User talk:Renice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Tips

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Renice, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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!  RJFJR 20:32, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Links to remember

• Special:Watchlist/edit
• Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission
  
• Wikipedia:Citation templates
• Help:Starting a new_page

[edit] Alternate welcome

Hello Renice, 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! (SIG) Getting started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikipedians Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

[edit] Removing a redirect / merging pages?

I've expanded the pacú section and I now believe the Piaractus mesopotamicus page should be merged with it. I also found that the subfamily that the pacú belongs to is currently redirected to piranha.

1. Do I need to wait for consensus to merge pages? (I have posted on the talk pages of both articles.)

2. Is consensus needed for changing a redirect to a separate page (which would only be a stub at this point)?

3. How would I change the categories on all affected pages from 'Category: Characidae' to 'Category: Characidae: Serrasalminae'?

Response:

1. If you think Piaractus mesopotamicus should be merged into Pacu (fish):

• Put at the top of Piaractus mesopotamicus: {{mergeto|Pacu (fish)}}
• Put at the top of Pacu_(fish): {{mergefrom|Piaractus mesopotamicus}}
• Wait a few days.
• If no one responds and you think there is no reason not to do it, do the merge.

Personally, looking at the two pages, I do not think they should be merged, because Piaractus mesopotamicus applies to a particular species, whereas Pacu (fish) applies to several species, including that one, and applies to them as a "sort" of fish as pet, fishing, and food.

2. No consensus is needed for a small or out-of-the-way page. Make sure to merge any appropriate information.

3. For semi-automatic changes, you can use a tool like WP:AWB. However, for moving a whole category, you should bring it up at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.

Overall, especially for redirects, check out Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages, a good principle on Wikipedia. If there is the possibility of someone objecting, or if an action would affect a major article, an article with a lot of editors, or many articles at once, you should bring it up for discussion, but if it is rather minor and no one will either care or object to it, then use your best judgement. If you have any other questions, I would be happy to help. Welcome! —Centrx→talk • 18:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Printmaking Article

As I stated in Printmaking Talk, I will be working on a revision of the article here.

[edit] Photo permissions?

I requested use of a photograph using one of the permission-letter templates. When I got approval from the author (see User_talk:Renice/Photo_Permissions), I uploaded the image.

However, I got a message that the image is marked for speedy deletion. What did I do wrong? What do I need to do?

thanks
Renice 21:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

It is probably because you did not give it the correct copyright tag. Could you perhaps link to the image (remember to put : before "Image" when you link it)? Ryūlóng 21:29, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I have found the image, and I have removed the speedy tag. It appears that you just did not choose a licensing tag when you uploaded it. That's the default these days. Ryūlóng 21:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! --Renice 21:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Black July edit

Very good job except the Context of violence section is no longer visible except when I go to edit the page, some formating error, can you look into it ? Thanks RaveenS 02:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I fixed it but look at it anyway, it was a fabulous job by you, finaly some one has made an article out of it. If you google Black July, it is the Wikipedia article that comes first and with the Ethnic problem in Sri Lanka heating up again many people are going to take a look at your handiwork. It makes me so proud to look at that article which has a lot of personal memories for me. RaveenS 02:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

It is done means done, I would like to peer review it and make it a article that is not prone to too many other changes, how do we do that ?RaveenS 12:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

How did you get interested in Black July ? I've seen versions of an article peer reviewed and archived but one can still edit and update the article but a version stays as the most appropriate one. Tell me when you are done and we can begin to archive that version as a peer reviewed one. Just my thoughtsRaveenS 01:16, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Grafikm fr/Title

Yes, you're absolutely right, the cat on User:Grafikm fr/Title was completely unnecessry (I copypasted a bit too fast I guess :)

Thanks for pointing that out!

Best, Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 14:32, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 11 August 2006, a fact from the article Pacu (fish), which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

DYK's are reserved for articles made or expanded significantly in the past 5 days, but I saw the recent additions you made to Pacu (fish) (and the great picture) and thought it was fair to put it up. Thanks for the contribution! -- Samir धर्म 06:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category for deletion

While I appreciate the heads-up on the proposed deletion of the Wikipedians from Texas category, I must point out that you may have jeopardized it by mass-posting notices to users in the category. This has been viewed as spamming in the past, and tends to elicit a very negative response. Jay Maynard 15:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Spam#Canvassing and Wikipedia:Votestacking. While your message doesn't appear to violate those guidelines, it may generate a backlash, even so. I don't know what the answer is; I just know that it came up as one reason to get rid of userboxes during those wars, and I'm very sensitive to anything that gives the anti-userbox admins reasons to oppose them. Jay Maynard 16:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lovely flag

(Reply from my talk page) Hi, got your message. When you say clear, do you mean it's transparent? (The white background, maybe?) If so, it still shows up on my browser (Internet Explorer 6) as white, so that's probably why I hadn't noticed. If you can reply to me saying exactly what's wrong, whether it's the background or something else, I can upload a new version which might correct the problem. (I can't right now as I need to go out, sorry!) Thanks for mentioning! -- Lewis R « т · c » 11:55, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

(Reply from my talk page) Thanks for the info, I've uploaded a new image (same file name), but this time the background is a tiny bit grey (its HTML colour is #FEFEFE) so hopefully it won't show up transparent in Firefox. I've also changed the dimensions of the images on the Lovely page and the in the userbox slightly to show the new image more quickly (we'll have to wait for the servers to catch up, otherwise). Thanks for bringing this to my attention! - Lewis R « т · c » 19:47, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the welcome

E4043 20:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Coccidia/Coccidiosis Merge

Thank you for your comments on my merge of the above listed articles. I am pleased that you thought I did a good job in merging the two articles. This was the first merge in my almost 1000 edit history of wikipedia that I carried out, so to get it right first time without reading the guidelines is a pretty neat piece of work, even if I do say so myself. Please feel free to provide comments or feedback on anything else I do within wikipedia, since I am happy to respond to comments or criticism. Regards, Thor Malmjursson 11:22, 15 October 2006 (UTC) Thor's Multilingual Talk Page

[edit] Inline page-number refs while reusing citation templates

Take a look my the example on the page, White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives -- I only hand-created the superscript on the citation-talk page as an illustration of the example. I think I'm doing it the way you're telling me to.... Sorry I wasn't clear: my question is about having a ref link at the end of an inline link -- stylistically that seems odd, but it does what I want, which is to have a page number inline, with a full ref in Refs. But stylistically it seems like I'm footnoting a citation and there should be a better way...????
thanks,
Renice 11:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of editing it myself instead of trying to explain. Hope that what I did is OK with you. -- Jmabel | Talk 16:17, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's an improvement. It's too difficult to tell that all the references come from the same source. I'd rather leave it the way I had it. But thanks. --Renice 17:19, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I am sending this out to wikiart folks everywhere,

so please don't feel picked on. Here's my thing. I've been watching list of sculptors recently and have been weeding out the entries in red on the theory that this is an index of sculptors in wikipedia. However i have been reluctant to remove artists that I know or discover to be real, wikipedia worthy people, so am trying to decide if i should just do a stub - maybe a lot of stubs - of these folks or leave them on the list [I HATE lists with too much red - check out the List of Frank Lloyd Wright works for example.

For example, i checked out one, François-Joseph Duret (1804 - 1865) and discovered that there are at least two sculptors with that name, (1732 - 1816) and (1804 - 1865)- this one is the son - and both probably could comfortably be in wikipedia. I did have a rather bad moment recently when someone DELETED my article on Connor Barrett about an hour [maybe less] after I first posted it, on the theory that he was not wikiworthy [or something] and a lot of these fairly remote (in time and place from me) artists are a lot more obscure than Barrett. So, i would like to know that i have the support of the wikipedia art history community before doing this. Drop me a line, if you wish to sit down and be counted. Life is good, Carptrash 05:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC) P.S. although i do mostly American art i have contributed to lots on non-American articles including Aleijadinho, Ásmundur Sveinsson, Einar Jonsson, Gunnfrídur Jónsdóttir, Henry Moore, Ivan Meštrović, Ørnulf Bast, Rayner Hoff, and probably some others. I say this because most of the stubs I'm proposing would be Europeans.

thanks for the feedback. Your comments along with those of a few others, have caused me to rethink may plan for turning all the red sculpture links to blue. I think i'll just start taking my meds again, go back to my old style of writing articles about folks as they come up in my life and allow the red to ripen in its own good time. Thanks again, Carptrash 15:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)