Small world...just a note to say I've declined your speedy on the above page, as the grounds you cited weren't appropriate. A7, which is about the only criteria I could see being relevant, wouldn't apply as the article asserted notability. Thanks! GBT/C 16:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please discuss the current dispute on the talk page, constantly reverting edits is counter productive. Remember WP:3RR. John.n-IRL 23:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hillary Rodham Clinton. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"where should it be then" - As far as I'm concerned, in the WWE article or nowhere. It's not notable as far as her biography goes...unless she happens to accept the invitation. Please take it to the talk page. --Onorem♠Dil 17:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Officially, it's only 2 name changes.--~SRS~ 19:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am talking about my username not the sig, the sig I always change, so that doesn't count. The name I changed twice, but SRS couldnt be passed, so its only 1.~SRS~ 21:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I noticed your edit on Wikipedia:Searching and (due to my ignorance) was puzzled by it.
Why did you do is as {{dablink|For test editing, go to [[WP:Sandbox]]}}?
(i.e. :''For test editing, go to [[WP:Sandbox]]'' would have been visually identical - why use {{dablink| ... }}?
Why do it at all? (i.e. I can't work out what value it is adding.)
I'm tempted to revert it, but I assume you did it for a reason. However, your edit comment only says "add" - it only tells me what you did (which is blatantly obvious and doesn't require any comment at all), not why you did it. So please, can you put me out of my misery and tell me why you did it?
Thanks in anticipation of an informative reply. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(P.S. If you have retired, why are you still making edits? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]
My comment was add, because I added something to the article. My reason is because, WP:S redirects there, but WP:Sandbox also starts with a S, so some users may find it helpful if there looking for the Sandbox. I'm still making edits because am officially retiring this Friday. RkOrToN 19:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. However, it's not obvious that's what you've done, nor is it obvious that's why you did it. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 22:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.[edit]
Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 08:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you've been editing a little bit too much to be retired... iMatthew2008 19:45, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So you can be semi-retired. iMatthew2008 19:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Idk why you changed it a while back, but it was supposed to go out last week, so I delayed it one week. April 27 would have been a two week delay. iMatthew2008 19:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you edit on Xbox and Xbox 360 and even our Portal page. If you like to you can join our WikiProject Xbox. BW21.--BlackWatch21 23:34, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't mind, retired from what? Thanks.--BlackWatch21 01:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thats a shame. Thanks.--BlackWatch21 20:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter[edit]
WWE has invited Democrats running for president, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to Raw to settle their differences in a wrestling match. The invitation video can be found here.
On the April 21 edition of Raw, the King of the Ring tournament will return for one night only. The entire tournament will take place on Raw.
Since the last newsletter, the number of stub articles has continued to drop, while the total number of wrestling articles continues to grow. A list has been placed on the stub article subpage of stub articles of well-known wrestlers that should be fairly easy to improve. Please check it out and see what you can help with (even if you can only add a few details or a couple of references).
Based on the active members list, there are currently 41 members currently active in WikiProject Professional wrestling.
NOTICE: If you are actively editing and contributing to articles under the scope of WikiProject Professional Wrestling, we suggest you add your name to the list of active members.
Next week we will start the Editor of the Week. This will take the place of the Member Interviews. The EOTW will be given their own interview instead. To be fair, this week we will post all of the interviews that were on the schedule. Click the link next to the user's name to see their interview:
WWE has invited Democrats running for president, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to Raw to settle their differences in a wrestling match. The invitation video can be found here.
On the April 21 edition of Raw, the King of the Ring tournament will return for one night only. The entire tournament will take place on Raw.
Since the last newsletter, the number of stub articles has continued to drop, while the total number of wrestling articles continues to grow. A list has been placed on the stub article subpage of stub articles of well-known wrestlers that should be fairly easy to improve. Please check it out and see what you can help with (even if you can only add a few details or a couple of references).
Based on the active members list, there are currently 41 members currently active in WikiProject Professional wrestling.
NOTICE: If you are actively editing and contributing to articles under the scope of WikiProject Professional Wrestling, we suggest you add your name to the list of active members.
Next week we will start the Editor of the Week. This will take the place of the Member Interviews. The EOTW will be given their own interview instead. To be fair, this week we will post all of the interviews that were on the schedule. Click the link next to the user's name to see their interview:
The lead is one of the most important parts of any Wikipedia article; its job to summarize the article in 2 to 3 paragraphs in order to familiarize the reader with the structure of the content that you will providing them as well as to give a quick one-minute overview of the topic. Many articles that are processed through Good Article or Featured Article assessments will be heavily scrutinized for a poor lead section.
For articles dealing with video games, a common practice has developed for leads, being a 3-paragraph discussion.
First paragraph
The first paragraph should state the name of the game (using both bold (to identify the article's name) and italics as per the manual of style), along with any other alternate names the game may go by. The genre of the game should be clearly identified as well as the developer and the publisher. If a notable person has been cited by the game as having worked on the game's development (such as Tim Schafer or David Jaffe), this should also be noted. Release dates should be given, along with the release of any ports, remakes, or sequels.
Second paragraph
The second paragraph should summarize the plot briefly in one or two sentences; a high level overview is only needed to set the stage for further discussion. One or two sentences should be included to discuss the gameplay, including any notable features of the game.
Third paragraph
The third paragraph should cover the reception of the game, citing its general critical reaction and any significantly notable successful or failing elements in the game. If the game has won awards, this aspect can be noted, but specific mention of any award is discouraged.
This approach should help you to write a good lead for nearly any game, though this may need to be altered for other games. If there's not a lot of reception information for a game, it may be worthwhile to combine the listed first and third paragraphs into one paragraph. There may be need to talk more about an aspect not normally covered in video game articles (such as with E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (Atari 2600)) which should be noted in the lead.
