User talk:Gs44631
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
{{help me}} I would like to work on Clean up of orphaned articles. However, i find that most of the articles in the orphaned list are already liked. Can be of help on this or does it take a experienced editor to do this. Gs44631 (talk) 14:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- An orphaned article may have many outgoing links, but few or no incoming links. Anyone could be of great help in finding (appropriate) articles to link to these orphaned articles. It would be very helpful.
- Also, some people don't remove banners when they no longer apply -- if you see an article that is not an orphan but is marked as one, removing that banner would be helpful too.
- Cheers, and happy wiki'ing! - Revolving Bugbear 15:01, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- For further clarification: If you saw the orphaned article...say..."History oftypewriters", then you might go to the article about typewriters and add a link to it from there--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 15:05, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 |
This user uses the editing tool wikEd |
Contents |
[edit] Welcome to the Orphanage
Hi there, Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for joining WikiProject Orphanage. If you have any questions about deorphaning, please don't hesitate to raise them on the project talk page or my talk page. Please make sure to read the guidelines on the project page before removing any templates from pre-existing orphans. Thanks, and happy editing :) Davidovic 23:34, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Gs44631, thanks for your question. Biographical and geographical stubs are some of the hardest articles to deorphan. The problem really lies in the notability of the subject. Wikipedia policy states that if a village, town or city exists, it deserves its own article. Battoni is an example of how this policy can result in completely orphaned articles. Battoni is such a small town that it doesn't even appear on Google Maps, but it is notable enough for Wikipedia.
- Biographical stubs are a little more difficult to gauge. If you believe that a biographical stub is not notable enough for Wikipedia, you could propose that it be deleted or put it up for an AfD. I would recommend the AfD process, because it results in the article being deleted or kept by a consensus of editors.
- The concern you raise is an important one, but at the moment there is not much we can do apart from try our best to deorphan as many articles as possible in a way that actually benefits those articles. If you attempt to deorphan an article and fail, you can replace the normal orphan template with the {{do-attempt}} template, but make sure to follow the link to that template and follow the instructions for using that template carefully, or it will not work. Thanks :) Davidovic 11:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- In response to your other questions: Yes, there are criteria for creating a biographical stub. The subject of the article must be notable enough to warrant their own article. Notability (people) is also a good page to read. Davidovic 11:29, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Adoption
Sorry, but I've only been on Wikipedia for 3 months, myself, and I'm still not that knowledgeable about much. To add to that, I have some major exams coming up and won't really be active for a while. Check out this page: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User for more info on adoptions :) If you do have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me, I usually check my messages once a day. Cheers, Davidovic 06:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Userbox
You might want to move that userbox from your talk page to your userpage :). Davidovic 11:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Adoption request
Thank you for requesting adoption with User:Marbles. Adoption can offer a whole host of benefits to an adoptee, including personal hints, advice, progress checks and much more.
For your information, I live in the United Kingdom, and therefore my timezone is UTC or BST. I am available on Wikipedia most days, and can offer advice on a range of topics including copyrighting images, policies, edit disputes, basic formatting, NPOV and referencing, alongside other ideas. To contact me, you can leave a message on my talk page or e-mail me.
If you wish to finalise an adoption status, please add {{adoptee|Marbles}} on your user page. If you already have the userbox {{adoptme}} on your page, please replace that with the one above. I can then add you to my list of adoptees.
Please don't hesitate to contact me. Many thanks, /Marbles (talk) 18:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Uploading pictures
Hi Gs44631!
Wikipedia's aim is to provide an ultimately free encyclopedia. Therefore the uploading of copyrighted images is forbidden from third party sources.
However, if the image in question enhances or illustrates an article (largely logos), it can sometimes be claimed under fair use. Since I don't know what this image is, I suggest you take a look at:
A photograph for example would most likely be inappropriate for Wikipedia. If possible, you can upload self-made versions of images. Whenever you upload an image, select the correct medium on the upload form, and information will be available there to assist you placing the correct copyright tags to an image.
Regards /Marbles (talk) 19:58, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] January 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles, as you did to Sex industry. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" is strongly discouraged. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Continued use of Wikipedia to promote AdultVest and Francis Koenig will get you blocked. [1] [2] / edg ☺ ☭ 07:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Adult Vest
Mate,have been away from Wiki for a while and just checked your message. what makes you think i was trying to promote adult vest.There are numourous references to other websites in the pages that i edited. I also think the reference to Adult vest was fully relevant to the section on ethical investing. Dont understand your rationale for blocking the edit. Gs44631 (talk) 18:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for asking.
- AdultVest has a history of self-insertion in various articles, so when I saw this firm again inserted into inappropriate articles, I presumed it was advertising. If your sincere intention was to improve those articles, then you have my apology.
- Your contribution to the Sex industry article seems to describe the company while shedding very little light on that article's topic. As this firm seems to be an investment novelty, neither representing a trend, nor having its own significant influence on the industry, a paragraph in that article gives this business undue weight. It's a gratuitous mention, regardless of the reason for the insertion. This is the reason AdultVest is removed from that article.
- The inclusion of AdultVest in Socially responsible investing is even less relevant. Obviously there are many trivial examples of investing that might be considered not socially responsible, and the inclusion of AdultVest is both questionable as an illustration, and violates WP:NPOV in the presumption that the sex industry is particularly opposite of social responsibility. The best examples are ones that need the least amount of argument that they are in fact exemplary.
- If you wish to contest the inclusion of "numerous references" to other companies in either of those articles, I would recommend you take it to the article Discussion pages. Your objections to those companies is not a rationale for including AdultVest. I hope this makes sense and seems fair to you. I've linked relevant Wikipedia policies where I think it might make things clear. / edg ☺ ☭ 22:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Unified orphan/de-orphan process
You might be interested in this discussion.--Aervanath's signature is boring 22:23, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
