This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tiptoety (talk | contribs) at 21:58, 14 September 2008 (You have been indefinitely blocked. using TW). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:58, 14 September 2008 by Tiptoety (talk | contribs) (You have been indefinitely blocked. using TW)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Shalom
Greetings and welcome to Misplaced Pages! You don't have to sign your own userpage -- it's your place to write what you want, so everything has your stamp of approval just by being there. If you have any questions, please drop me a line. :) DRosenbach 06:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, okay, thanks! I am sure it will take me a while to get a real hang of this place and I definitely appreciate any help! :) --Elisabeth Rogan (talk) 06:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah -- it's easy to spot you because you type full sentences into the edit summary...haha! I'm sure you'll change after a day or two. DRosenbach 06:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Is that okay to do? I want to make sure that I correctly and sufficiently summarize my edits. Thanks! --Elisabeth Rogan (talk) 07:00, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- It is ok, but usually not necessary. For Article or Project pages (like Policies), full and accurate edit summaries are really helpful. For talk pages it is common to see users who normally offer a full edit summary each time put nothing more than a "r" or "+" in the box. This is mostly because most actions on discussion pages are self evident and non-controversial. The other reason is that most discussion pages simply get longer, rather than overwrite past text. For articles, when you make a change it may eliminate some work that someone else has done. This is (of course) run of the mill. Talk pages, on the other hand, will continue down the page. That way, the "history" of a talk page is generally just read from top to bottom whereas the history for articles must be read from a separate page. Some people like to leave edit summaries for themselves. For examples, some people leave "delete" or "keep" in the edit summary for AfD "votes". Others like to summarize their point in edit summaries when making a longer comment. This can be a courtesy to people with lots of pages on their watchlist--they can look at the watchlist and know what the comment is likely to be about. Find what style suites you, of course. Protonk (talk) 07:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- I think there is something thorough about writing a full explanation in the summary and as I am in no hurry or anything with my edits, I believe that these sentence replies should prove helpful for readers, but we shall see over time. Thank you for the feedback! --Elisabeth Rogan (talk) 17:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- It is ok, but usually not necessary. For Article or Project pages (like Policies), full and accurate edit summaries are really helpful. For talk pages it is common to see users who normally offer a full edit summary each time put nothing more than a "r" or "+" in the box. This is mostly because most actions on discussion pages are self evident and non-controversial. The other reason is that most discussion pages simply get longer, rather than overwrite past text. For articles, when you make a change it may eliminate some work that someone else has done. This is (of course) run of the mill. Talk pages, on the other hand, will continue down the page. That way, the "history" of a talk page is generally just read from top to bottom whereas the history for articles must be read from a separate page. Some people like to leave edit summaries for themselves. For examples, some people leave "delete" or "keep" in the edit summary for AfD "votes". Others like to summarize their point in edit summaries when making a longer comment. This can be a courtesy to people with lots of pages on their watchlist--they can look at the watchlist and know what the comment is likely to be about. Find what style suites you, of course. Protonk (talk) 07:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Is that okay to do? I want to make sure that I correctly and sufficiently summarize my edits. Thanks! --Elisabeth Rogan (talk) 07:00, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah -- it's easy to spot you because you type full sentences into the edit summary...haha! I'm sure you'll change after a day or two. DRosenbach 06:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Welcome!
|
- Thank you for the nice welcome message! That is a lot of good stuff to read through! :) --Elisabeth Rogan (talk) 07:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Wiki-adoption?
Have you considered wiki-adoption at all? It's like a "big brother/sister" program for Misplaced Pages where you can have a friendly person that helps you become more familiar with Misplaced Pages. -Malkinann (talk) 07:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- That sounds like an excellent idea. Are there any adopters that you recommend? --Elisabeth Rogan (talk) 17:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Question
Have you edited under any previous accounts here before? krimpet✽ 15:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- I accidentally answered a reply logged out today, but I corrected it immediately. As you can see that is my only accidental logged out edit thus far. --Elisabeth Rogan (talk) 17:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- See WP:AN#Right to vanish and not vanished for why the above question was asked. - auburnpilot talk 18:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for the notification; I have commented in that thread. --Elisabeth Rogan (talk) 18:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Using Google News
First of all, whilst using Google News is a good tool to ascertain certain types of notability, some things with no profile there may still be notable (especially historical items). However, if you're going to use Google News, can I suggest you use it properly? In Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Camberford Law, you claimed that the company has no Google News hits. In fact , it has 78 (link). You need to click the "All Dates" link on the left-hand menu, because Google News defaults to just hits from the last month. Also bear in mind that Google News results tend to be skewed towards the USA, especially in local news items. Black Kite 20:16, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Might I also suggest using quotes around phrases when doing searches? In the Beyond The Grave AfD, you noted that there were many entries on Google Books with the name, however if you put quotes on the phrase "Beyond the Grave" the number drops dramatically. Google news and Google books are both very useful tools, but working on your "Google-fu" is important to find clear, relevant results. :) -- ] (] · ]) 20:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
September 2008
