User talk:Wfisher

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than (60) days are automatically archived to (User talk:Wfisher/Archive/Archive-2008). Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Contents

[edit] Please don't edit inside quotes

Regarding this edit to Russell's teapot: please do not edit content inside quotes. Even if the grammar appears wrong to you, don't touch it. If you think there is a problem, leave a note on the article's talk page and let other editors investigate and reach consensus. In this case, the previous grammar was correct, and even if it were wrong, it's a quote and should be left as is. Thank you. — coelacan talk — 05:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for my tone. I did not intend to give offense or overemphasize the issue. I've been involved in a fair number of disputes lately and I guess I let other frustrations seep over. You surely didn't deserve it. Regarding the "of" to "off", I was actually correcting another editor's decision that "off" really ought to be "of". Anyway, your own edit history is rather of quality, and I am sorry for biting you over this small thing. — coelacan talk — 06:41, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Apostrophes

Question: Are apostrophes supposed to be part of links? Should I link Robert (possessive) like Robert's or Robert's? Also if you could point to the part of Wikipedia help that mentions this rule that'd be great. Thanks.

Depends on the title of the page you're linking to. If it has the apostrohphe, use it. If not, don't. Otherwise you're giving a wrong picture of what you're linking to. Xiner (talk, email) 00:41, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Editing_FAQ#How_do_I_make_links.3F has links to other useful pages on the topic. Xiner (talk, email) 00:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:SheldonBrown.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SheldonBrown.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dolly Lenz

The article was deleted because it gave no independent verifiable references, and it was therefore not possible to establish from the article that Dolly met the notability criteria. It is up to creating editors to establish notability. There is nothing to stop you writing a suitable article to replace the deleted stub. Jimfbleak.talk.06:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that for short articles the speedy deletion tag previously added comes up as just "nn" or "nn-bio", leading to the suggestion that the deletion is requested because the person is non-notable. For longer articles the comment space is blank, and I now cut-and-paste a longer comment making it clear that it is evidence of notability that is missing. Jimfbleak.talk.08:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] thanks

Good fellow, I thank you for the removal of vandalism and such on the Dalton article. Its always quite amusing when I hear that the entirety of Horace Mann has been blocked from editing WP. --Osbus 02:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Good stuff, I know. Will 21:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Style note

Hi. Just a note. In math articles, per the math style manual, it is good to avoid the \forall and \in symbols whenever possible. Putting things in words makes it easier to read, and also, just as people prefer to write "three apples" instead of "3 apples", in a context where one mixes formulas with text using words is usually preferred. Thanks. You can reply here if you have comments. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)