even if you don't normally use the version the article is written in. Respect other people's versions of English. They in turn should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. If you have any queries about all this, you can ask me on my talk page or you can visit the help desk. Thank you.

Also, thanks to user Tocharianne,
I just wanted to let you know I reverted some of your changes and wanted to explain why. On Units of textile measurement there's no need to change from American to British spelling since both are acceptable on Wikipedia. You can check out WP:ENGVAR to learn more about that. Hope you enjoy editing on Wikipedia!

[edit] Other vandal warnings

==Your 17 December 2006 edits to [[Brick Township]]== Please do not remove information from articles unless it is incorrect or inappropriate, and then please explain the reason for removal in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. Such edits can be seen as [[Wikipedia:vandalism|vandalism]]. --~~~~

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia, as you did on [[27 February]] by replacing the [[Peter Drucker]] paragraph in [[Marketing]] with a quote from yourself [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marketing&diff=111325249&oldid=111175915]). Removing content is considered [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]]. --~~~~

[edit] Trivia: "a few examples suffice." Thanks, Ewulp!

<!--A few examples suffice here to make the point that Magritte's work is often referenced in popular culture. It is neither possible nor desirable to list every pop culture reference to Magritte in this article. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of trivia; please consider whether any proposed addition will shed important new light on the subject: Magritte.-->

[edit] You've spammed this link 5 times, please stop

Please do not add commercial material to Wikipedia, as you did to Pay per click. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Please don't add links to this or any other article unless the link has its own Wikipedia article. Red (no article) links will be removed on sight. --CliffC 16:39, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

{{subst:uw-advert2|Pay per click|Please don't add links to this or any other article '''unless the link has its own Wikipedia article'''. [[reddllinkkedd|Red]] (no article) links will be '''removed on sight'''.}} --~~~~

[edit] Please provide edit summaries

It would be helpful if you left an edit summary along with your edits, other editors had to spend time checking whether this was a legitimate edit or a vandalism. Thanks. --CliffC 18:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unsigned edits to Talk pages

Please try to sign your Talk page edits with four tildes (~~~~) so that everybody can see who said what when. Thanks. --CliffC 02:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good rant by Adrian M. H.

<start rant>Misuse of Wikipedia really gets my hackles up. This is, as it says in the tagline, an encyclopædia. Which means, among other things, that it is not here to provide free webspace for advertorial. We are here solely to build a verifiable, factual, and neutral compendium of the notable aspects of academic, scientific, historical, and cultural knowledge. Incidentally, if those of us who regularly nominate articles for speedy removal were to notify their creators every time, it would double our workload: we have no specific obligation to do so. The number of article deletions per day are in the four-figure region.<end rant/> Adrian M. H. 22:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your upset boss (comments by Canuckle, on Alison Lawton)

  • Tell your boss to calm down and realize that she can not control what other people say about her. The article about her has flags on it because in its current state it is a fawning fluff piece written by one of her employees. You're only making it worse with your contributions. Wikipedia is not a vanity page service and not her personal or corporate website. I sympathise with you and I'll try to take a look at it in my spare time. The rest of us are volunteer contributors you know, not paid to make her look good like you are. Canuckle (talk) 23:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why were my links removed? - an explanation

On almost any topic, there are web sites containing more information than the corresponding Wikipedia article. However, we try to encourage more content to be added to Wikipedia while keeping external links to a minimum. To do this, volunteers regularly review articles and prune external links.

One method we use to determine whether a link should stay or go is how it was added to the article. In this case, your link was added "bare" (no additional content was added to the article), across several articles. This approach always raises a red flag; if I had not noticed and removed those links, someone else almost certainly would have.

Wikipedia needs more content, not more external links. The best way to incorporate a link that points to an external web site is to contribute cited text - add information to the article that can be learned from the link in question and then cite it per normal guidelines. This is the happy medium that we strive for.

I hope this explains why your links were removed. For the future, here are some guidelines on external links: *[[WP:SPAM#How_not_to_be_a_spammer]] information regarding link spamming (in particular, see point number 2 in this guideline)
*[[WP:EL]] External Links guidelines
*[[WP:CITE]] Wikipedia citation guidelines
--~~~~

[and maybe...]

I have checked the history of the John Pierpont article, and you're right, in that case I did overlook your previous edit in which you contributed much of the article's text. However I do stand by the remainder of my removals, as only the bare links were contributed (Special:Contributions/129.219.46.76).
One of the major goals of Wikipedia is to compile a print version, for which more content and citations is much needed. If you are adding a link that serves as a reference for text that is in the Wikipedia article, then great (and thanks!) - but I urge you to focus on adding more content to the articles as you did with the John Pierpont article. If your website can be used as a source for the content you add, then by all means include it as a citation. Thanks! --AbsolutDan (talk) 23:56, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why were my links/articles removed? - another explanation

To expand for Adrian, and to explain perhaps the most important issue you mentioned, the copyright policy is quite clear: You may not copy and paste any portion of another website or page to create (or add to) a Wikipedia article. This is for legal reasons, which I'm sure you'll understand when reading the copyright policy (click on the blue words to read what they are about). Now, to expand above: Conflict of interest is when you create, or edit, an article about yourself, your family, company, product, or friends, as you would likely be unable to edit neutrally. Neutrality is one of the core policies of Wikipedia, as is verifiability. Verifiability means that any information given in an article must be verifiable with reliable, third-party sources. Reliable sources are not: Blogs, forums, fan site, personal sites, MySpace, etc. Reliable sources are: News articles, professional journals, magazines, TV news websites, or websites that perform fact checking to verify the items they report, to name a few. Without sources and verifiability, information is classified as original research, and not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Additionally, there are many notability guidelines, that cover everything from people to music, to academics. Basically notability means that something is important enough that the media has taken an interest in it, and has written about it, in more than one news article. Most important people are written about and reported on, so when notability isn't an issue, the sources to cite are quite easy to obtain. Hope this helps explain the issues! Ariel♥Gold 16:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Why was my page deleted?" - another explanation, by Ariel

Dear Sirs, I posted a page describing a new class of pharmaceutical products called a " "tarmogen" and it was apparently deleted. This is something that has been published on in major journals such as cancer research and nature medicine. I don't understand the wikipedia site or process well enough to figure out what or why it happened. Can you advise? Thanks. Former_ski_bum (talk) 20:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)kirk_christoffersen

According to the deletion log: 18:28, November 14, 2007 DragonflySixtyseven (Talk | contribs) deleted "Tarmogen" ‎ (copyvio). Which means the text was copied and pasted into Wikipedia, which is against copyright policy. For legal reasons, we cannot accept information taken word-for-word from other sites. Information must be summarized, paraphrased, condensed, and then can be submitted, if properly cited with reliable, third-party sources, because without them, there is no way to verify the information, which leads to original research, which is also not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Additionally, it appears you may be somehow connected with the product, judging from your image upload log, so I'll also direct you to the conflict of interest guideline, which discourages editing or creating articles about yourself, company, product, family or friends, as it would be difficult to edit neutrally. Neutrality is one of the core pillars of Wikipedia, so it is often best to allow someone uninvolved create articles with which you may have a personal connection. See Wikipedia's manual of style, layout guide, your first article, article development, and how to edit for further assistance, and if you'd like to allow a neutral editor to create your article, you can submit it to articles for creation, explaining that you are connected to the product, and thus, would like another editor to create it so there is no risk of COI. If you choose to do that, be sure you cite multiple, reliable third-party sources (company websites are not reliable sources, nor are blogs, personal websites, etc., and generally press releases, are also not considered to be a third-party source.). I hope that helps explain some of the policies and guidelines here. If you have any other issues, feel free to ask here, or at the Help Desk. Welcome to Wikipedia! Ariel♥Gold 20:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Well said, Ariel :) J-ſtanTalkContribs 20:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another keeper, this one from Gwernol

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Web hosting service, you will be blocked from editing. Gwernol 15:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

How do I have or get legitimate pages about my companies or articles into Wikipedia? It seems that all of the top hosting companies have their own pages. That doesn't exactly seem fair. Do I have to know or pay someone or is the system truely free? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.229.106 (talk • contribs)

If your company is notable enough to have been covered in multiple published, independent sources then someone else will write the article for you. You cannot, since that would be a conflict of interest. There is no payment ever required for Wikipedia articles, but we also have minimum standards of notability and we do not allow you to promote your own company through spam. Thanks, Gwernol 15:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Other spammer warnings

Some approaches to handling a persistent linkspammer

[edit] Nice piece on corporate "involvement"

It seems that you need to understand how Wikipedia works: No one owns an article; this is not the place for any "official corporate identity statements"; and no one has any say whatsoever about how their company is presented. This is an encyclopædia, not an advertising portal, promotional tool, soapbox or freespace, and no one gets to say whether their company is mentioned or not. WP:CORP does that. The history of the article shows that NPOV was violated as well. Adrian M. H. 15:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Overlinking

==Overlinking in [[Popcorn (disambiguation)]]==
Just a note, no big deal - but you might want to take a look at [[Overlinking]], especially the second bullet, characterizing overlinks as "Links that have little information content, such as linking on specific years like 1995, or unnecessary linking of common words used in the common way, for which the reader can be expected to understand the word's full meaning in context, without any hyperlink help"; and [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)]] advising in favor of "avoiding distracting information, such as extraneous links (internal or external)". Regards, ~~~~

==Overlinking in [[Italian American]]==
You might want to take a look at [[Overlinking]], especially the second bullet, characterizing overlinks as "Links that have little information content, such as linking on specific years like 1995, or unnecessary linking of common words used in the common way, for which the reader can be expected to understand the word's full meaning in context, without any hyperlink help"; and the third bullet, "A link for any single term ... excessively repeated in the same article"; finally [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)]] advising in favor of "avoiding distracting information, such as extraneous links (internal or external)". --~~~~

[edit] Removal of warnings

Policy does not prohibit users from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. Deleted warnings can still be found in the page history.

[edit] Why waste time posting all these warnings?

Lots of warnings but no blocks. Why do we even bother? --CliffC (talk) 14:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Test here

Y Done
N Not done

It has high-waisted, wide-legged, tight-cuffed pegged trousers (called tramas) and a long coat with wide lapels and wide padded shoulders (called the carlango).

Daniel Faulkner
Daniel Faulkner
Daniel Faulkner
Daniel Faulkner
Daniel Faulkner
Daniel Faulkner
Abu-Jamal
Abu-Jamal