User talk:ThaMoonwalker

What is the name of your old account?

Hey, I noticed that you recently started editing under this account name. This is obviously not your first account; under our multiple account policy, it is allowed to use different accounts for some acceptable purposes; but it is usually good practice to connect your accounts together so no one thinks you are trying to hide anything. Could you let everyone know what your earlier account was, so you can set my mind to rest? Thanks! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited as an anon. user earlier. ThaMoonwalker (talk) 00:31, 4 July 2009 (UTC)'[reply]

I have decided to discontinue use of my old account, since this is my clean start under a new name. I wish to be an admin one day, however I feel as if there are a couple skeletons in my closet. ThaMoonwalker (talk) 00:34, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your concerns on my talk page; I think you'll need to be on your best behavior with this account. Many people, myself included, believe in "fresh starts", but only where they are truly fresh; that you don't revert to any old disruptive behavior and that you act in an appropriate manner. You should definately not do anything that would raise suspicion and cause anyone to connect this account to any prior problematic accounts; doing so would result in a pretty fast block. So basically, I think a fresh start is OK, as long as it is truly "fresh"... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE :Thriller Werewolf picture

Hello!!

Yes, it´s from the Thriller video, but the screenshot you can see around the net. If you don´t mind, can you check please, if the license it is correct?!? I uploaded in Wikimedia Commons, not here...

Thanks for the attention.

PS: the image it´s for the first ever in Wikipedia, you can find in the article Thriller (music video)

Lightwarrior2 (talk) 03:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the picture, it is in the wrong section, the lead. It should be placed elsewhere in the text for a more logical flow and organization. Second, the article refers to the werewolf as a "werecat". Finally, the license used is incorrect. The screenshot does contain portions of copyrighted content - the music video, Thriller; the copyright holder did not allow Thriller to be used for any purpose; and no the work is not free software.

If you insist on keeping the picture, you need a valid license. Take a look at the other pictures in the article (click on them for a fair use rationale) for a guide. Do not copy it word for word. And the picture will need to be resized before placing it in the article because currently it offsets a lot of text. I did not understand fair use when I started editing Wikipedia as well; you are not alone :) ThaMoonwalker (talk) 03:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help - Citing Sources

{{helpme}} Am I citing my sources properly? I never got the hang of it. Here is an example.

Finkle, Jim."Update 3-Microsoft will soon unveil free anti-virus software", Thomson Reuters, June 10, 2009, accessed July 4, 2009.

Finkle, Jim.[http://www.reuters.com/article/CMPTRS/idUSN1044924620090610 "Update 3-Microsoft will soon unveil free anti-virus software"], Thomson Reuters, June 10, 2009, accessed July 4, 2009.

Thanks in advance. ThaMoonwalker (talk) 04:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Template:Cite news. Just fill in the fields and that will automatically format them! Further questions? let me know! Fleetflame 04:22, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on my talk page. Fleetflame 04:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinks

{{helpme}}

How much should I rely on wikilinks to explain something in an article? Should I just wikilink something and hope readers will click on that wikilink, learn an essential piece of information, and continue reading the main article with the information in mind? Or should I give an wikilink and then state the important fact.

For example, take AVG Technologies. I want the reader to know AVG makes a shareware antivirus program. Should I state that outright like this "AVG Technologies, makers of the shareware AVG antivirus"? Or should I depend on the wikilink to take them to the AVG Tech. article and then learn they make a shareware antivirus application?

Thanks! ThaMoonwalker (talk) 02:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, just do what feels good. If you think that a link in a sentence or whatever would help someone understand the subject better, then link it. In the case of the example you gave, (assuming we have an article about both) I would say link them both. Just don't overdo it. Sentences like this are very annoying ;-) J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 02:29, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense! ThaMoonwalker (talk) 02:36, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Linking which has some pretty good tips and guidelines. Generally, common terms and words are not linked, but things that a reader might need to know more about are. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:58, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree common words do not need to be wikilinked. I was wondering if there should be a little explanation after a wikilink with a little explanation, so readers do not have to click off to several different articles. ThaMoonwalker (talk) 05:07, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinks in references

Should redundant wikilinks in references be avoided? For example, should I wikilink "BBC" in every single ref, or just the first one? Thanks. ThaMoonwalker (talk) 05:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand your question.. In articles, usually only the first instance would be wikilinked, but what do you mean about using links in references? Sorry :) — Deon555^talk_{I'm BACK!} 05:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Say I got one reference published by CNET. I wikilink that in the first ref. Should I wikilink CNET every single reference? ThaMoonwalker (talk) 08:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Need answer to above question. Thanks. TechOutsider (talk) 12:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In general, you should only link to the first occurrence of an item. This applies throughout the article and not just in references. This is the guideline from Wikipedia:Linking#Link density. Since it's a guideline and not a policy, it's ok to make an exception if you feel that it's better to create an internal link multiple times. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 13:03, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft Security Essentials in nominated for featured article

Hello, ThaMoonwalker

I wanted to let you know that Microsoft Security Essentials is nominated to become a featured article. Apparently, you are the second most active contributor of this article, so perhaps you'd like to participate. You can find the nomination at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Microsoft Security Essentials/archive2.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 09:58, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]