User talk:LindaSportGirl/Archive1

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse![edit]

Hello! LindaSportGirl, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! heather walls (talk) 06:05, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please fill out our brief Teahouse guest survey[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages sometime in the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 00:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Sports[edit]

Hi. If you need help editing women's sport articles, please let me know as I am more than willing to help. --LauraHale (talk) 22:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment, I've been working pretty extensively on Australian sport where they are Olympic bound. This means water polo, basketball, field hockey, archery. I've also done softball, netball and taken pictures of Australian rules football. If I get the time, I do Paralympic related article work. I'm also in the process of working on national football team articles with a focus on Africa and the Caribbean, trying to take these articles through Good Article and possibly featured. I'm sitting on top of one of the better sport libraries in the world so easy enough to get some good sources. Thus, no particular sport. When not doing Wikipedia, I'm also on Wikinews, which is a fantastic way of promoting sport when players and athletes do not qualify for Wikipedia articles. --LauraHale (talk) 23:12, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Press pass or as a fan? Sport media credentials for WMF documents some of what I have done. I think I could go to the Paralympics with a press pass if I wanted to, but the copyright restrictions on pictures is PITA. :( I'm a PhD student writing on sport. Hence, some interest. --LauraHale (talk) 23:28, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never hurts to ask. :) --LauraHale (talk) 01:07, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At home in the USA, I mostly follow men's sport with ice hockey and baseball but it is easier to follow women's sport in Australia, (national teams have played several games about 20 km from where I live) the quality of play is pretty high and I find some women's sport to be more entertaining than men's. Women's basketball requires a lot of thinking because they can't always just power to the net to slam it in. Women in soccer play meaner, coming in cleats up. Beyond that, there isn't as much research in the area of women's sport so there is a greater opportunity to carve out a niche. Women's sport ties in to greater issues in society that can help women such as health and welfare. But really, the thing is just entertaining to watch. I love watching the Canberra Roller Derby League or the Canberra Capitals or seeing the Australia women's national basketball team during training or watching the Australia women's national water polo team... and the women who are just so nice. --LauraHale (talk) 01:25, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

June 2012[edit]

Please do not write an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you. GouramiWatcher ^(Gulp) 14:07, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that you had written the article "Linda Ochoa" about yourself, as the title of the article is ver similar to your username. I take it now that this was a mere coincidence. Sorry for the confusion! --GouramiWatcher ^(Gulp) 15:21, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Hi there - when you add references to an article, such as here, please also remember to add publisher, date, and accessdate as a minimum. Regards, Giant Snowman 20:36, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problems - but if that information is unknown, you can just leave it out. No need to write date=unknown. Regards, Giant Snowman 12:32, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Palmares[edit]

Several users have different aspects of how they record such palmares section; some go by chronological by date, some go with any old order, or in my case, using low-to-high, and splitting races down: first would come championship races as they are the most prestigious, followed by overall classifications, one day races and then stage victories. See a little more here. Regards. Craig (talk) 00:25, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It would be best to put them in one sort of order, but as long as it still has all the results there, it should be alright. I would still group the results together by 1sts, 2nds and so forth...but it is up to you! Craig (talk) 11:40, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By all means; I did save you the revert but, as I did it for you. ;) Craig (talk) 14:29, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*writes down a note of owing* I'll bear that in mind from now on, I think! Haha. Craig (talk) 14:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd advise you to be on guard 24/7 then; you never know when I may be requiring of assistance! BE WARNED!!!!! ;) Craig (talk) 14:41, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't want to put any unnecessary stress on you...but I do try my best to be as light-hearted as possible... Don't take things too seriously also... in other words, forget the 24/7 thing... More like 25/7 anyway! ;) Craig (talk) 15:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all; just wanted to clarify in case of confusion. :) Craig (talk) 15:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Upon reflection, I must sincerely apologise for being a bit of an idiot. :) Craig (talk) 18:50, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope; I knew deep down that I was far too hasty with my etiquette, and that I definitely should have been more welcoming to you...especially with the potential sports knowledge that you can offer. So yeah, sorry. With cherries on top. Craig (talk) 19:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unluckily, I don't like cherries; so they are all yours. True enough about the reversion, but that doesn't make the conversation a bad thing, does it? Well, I wouldn't know about that last point per se; I've not really seen many female editors upon the specific articles that I usually edit...and I suppose that's the one disappointing thing about Wiki in general...I think if there were more female editors to apply their knowledge of sports on here, then it would be a better, and more friendly to an extent, place. Craig (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's far too much tension between them; if something contentious happens in an event, for example if Driver A takes out Driver B in a motor race, Driver A's article will be vandalised to the extent from IP users until a ceasefire can be achieved, usually via a page protection. Then there's the points of view of some users; one user may type one thing and another may type another and the two users may start a reversion war and end up getting themselves blocked. Too much testosterone flying about here. Just take no notice of them, and everyone else will be just as hospitable as I am. Craig (talk) 20:21, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, there are still some users that fail to add reputable sources as a backup to their claims...that's another reason for such revert wars to be instigated; one user objects to an unsourced claim, and it begins. I must admit that all the way back in 2005 – yeah, that long ago – when I first edited here, I was never using sources but now I'm mentoring others in how to use citation templates correctly. Some people just like to cause trouble, and the way I see it, that's the wrong thing to do. That citation template is a godsend for them, and why they don't choose to use it, is beyond me... Craig (talk) 00:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely; you see some amount of lies on certain articles, just through people's fantasies. I've gotten to the stage of editing here that I don't mind the extra typing; it's become that automatic for referencing that it is now instinctive to do so. Give it time and you'll be just like me with the referencing standards. ;) Craig (talk) 00:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. High standard of writing straight from the get go; That Lagab article was nicely-written by the way – forgot to mention that in the very first post, like the fool that I am – and I definitely would have struggled to have made it of the level it currently possesses. Gold star for that one! I don't think I've needed all the parameters that are on offer from the cite news template; but the cite journal and cite web ones combine them both, and its systematic nuances become clear immediately. Craig (talk) 00:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know I was doing such a thing! I do apologise, but it might be hard to stop, haha. ;) You're welcome! Wikipedia is clearly going to be a better place with your arrival, haha. ;) I've done a few short articles in recent times, but that's only due to the riders becoming notable by winning one of the upper-continental races (1.HC/1, 2.HC/1), taken top 5 on a stage at World Tour level or top-10s in a Grand Tour. If the time comes, I can always pop back and expand it to the Lagab standards, but I'm usually putting the main focus into the season articles, or complete reconstructions of certain pages that could be deleted if they weren't rectified. But your last point is absolutely spot on; if only there were more hours in the day to write top-notch articles for everyone... *sigh* Craig (talk) 00:39, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, if you say so! ;) Yeah, totally. A group of people combining together to create the information that we wish to see attributed into an article, and then we can improve upon if and when events change. Then there's the users who are always open to chat/mentor newer users – if you ever feel the need for a chat, just leave something on my talk page :) – and then you can pass your experiences on through time. It is so worth it. Craig (talk) 00:52, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, everyone will be glad to have your sports expertise on here, now. :) No problem at all, and you're more than welcome! Craig (talk) 01:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bedtime?! Damn... In all seriousness however, sleep well! Craig (talk) 01:05, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1988 Giro[edit]

Haha I haven't messed with the that part of the intro in a while. Well I fixed it, thanks for pointing that out for me. ThurstAsh13 (talk) 01:38, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well thanks for the look over, I appreciate the help! ThurstAsh13 (talk) 14:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, LindaSportGirl. You have new messages at Gourami Watcher's talk page.
Message added 03:02, 29 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

GouramiWatcher ^(Gulp) 03:02, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]