User talk:512bits: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:13, 20 March 2012

Hello, 512bits, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Manual of Style
Your first article
Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

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, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place "{{helpme}}" on this page and someone will drop by to help. You can also contact me if you wish by clicking "talk" to the right of my name. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you Miss Anna! I'll try to learn to sign my name now. 512bits (talk) 02:51, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Message

Hello. You have a new message at Anna Frodesiak's talk page. 10:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some bubble tea for you!

For asking questions and seeking to learn more about the Wikipedia project. Most new editors go out and explore the "Wikiworld" and learn as they get mauled by any of the aggressive "WP:WikiFauna". Regards. MarshalN20 | ^Talk 14:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you. I'm glad I'm going about it right so far. I've glad you and Anna, the first two people I've met here are two of the very nice types of WikiFauna. 512bits (talk) 23:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Well, I'm glad your first experience at Wikipedia has been nice. However, please be aware that you will eventually run into unsavory characters. As I wrote on my userpage, some Wikipedians are grumpy. Try to avoid them.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Soybean

Thank you for the compliments. I'm glad you like plants; botany articles tend to be abandoned (nobody takes care of the plants). The reference situation is somewhat complicated. Look at the following link: ([1]). All you have to do is the following:

Find what kind of source you are trying to fix (book, thesis, website, etc.).
Copy-paste the appropriate template from the list in the link ([2]).
Fill-in the template with the appropriate information (sometimes you won't be able to "fill in" every single bit of information, but try your best to not leave any blanks).
Finally, close your citation with < ref > and < / ref> (without the spaces, or triple quotations).
Don't forget that your citation goes inside the body of the text (the web automatically will send it to "references" section on its own).

If you've done everything correctly, you should see your citation in the "references" section. Reference work is a very tedious job, which is why most people do not bother to do it. However, it is crucial for any work that a proper reference section accompanies it. I hope this helps. Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I'm somewhat anal and good at paying attention to detail so I think I'll like fixing up the references. So I'll get to work on the soybean references. Won't get far but let me know if I mess up. 512bits (talk) 00:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see there's a way to reuse references withour copying all that code. Looks simple to use too. But there's one in Japanese or Chinese. Can we use it? Is there someone here that can get the info we need for a good reference? 512bits (talk) 00:56, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can try to use it, but I don't know if it will work for you or not. So far you're doing great.

You can try to use the WP:RS/N to find someone who can help you out finding information for reference. Wikipedia has several of these "noticeboards" (each holding specific purposes), and they are generally a great way to find help during your time here at Wikipedia.

There is also the WP:RD/L, where Wikipedian language experts (of various languages) generally pop up from time to time and provide their help. One (unofficial) golden rule exists in these boards: Be concise (go straight to the point) and accept their comments as suggestions (don't get angry at what they may or may not tell you). Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 01:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Boxes

The userpage boxes are fun to use, and several styles exist. I did my page based on that of another user (simply copy-paste their format, and then add your own things to it). My best advice is to look at different users, check out which pages you like the most, and combine them to your liking (you can edit your userpage as many times as you want). Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 17:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Botany

I am not much of an expert on botany-related articles (aside from potatoes). I'd recommend you use the article Genetics as a model. If you need any help with research, contact me and I'll see if I can find the text you require. Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 01:57, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I could also use ideas on how to go about improving it, if you have anything specific. Otherwise I'll just try to mimic Genetics as you suggest. 512bits (talk) 02:01, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Exceptional Newcomer Award

		The Exceptional Newcomer Award
		For being such a good editor, and working in an area that really needs you! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:17, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you very much Anna! 512bits (talk) 02:21, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I support Anna's award. I think Botany articles are generally non-controversial, which is probably also why so few people work on them, but that should allow you to work in them without problems. I'd like to see you become a prominent member in that field of research. Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 02:27, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're saying a lot of people here like drama and controversy? Wow. I prefer peace and quiet, so looks like I picked a good area. 512bits (talk) 02:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just here, but life in general. By nature, most human beings like drama and controversy (and pay to see them on movies, television shows, etc.), and Wikipedia provides a certain degree of anonymity which allows them to act out their inner dreams. The point is to remember that Wikipedia is, ultimately, an educational project where we are all colleagues working to create a body of knowledge which present and future generations of individuals can use for their personal development. Not surprisingly, trying to get that through people's heads is a nearly impossible task.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 17:35, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Understood and agreed. It's sad though. Hopefully the drama queens will not bother me.512bits (talk) 22:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting that y'all have the impression that botany articles are non-controversial. Perhaps most are. There's a certain amount of "animated discussion" (as cricket commentators sometimes call it) at Wikiproject Plants whenever questions of botanical nomenclature arise. There's even more of that sort of "lively exchange" between people from there and some zoologists, and it turns out that this is because botanical and zoological nomenclature are mutually incomprehensible. Some day, Wikipedia might succeed in explaining the differences so well that we'll all be happy, but that day is still some distance away. In the meantime we can only choose which battles to fight, and help one another out occasionally. Best wishes, Nadiatalent (talk) 20:22, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Message

Hello. You have a new message at Anna Frodesiak's talk page. 13:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, 512bits. You have new messages at Template talk:Harvard citation no brackets.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Redrose64 (talk) 22:24, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Smile award

	A big smile
	For your efforts to not only improve Wikipedia, but to keep the atmosphere pleasant for other editors. It is very much appreciated. Nadiatalent (talk) 20:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It's good to meet nice people here.512bits (talk) 20:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Abu al-Abbas al-Nabati, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andalusian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Sometimes bots are good.512bits (talk) 12:54, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Hello! 512bits, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. An awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! Rosiestep (talk) 04:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like duplication of the helpdesk.11:43, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It is similar to the Helpdesk as both are styled to answer questions. The difference is that the Teahouse provides peer support to new editors, and helps them become accustomed to wikipedia's culture. I can see you have hundreds of edits since you got started last month, and you seem to be doing fine, but just know that the Teahouse resource is available if you'd like to give it a try. Cheers, --Rosiestep (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Night critical photoperiodism

Thank you for at last providing a use for the old edition of Plant Physiology by Taiz and Zeiger that has been sitting on my shelf unused for several years. The references that they give for the discovery that night length was also important are:

Hamner, K.C. (1940). "Interrelation of light and darkness in photoperiodic induction". Botanical Gazette. 101 (3): 658–687.

Hamner, K.C.; Bonner, J. (1938). "Photoperiodism in relation to hormones as factors in floral initiation and development". Botanical Gazette. 100 (2): 388–431.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Nadiatalent (talk) 14:18, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!512bits (talk) 14:20, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

Hi. When you recently edited Botany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nucleus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Photos

Yes, I'm checking the Botany article from time to time. You're doing a fantastic job so far. I don't know much about commons, but what Id o know that it is a place where the photos are made more easily open for other wikiprojects (such as from other languages) to use them. Once you upload your photos into commons, you can use them here in the English Wikipedia the same as you would a photo uploaded directly here. I generally simply upload the pictures I create here into the Wikipedia servers (though it is generally discouraged), but that is just because I am not much interested in creating a Commons account (added that I don't generally upload much images). However, if you are going to be uploading images several times, then it probably would be a good idea to create a commons account.

First, create a new account (use your WP username if you want): [3]
Next, upload your file: [4]
Then, fill out the details of your file, and license it for free use (anyone else can use it; however, you do retain certain rights such as having any reproduction of the image be referenced back to you as the author).
Finally, come back here to Wikipedia and use any image box to place your picture(s). Several styles exist. For example, the Demographics section in the Peru article has an image style which I placed (I copied it from another article). In the Pisco Sour article another image style can be viewed in the "Preparation" section. Others exist, but you have to look around.

I hope this helped! Best regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 01:01, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'll get to uploading them in the next few days. I still want to concentrate on Botany, you when you plan photos of stages of development, timing is critical, haha. If others have input, please let me know. 512bits (talk) 01:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of points:

It is much better to upload images directly to Commons. This makes them easily available to all the wikiprojects, including all the other language versions of Wikipedia. The only images that should be uploaded to Wikipedia rather than Commons are those which cannot be given the appropriate free licenses, e.g. images for which "fair use" is claimed.
Before you upload an image, check that there isn't a good one there already. Searching at http://commons.wikimedia.org/ is a good way to start. Working through the category system is also useful in my experience. For example, to find if there's a photo of a particular species of cactus you could start at commons:Category:Cactaceae (note that if you put "commons:" first in a Wikipedia search box it goes to Commons).

One serious problem is that there's a lot of misidentification in the plant photos in Commons. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A couple more comments: I put images into commons and have never put one directly into wikipedia, so I don't know how that works.

The misidentification problem in commons seems to be getting slightly better, but it is important to check very carefully (found one yesterday that was of Cilantro, but the file name is Celery, and I don't know what the procedure might be for getting consensus to move the image).

When you upload at commons the upload wizard never puts the category information on the photo, so you need to go back later, edit the file to remove the "uncategorized" template, and put in your own categories. The easiest way to find your photo again is probably through "my uploads".

After you have uploaded, the wizard gives you a handy string to use to call up your photo in wikipedia, or you can probably guess by looking at how other photos are used on wikipedia. Upper and lower case is very important (e.g., .jpg and .JPG are totally different). Spaces become underscores (or at least they can, perhaps one can get away with spaces sometimes, I'm not sure).

I upload photos that are my own work. Once when a friend donated one and I uploaded it, I had to ask him to send email to the people who patrol to convince them that he had donated it; it didn't save him any bother at all for me to do the uploading.

Lately, since cameras give bigger images, I don't think it is necessary to follow the advice that might pop up about donating the biggest and best image that you have: you could shrink the image and keep some pixels in case you want to use the photo for other purposes, perhaps even sell it. Nadiatalent (talk) 11:56, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Some points, if I may. There is no need for 512bits to create a commons account - it already exists, because of the Unified login feature.

The commons upload page at commons:Commons:Upload allows you to select categories, but it will immediately forget these if you then use the "Preview" button. The trick is to fill in the whole form except for the cats, preview it, and then select some cats and hit "Upload file".

Spaces and underscores in image names are always equivalent, just like Wikipedia article names; and for the same reason, upper and lower case are different except for the first character of the filename. More at Wikipedia:Page name. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:14, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. At first this looked overwhelming but now it doesn't look so bad, except for the licensing. 512bits (talk) 23:18, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing is a minefield if the photo is not genuinely one that you took yourself, or if it depicts some copyrighted item such as a published piece of text. The people at commons are known to stamp down hard if they get the slightest suspicion that copyright has been breached.

But if it is all your own work (a photo of a plant that you took yourself, for example), the easiest thing to do is to look in the licensing drop-down menu, and select "Multi-license with CC-BY-SA 3.0 and GFDL (recommended)". Those are the licenses under which you submit textual content to Wikipedia, so they're 100% compatible with Wikipedia's aims. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

commons:Special:UploadWizard makes uploading as simple and user-friendly as it can be. You might want to give that a go first. SmartSE (talk) 01:06, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I like simple.512bits (talk) 01:08, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, see [5] for my first upload efforts. Great set of tips guys, I used the Upload tool.512bits (talk) 02:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I object. I'm short-tempered, impatient, a bit cynical, and very opinionated. In short, not very nice, heh, but thanks. Glad to see you're adjusting to Wikipedia well. If you need help, just ask. Cheers. :) -- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 23:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's me too. We'll get along great. 512bits (talk) 23:32, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

	The rose of Jericho
	Thanks for your work on botany - I am scared of broad articles like that, but I'll try and do something if I can. SmartSE (talk) 00:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I like working the botany article. 512bits (talk) 00:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 132: / Line 132: @@
 ::::::[[:commons:Special:UploadWizard]] makes uploading as simple and user-friendly as it can be. You might want to give that a go first. [[User:Smartse|SmartSE]] ([[User talk:Smartse|talk]]) 01:06, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 :::::::I like simple.[[User:512bits|512bits]] ([[User talk:512bits#top|talk]]) 01:08, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
+:OK, see [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/wiki/User:512bits] for my first upload efforts. Great set of tips guys, I used the Upload tool.[[User:512bits|512bits]] ([[User talk:512bits#top|talk]]) 02:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 == Thanks ==