User talk:IceDragon64

NoACEMM

Hello, IceDragon64, 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
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Rydra Wong 23:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, folks I screwed up the Millennium Green page. The facts are all correct enough, but it all went into an ugly text box thing. I thought I had the hang of it- obviously not! Ice

I rolled back your edit to Millennium Green. Your edits are appearing in ugly boxes because of the spaces you're adding at the beginning. I'll move this to your talk page now. --Húsönd 20:15, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Husond I know not to indent my writing, which put things into stupid boxes! I have now created my first page- wait for it to be messed up!

Greetings, IceDragon64. I replied to your query on my talk page. I don't claim to have all the (or even many) of the answers but if I can be of further assistance please don't hesitate to ask. -- Rydra Wong 02:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IceDragon64, I moved (renamed) the Doorstep Greens article. This revitalizes a variety of links including the one in the Millennium Green article. -- Rydra Wong 06:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has made a mess in rheumatic fever 3. Minor Criteria. I am not quite sure what has gone on here; can someone put it right? I don't want to make it worse! {{helpme}}

It looks like someone hit a few toolbar buttons and saved it. I've cleaned it up. --Sopoforic 22:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And, incidentally: don't worry too much about making mistakes. In the worst case, we'd just have to undo your changes, so be bold in editing! --Sopoforic 22:45, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IceDragon:

I want to tell which the article need of a "cleanup", the article need to be like anothers articles, following the "manual of style"; If you have time to read, you will undestand what I'm telling; is olny this, OK? ;) --Brunoy Anastasiya Seryozhenko (talk) 20:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Stifle,

I don't understand quite why my article on Richard Scarry's book Best Word Book Ever was deleted. I looked up the thing about Blatant Advertising and I don't see quite why this applies to my article. I am nothing to do with Richard Scarry or his publishers and neither are the two sources I quoted as reference. I am fairly new here and I am sorry if it isn't quite right, but I am disappointed that the article was deleted without any attempt to explain or put it right.

It had a No Reference tag put on it by someone, although it did have to references when I posted it. When I queried it with him he said it only needed a clean up, nothing else. OK I can try and 'clean it up'- when I figure out what that means

Richard Scarry has a page on Wiki and this is his most important book- the one which got him started on 300 million sales and is still in print after 45 years. It has quite a lot said about it - including about the PC changes which have been made to it- on the internet, so I thought it should have a page of its own.

Please can you help me to create a more suitable article

IceDragon64 (talk) 00:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the best person for creating articles, but if you do create that article again you should try to write it from a neutral point of view. For one thing, sentences like "Scarry's fun style that has carried on through 300 books has made it popular and remembered through the generations" and headings like "Updating the Best" don't conform to that. Stifle (talk) 10:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Best Word Book Ever, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 00:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Stiffle,

I have followed your kind advice and recreated the page with a more neutral point of view. I understand now that speedy deletion makes authors learn to do things properly. I have put more info in and more references. However, someone put in a Speedy Deletion just because it was deleted before and a note has been left on my page about Citing it and not having good enough references. I have defended it as best I can, but I don't understand what they are saying and its all getting a bit too much for me. I am not very computer literate, I am 43 years old and I don't understand it all. I am trying hard to write a page about a book and I feel like giving up now. I've spent hours going round in circles, such as trying to figure out how to use the Book infobox- nowhere does it tell me how to put info into it. I know you said you weren';t the best person to turn to, but I don't know anyone else and I am affraid that person is just going to delete it all over again.

Thank you for your attention

IceDragon64 (talk) 01:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need to include citations from reliable sources that prove that your book is notable and to comply with the verifiability policy. Stifle (talk) 20:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of references, the reason I removed the TV.com reference is because, like Wikipedia, it's content can be changed by users of the site, and that makes it unreliable. Also, if you look it up on Google, you'll find plenty of reliable sources which state that it premiered on Showtime in 1994. It only aired on Nick Jr. in reruns. Brittany Ka (talk) 23:57, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have been asked to provide references for my page Best Word Book Ever or it will be deleted. I have been struggling for hours to get it right tonight. I get it so far, then when I try and Show Preview or Save Page I can only see half the text on the page. Assuming I had done it wrong somehow I undid the work and started again, but its half invisible again. You can see all the References, and Links in the Editing Box, but not on the page to view :(

Hi! I've fixed it. The problem was that you hadn't closed one of the <ref> tags - I've closed it for you now, and half the article has appeared. Have Fun, Stwalkerster [ talk ] 22:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may also click on the signature button  located above the edit window. 

My to-do list is just a list of articles that I need to sweep for GA Sweeps. :) Corvus coronoides _talk 17:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the extra bits, the referencing of an email is classed as non-verifiable so can't be used... often wish it could, would save me a lot of trouble as well. I'll do some digging and find where they have hidden the criteria then reference it. The linking of the pennant and the flag is actually a simple process of a re-direct. I will do that next couple of days and let you know, then you can see how it's done for your future reference. Regards Phil aka Geotek (talk) 00:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a redirect page for Green Pennant award, if you enter Green Pennant in the search box, it will take you to Green Flag award. Look at the top and you will see the redirect... click on it to take you to the redirect page and you can then see how the redirect is applied. Regards Phil aka Geotek (talk) 14:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your compliments, you've been an excellent contributor to the article yourself and improved it significantly. Originally I had only planned to remove vandalism--have to get my barnstars somehow--however I will keep it on my watchlist and perform clean ups every now and then. I think in order for us to improve the article we need a complete rewrite such as I did with The Five Heartbeats, we've got to build it from the ground up to match the manual of style and mimick the qualities of succesful internet website related articles. UniversalBread (talk) 15:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This should help us out. There's a lot of repetition on Google books, every book you come across will state Newgrounds hosts amateur flash films. But if you search vigilantely you mighnt come across something useful. UniversalBread (talk) 16:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our similarities will make the work a lot less difficult. I'm a NG user under the name Reveicha, I contribute through reviews although I have not achieved statistics such as yours. I think our main focus on improving the article should be expansion (there are multiple unfavorably short subtopics throughout the page) and the deletion of irrelevant or insignificant information (such as statistics lists, they only advertise the contributions of active members). Newgrounds can be utilized as a reliable source in some circumstances, similar to how Myspace Tom's page includes information on the site itself I'm sure the administrators have included some relevant information in their blogs. However it's often dificult to distinguish whether or not they are merely joking, the forums should definately be excluded. Honestly although I don't want to discourage IP contributions a majority of editors from Newgrounds seem unaware of what is appropriate for the encyclopedia, I think if we where to use my talk page as a Sandbox we could significantly improve the article without distraction. UniversalBread (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I want to create an article on tom fulp but i'm still an amateur editor on wikipedia.I know you want to create an article on tom fulp too,and i think you're more experienced than me on this subject matter,so i'll let you create this article,but i want to help with some sources..I just want your opinion on this interview with tom fulp at comic-con 2008.This video interview is on his game called castle-crashers and it's debut.Come check it out and tell me if it can be a source in his future article on the castle crasher section or something.This is his biggest thing since alien hominid and it deserves a mention in his future article,don't you think?Just give me a call at my talk page... Sammy theeditor (talk) 02:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and get as many valid sources and references as i can on tom fulp icedragon,and I know you'll make a great article on him.Now I'm off to get some sources.Later,--Sammy theeditor (talk) 00:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't got the time or knowledge to write about this topic, but we should definitely have an article on it. I have contacted an expert on the subject and he seems willing to write one, so hopefully we'll have something in a few months at most. Richard001 (talk) 10:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't be in upper case - we name articles in lower case unless there is some reason not to. I don't really know if this will help; he might just write his own lead section and overwrite this. Might be a few months before it happens though. Richard001 (talk) 04:49, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw in the discussion you contributed to the article 'Harpers Ferry Armory'. I tidied up the article into a nice fashion after coming across it looking like a piece of famished repertoire. This is just FYI. Thank you for your contributions! WinterSpw (talk) 07:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Heterogenesis, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Dictionary definition.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.  Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've put up all can on the Mass Driver 1 discussion page, and my talk page. Thanks for the inquiry (I actually got scolded, by another [teen-age I think] admin at the time for that "help me" message, ...  :) Cheers, Bill Wwheaton (talk) 23:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't access the original article, but I'm right now carefully re-reading the secondary sources to try to figure out the answers to your queries.

In general, the entire Puijila article needs to be extensively rewritten! --Levana Taylor (talk) 22:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although the message isn't directly intended for you, your opinion on the matter would be appreciated. —LedgendGamer 23:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Flutterby by Zarrianne-1-.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:04, 13 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Admrboltz (talk) 21:04, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I can't immediately think of anything further that could be linked to the festival apart from the (already linked) Short film page. Seems like an appropriate place to link. If I think of anything further apart from this, I shall contact you again. Bobo. 20:05, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? --4wajzkd02 (talk) 02:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colds7ream (talk) 08:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Flutterby by Zarrianne-1-.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:32, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that you changed lied to lay on the Goatse Security, but I'm not sure whether that's correct. It's my understanding that "lay" is use when a direct object is present and that "lie" is used in the absence of a direct object. For example, "I laid the book down on the table" (the book being the direct object) vs. "The book lies on the table" (the book doing the action to itself). I'm not good with grammar, so I'm not completely sure. Should the article say "Although the problem lied with the AT&T website rather than the iPad itself" or "Although the problem lay with the AT&T website rather than the iPad itself?" --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 22:49, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm stupid. Lay is the past tense of lie. Thanks for the correction. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 14:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot edit it on my Firefox browser. Is there a reason behind this?--Graythos1 (talk) 18:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the editor who placed a tag for POV concerns at Mohammed Waheed Hassan, would you be willing to look at it and double-check my work? I think I've resolved many of the issues there, but it's been a big job and I'm doubtless losing perspective. Thanks! Khazar2 (talk) 03:26, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm v confused - where is Colney Hatch Park? Cheers DBaK (talk) 18:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Spear-thrower, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Woomera. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your efforts to improve Wikipedia, and in particular for adding references, as you did to RAF Lakenheath! However, you should know that adding a bare URL is not ideal, and exposes the reference to linkrot. It is preferable to use proper citation templates when citing sources. A bare URL is a URL cited as a reference for some information in an article without any accompanying information about the linked page. In other words, it is just URL copied and pasted into the Wiki text, inserted between <ref>...</ref> tags, without title, author, date, or any of the usual information necessary for a bibliographic citation. Here's an example of a full citation using the {{cite web}} template to cite a web page:

Lorem ipsum<ref>{{cite web |title=Download the Scanning Software - Windows and Mac |publisher=Canon Inc |work=Ask a Question |date=2022 |url=https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/index?page=content&id=ART174839 |access-date=2022-04-02}}</ref> dolor sit amet.

which displays inline in the running text of the article as:

Lorem ipsum^[1] dolor sit amet.

and displays under References as:

1. ^ Download the Scanning Software - Windows and Mac". Ask a Question. Canon Inc. 2022. Retrieved 2022-04-02.

If you've already entered one or more bare urls to an article, there are tools available to expand them into full citations; try the reFill tool, which can resolve some bare references semi-automatically. Once again, thanks for adding references to articles, and to avoid future link rot, please consider supplementing your bare URLs—creating full, inline citations with title, author, date, publisher, etc. More information can be found at Wikipedia:Inline citations. Thank you. Dormskirk (talk) 22:59, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]