User talk:CreativeLogic
Welcome to CreativeLogic's Talk Page.
Nothing of course to do with the company Creative Logic which I believe makes chips - I just like the name.
Hope to contribute usefully, although fairly nervous as this is obviously a very busy and big place with lots of rules, so do please forgive me any obvious mistakes and let me know politely what they are. My main interests are history of Europe and Britain, economic history, political theory and nation-states.
Vandalism
[edit]
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to padraig3uk, you will be blocked from editing. --padraig3uk 21:46, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, please ignore this warning
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. --padraig3uk 22:57, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
============ Talk to CreativeLogic below this line =====================
[edit]Welcome!
[edit]
|
Guide to referencing
[edit]Click on "show" to open contents.
| Using references (citations) |
|---|
|
I thought you might find it useful to have some information about references (refs) on wikipedia. These are important to validate your writing and inform the reader. Any editor can removed unreferenced material; and unsubstantiated articles may end up getting deleted, so when you add something to an article, it's highly advisable to also include a reference to say where it came from. Referencing may look daunting, but it's easy enough to do. Here's a guide to getting started. Good references[edit]A reference must be accurate, i.e. it must prove the statement in the text. To validate "Mike Brown climbed Everest", it's no good linking to a page about Everest, if Mike Brown isn't mentioned, nor to one on Mike Brown, if it doesn't say that he climbed Everest. You have to link to a source that proves his achievement is true. You must use Reliable sources, such as published books, mainstream press, authorised web sites, and official documents. Blogs, Myspace, Youtube, fan sites and extreme minority texts are not usually acceptable, nor is Original research, e.g. your own unpublished, or self-published, essay or research. Simple referencing[edit]The first thing you have to do is to create a "Notes and references" section. This goes towards the bottom of the page, below the "See also" section and above the "External links" section. Enter this code:
The next step is to put a reference in the text. Here is the code to do that. It goes at the end of the relevant term, phrase, sentence, or paragraph to which the note refers, and after punctuation such as a full stop, without a space (to prevent separation through line wrap):
Whatever text you put in between these two tags will become visible in the "Notes and references" section as your reference. Test it out[edit]Copy the following text, open the edit box for this page, paste it at the bottom (inserting your own text) and save the page:
(End of text to copy and paste.) Information to include[edit]You need to include the information to enable the reader to find your source. For a book it might look like this:
An online newspaper source would be:
Note the square brackets around the URL. The format is [URL Title] with a space between the URL and the Title. If you do this the URL is hidden and the Title shows as the link. Use double apostrophes for the article title, and two single quote marks either side of the name of the paper (to generate italics). The date after The Guardian is the date of the newspaper, and the date after "Retrieved on" is the date you accessed the site – useful for searching the web archive in case the link goes dead. Wikilinks (double square brackets which create an internal link to a wikipedia article) function inside the ref tags. Dates are wikilinked so that they work with user preference settings. Citation templates[edit]You may prefer to use a citation template to compile details of the source. The template goes between the ref tags and you fill out the fields you wish to. Basic templates can be found here: Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles/Citation quick reference Same ref used twice or more[edit]The first time a reference appears in the article, you can give it a simple name in the <ref> code:
The second time you use the same reference in the article, you need only to create a short cut instead of typing it all out again:
You can then use the short cut as many times as you want. Don't forget the /, or it will blank the rest of the article! A short cut will only pick up from higher up the page, so make sure the first ref is the full one. Some symbols don't work in the ref name, but you'll find out if you use them. Example[edit]You can see refs in action in the article William Bowyer (artist). There are 3 sources and they are each referenced 3 times. Each statement in the article has a footnote to show what its source is. Next step[edit]When you become familiar with the process, the next step is to have one section, "Footnotes", with links embedded in the text, and another, "References", which lists all of your references alphabetically with full details, e.g. for a book:
If you're ready to go into it further, these pages have detailed information:
I hope this helps. If you need any assistance, let me know. |
Welcome
[edit]Since nobody else has, Welcome!
Hello, CreativeLogic, 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:
- 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 ask your question there. Again, welcome! --Concrete Cowboy 13:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
? Area to start
[edit]Hi, I saw your message on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography & would agree with the comments about picking a place to start where your knowledge is strong. If you wanted to get involved with an article (& related pages) where there is already a lot of content, but needs more work to get it to Wikipedia:Featured article criteria then I'm currently working on Mendip Hills which needs more on "economics, geography, urban and rural society" & I would appreciate any help.— Rod talk 10:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Political History
[edit]You're right, the Political History page is rather short. There's not really a reason for that, maybe the problem is that it's such a huge topic that not many people feel confident in editing it. So, feel very welcome to expand it! SFinamore 14:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's a while since you noted (correctly) that Political history was a rather short article and didn't adequately cover the topic. I've been working on expanding it and adding sources - take a look. Walton Vivat Regina! 20:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Provisional Irish Republican Army - 22 March 2007
[edit]Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.
- You state that I have been blocked for vandalism. Can you show me where and when this was? Secondly you added unreferenced tabloid material and you have done this not only on the Provisional Irish Republican Army page here and here but on the Robert Mugabe page here at the Nazism page where you removed referenced material that you disagreed with here, here - this constant disruptive editing is considered vandalism and you can be blocked for this.--Vintagekits 19:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Please outline these "personal threats" which I have made. Your are more than welcome to edit on wiki however there are rules and we must all abide by them. Additonally please do note remove warnings or conversations as it is seen as poor wikiquette and this allows other edits to see your history of engagement with others - unless you have something to hide. regards--Vintagekits 19:15, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- I am removing your blatant vandal tag because it is a blatant lie. The material about the IRA is perfectly factual. CreativeLogic 19:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- A test2 tag would probably have been more appropriate. Now can you explain your edits and what "personal threats" I have made.--Vintagekits 19:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Since you leap for your vandal accusation bag of tricks as soon as someone makes an edit you don't like, I hardly see why I have to explain my actions in reversing the unjustified ones. A small dose of manners might help you a lot. I will try other admins and see if they can help me. Personally I think you should be blocked permanently from Wikipedia the way you treat people. CreativeLogic 19:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- CreativeLogic, in future can you checked the sources you provide, the source you give in your claim of IRA racketeering, drug dealing etc was refering to loyalist groups not the IRA, in fact the only allegation against the IRA is the northern Bank robbery which is unproven.--padraig3uk 19:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- CL, can you please calm down a little and discuss the subjects at hand, I am sure we can sort any issue we may all have out.--Vintagekits 19:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- That is the way conversations should start and then be continued. Tyrenius 20:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- CL, can you please calm down a little and discuss the subjects at hand, I am sure we can sort any issue we may all have out.--Vintagekits 19:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- CreativeLogic, in future can you checked the sources you provide, the source you give in your claim of IRA racketeering, drug dealing etc was refering to loyalist groups not the IRA, in fact the only allegation against the IRA is the northern Bank robbery which is unproven.--padraig3uk 19:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- I am removing your blatant vandal tag because it is a blatant lie. The material about the IRA is perfectly factual. CreativeLogic 19:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Please outline these "personal threats" which I have made. Your are more than welcome to edit on wiki however there are rules and we must all abide by them. Additonally please do note remove warnings or conversations as it is seen as poor wikiquette and this allows other edits to see your history of engagement with others - unless you have something to hide. regards--Vintagekits 19:15, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- You state that I have been blocked for vandalism. Can you show me where and when this was? Secondly you added unreferenced tabloid material and you have done this not only on the Provisional Irish Republican Army page here and here but on the Robert Mugabe page here at the Nazism page where you removed referenced material that you disagreed with here, here - this constant disruptive editing is considered vandalism and you can be blocked for this.--Vintagekits 19:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Nobody has made any attempt to discuss this issue on Talk:Provisional Irish Republican Army. Please do so. Edit summaries are not the way to converse about topics. They are just a summary of the edit. Tyrenius 21:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Advice
[edit]Sorry, I didn't notice you're quite a new editor, and it takes time to get the hang of things. I've left some info at the top of the page. WP:BLP is an important policy. Basically be very cautious about inserting any negative/controversial information about living people. It has to be done carefully and only if with rock solid sources, which must be linked with a reference to any statement. See core policies at WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:NPOV, also guideline WP:RS. And it's a good idea to enable an email account, so you can raise any issues privately if need be (a google account does not reveal your IP address). Tyrenius 21:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Please stop this trolling. Have a look at WP:TPG. A talk page is for improvements to the article, not for personal opinions and nonsense. And who are you a sock of exactly? Tyrenius 21:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
PLease stop - I have tried to revert them but you have added them again. Admin with block you if you continue - give it a rest please. regards--Vintagekits 22:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Passing admins - please note the attitude of this deeply biased pro-IRA editor who believes that admins are at his beck and call and will attempt to crush anyone who dares to try to make the IRA page more neutral. I have attempted to warn other users of Wikipedia about his total prejudice but been repeatedly threatened by him, to the extent that I believe my life may be in danger. I suspect that he will attempt to mobilise an IRA death squad against me and my family. CreativeLogic 22:46, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
What the hell are you doing? Stop Now or I will block you. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
For personal attacks and trolling, I am blocking you for a week. Can't say you haven't been warned! - Mike Rosoft 22:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hello CreativeLogic. I don't think it is any great secret that Vintagekit has republican sympathies, but lots of editors have strong opinions on a number of contentious subjects. That doesn't make them likely to be violent or theatening to editors who hold different views. If you have genuine reason to believe you are under threat, then please contact an administrator by email with your evidence. If your comments are based upon your difference of opinion here, then may I ask you begin to WP:AGF and drop the histrionics. If you have genuine concerns about bias in the IRA article, then please discuss it on the talkpage or open a WP:RfC. Trolling another editor's talkpage with neutrality "warnings" is not the way forward. I'll be happy to assist you further if you need help on any of these issues when you block expires. Best wishes, Rockpocket 23:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)