User talk:ChecKemzV/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome[change source]

Hello, ChecKemzV and welcome to Simple English Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy working here and decide to stay. After looking at your edits, I thought I'd tell you some things about how this Wiki works (there are some differences between this one and other Wikipedias).

  • We do not remove red links just because they are red. Since we are a smaller wiki, we use the red links to help us find articles that we need. Because of that, please don't remove red links.
  • When you add a maintenance tag to an article, such as {{redlinks}}, the date should be in the form "Month year" (for example, "October 2015"). You do not include the day.
  • If you create a maintenance category, please use the template that we use for that. When you created Category:Pages with too many red links from October 12th, 2015, you created it without the template -- without any categories or anything, in fact. You can look at an existing category to see how to do it. (That category was deleted anyway because of the day in the date.)

If you would like to know more about how this wiki is different from others, you could look at a write-up I did at User:Auntof6/Things I would like Wikipedia editors to know#Things we do here that might be different from other Wikis. Feel free to ask me if you have any questions about that, or about anything I said above. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 03:00, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcoming[change source]

Welcoming notes are for new editors making positive contributions. One should wait a bit until they give some indication of their intentions. It causes problems if we put on a user page a welcome when the editor is continually vandalising. To avoid this we suggest taking it easy at first, so the messages don't contradict each other. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. The Checker of Kemz Five (Talk to me!) 20:19, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging articles[change source]

Please slow down on tagging articles.

  • You've tagged some as hoaxes that weren't hoaxes, such as Gareth. (Sir Gareth was one of the Knights of the Round Table.)
  • You've tagged articles for not having context, when there was enough context. For example, for an article about a town or city, it is enough to say something like "X is a town in Y." We like to have more than that, but that is enough for a stub, and the issue is not context. If you tagged this for context because there was very little information, then what you're looking for might be the stub tags. Stub tags say that the article has minimal information and needs to be expanded.
  • We don't need as many redlinks tags as you have been adding. We know we have a lot of red links. We are a smaller wiki, and there are a lot of articles we don't have yet. Please save the redlinks tags for articles that have a very large number of red links, such as hundreds, or where the proportion of blue to red links is very small. It also depends on the type of article. For articles about days, such as September 19, we expect to have a lot of articles. We also don't usually have references on those pages so there's no need to tag them for references, either.

When you do tag articles, please be sure that the reason you give is valid. On Sydney Tamiia Poitier, you said it contained one or more of "Vandalism, patent nonsense, blatant hoaxes". The article was mistaken, because it called Sydney the "son" of Sidney Poitier, but there was no vandalism or nonsense, and such a mistake doesn't rise to the level of being a hoax. You could have tagged that article for not showing notability (and I have deleted the article for that reason). You could also have QD'd the David Morse article for the same reason. Speaking of the David Morse article, when you nominate an article at RfD, you need to add the discussion to the WP:RFD page. Otherwise no one will see it.

Here are some things that might help you here:

  • Get familiar with our quick deletion criteria. You can read about them at WP:QD. When you put a QD tag on an article, make sure you are using one of the options listed there.
  • If you create a maintenance category, such as Category:Articles needing additional references from October 2015, use the template that we use to set these categories up properly. Look at an existing category to see how that is done.
  • Take some more time to get used to how we do things here. Many of our procedures are different from other Wikipedias.

As always, feel free to ask any questions you have. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 14th, 2015[change source]

{{Helpme}} Could somebody please help me trim this down so that it meets the criteria for an article here? Except for the sandbox notice, the contents were copied from the normal Wikipedia article. Thanks! The Checker of Kemz Five (Talk to me!) 01:44, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of help would you like? It doesn't necessarily need to be trimmed down, but it should be simplified. If you haven't already read it, you could look at Wikipedia:How to copy from another Wikipedia for information on how to bring pages over from another Wikipedia.
By the way, it's better to make this kind of request at Wikipedia:Simple talk. The only people who would see it here are people who watch your talk page or people who watch for help requests: there probably aren't many of either of those. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:40, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thanks. The Checker of Kemz Five (Talk to me!) 11:10, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 15th, 2015[change source]

@Auntof6: The page you linked me is very confusing. Could you or someone else perhaps simplify the page for me, and then I'll take a look at and approve/disapprove? (I wouldn't kind if you propose changes on the sandbox talk page first either). The Checker of Kemz Five (Talk to me!) 01:04, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Which page is confusing? Do you mean Wikipedia:How to copy from another Wikipedia? If you want, I could help you understand the things on it.
I assume you mean simplify the page that's in your sandbox. If someone else simplifies the page for you, then that person would be writing the article, not you. I certainly wouldn't want to simplify that long article just so you could say whether or not you approve of what I did. I would simplify a paragraph or so to give you an idea of the kinds of changes that are needed, but if you want to create articles here you need to be able to do that yourself. I'd rather help you learn how than to do it for you.
By the way, when you have a question like this for a specific user, it's better to put the question on that user's talk page than to post something on your own talk page, even if you ping the user. Not only is that the standard procedure, but you seem to want to delete old conversations from your talk page. If I take the time to answer you, I'd like to know that I can refer back to what I said if I want to. That being the case, I'd appreciate it if you don't delete this conversation in the future (archiving it would be fine). --Auntof6 (talk) 01:46, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the page that is confusing is Wikipedia:How to copy from another Wikipedia, and the page to be simplified is the one in my sandbox. Setting up an archive page may also be helpful. The Checker of Kemz Five (Talk to me!) 11:12, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I can help you set up the archive. Do you want to do automatic archiving, or manual archiving? There is a bot that can do it automatically, based on age and how much is on your talk page. By the way, I moved your reply from my talk page to here. When you reply to something on a talk page, put the reply on the same page as the rest of the conversation so that it's all in one place. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 15:49, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 16th, 2015[change source]

There is no recorded discussion for this date

October 17th, 2015[change source]

@Auntof6: I'm less worried about the archive than I am about trimming down my sandbox draft. I want to tackle that first. The Checker of Kemz Five (Talk to me!) 21:16, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 18th-21st, 2015[change source]

There is no recorded discussion for this time frame

October 22nd, 2015[change source]

Hello, ChecKemzV. Thanks for the qd requests on bad articles. Please be aware that you don't need to blank the articles unless they are copyright violations. Doing that just makes it harder for the admins to evaluate the page. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 21:59, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind explaining this edit? The information you removed seems to be valid. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:44, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6: When I made the revert, I had not yet heard about the content which it describes. I learned that is was true that night on the news. The Checker of Kemz Five (Talk to me!) 15:17, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Please be careful about that. We have several editors who keep close track of current events. They often see news items before most news outlets carry them. Maybe next time you could ask for a source instead of reverting the edit, at least where the item isn't completely unbelievable.
By the way, thank you for taking the maintenance tags back off of your user draft. Those tags put pages in maintenance categories that should not contain user pages. I don't usually edit other users' pages without their permission, but I do edit them in cases like that. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:04, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]