User talk:Notmyhandle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Notmyhandle, 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:

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!  - CrazyRussian talk/email 12:01, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Deleted page "Cut it Out (album)"

Hi. A page you created, Cut it Out (album), has been deleted in accordance with our deletion policy.

Wikipedia has certain standards for inclusion that all articles must meet. Certain types of article must establish the notability of their subject by asserting its importance or significance. Additionally, since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, content inappropriate for an encyclopedia, or content that would be more suited to somewhere else (such as a directory or social networking website) is not acceptable. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for the relevant policy.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable notability guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content; it will be deleted again and may be protected from re-creation. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article. If you have any questions, please contact an administrator for assistance. Thank you – Gurch 11:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of Nintendo trademarks

Thanks for adding so many things to the list, you did a great job !--Granpire Viking Man 23:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Sonata Arctica

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Notmyhandle! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. You've received this warning 1 times. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, and try to reinsert the link again. If your link was genuine spam, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 09:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Shop View.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Shop View.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Section Headers/Syntax

{{helpme}} What are the rules for sections, aka the use of "==", because I started changing pages so that the sections would be one tier greater (reducing the amount of equal signs) and then noticed that it was generally used that the double equal sign is the highest tier. When should I use the single equal sign for headers? --Notmyhandle 10:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, this would help you. Wikipedia:Introduction. Use the helpme tag again, in case you need help. Best wishes. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 10:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I got the information from Wikipedia:Manual of Style. --Notmyhandle 18:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What's the best structure for external links & references?

{{helpme}}

What is the best way to structure the external links and references section of an article? should it be in two separate sections, i.e. equal tiered headers? Should they be tiered underneath one another, where references is under external links because an external link can have a reference? Should it be combined into "External Links & References"? --Notmyhandle 00:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

In my experience "external links" and "reference" sections are kept separate, with References being first. I'd use top-level sections for each of them (== References == & ==External links==). Most often external links are sorted alphabetically by title. Alternatively the official site could be listed first with the rest in alphabetical order.
For the reference section, are you planning on using the <ref></ref> tags? ---J.S (T/C) 19:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I use <ref> tags, which is why I've been putting the reference section after external links in case an external link would need a reference... --~~~~
Gotta use the <nowiki> tags around REF tags or they mess up talk pages:). External links shouldn't ever need references, since it's just a list of "see also" type links. ---J.S (T/C) 20:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chrono Trigger

Thanks for catching my thinko! — Feezo (Talk) 01:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alphabetize "Bellingham, Washington" by which name?

Hi, Notmyhandle, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

I noticed you just went to the trouble of alphabetising all the entries in Bellingham, Washington#Notable citizens. However, you alphabetised by first name. The entries were already alphabetised by last name.

I think last name is a better choice of ordering for lists in an encyclopedia. In a formal context like an encyclopedia, phone book, or list of Nobel Prize honorees, it's conventional to order by the last name. The last name is the more public or formal name. So I think we should go back to the previous ordering.

Could you please tell me your reasons using first-name order? thanks! --Jdlh | Talk 00:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I alphabatized by the name currently displayed. Seeing as the names are not Lastname, Firstname, listing by lastname would only make them visually disorganized. If you go ahead and change the name formatting, I'd be happy to re-alphabatize. I didn't want to change anything on the page, just organize the existing format in some fashion. --Notmyhandle 00:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess I don't see having names spelled as "firstname lastname", but ordered as "lastname, firstname", as visually disorganised. I don't think changing to "lastname, firstname" spelling would be much of an improvement, so I'm not inclined to do that work. I do think that sorting by first name is a step backwards, and would like to see that changed. I'll bring it up on the Bellingham article's Talk page, and see what other editors think. Let's discuss it there. --Jdlh | Talk 00:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] subst

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When using certain templates on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:uw-test1}} instead of {{uw-test1}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thank you. -- pb30<c.t> 20:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sent in Slipknot (band)

I removed "The band's genre is disputed among listeners and is thus classified under several."(or at least the current altered version of the sentence), because it was based on your interpretation of the situation rather than what any source actually said. If you can find a source that states "The band's genre is disputed among listeners and is thus classified under several." or something similar to that, I'll have no opposition to the addition of the sentence.--Wildnox(talk) 01:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Paradise Lost (Symphony X Album)

Uh I moved the tags to the top because that's where they are supposed to be, as ugly as they are. Even guidline pages have them, like Wikipedia:Guide to layout. They are there to tell you what's wrong or what's going on. I didn't even see the tags until I scrolled to the bottom of the code for no reason and saw them there. The about to be released tag is at the top of EVERY album that is expected to be released. This should be no exception. It's to inform readers that it is yet to be released and that they should be more critical of the information that appears on the ppage because it is harder to verify. Anyways, just look at other pages; not user opinions. I don't actually have a definite answer so I won't move them back to the top, however once I find that answer and the Wikipedia guideline page that has it, they will be placed accordingly. --Notmyhandle 01:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Guideline pages having them are perfectly fine. The problem with tags, as the essay points out, is that they are self-referential. Can you imagine reading Britannica and finding a comment at the top of an article that says, "This article could have been better written"? Of course not. But on pages that tell Wikipedian editors what to do, tags make sense. Such tags do not detract from our professional appearance.
There is no policy that says that articles need tags. It has become convention. But that convention started with an idea, and evolved into the ugly mess that we have now. Fortunately, the tide is slowly beginning to turn, because of other ideas. We now have small, unobtrusive protection tags available, such as seen on George W. Bush. These were created by editors who recognized how foolish our tag system makes us look.
As to tags about upcoming albums (or bridges, or buildings, or elections), my feeling is that we should not treat our readers as morons. If an article starts of with the words, Paradise Lost is the yet-to-be released seventh studio album by progressive metal band Symphony X. Its release has been delayed numerous times since the announcement on November 16, 2005, that they were going to "Start pulling it all together", then I'm guessing that the reader is not so stupid that he won't realize that a) the album is not yet available, and b) the album may not yet have taken its final shape. Do you know anybody so dense that they wouldn't realize that that's what those words mean?
The future tags are unnecessary because what they tell us can be and should be covered in the first sentence or two of the article. If you look in the 2007 World Book, it will have an article, I'm sure, on the Orion spacecraft that is being developed to take us back to the moon. The fact that Orion will be completed in the future will be made clear in the writing, not in some silly "tag" at the top of the article: "This article is about a spacecraft that will fly in the future. Information may change rapidly as . blah, blah, blah."
I place them at the bottom because I know that deleting them will appear to others to be vandalism, rather than my attempt to improve things. And in fact, it's too early to eliminate them; we need more small icons to be created. What I'm doing is a stopgap measure. And I know that you're trying to uphold the convention, which is worthy of respect, and you have mine. I ask you though to consider helping to make the project even better. Unschool 02:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Look at the upper right hand corner. You'll see the padlock that also appeared on the old tag, but smaller, much less obtrusive. Holding your cursor over it indicates its purpose.
And welcome! I am merely a humble servent spreading the word. If you actually know how to create such things, then I encourage you to create some new icons for future events. Unschool 04:00, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archmage (computer game)

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Archmage (computer game), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest 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. Marasmusine 16:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Humourous

I saw your message on User talk:Spellmaster about this spelling mistake. You may be thinking of "humor" and "humour" which are the U.S. and UK English spellings. "Humorous" is spelled like that throughout the world though. Thanks for caring about spelling. --Guinnog 00:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nice job on template

I caught the discussion between you and Unschool over at his talk page, and I must say the new cleanup template you're working on is very nice. It's a lot sleeker and more attractive than the huge block-o-blue that is the current design. If you decide to submit it, let me know, and I'll throw in my two cents. Horologium talk - contrib 01:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Likewise I too saw your conversation on Unschool talk page. It seems that there are more people who agree on this issue than is at first apparent, please see Wikipedia:Template standardisation/article and its talk page. --Philip Baird Shearer 08:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Invitro WIWAP Cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Invitro WIWAP Cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — Save_Us † 15:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Wolf Band Logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Wolf Band Logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of List of samples used by DJ Sharpnel

I have nominated List of samples used by DJ Sharpnel, 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/List of samples used by DJ Sharpnel. 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. Jfire (talk) 04:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)