User talk:Emtigereyes

Welcome!

Hello, Emtigereyes, 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
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 05:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

• I grabbed a couple of sources from this search; there may be more useful stuff past page 3. We need a picture though--she's a cutie patootie. Drmies (talk) 05:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup

Heh, no problem. We all start somewhere. Don't hesitate to leave a message on my page if you ever have questions on editing. — Huntster (t @ c) 18:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey there, just a note regarding references. I just saw your recent edit to Orla Fallon, and want to point out that list-style references are generally not desired on Wikipedia. If the article contains information useful to the article, go ahead and add the information in and use the source as an in-line citation. Or, if the article covers information already in the article but lacking a reference, just add the citation to that material. A citation that just sits at the bottom of the page doesn't tell a reader anything useful. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:27, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Alice in Wonderland cast

Per Eriks suggestion to see how a table would work, I have added one here. Though I'm not sure what kind of "notes" could be added to it. —Mike Allen 02:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm about decided to leave the bullets there and when I apply for the GA review, we'll see what the reviewer says. I still don't like the bullets, but I think another cast section will be superfluous and just adds more unnecessary kilobytes to the article. —Mike Allen 22:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Makes sense. I've been having difficulty coming up with another format to display all of that information. Hopefully what we have works, and if not, the GA review will have suggestions. Emtigereyes (talk) 19:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I guess I'm learning not all articles will follow the same style. IPs had been making one sentence paragraphs so obviously people were having problems with readability. Thanks for your suggestions and input. :) —Mike Allen 01:13, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. IPs hardly ever leave an edit summary. Mike Allen 02:25, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Well I think I went back to a revision from over a week ago. I may have zapped some good edits. Mike Allen 05:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Looking through it, it appears to have all of my minor edits and those of others. No worries. Emtigereyes (talk) 16:41, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Red links

Hey there, just a note regarding this revert...even if no article exists, Wikipedia tends to encourage red linking (in moderation) in articles, as it has been shown to encourage people to create new articles. See Wikipedia:Red link. I'm not going to restore the red link to that article, but just keep this in mind for future reference, especially if a red linked name or topic seems like it would be notable enough to warrant an article here. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:45, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. I can see how that would potentially encourage page creation... I just thought that if someone wanted information linked, they would start a page at the same time. I'll keep that in mind. Thanks for the info. Emtigereyes (talk) 14:16, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, someone may recognise that a person or thing might be important enough to warrant an article, but not know enough or have the desire to write a page. So, hopefully someone else will come along and do the deed. Myself, for example...I'm a copy editor, and couldn't write a good article to save my life :P — Huntster (t @ c) 23:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Alice in Wonderland GA

Hi, I'm just letting you know that an editor has nominated Alice in Wonderland for GA. I'm letting you know since you have put a great deal of work in the article. :) Mike Allen 01:39, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, I saw that on Monday it had been nominated. Out of curiosity - while that's going on, do we need to slow down the edits to simply responding to GA Reviewer suggestions, or just work normally? Emtigereyes (talk) 14:07, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello! I'd say edit normally and clean normally regardless. The page is looking pretty good so I think you are off to a good start! Keep it up! Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:16, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Alice in Wonderland c-listing

Hello. I can help advise you with some of the other citations in a little bit. Some of them appears to be from blogs so I'm not sure how good of cites they are, but I'd need more time to look through it. I'll try to do this in the afternoon. Cheers! Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:16, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)