User talk:Zatchmort

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Zatchmort, and welcome to Wikipedia! Here are some recommended guidelines to help you get involved. Please feel free to contact me if you need help with anything. Best of luck and happy editing!  ♥ Kylu  (talk • contribs • email • logs • count)
Getting Started
Getting your info out there
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting Help
Getting along
Getting technical

Glad you finally decided to join our secret Cabal and help take over the world!join Wikipedia as a registered user! If you run into any questions, please feel free to leave a note on my talkpage! :D ~Kylu (u|t) 04:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents

Question about Notability, Verifiable info (Originally from [[User talk:Kylu)

Hey, thanks for the welcome message! You said to ask you if I had any questions, so here goes.

  • I recently found that my school has an entry in Wikipedia. The article is short, with a decent intro, but the specific details are just kind of random, not very broad or informative. My question is this: can I expand the page (as an "expert"), with the idea that some data is better than no data-- or should I leave it, until someone who carries around verifiable sources (newspaper articles, maybe?) comes along?
  • Wikipedia has entries on several webcomics, as well as the concept itself, but not one of my personal favorites. As I understand it, Wikipedia is not just a general-purpose encyclopedia, but also a collection of more specialized encyclopedias (hence the number of detailed articles on individual species of plants, computer terminology, philosophy, etc.) On the other hand, I've heard complaints from people who say WP is becoming cluttered with trivia, and there are rules (guidelines?) about notability. So, should I go ahead and write the page (I consider it significant-- it's about the second webcomic I ever heard of), or leave off, because it's not notable and would just get deleted anyway? --Zatchmort 21:12, 1 July 2006 (UTC)


  1. There's no problem with your expanding the page on your school and in fact we welcome you to do so! So, saying that, there's the catches. When you go to edit an article, it says (right below the edit box, actually) Content must not violate any copyright and must be based on verifiable sources.
    There's important stuff here: Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability are directly named. If I put "The house at 10292 on my block is owned by a family of five and the head of household is a Politician", it may well be truth, but if it's not verifiable, reliable source then the information needn't be included. Ideas though: Does your school paper have a website? How about the PTA or School Board? I bet there are more citable sources than you think there are. :)
  2. As far as your webcomic goes, I have a funny way of determining notability on something "Iffy" like that. First, google the thing and see if there are a lot of mentions on sites other than the comic. Typically at around 500 hits, I start thinking the content is 'pedia-worthy. That's like asking how you vote on an AfD though, really. Check out Wikipedia:Notability (web). If you absolutely can't decide... well, y'know, write the article anyway. Do a good job. If it gets deleted for being non-notable, then your question is answered! :D Seriously though, if it gets deleted for "fails to establish notability" then that's where you really want to focus. Determine if and why the webcomic is notable. Attempt to explain this in the article. Compare to other similar articles.
  3. Lastly, if the community decides that your contribution doesn't live up to its standards, make sure you don't take it personally. If you have the opportunity, make the article content better. If it's a notability issue and about to be speedy-deleted, put {{holdon}} on the article page and talk it out with the people that feel it's not notable. Network with people, establish dialog, communicate. That's what we're good at. :) Ask if they'll change it from a speedy-delete to a {{prod}} or possibly AfD.
I really hope that helped you a bit. I do mean it, though... if you have questions, just ask me. I love to help! :D ~Kylu (u|t) 21:47, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ATT Poll

Did you realize you put your vote in the 3rd section "Neutral/qualified/compromise/other"? Just asking. Johnbod 21:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] VeggieTales

Thanks for the copy editing. I'm embarrassed that I missed "it's"! --Flex (talk/contribs) 21:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!

Hello Zatchmort! Welcome to Wikiproject Christianity! Thank you for joining. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing!
Getting Started
Useful Links
Miscellaneous
Work Groups
Projects
Similar WikiProjects

TTalk to me 23:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] June 2007 Wikiproject Christianity Newsletter

June 2007 Automatically delivered by HermesBot

[edit] Kent FAC

Hi. I'm sorry to bother you, but as a LoCE member, I just wondered if you would be willing to have a look through the Kent article. It is currently a Featured Article Candidate and needs a copy-edit for grammar by someone who hasn't yet seen it. Any other ways to improve the article would also be welcome. Thank you very much, if you can. Epbr123 16:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] League of Copyeditors roll call

Greetings from the League of Copyeditors. Your name is listed on our members page, but we are unsure how many of the people listed there are still active contributors to the League's activities. If you are still interested in participating in the work of the League, please follow the instructions at the members page to add your name to the active members list. Once you have done that, you might want to familiarise yourself with the new requests system, which has replaced the old /proofreading subpage. As the old system is now deprecated, the main efforts of the League should be to clear the substantial backlog which still exists there.
The League's services are in as high demand as ever, as evinced by the increasing backlog on our requests pages, both old and new. While FA and GA reviewers regularly praise the League's contributions to reviewed articles, we remain perennially understaffed. Fulfilling requests to polish the prose of Wikipedia's highest-profile articles is a way that editors can make a very noticeable difference to the appearance of the encyclopedia. On behalf of the League, if you do consider yourself to have left, I hope you will consider rejoining; if you consider yourself inactive, I hope you will consider returning to respond to just one request per week, or as many as you can manage. Merry Christmas and happy editing, The League of Copyeditors.

MelonBot (STOP!) 18:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Christianity Newsletter

- Tinucherian (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Christianity Newsletter

[edit] WikiProject Christianity Newsletter