User talk:Jghapher

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Jghapher, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for PS, The Preventive Maintenance Monthly. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Chris Troutman (talk) 19:07, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jghapher, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Hi Jghapher! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Doctree (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cartoons[edit]

Hi. I'm writing here because after not hearing from me for a while, it would have been understandable if you removed my talk page from your watch list.

I finally looked at the DRN "discussion" on the cartoons; when I read your synopsis on my page, I didn't pick up that the one responder was closing the discussion, and hoped for a few more comments by the time I arrived. Sorry I didn't actually participate, though under the circumstances I don't think anything I said would have contributed anyway.

As a side note, I think part of an ideal solution would be for someone to create an article here on Bill Sykes, and include the entire sub-site as an external link there. But that still wouldn't resolve the question of whether the individual cartoons should (also) be included in the articles on their subjects.

On the individual articles issue, I'm not sure what the next steps are. I know what I think should happen, but that would entail a lot of unnecessary work on your part, developing a consensus to add in 20 articles, while I wouldn't have to do anything; somehow that doesn't seem like a particularly fair option to suggest. A somewhat less demanding alternative might be to develop a boilerplate request for comments (not actually a formal WP:RFC), modeled on your post at DRN but with a bit more emphasis on the need to determine value to the article rather than spam status. If you were to post such a question at each talk page, I probably wouldn't feel the need to oppose each one (with the possible exception of Batista, which is an article already on my watch list), so lack of other opposition for, say, two weeks or so might be reasonably taken as consensus to add. (Note that although I have had both agreements and disagreements with User:Rjensen in the past, I respect him as an historian and an editor and didn't re-revert the two that he added back. In fact, one of them – Editorial cartoon – I had debated leaving up originally.) If you have an improved approach, let me know. Fat&Happy (talk) 22:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the thoughtful followup, I'll take this to heart and be more selective in the future Jghapher (talk) 02:12, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]