User talk:Shaundakulbara/Sandbox

Help maintain Wikipedia across departments. Greet new users. Fight disruptive editing with warning templates. Nominate non-encyclopedic articles at WP:AFD. Disambig with these templates. Avoid using the general {{cleanup}} tag; use specific tags instead.

Check out stats on my edits from Essjay's counter and the underrated mathbot. Try a nifty tool, WP:POP, and Magic words. I used {{-}} to fix Georgia Cyclone, but haven't found another use for it.

WP:TWINKLE simplifies reverts and AIV reporting. Close XfD's without admin tools. Use a template without taking its categories. Opt out of auto-signing (not recommended for most people).

Now a bit about myself. I live here, went to this and that, was once in this racket, and formerly worked for these guys, among others.

Have you ever played with a Möbius strip?

I oppose third party candidates until cool voting methods are adopted, but will people know how to vote correctly on those ballots?

Sunday

3

November

08:05 UTC

WikiQuotes

Known pages on which I have been quoted include coelacan.

I have finally been accused of being a Republican. I don't get many accusations, so it was a pleasant surprise.

Best {{helpme}} request and a wonderful answer, best point about WP:POINT, and a funny prank.

And here's a list of 100 most-viewed pages on Wikipedia as well as other interesting statistics.

Thoughts on Wikipedia

My editing philosophy: Try very hard to avoid POV sources, try very hard to be NPOV, do not make trivial edits (but always correct mistakes), and ALWAYS leave an edit summary.

When making an edit that may be controversial, imagine you wrote the article and now someone wants changes. How would you like them to go about it? How can they do it so you will not complain?

I probably am not a deletionist or inclusionist, for I do not believe in most generalizations. Many items on Wikipedia are useful; many are not. I prefer to judge each case by its merit, and always keep in mind the option of Transwiki to Commons.

First steps to conflict resolution

Look here.

*4im warnings

I've used {{uw-vandalism3}} many times, but never {{uw-vandalism4im}}. 4im's limit my and other editors' options the next time the person misbehaves. I don't want to report someone to AIV just because someone else placed a 4im tag on a talk page. In the case of spambots or past vandalism that is not warned, the level-3 warnings say pretty much the same thing, except for the "only warning" reference. Given that the current 4im's don't mention the "multiple edits" nature of the crime, I think all these templates deliver the same results, except that other people who see the 4im's may wonder if the warning was too harsh.

Ready for RfA?

You should be able to comfortably answer these questions before submitting yourself for merciless dissection at WP:RFA:

What may trigger your emotions in a conflict? How do you deal with it?
Do you leave edit summaries on every edit?
Why is a block never a punishment?
Can I use two Wikipedia accounts to edit?
Can I handle myself comfortable at AfD, CFD, IfD, UCFD, and TFD?
Do I worry about vandals, or how to deal with them?
Do I know how to properly handle myself in a content dispute? Edit war?
How would you appeal an article deletion?
What are the RfA voters concerned about at the moment?
Have you at least 500, preferably 1000 edits in article space (with significant numbers in both articles and their talk pages), in XfD's, and on user talk pages? It's unfair to ask for anything more than that because these numbers very likely mean that you've been encountering situations where you wished you had sysop tools.

Reasons not to vote against RFAs

Not enough contributions to the encyclopedia (if the user has over 1200 edits there)
Not enough recent activity (if the user has been active over the last six months and 1200 edits each in article, user talk, and Wikipedia space)

fair-use

Per WP:FUC#9, you shouldn't have fair-use images outside the articlespace. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 01:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]