User talk:TheTrojanHought

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, TheTrojanHought, 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 ask your question there. Again, welcome!  J Milburn 17:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Geographical features of Askam and Ireleth

It is certainly worth considering- I will mention it on the article talk page. J Milburn 17:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lists of tropical cyclone names

Please do not change List IV to indicate it is the list for 2012. The World Meteorological Organization has not met yet, and assuming no names were retired is original research. Hurricanehink (talk) 16:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Gangs in GTA Series Page

Hi, TheTrojanHought. Your opinions in the development of the criteria for inclusion of gangs on the list for the GTA series were very helpful. Please pop over there and cast your vote on the final version of the criteria. Your opinion is an important part of the consensus! Eganio 09:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Linking dates

Hi I noticed you took the time to link single years in some articles, but I would like to point out that generally the practice is frowned upon as it clutters the page, so you might want to save your energy. You can read about the relevant guidelines here. Thanks and happy editing! Katr67 16:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Askam and Ireleth

I will get back to Askam and Ireleth- it is the closest article to featured I have been part of, I'm just waiting for the motivation. I am gonna need to find some half decent sources about it, too. If you want to add the section yourself, feel free, but please remember to source it well. J Milburn 18:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that looks fine. J Milburn 15:01, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link removal

Could you please stop removing what you refer to as 'faulty links'. The red links are not faulty, they are links to articles which have yet to be created. Thanks. Figaro 04:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Help needed

Sorry for the delayed reply, I have limited Internet access. Sourcing is explained in detail here, and sources used should be reliable sources, so should be primarily third party. Marking a page as 'patrolled' is a very new feature in the software Wikipedia uses- it means someone has seen the page, and has either done what is needed to delete it, or believes that it should be deleted, so as it stands, it does not look like the page will be deleted. I have made a few tweaks on the article, as well as tagging it as needing categories. Take a read of this to get an understanding of categorisation. Focus on the real world information about the series- sales, critique, inspiration, controversy... that kind of thing, rather than the in world (characters, plot etc) to make a good article, and remember to cite reliable sources. Take a look at similar articles of a high standard (such as Harry Potter) to get an idea of ways to structure, and information to include. Feel free to contact me if you need any more help, but I may take a few days to reply. J Milburn (talk) 18:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Lakes in England

Thanks for your updating. When this was first started I thought that in time it might be possible to provide more structured information as in the tabular section of List of lakes in Wales. However the task seemed mind numbingly large and I went on to other things. However, a more structured approach might be more encyclopaedic and your updates would help towards such a structure in the future. Any thoughts ? Velela (talk) 20:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

re your comments - I would fully support any grouping or ordering that makes the list more usable. Even if one pattern is used for now it is relatively easy to re-group off-line on a spreadsheet and re-import if there is consensus for a different way of grouping. However, I guess grouping would be better completed before moving to tabular format which would be destroyed by any spreadsheet sort. Velela (talk) 20:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)