User talk:Knownfact123

Politicks

First of all, I usually do this with a template (which is like a automatic message) - but I'd just like to quickly welcome you to Wikipedia, and congrats on creating politicks. Just to let you know I worked on the page a bit - like fixing the picture link, putting the pic in the right place. But most importantly, I removed some pov (point of view). Since your new you probably haven't heard of NPOV - which stands for neutral point of view, and is possibly the most often mentioned wikipedia guideline. But pretty much, to sum it up, just be careful about saying stuff like, "The band is unique" - because that's your opinion, and wikipedia doesn't allow opinions.

A way you can avoid this is by citing EVERYTHING you put on. I personally like using the <ref></ref> tags - where you can type anything you want inside those tags, and then if you type {{reflist}} at the bottom of the page, it'll show up! Just like this!^[1]

References

^ The New York Times

Oh - and make sure you get your references from good sources - no blogs or anything like that unless the article is about the blog. (Oh and also, you would type a direct link to the article that proves your statement - not just what I did). If you need any help at all - just understanding that type of thing, or something else, feel free to contact me on my talk page.danielfolsom© 00:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BIG NO! Ok, don't remove the speedy delete thing - it's for the admins to decide whether or not it's deleted - you can't jsut say. I DON'T WANT IT TO BE, and remove it. instead type {{hangon}} under the template. Also, don't make the pic so huge - and keep the references. After you type {{hangon}} - go to the discussion page (next to edit this page) and type why it shouldn't be deleted - make sure to use valid arguments though. In this case you have to prove the band is notable - meaning find a newspaper that's written about them or something. For more specific details on notability, see WP:Notabilitydanielfolsom© 00:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it's a lot to do at once. Here's an article about the band http://www.ontaponline.com/view_article.php?article_id=10489 I know there are more. I will find and add them later.

Nice - but just to let u know for future reference reply on my talk page.:-D - I'll incorporate anything in that article in.danielfolsom© 00:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright here's the deal mate: I removed everything that could lead to trouble - and I added a lot of fact templates ({{fact}}) - which add ^{[citation missing]} next to a line that didn't have a source attributed to it (meaning that that sentence/phrase has to be sourced to be proved true). One of the sources on the page now (there are two - see under the references section) might have some of the info your looking for, but even if they don't it's up to you to find sources that do. (take a look at the ref tags on that page - that'll give you a good idea on how to use them - the "ref name =" thing allows you to use the same source to cite more than one line - if you want, fool around with it, and just click the "Preview" button next to "Save Page" to see what you did - sadly I don't have time to help you out with this - so again it's on you. HOWEVER - if you have any questions at all, again, just go to my talk page (either go to my userpage and click discussion, or clikc the "folsom" part of my signature") and ask one - I always have time to answer questions.

Lastly - remember to sign your post with four tildes (these things: ~). This gives you a signature (yours won't be colorful now - but you'll learn about that later) - and allows me to know who's talking. Talk to you later!danielfolsom© 00:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AMAZINGNESS! You did a great job with that - although one more thing: when you do a link to a non - wikipedia article, you already know you put it in single brackets([]) - but when you type what you want to show up, you don't type the '|' - meaning this: [http://washingtonpost.com washington post] not this: [http://washingtonpost.com|washington post] is right. :-Ddanielfolsom© 04:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Politicks-cowboys.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Politicks-cowboys.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BlueAzure (talk) 21:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Politicks-band.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Politicks-band.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:57, 14 June 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BlueAzure (talk) 21:57, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[1] The New York Times

[1]