User talk:Ctny

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, Ctny! Thank you for your contributions. I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. 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 will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Marek.69 ^talk 09:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AJM's advice to new editors[edit]

Look at the article to see how it is laid out. The Table of Contents is the best place to start.
Read the article to see if what you want to add or remove is appropriate, necessary, or adds value.
Search for the right place to put it.
Check Use the "Show Preview" to make sure that what you have done is appropriate and correct.
Discuss any change about which you are uncertain, by placing your proposed text, or just a suggestion, on the talk page. Someone who watches the article will usually answer in a day or so. You can monitor this by clicking the watch tag at the top of the page.
Be aware
- that an addition inserted between two sentences or paragraphs that are linked in meaning can turn the existent paragraphs into nonsense.
- that a lengthy addition or the creation of a new sub-section can add inappropriate weight to just one aspect of a topic.

When adding images

Look to see if the subject of your image is already covered. Don't duplicate subject matter already present. Don't delete a picture just to put in your own, unless your picture is demonstrably better for the purpose. The caption and nearby text will help you decide this.
Search through the text to find the right place for your image. If you wish it to appear adjacent to a particular body of text, then place it above the text, not at the end of it.
Look to see how the pictures are formatted. If they are all small thumbnails, do not size your picture at 300 px. The pictures in the article may have been carefully selected to follow a certain visual style e.g. every picture may be horizontal, because of restricted space; every picture might be taken from a certain source, so they all match. Make sure your picture looks appropriate in the context of the article.
Read the captions of existent pictures, to see how yours should fit in.
Check the formatting, placement, context and caption before you leave the page by using the Show preview function, and again after saving.
Discuss If your picture seems to fill a real identifiable need in the article, but doesn't fit well, because of formatting or some other constraint, then put it on the talk page and discuss, before adding.
Be aware that adding a picture may substantially change the layout of the article. Your addition may push another picture out of its relevant section or cause some other formatting problem.
Edit before adding. Some pictures will look much better, or fit an article more appropriately if they are cropped to show the relevant subject.

Amandajm (talk) 05:05, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About adding pics[edit]

Please don't add pictures to articles simply because you happen to have them. In some instances there are a hundred pics of a particular subject, eg St peter's, which means that the pics in the article have probably been carefully selected. Only put in picture or change a picture for one of your own, if your picture really has something to add to the article. So if there is already a similar view, try to look objectively and decide which serves the article best. There may be several considerations. For example, the pic that you removed from the St Peter's article: a. fitted the space b. matched the nearby pics in format and colour c. showed all the details of the sculpture surrounding the Holy Spirit window and how it fitted into the architecture.

Some articles e.g. the Pantheon article, are very poorly laid out, because everyone who has come along has jammed a picture into it. And perhaps the person who watches it has no artistic sense. On the other hand, some, like the Saint Peters Basilica article is very carefully laid out. This means that the style, shape and colour of every picture has been as carefully considered as if it was a book article.

Another consideration is whether the insertion of a pic is going to create a big gap in the text, or push down a picture that it married to the text beside it. e.g. If there is a section on the statue of St Peter (for example) and the picture is in that section, if you put another picture into the article above it, then the pics below may no longer be with the text they accompany.

The main message here is: Try to be truly objective about your own work and additions. Some people add hundreds of photos to Commons, but only a fraction, even of the very best ones, make it to the encyclopedia. Also: Don't label the addition of any material as a "Minor" edit. A minor edit is a spelling correction, the reversal of vandalism, putting in a comma where essential, fixing a typo.

Another thing that I should tell you about is that Wiki is written in both British and American English, depending on the subject. If you are from the US and you change British spelling to American, or vice versa, then beware. Don't change "colour" to "color" or vice versa unless you know that it is wrong in the context of a British or US article. European articles are mainly in British English. A general article like World War II is likely to be in US English.

When you start editting written content, use the same discretion that I advise with pictures. Read carefully before you change. If it's a well written and important article like Architecture for example, it can get 1,000 views a day, so it important that it remains consistent. The best approach is to leave suggestions on the talk page. On the other hand, there are about a zillion articles that need a lot of work. If you click "random article" in the left column, you get some idea of the amount of work that can be done.

Happy editting! Amandajm (talk) 12:13, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out the problems with that photo. I went through Wiki Commons and found a picture that showed the chancel very well. It is now in the overview section. Amandajm (talk) 06:55, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

St Peter's again[edit]

Let me say it again: please try to be objective in inserting photos. Your picture with a distant view of the statue, (already represented in the article) pushed the photo of the Pope down out of the section that pertained to the status of St Peter's as the main church (though not the Cathedral) of the Pope. There really is only one section in the article where a picture of the pope is relevant, and that is the section that you effectively removed it from, by putting a pic ahead of it. I have left the other pic, because although it is a minor detail, within a building full of important artworks, the public are always intrigued by the vents and photograph them. Amandajm (talk) 05:04, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that St Peter's is such a big topic that it might benefit by the creation of a number of extra pages. I have been seriously thinking for a while of carving off the story of the building of St Peter's and making it a separate article. Then the Main would deal principally with the sort of info that the tourist/casual reader wants. Some history, a brief architectural overview, more on services and music, and a brief "guided tour" of the building.

A third article could deal with the most important artworks in more detail. That would allow for plenty more pics.

What do you think?

Amandajm (talk) 05:21, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a good idea. There can be content more tailored toward what different people are looking for. It seems like a big undertaking for a single person, but of course, you are 100x more experience in editing articles than me. I try to have a photo-journalism style in my shots, I can see if I have anything that can benefit the resulting pages when you are done.

I even have photos of the toilets in Saint Peter's Basilica... There are no seat covers, the pope doesn't trust us not to steal them as souvenirs :-) Ctny (talk) 05:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Ha!

I had a funny experience the first time I visited St Peter's. (In fact, I've had funny experiences every time I've visited St Peter's). Anyway, on this occasion I was lecturing in Art History and I happened to have with me a mature-age student, a women of about 60 who was devoutly Catholic and desperate to see the Pope (Pope Paul). Well, she headed off down a corridor, with me saying "No, Betty, you can't go there!" and her saying "Yes but the Guard beckoned me!" I am yelling Stop! Stop!, aware of the fact that she had mistaken his back-handed gesture for "Come on", when what it signified was "Go Back!" He was actually looking very hostile. As she tried to walk past him he barred her way with this bloody great halberd and nearly chopped her nose off! I thought she was going to faint! But it really was hilarious! Needless to say, she railed at Italians for using such vague and confusing sign language, and the Swiss Guard in particular for not speaking English!

Next day, the Pope appeared at his window overlooking St Peter's Square, and everybody prayed the Lord's Prayer together, all in their own language, and the Pope and older clergy in Latin. Betty bought a little bottle of Holy Water and was satisfied. Amandajm (talk) 09:40, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jing'an Temple[edit]

Your pictures are obviously an improvement. I don't know what that editor is about, since he/she doesn't appear to have contributed to that article.

Anyway, I took a look and saw that the pics were "sandwiched" so I deleted the tall lefthand pic, which had superfluous buildings and forecourt, cut it down to size and put it in the intro. Have a look and tell me what you think?

Amandajm (talk) 02:56, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Guanyin photo is beautiful. It shows the whole scene very well.

I live in Australia, and there is a large Buddhist Monastery quite close. It is in a lovely situation, on a hillside with beautiful views. Amandajm (talk) 17:23, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shanghai Zoo[edit]

More info on my talk page and Moonriddengirl (linked from my talk page). I think we are OK with this one now that it has the correct template. We should consider if it tells part of the zoo story or not, but I will let you decide that. If you think it does, then some mention in text about the statue and its context would probably be appropriate. If you can point to some information on the Web about the statue (since it seems the incident is famous), I may be able to help write this. Don Lammers (talk) 12:36, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of St. Catherine's Park[edit]

A tag has been placed on St. Catherine's Park, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

address only

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. The Newspaper (talk) 04:21, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Ctny. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]