User talk:TBMforeverNowhere

Welcome!

Hi! Please put new post at the bottom of the page. Thanks. Jason (talk) 06:45, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable review sites

FYI, sites such as the ones I removed here are not reliable. They lack (proven) editorial control, are user-submitted, etc. Since Wikipedia is not a repository of links, they should not be included in Wikipedia articles. See WP:RS for how reliability can be determined. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:01, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 19:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Ouellette

I was looking at Ouellette's article. You had IMDB and YouTube as references. They are deemed unreliable as anybody can add what the want on there... the same reason you can't use Wikipedia as a reference. I searched and couldn't find any reliable references for Ouellett to make him notable. As you know his story better, is there any other sources? WP:SOURCES has a listing of what is and isn't reliable. Oh, you did a great job on The Birthday Massacre and A Primitive Evolution's articles. Bgwhite (talk) 05:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bgwhite, Noted. I added the imdb citation purely for notability, but your right it dosn't belong. I'm still trying to wrap my head around WP:SOURCES as im fairly new to editing wiki's, I know that its not the policy to cite blogs or social networking sites, and im all in favor of using secondary sources however, im finding it hard to get good sources with living biographies especially. I'm still searching for better citations but haven't had time to devote to this page yet. I added a "BLP" tag in the hopes that fans of Ouellette can contribute to this article. I don't really know much about his biography either but I do know that he is notable and the world will likely see more of his incredible art in the coming years. Its just the task of proving this that takes time. Jason (talk) 05:37, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks also on The Birthday Massacre article, it has taken a week or so just get to a decent state, admittedly its a terrible mess with the citations but im hoping to come back and purge them all when time allows,or let someone else do it - just wanted to establish a base article from which to work from. Jason (talk) 05:37, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Primitive Evolution

For what it's worth, you should always link directly to the intended topic. While both links will get you to Niagara Falls, Ontario, linking directly to that title will get the reader there directly, but linking to the plain title Niagara Falls requires the reader to perform an extra click to get to the city. And the underscores in the URL are just because a web URL can't actually contain spaces — at the text reading and editing level, underscores and spaces work the exact same way. So while it doesn't really matter from a functional standpoint, it's just easier for you and other editors to remember that you can just type [[Niagara Falls, Ontario]] instead of [[Niagara_Falls,_Ontario]] or [[Niagara_Falls,_Ontario|Niagara Falls, Ontario]]. So in both cases it's just a matter of simplifying things, really, but one's more for the reader's benefit and one's more for the editor's.

WP:AWB is a tool that's mainly designed for batch jobs where you want to apply the same or similar edits to a list of articles — such as formatting cleanup, maintenance tagging or revising links to a disambiguation page. There's no reason why you couldn't use it, but unless you're planning to get involved in one of our cleanup or maintenance projects you probably just wouldn't find it that useful yet. But by all means, feel free to take a look at the AWB intro page to get a sense of what it's all about and whether it's something that interests you or not. Bearcat (talk) 14:37, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you wanted AWB to be run on one of your articles, just give me a buzz on my talk page and I'll run it for you.

There are some on-line type tools you can run on your articles.

Bgwhite (talk) 06:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just ran AWB on both. The Birthday Massacre had two recurring themes...

Need to put the ref after punctuation. For example... Birthday Massacre blew them up.<ref> NOT blew them up<ref></ref>.
When doing wikilinks, you don't need the underlines that act as spaces.... [[dead_bunnies]] should be [[dead bunnies]].

Otherwise, everything looks good Bgwhite (talk)

Sandbox

I see you experimenting with citation templates on your User page. Any references I do, I use the templates. They come in real handy.

I have WP:CITET as my first link on my User page. Hopefully you will find it handy.
If you want to mess around experimenting with stuff or you want to write a new page without putting it live on Wikipedia, create a page called a "sandbox". Create it at User:TBMforeverNowhere/sandbox. A sandbox is a term used in computer programing where you can play, experiment or test stuff without harming what is running live. You can add Template:My sandbox to your user page if you want.
I ran AWB on Martin Streek yesterday. Didn't find many errors. Bgwhite (talk) 20:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right on Bgwhite! Thanks a lot for the info. I guess you noticed that I was just pasteing those references in there for quick access (since they don't have these specific tag's in the normal toolbar). WP:CITET seems much better. Like yourself I do have a background in Computer Science (although no diploma yet) so this stuff isn't completely over my head :-) It's just I never found the time to learn about Wikipedia until a couple weeks ago - I'm actually a bit embarrassed in myself that I've never taken a stronger interest in Wikipedia, seeing as how its one of the biggest (and most important) inventions in the last few years. Again, thanks a lot for you help! Jason (talk) 23:01, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can anybody edit your sandbox or just the user?Jason (talk) 08:51, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've got to warn you, Wikipedia can cause extreme addiction. There are so many different things anybody can do on Wikipedia. So, there are so many different forms of addiction. Anyone can edit any page as long as it is not protected, this includes any pages in your userspace like the sandbox. Any of your userspace pages are automatically put on your watchlist. You can receive email updates or an RSS feed when a page on your watchlist gets changed. Bgwhite (talk) 17:06, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha! Well hey, thanks for being such a high ranked editor, thanks for putting in the work. The deeper I dig into it - the deeper appreciation I have. Its a lot of work so well done! Well, im started to sound like a broken record here, but would you mind AWB on this page too? WatchKnowLearn (kinda shocked this page didn't exist before, but it was a nice article to learn with, used the sandbox like you suggested and its much better than editing the page live) Cheers! Jason (talk) 17:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the NOINDEX tag and the userspace template as we don't want this showing up on Google and anyone who does run into it needs to understand it's not the article. I've also removed the categories, no article categories in userspace please. I hope that your plan is to use your sandbox to edit the main article and not to replace it. Replacing makes it much harder to trace who wrote what, and messes up WikiTrust entirely. Thanks. Oh, forgot, please be careful about the use of the term vandalism, see WP:Vandalism. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 20:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been wondering how to do what the NOINDEX tag accomplishes. I see the tag isn't on Jason's sandbox page, where do you put the tag? Bgwhite (talk) 22:29, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Bg, he placed it on a temporarily sandbox page I set up here User:TBMforeverNowhere/sandbox/cropcircles. I placed it also on my userpage too but I'm not sure if it has any effect. I'm interested in learning more about the NOINDEX too, especially since im trying to research more in about the wayback machine and Internet crawlers. Jason (talk)

Ah, that makes sense. Talk pages are automatically not indexed. Only place where you can add NOINDEX is on your own user pages. <shudder>Wayback machine</shudder> The place where I can see the leading edge (now crappy) web sites I created in the 90s. Bgwhite (talk) 23:15, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

lol! yeah no kidding. I'm just grateful today I don't need to create different websites for different browsers(as much). But I think something that's overlooked about Wikipedia is it's function as a historical document. Just imagine 20 years from now looking back on these articles. And you can't delete anything here either. This is something I recognized a long time ago, even before editing wiki's (which has given me a much better understanding of whats actually going on here in terms of the community/communication), but I've always paid attention to the History of an article and suspect other people do too, in a strange sense its just as important as the article itself, don't you think? Jason (talk)

Video citations

Sorry it's taken me longer to get back to you than you might have liked — it's been a busy week and I just haven't been around here much. Unfortunately, I'm not really sure how best to answer your question, as I've never really done much work with that template at all — your best bet would be to post a request for assistance on the template talk page, so that people who are more familiar with how it works can help out. Hope that helps. Bearcat (talk) 05:06, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bearcat, I've been getting the hang of it now, made of few errors at the beginning but I'm learning lots. I was mostly just interested in your opinion, not just about formatting but the best habits and practices to get into. I've been posting on other discussion boards of respected Wikipedian users and trying to feel out the community. Mostly just editing though. It's only been a month but so far my edits have been positive; nevertheless, I do anticipate some clashes of opinion. Thanks for taking the time to reply at all! Have a good one. Jason (talk) 15:40, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Howard Bloom

Yeah, that's cool. I'll back off a bit to give you some breathing room. Kudos on the initiative. :-)

And don't feel bad about a 1000 edit count indicating the lack of a life. By that measure, I have no life over 50 times over! Btw, which edit counter do you use? I'm looking for a new one now that Kate's Tool seems to have expired. Nightscream (talk) 22:22, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No insult perceived. You were making a humorous, self-deprecating remark, and I merely seconded it. And yeah, it is rather addictive. I've also been using X's edit counter since Kate's Tool expired; I was just wondering if you were using a different one. Good luck on that article. :-) Nightscream (talk) 02:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nightscream, I think I might actually spend more time researching this before I dig in. I'm re-reading Bloom's books right now but they are just so in depth and cover so many areas that its hard to know where begin - and extra hard to try to summarize his ideas in a few paragraphs. Taking notes though. hummm Kates Tool sounds interesting, too bad it expired. Jason (talk)

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) 16:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dan Ouellette for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dan Ouellette is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Ouellette until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Dac04 (talk) 17:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]