User talk:Dell9300
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Dell9300, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Cyde Weys 20:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] New userboxes
Per the terms of the German userbox solution new userboxes should not be created in template space. Please read up on the current practices. That page has instructions on how to properly create userfied userboxes. --Cyde Weys 20:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] NTL/Telewest channel numbers on TV channel pages
I noticed you changed the infobox on the Five (TV) page to read: NTL Telewest linking to separate articles NTL and Telewest. On the Five Life and Five US page it is formatted as NTL Telewest linking to one article called NTL Telewest which redirects to NTL. Meanwhile the majority of pages have separate entries for each platform (and some still have the old NTL channel numbers before last month's reshuffle as I only managed to get as far as ~200 when I went through the list and haven't completed the task). Which do you think is better, to list NTL and Telwest channel numbers as though they are one platform, separate platforms on the same line, or separate platforms on separate lines? - Lee Stanley 14:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- I think NTL and Telewest should be on the same line, as two platforms when the channel has the same EPG number, since there isn't an NTL Telewest article (as you said NTL Telewest redirects to NTL). However if NTL and Telewest have different EPG numbers for a channel I think they sould be on separate lines.--Dell9300 14:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC) (copied)
- There shouldn't be any cases where the channel number is different on NTL and Telewest, as they have changed both NTL EPGs to match the Telewest one. I'm happy with your suggestion, and will copy this conversation to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_British_TV_channels and see if they agree over there before we go and change every infobox. Also, you can reply on your own talkpage as I have it on my watchlist :) - Lee Stanley 14:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- I noticed you changed another infobox this evening, so I highlighted my above comment. - Lee Stanley 17:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry!--Dell9300 17:20, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- It's OK. Just that the discussion for that infobox belongs there with the default template. So it's only fair. I think it likely they will agree, in which case I would be happy to help you with the task. - Lee Stanley 17:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- We can do this now. Do you want to start at 101 and work forwards, and I'll start at the top end of the EPG and work backwards? - Lee Stanley 17:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, that's fine. --Dell9300 16:35, 14 October 2006 (UTC)]
- How far have you got? I have done as far as 533: NASN, but there are a lot of gaps where the articles don't exist or haven't been separated from a worldwide article yet, so that equates to 35 edits. - Lee Stanley 18:49, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- Just to add to that, I've been sent a document detailing where some channels don't match EPG number, and which ones are only on one platform, so I'll go through those and mark on the relevant talk page that that's the case. - Lee Stanley 21:18, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- How far have you got? I have done as far as 533: NASN, but there are a lot of gaps where the articles don't exist or haven't been separated from a worldwide article yet, so that equates to 35 edits. - Lee Stanley 18:49, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, that's fine. --Dell9300 16:35, 14 October 2006 (UTC)]
- We can do this now. Do you want to start at 101 and work forwards, and I'll start at the top end of the EPG and work backwards? - Lee Stanley 17:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- It's OK. Just that the discussion for that infobox belongs there with the default template. So it's only fair. I think it likely they will agree, in which case I would be happy to help you with the task. - Lee Stanley 17:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry!--Dell9300 17:20, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- I noticed you changed another infobox this evening, so I highlighted my above comment. - Lee Stanley 17:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- There shouldn't be any cases where the channel number is different on NTL and Telewest, as they have changed both NTL EPGs to match the Telewest one. I'm happy with your suggestion, and will copy this conversation to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_British_TV_channels and see if they agree over there before we go and change every infobox. Also, you can reply on your own talkpage as I have it on my watchlist :) - Lee Stanley 14:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Price Is Right (UK game show)
Wow. Very nice work cleaning up this article today. I'm impressed! -TPIRFanSteve 02:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! --Dell9300 17:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Editors that don't provide an edit summary tend to look like vandals
I have noticed you commonly don't enter an edit summary as you didn't when you edited Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories (see this edit). This causes me problems. When I patrol for vandalism, I use the summary to make a preliminary decision on whether or not the post is a vandal edit or not. If the summary is present (or at least a section header, the part inside the /* */), I commonly decide the edit is legit and move on.
However, if no edit summary is available, I typically resort to loading the diff for the edit. This takes time. For that reason, if your edits are all valid, I ask that you provide edit summaries. For more on how to enter an edit summary, please read Help:Edit summary.
Incidentally, it is not just me that appreciate having edit summaries. When you omit your summary, you may be telling various bots that you are vandalizing pages. For this reason, please consider providing that summary. It is very important. You can enter that summary via the edit summary box on edit pages (as shown below).
- Page history - list of changes to the page you edited
- User contributions - list of all your edits
- Watchlist* - list of recent changes to watched pages (logged-in users only)
- diff page - shows the difference between two edits
- Recent changes - list of all recent edits
- Wikipedia IRC channels - real time list of all edits
- Related changes - list of recent changes to pages linked to the page you edited
- List of new pages: shows the edit summary of the creation.
For more tips on how to avoid being mistaken for a vandal, please visit Steps You Can Take to Avoid Being Thought of as a Vandal.
While you do enter summaries about half the time, that is half the time you skip that very important step. Will (Talk - contribs) 23:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bionic Woman episode list
Please explain on the Talk page for The Bionic Woman why you deleted the episode list. If an episode list article has been created, that's fine, but a link should have been created. I have reverted that change. Also, as noted in the above note to you, please include in any edit summaries you do a brief explanationr regarding the reasoning, otherwise unexplained changes -- such as the one I'm writing to you about -- are likely to be reverted without question. Additional -- I see you have in fact included such a link. This misunderstanding is the reasson why you shoud always include an edit summary. Cheers. 23skidoo 19:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Marple
Hello. I reverted because I feel that it is called Marple more than it is called Agatha Christie's Marple. For instance is most listings and IMDb it is called Marple:Name of Story (ie Marple:4.50 from Paddington), unlike Poirot, which is always called Agatha Christie's Poirot. I also do not believe that we can purely go by the opening credits, I think the TV listings and other sources combined are more reliable. When the programme was first commissioned a lot was made of it being called simply Marple, and also we musn't Americanise the title (as over there is airs as Agatha Christie's Miss Marple). If you choose to revert again, I most likely won't change it back, but I would prefer its stays where is. --UpDown 09:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Flag of Aberdeen
I have added Image:Flag of Aberdeen.gif you created to Symbols and mottos of Aberdeen but I cannot find any details on the origins, history or what the three castles represent (I always thought there was only one Aberdeen Castle...) I wondered if you know anything? Bobbacon 10:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have found out that the flag represents three castles that used be found in Aberdeen on three different hills. I know nothing else about them, not even if they existed in the same or different periods of time. Bobbacon 09:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] BBC Radio 1
Please could you explain why you have changed the logo twice to a worse quality version? Thank You. Tiddly Tom 20:31, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, and by a quick look at the homepage of BBC Radio 2, it does not appear they have yet changed their logo. Should we not keep the old one until it is used widespreadly Tiddly Tom 20:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- I have changed it so all the BBC Radio articles have the same size and shape of logo. Also the logo is only slighly worse quality. BBC Radio 2 and some other stations haven't updated their websites yet. Dell9300 20:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)#
-
-
- Can we not get a better quality version of the logo? In my option it being smaller and better quality is better. Tiddly Tom 20:50, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I've updated the quality of my version so we both win (good quality and same shape/size as others). Dell9300 20:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Brilliant, Thanks. Tiddly Tom 21:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] Murder, She Wrote DVD releases
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Murder, She Wrote DVD releases, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}}
to the top of Murder, She Wrote DVD releases. JohnCD (talk) 18:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
The reason I gave for the PROD was: "Wikipedia is not a sales catalogue. The news of DVD releases could be added to the main article: details of price etc. are not appropriate for Wikipedia." JohnCD (talk) 18:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)