User talk:Ariyen/Archive1

Welcome!

Hello, Ariyen, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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! gb ^{(t, c)} 13:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem - I've looked at your contributions, and can't see what links you've posted. What are the links that you're proposing to add?

Oh, and just a pointer, but remember to leave your comments for people not just on their talk page, but at the bottom of their talk page. It makes it much easier to find new comments! gb ^{(t, c)} 13:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I see you've asked Also there are dead links posted on some of these sites, what shall I do about them? Any possible way of removal?. Be bold. If there are dead links, either fix the links, or if they're not fixable, remove them. Just be sure to put in your edit summary why you're removing the link, so no-one gets the wrong idea. gb ^{(t, c)} 13:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

You don't really need to note the removal on the talk page of the article. When you edit a page, underneath the big white box with the contents of the page, you'll see a smaller page with the heading "Edit Summary". In there, write a brief description of the change you've made. If you're removing a dead link, write "Removed dead link". If you're adding a link, say so. That way, on the page which shows recent changes people can see at a glance why you've made the edit.

Don't worry about people being rude - that person is just a vandal. It happens! gb ^{(t, c)} 14:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Just to clarify, though, you would probably do well to discuss changes in advance on the talk page where the change is likely to be controversial. gb ^{(t, c)} 14:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

When you click on "Edit this page", you have a big white box, which contains the contents of the page. The smaller box under it (just above the buttons saying "Save page" "Show preview", "Show changes", and just above the tick boxes for "This is a minor edit" and "Watch this page") is the edit summary box. This page explains more. gb ^{(t, c)} 15:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Your changes haven't been undone - have you refreshed the page (by pressing F5)? I can see your changes, and no-one's undone them, as far as I can tell. gb ^{(t, c)} 15:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, okay, they have. The user's left a message below, and I've left him a message on his talk page. Can the two of you work it out between you? gb ^{(t, c)} 15:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Pig (zodiac) do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Mayalld (talk) 15:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

External links

As you may have noticed, I've just reverted a few of your edits that added a whole chunk of external links to pages. User:Gilesbennett just left me a note to say that he's been trying to help you out, and asking me to offer you a little more advice rather than simply reverting you and issuing boilerplate warnings. Mayalld (talk) 15:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

In brief, Wikipedia is not a collection of external links.

External links are added where they contain additional information over and above what the article can possibly show, even if it was improved all the way to Featured Article status.

That means that we are choosy about external links. We don't add loads of external links to sites that contain some material that may be relevant. We add few, focussed deep links to pages that really add something to the article, and which cannot be incorporated into the article.

WP:EL goes into more detail about this, and I recommend that you read it. By and large, editing wikipedia should involve far more addition of original content than addition of external links, and an editor who simply adds external links is likely to be regarded as a spammer.

If you genuinely believe that these links are vital to the articles, then you ought to seek consensus from other editors interested in the article on the relevant talk page. I note that (to your credit) you have posted to the talk pages before making the changes, but you haven't actually waited to gauge opinion before going ahead and adding the links. Gaining consensus involves waiting to hear other views before pressing on. It doesn't mean that less than 2 hours after posting to the talk page you can take silence as assent.

Mayalld (talk) 15:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

If I may chip in, in the spirit of being bold, and since we were talking about links, not substantive comment, I encouraged Ariyen to add in the links. Maybe this could turn into a worked example of finding consensus...? gb ^{(t, c)} —Preceding comment was added at 15:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I really don't want to make major changes myself. Just adding in the links that are already there on some of these horoscope pages. same stuff on each page are in these links and apparently someone thought it was good to post these links in other pages. I even found some dead links. I can, if you will allow me to... Add in fewer links, but not quite so many. Just enough to support the page. If these pages or websites I should say add to the articles, why are they there in few of these horoscope links? Ariyen (talk) 15:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea!

I think the key issue to address first is that each article in Wikipedia should be considered in isolation, in order to make that article the best article that it is possible to be.

The problem in this case is that there is an assumption that if an external link to site A is appropriate for Dog a similar link would be appropriate for Pig. This may well be a neat and tidy approach, but it isn't bound to be the best approach.

It may well be that Site A has an excellent, best in class, piece on Dog that really adds to the article, but that its article on Pig is far weaker than the article on Site B

The neat and tidy approach would have it that if a site has one brilliant article on a single zodiac sign, it should be linked to for all signs, even if that particular piece isn't very good.

The approach that fits WP:EL is that Site A is linked from Dog and Site B from Pig each link being there on its own merits, not on reflected glory from some other article

So, it is likely that each sign will have a different set of site links according to who has the best material for that sign.

IMV, the ideal endpoint would be for each site to link to between 2 and 4 superb external pieces, which may well be different from sign to sign.

Signing off for now, but will return to discuss further later. Mayalld (talk) 16:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

CamelCase

Hi, something you couldn't know: Wikipedia originally used CamelCase links, but later enabled and recommended free links. Which is why we avoid deleting such redirects. Especially if they have old content about disruption on Wikipdia as DisRuption by the co-founder. As far as i know, in 2001 there was no separate Wikipedia space for policies, essays etc. yet. Cheers.--Tikiwont (talk) 11:35, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Something I guess that was changed, since I last visited. Appreciate that very much. Ariyen (talk) 10:05, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Kind message

Hiya =)

Tell teh baby some internetz guy says hi. A F K When Needed 18:26, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Lol, thank you. She has tried to push keys, while I try to respond, etc. She is a curious girl. Am happy for how smart she is. Ariyen (talk) 09:42, 13 March 2010 (UTC)