User talk:RogDel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello, RogDel, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! DickClarkMises (talk) 17:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] January 2008

Hi there, welcome.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In your recent edit to Chas Smith, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Thank you. MKoltnow 04:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Something else that you can do which will really help other editors is to leave an edit summary on each edit you make. Just tell folks what you're changing by leaving a short description in the Edit summary box. MKoltnow 04:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] {nofootnotes}

For (what ought to be) very obvious reasons, please refrain from adding gratuitous {{nofootnotes}} templates to articles with only one source. Thanks. -- Fullstop (talk) 17:01, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tagging the pages

Hello RogDel. It is great to find you tagging the pages. This is good for the Project though sometimes looks really amusing! However, a little help in developing the contents shall be useful. I think that you will not take this as negative comments. Cheers. --Bhadani (talk) 12:19, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Bhadani, thanks for your message. However, I'm afraid, I see myself more comfortable at tagging the pages than developing the contents, at present. I hope tagging is a real essential work too? --RogDel (talk) 12:51, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
I think that it's OK for the time being, I mean the tagging work. However, I suggest that while tagging the pages, you may devote a little time to the existing contents too (I presume that you may be already doing this) to help in tasks, if required, like minor clean-ups and so on. And, sure, tagging is a fine job as it brings to focus certain missing aspects. I look forward to future when you will start enjoying contributing to contents too - you will surly be doing, I am sure. Regards. --Bhadani (talk) 14:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You tagging actions

Why don't you write at least one article after tagging a few hundred in two days? That said, you could also extract the footnotes out of the wiki links and external links that a lot of articles have that you keep tagging. That would be work but real help.--Peter Eisenburger (talk) 10:13, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for correcting the comma in one of my articles. But, additionally to what I said before, you should really think your actions over. I can see no sense in asking for footnotes and citations in articles like Jim Love (artist). There are five given references for this small article! You could read one of the referenced books and add well sourced information to the article. For now I deleted your tag. - You have been hinted to this point before by User:Fullstop. So will you please take a break? --Peter Eisenburger (talk) 12:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Harry Pye (prospector)

At your request, I have added footnotes to the Harry Pye (prospector) article, all of eight sentences. I hope that you don't find it too cluttered. I endorse Peter Eisenburger's and perhaps Fullstop's suggestion that you tackle footnoting one of these articles, as well as suggesting that it be done. It is work and not as much fun as writing or word-smithing articles. Big banners at the start of short articles are disheartening. It is often better to use the in-line fact template to identify specific facts that may be unusual or controversial, and not to use the header template Citations missing. --Bejnar (talk) 19:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Places of birth/death

You have been repeatedly moving these into the vital dates, which is exactly opposite the recommended practice. See this page.--BillFlis (talk) 15:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, just reverted your edit to Omer Clyde Aderhold so that all fukk dates are wikified. Please read WP:Date for correct formatting of dates. --Roswell native (talk) 04:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


==Kedar Joshi==

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Kedar Joshi, 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 Kedar Joshi. Bsnowball 13:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)