User talk:Richard Taytor

Welcome! (We can't say that loud/big enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page.

We're so glad you're here! -- Essjay · Talk 06:47, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

		The Template Barnstar
		For Making some Useful recent Changes Coolmoose (talk) 21:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stalker (film)

Thanks for contacting me. Also, thanks for the link to the blog, it was an interesting read. I don't recall that edit specifically (it's been a while and there has been thousands of edits in between), but looking over the diff, it looks like I was cleaning the article overall. If you look to the talk page, the various unsourced statements were moved to this section. To the best of my knowledge, I don't delete large amounts of unsourced statements on sight. I usually move it to the talk page for the main contributors of the article to readd when sources are found. I also do look for sources for unsourced statements I run across, and tag some statements with fact tags when necessary. Remember that anybody can edit, and that when people contribute information, they should include sources to provide verifiability. And don't worry, I'm all for building content on Wikipedia, I developed many articles since my time here. Sourcing is very important to Wikipedia, and I usually do my best to source materials I add to Wikipedia (see the GAs/FAs I have sourced). Out of curiosity, how did you find this revision? If you need further details or clarification, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:18, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was to the best of my knowledge. I don't remember every revision I've made (that would take a while to remember!). Usually I do move content to the talk page when I am reviewing an article for GA, where the editors contributing to that article are able to find sources for the information. Looking over this article, I don't remember the exact reason for removing the uncited information, but it was likely because there was multiple occurrences. By providing the information on the talk page, where contributors collaborate on improving the article, an editor best suited for finding the information can assist with sourcing and re-adding the content. It is much better than someone going through and deleting the information and having it lost (unless someone happened to check every revision, such as in your case). By being located on the talk page, the information will always be there for an interested editor to look for including if they are improving the article. Indeed, it is great that people add content to articles, and that is how the encyclopedia grows. However, we can't add just anything. To improve the reliability of Wikipedia, verifiability is very important to ensuring that information is accurate and attributed. We don't want people copying-and-pasting information just to build content or because they think it sounds good. Could I have searched for that quote and found a source for it? Most likely, yes. It's possible I could have found sources for the other statements as well. If I did this for the thousands of uncited statements that I run across, I would continuously being looking for sources for articles that are lacking them, perhaps on a topic I know nothing about, or where I am unaware where to find the information. However, a large part of my editing is spent helping with sourcing. I use the resources available to me to find sources for articles I am knowledgeable about. Every part of Wikipedia thrives under different types of editors, and there are many out there completing various tasks. There are thousands of articles here that are tagged with citation needed tags, many dating back to 2007 or even earlier. Like I said, I do like to see reliable sources added to articles, as it does significantly improve the article. Wikipedia can be edited by anybody, and since you found a source, feel free to readd the information with the source. If you need assistance, let me know, and I'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:49, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay, I lost your message in my watchlist. In the future, remember to use an edit summary, as it is helpful for editors looking at your changes. Anyway, if you haven't already, please take a look at Wikipedia:Verifiability. As I stated before, information needs to be cited if its likely to be questioned by the reader. I, or somebody else reading the article could think that the quote was made up by somebody, was a mixture of several quotes, was somebody else's quote, etc. It is the responsibility of the person adding the content to ensure that it is verifiable. Editors here, or other readers, are welcome to add a source for a statement, but they are not required/obligated to do so. Let me know if this policy doesn't explain the details you are seeking. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, can you please state what you find disturbing? Is there something that I need to clarify further? I have clearly provided you an explanation of the moving of the statements to the talk page. I was unaware of the discussion on the WP:V talk page (if you had wanted me to respond there, it would have been beneficial to provide a link when you started the discussion). If you somehow think that I am fighting you on this issue, please remember to assume good faith. I'm busy today, but I'll take a look at that discussion later tonight and weigh in. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 19:44, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for taking so long to get back to you, I've been moving to a new house and have not had an Internet connection the last two days. I added the quote to the article. I had initially assumed you were going to add it and was waiting to do so if you didn't. I guess I tend to follow the "Teach a man to fish and you feed him for life" mentality here, so I'm constantly trying to help others learn the methods and guidelines of Wikipedia so that it can continue to thrive. At some point, I won't be here anymore (who knows when that will be), and I would rather leave hundreds of editors here to take my place and help keep Wikipedia going. Unfortunately we are always losing dedicated editors who do cleanup for the additions of others, but then again, we are fortunate to get new editors to replace them. With Wikipedia still in its early stages, it will be interesting to see how it continues to grow. Anyway, I apologize if I was not able to adequately address the issue you raised. I do not interpret my action as an error, but recognize that I am capable of readding the material to the article, and have done so. I do appreciate your raising my attention to this (I really don't remember making this edit), and I'll make sure to provide clearer edit summaries in the future. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 21:07, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]