User talk:Silvlasdfj

Welcome!

Hello, Silvlasdfj, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

float

• Your first article
• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.
  
  

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

— Dismas|^(talk) - 02:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The Grinch

Hey there. Hopefully I don't sound too Grinchy myself, but just thought I'd try to let you know a few things about the article you're working on, How the Grinch Stole Christmas (animated short).

The first thing is that it looks like the article on the book originally contained all the info on the animated short as well, but it was removed on October 9th by an anonymous editor (diff). What's there doesn't look too bad, so you might want to incorporate some of it (mentioning in your edit summary that you used it).

Second, we generally don't want to see editorial comments in articles (I'm talking in particular about your "please don't edit yet" notice). If you want people to know that you're still working on it, there are generally two ways to do it: (1) there are a few templates available, including {{inuse}}, or (2) creating a personal "sandbox" (e.g. User:Silvasdfj/Grinch), and moving it to article space once it's ready.

Third, and this is probably the one you want to worry about most at the moment, at the moment about the only thing in the article is a detailed plot summary. As per the guidelines about writing about fiction, this isn't a good idea. I would suggest trimming the plot section down (it's covered in the book article, anyway), and including more "out-of universe" information. Some things you might like to use include critical reviews (try RottenTomatoes, but remember that it contains a lot of user-generated comment as well), the DVD release, and (while long trivia sections are generally discouraged as well) you could easily take a lot of the information from the trivia section of the book article which is more closely connected to the animated version.

Fourth, once you're done, I would suggest cleaning up the book article so it is just about the book, with links to the articles on the various adaptations. This would include changing the disambiguation "hatnote" so instead of saying "This article is about the book and animated versions. For more detailed information ..." it would say something like "This article is about the Dr Seuss book. For the 1966 animated short based on it ...".

Hope that helps! Confusing Manifestation 23:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)