User talk:O'delaquatique

Welcome!

Hello, O'delaquatique, 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:

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! - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actress stub types[edit]

Hi - all of the stub templates you made relating to actresses have been speedily deleted. It is policy on Wikipedia that people who work in specific professions are generally grouped together and not separately grouped by gender. As such, the various {{x-actor-stub}} templates should be used for actresses. Please note also that all new stub templates and categories should be proposed before being created at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, so that they can be vetted, as explained at WP:STUB. Grutness...wha? 00:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but it's only because of political correctness and that there must be equal rights for men and women have equal rights. I know it's a pain in the neck, but... Oh yeah, I hope your meniscus get's better.--O'delaquatique (talk) (contributions) (email) 08:27, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphans[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your attention to Tim Carter (musicologist), but I'm presuming from the edit summary that you left when you removed the orphan tag that you may not be familiar with the de-orphaning process. In determining if an article is orphaned, we consider incoming links from article space, not project space. We also do not count disambiguation pages. This article is currently linked from one other article. It remains an orphan until it is properly linked from three. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Occurs to me I forgot to link Wikipedia:WikiProject Orphanage, which you might find helpful. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's the difference between article space and project space?--O'DELAQUATIQUE (talk) (contributions) (e-mail) 20:09, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article space refers to articles. Tim Carter (musicologist) is an article, so we would call it "article space." Project space are maintenance spaces that start with the "Wikipedia" prefix. A good example, relevant here, is Wikipedia:Namespace. :) Only article spaces count in de-orphaning. Project space doesn't count, and neither does User space, which has the "User" prefix. The reason is that de-orphaning is an effort to make sure that readers can easily navigate to articles by clinking on links related to them within other articles, as Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) calls it "bind[ing] the project together into an interconnected whole." --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's great that you're interested in connecting this article, but disambiguation headers don't count, either. Neither, for the record, does inclusion in list articles. In order for the article to be de-orphaned, it needs to be worked into the text of three other articles in relevant ways. (Even if it did count, the article would only have two links, as disambiguation pages explicitly do not count.) I've removed the disambiguation header you placed at Tim Carter (basketball coach). There's no reason to assume that readers would have special confusion there while looking for Tim Carter (musicologist), and we already have a disambiguation page. If you think that readers may land at Tim Carter (basketball coach) while looking for other Tim Carters, you may want to put a header there directing them to the disambig. Meanwhile, pending the linking of this article in relevant article text, I am restoring the orphan tag. If you want more information about de-orphaning articles, Wikipedia:WikiProject Orphanage may be of interest. If you're having trouble finding relevant articles, the contributors to that project are likely to come up with something when the tag draws them as it is meant to do. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of CorenSearchBot[edit]

For every category you create, you should specify parent categories to which it belongs. In the case of a category like this one, parent categories are provided automatically when you include a {{sockpuppet category}} template.

Contact me if you have questions about this. Best regards, --Stepheng3 (talk) 21:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cut and paste moves[edit]

Hi. I just noticed that you attempted to move the article Lotte to Lotte (conglomerate) by cutting and pasting it. This is not the way things are done on Wikipedia; when we want to give an article a new title, we move it so that its attribution history remains intact. Among other reasons, we need this history to be sure that the contributors to the article receive credit for their text. Contributors to Wikipedia do not relinquish their copyright to text, but license it for reuse under GFDL. In order to comply with that license, we have to give them credit for their work. We do this through the attribution history. I will repair this one, but if there are other articles that you have attempted to move in this way, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen, where another admin who volunteers in that area will correct them. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I also fixed Lotte (disambiguation) while I was at it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oky. My account is old enough to be able to move pages now anyhow.--O'DELAQUATIQUE (talk) (contributions) (e-mail) 12:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

I appreciate your assistance in editing my talk page to remove typos and obscenities but, as a general rule, I prefer not to do that in order to preserve the actual utterances as they were made. Besides, despite editing, the original material is always available underneath to those who are looking for it, stored in the edit history. I note that you're a fairly new editor so I'll suggest that as a general rule, people's own talk pages and user pages are their own responsibility; it's not usually done to edit them for others. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since I'm watching your page in case you wish to discuss the above, I noticed this new comment. In a similar vein, I have restored the original text to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce Roselle. First, it wasn't a typo; "ghits" is a standard elliptical expression for "google hits". Moreover, archived discussions should not be modified; please see the request to that end at the top and bottom of the page. You might wish to view Wikipedia:Talk#Editing_comments; editing comments by others is discouraged. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I only remove typos because I can't stand them. It's not like I'm refactoring them or anything similar. The "ghits" I'm always suspicious about because I keep thinking that they've put the "g" in as an error (it's right next to the "h" on the keyboard). Would I get away with asking those who added that comment if they would like to remove the typo seeing as I'm not supposed to? And by the way, don't you mean "editing comments made by others is discouraged" in your above comment?--O'DELAQUATIQUE (talk) (contributions) (e-mail) 12:16, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As to asking others to remove the typos, I can't see this being useful in most contexts and may broach incivility if others feel you are belittling their language skills. We really don't need copy-editors in talk or discussion space; we need them tremendously in article space. If typos are a particular pet peeve for you, you may want to contribute by fixing them there, where it is not only welcomed but encouraged. There is a tremendous backlog of articles that are tagged for cleaning: 39,433 articles, at present. There is also a discussion board, Wikipedia:Cleanup, where people place specific articles for requested clean-up. You may find some topics of interest to you there. I think for most native English speakers, my phrasing above should be clear. If it was not for you, I apologize, but I'm glad that you were able to puzzle out my meaning anyway. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for offer[edit]

Do you want me to take care of some of your work for you?

I think that Waacstats has taken on the most important part of it, and the rest doesn't matter if it's only done irregularly, so I should be able to cope with it. But thanks for the offer, and any little helps :) Grutness...wha? 20:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I hope you get better anyway.--O'DELAQUATIQUE (talk) (contributions) (e-mail) 13:09, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pleasure Ridge Park High School[edit]

Thanks, but the template placed was improper. Amalthea had already fixed the article, by removing it. I've removed it again so that it will list properly. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi; another thing, while I'm here. I've proposed moving the article Georgina, Ontario to the space at Georgina, since there seems to be no reason for the disambiguation. If you have interest in that conversation, it can be located at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2009/March#Unnecessary disambig? (It's also been noted at Talk:Georgina, Ontario#Proposed move. Meanwhile, I have pointed Georgina at Georgina, Ontario again. Since the term "Georgina" doesn't appear at the disambiguation for Georgia to which you had redirected it, I wonder if you were thinking of Georgia (name), where it does appear. I suspect if there is consensus to move Georgina, Ontario to that space, that a hatnote would be appropriate, unless the Georgina page is made into a full disambiguation page itself. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alien.[edit]

wasn't the tag line "...In space, no one can hear you scream...." ?? Wuhwuzdat (talk) 18:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What was it the tag line for?--O'DELAQUATIQUE (talk) (contributions) (e-mail) 18:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The movie "Alien". But, I see you have already moved the redirect, so... Wuhwuzdat (talk) 18:40, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have also tagged They can't hear you scream in space for speedy deletion.--O'DELAQUATIQUE (talk) (contributions) (e-mail) 18:42, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then all is well. Just don't forget "Jones", when you abandon ship. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I don't know what you mean.--O'DELAQUATIQUE (talk) (contributions) (e-mail) 18:50, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Jones" was the cat, only survivor besides Ripley. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 18:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, O'delaquatique. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Vandalism warnings[edit]

Hi. Thanks for keeping an eye out for unconstructive editing and for attempting to warn contributors, but I'm afraid that your notice at User talk:Patrondice may have been based on a misunderstanding. The edit you tagged as appearing unconstructive, here, was to the Introduction page and properly executed. Soxbot doesn't remove it because it is unconstructive, but as routine cleaning of the sandbox. I have explained to the contributor that his or her edit was okay; if you decide to remove your vandalism warning, please feel free to remove that note of explanation. The "welcome" template, however, I would prefer to remain. He or she may find it useful when he checks back in. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but lemme get this straight - that is the sandbox?--O'DELAQUATIQUE (talk) (contributions) (e-mail) 16:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sort of. :) Technically, they should click on "edit here" to be redirected to the actual sandbox, Wikipedia:Sandbox. But newcomers are often confused. If they click edit this page on the "Introduction Page" itself, they see "{{Please leave this line alone}} " As long as edits to that page leave the first line, they're complying. The bots routinely clean the space. Edits like this, now, are not acceptable anywhere for WP:BLP reasons. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2009[edit]

<removed false positive>
The edit that your edit referred to was not vandalism. Where it had put "replaced entire content with something else", I changed it to "replaced entire content with THIS WEBPAGE OF THE GRIZZLY BEAR IS BLOCKED BY THE OPEN DNS GUIDE", which was he replaced the page with.--O'DELAQUATIQUE (talk) (contributions) (e-mail) 16:49, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 16:54, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. We all do it...--O'DELAQUATIQUE (talk) (contributions) (e-mail) 16:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Signature[edit]

Can you please change your signature so i is not so unnecessarily large? Viridae ^Talk 05:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]