User talk:Occuserpens

Welcome!

Hello, Occuserpens, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 01:19, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks :-) Occuserpens 16:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Belarusian presidential election, 2006[edit]

Please, follow standart for the references formating. Thanks, --tasc 20:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is that so hard to comprehend? --tasc 10:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Issues with <ref> tag[edit]

-- In general, this tag is significantly more complicated to use than plain []. In fact, [] is supposed to simplify HTML <a>, but <ref> is more complicated than <a>!

-- Checking correctness of [] is easy. Quite unfortunately, Show Preview does not seem to support the checks. But what if the link or formatting is wrong for some reason?

-- To go to the actual link in the ready text, <ref> needs 2 clicks, not 1 :-( I am sorry, but this is _extremely_ inconvenient!

-- In current events, the name of the source is especially important because news coverage of BBC, Fox, Itar TASS, Aljazeera, etc is very different. So, IMO, it makes sense to put the name of the source inside the article, not just in the separate Reference section. But this is not the way <ref> tag works.

-- Suppose there are lots of references in the article and we want to know what [17] refers to. Then it needs a special click - instead of just saying that this is Reuters.

-- All these problems are especially disturbing when current events are concerned - in this situation, maintenance of links is critical.

-- Contributor needs to do meaningful abstracting of the source and then incorporate the result into wiki entry. So, I really can't imagine how to do any serious work with current events using <ref> dorectly. IMHO, the initial contributor is simply too busy to get involved with this clumsy thing.

-- Wikipedia:Manual of Style does not even mention <ref> for external linking.

Occuserpens 16:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

initial contributor busy? sorry, most of the text of your contributions is planly copied from corresponding sources. You don't have to be too busy, it's encyclopedia, not a newspaper. Manual is only a guideline, disputed and quite old. I personallyl think that there are too many links already in the article, i don't think that every word or citation should have web ref. the link for citation news sources is pretty easy {{citenews|title=|url=|org=as in wikipedia article|date=[[yyyy-mm-dd]]}}. --tasc 18:50, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, Current events is much more than a newspaper, it is a brand new way to present news. So, this way needs to be as convenient as possible. The alternative is a blog where every news story is properly documented with title and link, for example [1] (which is much simpler than ref tag).

Wiki entry looks better than linear blog because it is structured into sections. However, IMO, links to news stories are essential because otherwise the blog is better.

Anyway, I'd like to contribute these remarks on ref tag to wiki admin, but I don't know how.

Occuserpens 23:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yuval Ne'eman[edit]

Hi, I need help with uploading his photo to the English value..http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%91%D7%A5:Neman_yuval.jpg

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]