User talk:Epicstonemason

210+

This user has made more than 210 contributions to Wikipedia.

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Reviewer

Wikipedia policies

recent changes, not mine

Guidelines

Hello. Here is a list of things NOT to write on this talk page:

Plain old mean stuff.

EXAMPLE: Dude all your edits are vandalism! You should be banned from Wikipedia!

Nonsense.

EXAMPLE: You break so many rules. Like totally rule breaker man. No rules here.

Threats.

EXAMPLE: I'll ban you!!!

Destructive criticism.

EXAMPLE: You don't know how to edit. You are stupid.

Epicstonemason (talk) 23:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My Questions

What is pending changes? I saw something about it and when I read the article on it I was left confused. Where is the pending changes tab? Will pending changes prevent me from viewing my edits? Am I not getting the full scope of articles because of pending changes?Epicstonemason (talk) 20:30, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Start reading here; http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Pending_changes Qwrk (talk) 21:29, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a few more questions. what kind of user am I (administrator, reviewer, confirmed, new, or anonymous)? Am I allowed to put my user status on my user page? What status is recommended for me? How do I get to that status?Epicstonemason (talk) 22:49, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Epicstonemason, 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)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Teapotgeorge^Talk 21:13, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 2010

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Mountain worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. Qwrk (talk) 20:51, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Hill, even if you intend to fix them later. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Qwrk (talk) 20:52, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"this page in a nutshell"

Just a wee remark. You and your I also think: it would be cool if I knew how to make those "this page in a nutshell" things as I find them helpful. better take these up with other editors on the respective talk pages to see if this is needed and appreciated. Please refrain from boldly wrecking things up. Qwrk (talk) 20:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I understand things better now. I will talk to people in the page talk area before I edit. In the page talk area I can also find out if people are requesting edits. Also, if you can answer the questions that I made above I would be happy. One last thing, It makes me sad when you call my edits vandalism.Epicstonemason (talk) 21:03, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First off I would start READING about rules and advisories, if I were you. I know it might not be that simple from scratch but we all had to try the hard way without seriously disrupting other peoples work. As for my remarks concerning your vandalisms, that's just part of how Twinkle handles things; first a remark, then a caution, and later on a last warning before you're banned. Stick to the rules and you won't have any troubles, but be aware there's people watching your moves. Be welcome, but do not overstay it. Qwrk (talk) 21:09, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page in a nutshell:

Unless there is clear evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it.
If criticism is needed, discuss editors' actions, but avoid accusing others of harmful motives without clear evidence.

I copied this from the good-faith article. It means you shouldn't yell at me for adding stuff to articles. I'm just trying to help.

I'm a network engineer by trade and I know [my] users. That's not being cynical, it's the realist in me who's cautious. No hard feelings. Qwrk (talk) 21:52, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a grammar issue, nor a semantic one. Just read what's being written there. You weren't tagged for vandalism, you were cautioned for repeated test edits, thus fitting the criteria. Qwrk (talk) 22:38, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mountain nutshell

I reverted your nutshell on Mountain (even if it was reverted a second before me) for two clear reasons: 1) it was not needed; the opening paragraph did a fine job of a short and sweet explination of mountain and 2) it was poorly worded with a red link. However, I strongly disagree that it was vandelism... it was NOT. It was simply a rookie mistake, do not take it personally (even if others do or even if their automated program forces them to). Keep in mind: nutshells are great IF there is a complex open that does not easily explain the topic. Of course, the best thing to do is refin the opening paragraph, but in certain (relatively rare) cases, a nutshell is useful. Now, there is one on my user page, but it is for humourous purposes only. Happy editing and good luck! Feel free to ask questions when unsure of what to do next! QFL 24-7 ^{bla bla bla ¤ cntrb ¤ kids ¤ pics} 23:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Count

Is there any way for me to have some sort of thing that can display how many edits I have made on my user page?Epicstonemason (talk) 23:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, with the userbox:

999,999,999,999+

This user has made more than 999,999,999,999 contributions to Wikipedia.

(in WikiText: {{User contrib|0.1}}, where 0.1 is your edit count). Only problem: NOT automated... you have to check a page like this to find out and update every so often.

QFL 24-7 ^{bla bla bla ¤ cntrb ¤ kids ¤ pics} 23:45, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The main way to get cool stuff on your user page is do what I do: check out others, go to the edit tab, and steal+modify. QFL 24-7 ^{bla bla bla ¤ cntrb ¤ kids ¤ pics} 23:47, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ERROR???

I have made many edits to Wikipedia, and my account is currently three days old, but I am still not a confirmed user. I think something has gone terribly wrong here. If you can help then tell me what to do. If you are an admin and can fix this then I will be very happy.Epicstonemason (talk) 17:57, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your account must be four days old to be autoconfirmed. Chzz ► 18:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully Sometime Soon

Reviewer grantedEpicstonemason (talk) 22:13, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Unidentifiable

The article Unidentifiable has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTDICT

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. elektrik SHOOS 21:38, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The word described in the article is self explanatory. However, it might not be a common word and may be unknown to some users.Epicstonemason (talk) 21:42, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give me some tips that will help me become a reviewer??? Epicstonemason (talk) 21:44, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Summaries

Can I suggest that you use the Summary box when you edit? It does help when we flick through things to see what's going on somewhere. Peridon (talk) 22:00, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also please make sure that your edit summaries are relevant. An edit summary is supposed to indicate what your edit is doing. For example, it is not remotely helpful to keep putting "make me a reviewer" as edit summaries for edits which have nothing whatever to do with being made a reviewer. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:39, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking

You appear to be on a mission to wikilink random common nouns, whilst not vandalism yet it could be construed as disruptive and unhelpful. I suggest you stop.Teapotgeorge^Talk 09:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking, a link from one Wikipedia article to another should be provided only when the content of that other article is likely to be significantly helpful to a reader of the article where the link appears. It is not helpful, for example, to add a link to sugar everywhere where sugar happens to be mentioned. Also, if there is a wikilink for a word, it is not usually necessary to add further wikilinks for the same word: one is enough. You may like to read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (linking). JamesBWatson (talk) 09:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Objective

My primary objective: To create new and fully formed sections to articles in need of them.Epicstonemason (talk) 13:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Teapotgeorge^Talk 14:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling

If you find what looks like a spelling mistake, don't leap into edit mode and correct it. What you think is an error may be a perfectly legitimate spelling in context. For example, have stumbled upon a national variant of a word: What is "colour" in the United Kingdom is "color" in the United States; neither is wrong.

Wikipedia's spelling rules are mostly based on consistency. For example, don't mix variants of the same word within a single article. If an article is about (say) a major city in Australia, then spellings used in that country are correct for the article; if an article has evolved primarily with one variety of English, the whole article should conform to that variety. and you are still not using edit summaries despite being asked on numerous occasions. Cheers Teapotgeorge^Talk 14:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]