User talk:Solo1234

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Solo1234, 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:

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! --TeaDrinker 00:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the work on the Cecil John Rhodes article. As I looked over the history, it looks as though someone was attempting to vandlize it as you were editing it. I have tried to restore the article as best as I can while keeping your changes. While vandalism on Wikipedia is not overly rare, it is infrequent when someone is actually working on an article. In such cases, occasionally an edit is lost or a bit of vandalism is accidentally kept. I think all of your edits were kept, but if you were getting errors when you went to save your work, that is why. Let me know if there is anything I can help with (just write a note on the bottom of my talk page, User_talk:TeaDrinker). Thanks, and again, welcome to Wikipedia. Cheers, --TeaDrinker 00:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colorado River

The Colorado River page's (default) "Course" section is screwed up somehow. Clicking on the quick link takes you halfway down the page. The "edit" sign is next to the 4th picture down, which is where the "Course" quick link takes you. I've tried editing it but it doesn't work. Wondered if it was normal, a bug, or what. Thanks, --Solo 20:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, the link from the article table of contents seems to work for me, but I don't show a section edit link at all (they often get pushed around by pictures). All the images right up on the top of the page may be playing with the formatting. You may want to try moving them into sections, or removing one or more entirely (I don't think we really need all the images we can find...), if you think the article is overcrowded with pictures. Some people also use galleries, although I tend to avoid them (just a matter of style, I guess). Let me know if there is anything else I can help with, or if this didn't answer your question. Thanks, --TeaDrinker 21:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion?

How do I recommend a page for speedy deletion? Thanks, --Solo1234 21:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

The first thing to check is that it meets the criteria for speedy deletion. There are several deletion paths, depending on how clear-cut the deletion is. Articles which meet the criteria for speedy deletion can be nominated for deletion by adding a deletion template to the top of the page. There are a lot of speedy deletion templates, but the most common ones are listed in the box on the right side of the criteria for speedy deletion page linked above. The generic tag is {{db|reason for deletion}}; just add that bit of code to the top of a page (substituting your reason for deletion), or to save time, use one of the specific tags listed at WP:CSD.

If an article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, but still violates policy or otherwise should be deleted, you can nomiate it for deletion through the article for deletion or proposed deletion process. Article for deletion (AfD) is a three step process, with the specific instructions at the bottom of the article for deletion page. Proposed deletion is for articles where the deletion is not probably going to be controversial. To prod an article, as it is called, just add {{prod|reason for deletion}} to the top of the page. Unlike speedy deletion or AfD, anyone can remove the prod tag, in which case it should be moved to articles for deletion.

That is a lot of information. The main thing to article deletions is

If it meets criteria for speedy deletion, add a {{db}} tag
If not, add a {{prod}} tag.
If the prod tag is removed (which anyone can do), nominate it for article for deletion
Always keep in mind that the author of the article is probably going to be disappointed that their article was nominated for deletion; it is important to be as nice to them as possible. Some misunderstand Wikipedia, most have not read all the policies (has anyone?), but most mean well and really want to improve Wikipedia.

Let me know if I can help with anything, or if you have any questions. Best wishes and thanks for the note! (Incidentally, you can also sign your name quickly by using four tildes: ~~~~, which adds a link to your userpage and the date/time.) --TeaDrinker 01:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks so much for the barnstar! It really made my day and is greatly appreciated! --TeaDrinker 18:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism charge

Hi there. I'd like to chat with you about this edit [1]. If you look at all of that editor's edits to the article [2], [3], [4], and [5] seem to me to be good faith if somewhat poorly written additions. I'd like to hear what you think about this, Cheers! —Elipongo (Talk contribs)

Hi! Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I believe that that may be a possibility. However, given the fact that the IP address was a public one, I was suspicious as to whether or not good faith was assumed, as from a distance the remarks seemed slightly derogatory. The reason I gave them a level 3 warning was the fact that they were persistently undoing legitimate edits and replacing them with their own, in multiple sections. Perhaps I acted to rashly? Thanks again, Solo1234 21:36, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to say that I think that a {{uw-v1}} at most would have been more appropriate. The user may not have even realized that other editors were erasing his edits; he could have thought it was a simple software glitch (like that never happens here, lol!). It can be tough to differentiate these things when you're trying to act quickly to clean up an article and we've all made errors, you might think about changing that template though... —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 22:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help, I'm going to go change it right now. Solo1234 22:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome

Thanks for your diligence w/vandals as well. : ) --MPerel 20:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 17:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of grammatical problems...

Hi! Just wanted to let you know that on your profile, you wrote "I am an relatively new". Should be "a relatively new". "An" is for words that start with vowels. Thank you and have a good day!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.235.26.116 (talk) 02:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Taekwondo

Hi, I thought you may want to know of this one:

Pundit|utter 16:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy

I suppose I am not as active as I was a few years ago. The demands of school (I'm a grad student) have drawn me away. But if there's anything I can help with, do let me know. --TeaDrinker (talk) 01:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]