User talk:BRPever

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome![change source]

Some cookies to welcome you! Face-smile.svg

Welcome to Wikipedia, BRPever! I'm Rubbish computer and an active editor here. Thank you for your changes. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out Wikipedia:Questions, or send me a message on my talk page. I like to help new people, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like Wikipedia and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 13:50, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

RE: January 2016[change source]

Hi! G. Hannelius is 13 I have sources -- (talk) 15:37, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

see [here]-BRPever (talk) 15:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

New categories[change source]

Hello, BRPever. Thanks for your work on things related to Nepal. I have some comments about categories that you created.

  • Category:Cities of Nepal: We already had a category for this, called "Cities in Nepal". I moved Biratnagar to that category and deleted the category you created.
  • Category:Municipalities of Nepal and Category:Waterfalls of Nepal: These were created with two and one entries, respectively. Normally we want at least two entries in every category. You can read about that at Wikipedia:Categories#Is there a need for the new category?. Categories with fewer entries are sometimes deleted. I have recategorized Namaste Falls and deleted the waterfall category. I have left the other category for now, with a tag saying that it needs more entries. If you are going to add to that category, please do so soon so that it will not get deleted.
  • Category:Settlement articles requiring maintenance: This is a maintenance category. You didn't put this category into any categories of its own. When you create a maintenance category, please be sure to put it into appropriate categories. If you are not sure what the appropriate categories are, you can ask for help or just don't create them. Not every category has to be created, even if there are entries in it. Maintenance categories also need several templates included in them: if you're not familiar with what templates should be used, please ask before creating one of these categories.

Thanks. If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Boston King[change source]

Hi BRPever! I just mentioned this article as an example. It usually isn't necessary to place multiple tags on new pages as the patrollers will usually go over them and make necessary changes before marking them patrolled. I say this as one who did this for some time myself before learning to taking the time to wikify, simplify (as necessary), add categories and source citations. When tagging existing pages, consider we don't have that many editors here. That means a tagged page may remain unimproved for months, even years. I'm still running into pages I tagged years ago (which I'm now obliged to fix). You can tag them, but consider making some of the changes yourself as you can. Thanks and welcome User:Rus793 (talk) 16:51, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

February 2016[change source]

Information.svg We like and strongly encourage helpful changes to Wikipedia, but "Ida B. Wells" was directly copied and pasted from the main English Wikipedia. Please do not do that. Such articles are usually too complex. They need to be simplified before or immediately after being added to the Simple English Wikipedia. In addition, be sure to include attribution on the article's talk page. Thank you. Also, the copied single source citation failed verification. Please see Wikipedia:How to copy from another Wikipedia User:Rus793 (talk) 14:53, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Noting that the article was copied from Enwiki I included the transwiki attribution on the talk page to show you what it looks like. See the article as is now and, if you would, take the time to read at least some of the source citations used here. See how they verify all the information in a statement? One of the problems when copying just a line or two from an Enwiki article (aside from complexity) is that it may be too short to say why the subject is notable. In other words, why it is important enough to deserve an article in this encyclopedia. An article, even a stub, needs to say why and, better still, show why it is notable by including reliable source citations. The article could still be expanded—there is a lot of information available on her. This is something you can do if you like. It's a very interesting biography, thank you for starting it. User:Rus793 (talk) 16:22, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

What is and is not good faith[change source]

Good faith edits are edits intended to improve the page. Many will be attempts to change the wording on pages which are basically in good condition. Many fail to be improvements, and so are reverted, but they are not vandalism.

Vandalism is making changes to a page that make it worse, often deliberately. This includes adding nonsense or remarks which have nothing to do with the content of the page. The addition of "balalllalalalalala" is vandalism, not a good faith edit. So your welcome to User talk: was somewhat overgenerous. In general, we do not welcome IP users until we see whether they are going to make good edits. Cheers, Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:34, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for information I will do as you said.-BRP ever 15:33, 4 April 2016 (UTC)