User talk:WikiDiction
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, WikiDiction, 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:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Simplified Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- WikHead (talk) 06:30, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Re: Neat!
[edit]Well, if you like to read, that's excellent! it's a great way to get off to a good start here 
. The links in my message above are a very helpful read for new users especially... and I suspect that someone else will be along shortly with a Teahouse invitation to further editing resources and help. You appear to have a very good wiki-attitude, so I hope you find the whole experience as enjoyable as I do myself. Stay well, and happy editing! -- WikHead (talk) 06:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Re: Random Acts of Kindness
[edit]Thank you kindly for the lovely new barnstar WikiDiction! It's always a pleasure logging in for my daily session to discover that work I've done in previous sessions has been so genuinely appreciated by others. Should you ever get stuck with anything along the way, please don't hesitate to give me a shout on my talk-page. Friendly users like you are always fun to work with . -- P.S. I've taken a look at your user-page, and that's a great looking cat you've got there! Cheers! -- WikHead (talk) 10:09, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
- Dang! I was convinced that was your cat... and a mighty fine specimen at that
. You're most certainly welcome for the links WikiDiction... Your eagerness to browse through them is a good sign. I have a feeling that you're going to become a great contributor here! 
-- WikHead (talk) 02:48, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Re: Emergency disconnect package article
[edit]My advice... rather than completely remove existing content, it would probably be wise to overwrite the incorrect portions with your new referenced content. A brief description of your changes in the edit summary will go a long way as well, and is very helpful to those who will review the changes behind you. -- WikHead (talk) 03:20, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
- Good work at the Oatmeal article! Don't worry so much that I tweaked the formatting a bit behind you... as formatting and markup will become much easier with a little more wiki-experience. The important thing here, is that you've added requested citations to this article, and that's a very valuable contribution to the project. The wiki-community appreciates your efforts... Keep up the good work! -- WikHead (talk) 04:17, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
- For a new user, I think you are doing very well! Wiki-markup and page formatting can seem a bit awkward at first but something I'm sure you'll catch onto very quickly. As you've probably already figured out, articles need to have either a {{reflist}} template or <references /> tag present in the lower page to display the list of references that have been inserted in-line. The preference for in-line references is to use {{cite}} templates... but if you are unfamiliar with their usage and format I'd highly recommend keeping it simple and formatting your references either as <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/</ref> or <ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]</ref> ←Note: +1). the URL should always appear before the text. +2). don't forget to include the http:// link-prefix. Though bare URLs are discouraged, the example I've provided is the easiest form for other users, bots, and tools to quickly work with and convert. I hope you find this information useful. -- WikHead (talk) 12:14, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
- I do not recommend removing dead links or dead linked content. If you find dead links in an article, they should either be tagged with the {{dead link}} template, updated to a current target, or resolved/repaired using an archive service such as WayBack. Even if you are unable to fix the link, it's possible that another editor might. Some editors are very sharp at fixing these things, and specifically look for articles where dead links have been tagged. If you are able to locate good references for existing content, by all means, add them... they can co-exist with with other references (on the same line) even if some of them are dead. If you find incorrect information sourced with dead links, and you can overwrite it with functional references, that's really helpful as well. Feel free to improve the existing grammar and whatnot as you work through, and always feel free to expand and add new referenced content if you think the article could use it. Hope this helps answer some of your new questions. -- WikHead (talk) 20:20, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
- I do not recommend removing dead links or dead linked content. If you find dead links in an article, they should either be tagged with the {{dead link}} template, updated to a current target, or resolved/repaired using an archive service such as WayBack. Even if you are unable to fix the link, it's possible that another editor might. Some editors are very sharp at fixing these things, and specifically look for articles where dead links have been tagged. If you are able to locate good references for existing content, by all means, add them... they can co-exist with with other references (on the same line) even if some of them are dead. If you find incorrect information sourced with dead links, and you can overwrite it with functional references, that's really helpful as well. Feel free to improve the existing grammar and whatnot as you work through, and always feel free to expand and add new referenced content if you think the article could use it. Hope this helps answer some of your new questions.
- For a new user, I think you are doing very well! Wiki-markup and page formatting can seem a bit awkward at first but something I'm sure you'll catch onto very quickly. As you've probably already figured out, articles need to have either a {{reflist}} template or <references /> tag present in the lower page to display the list of references that have been inserted in-line. The preference for in-line references is to use {{cite}} templates... but if you are unfamiliar with their usage and format I'd highly recommend keeping it simple and formatting your references either as <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/</ref> or <ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]</ref> ←Note: +1). the URL should always appear before the text. +2). don't forget to include the http:// link-prefix. Though bare URLs are discouraged, the example I've provided is the easiest form for other users, bots, and tools to quickly work with and convert. I hope you find this information useful.