User talk:Ninty

Welcome!

Hello, Ninty, 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! Dr Debug (Talk) 17:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Sorry for posting this rather late but many thanks for creating the weebl's stuff page that I suggested yonks ago. Completely forgot about it till now! Boyinabox 14:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Library of Earth and Sky[edit]

I originally posted something like this on one of the talk pages of the library subsections, but as this applies to the whole 'project' and you seem to be the only contributor I'll post it here. In depth coverage of fictional universes is common on Wikipedia, and thanks for helping to expand our knowledge of this one, but be careful of how much detail you go into. I notice you've created redlinks for a lot of 'creatures' in this universe, and categorised them alphabetically. I don't know how much backstory is available on all these creatures, having never read the books, but if you can't write more than a few sentences on each each one, it would be best to merge them into a single list (though if there's any with significant backstories, you could wikilink their entries in this hypothetical list to more detailed articles and leave the rest). Excessively detailed information on fictional universes, particularly short arguments on minute details, is often nominated for deletion. --Malthusian (talk) 16:10, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing - the general tone of the articles, particularly the 'welcome' message at the front, makes your articles look very much like a walled garden, something that is frowned upon as Wikipedia is not a free wiki host provider. --Malthusian (talk) 16:13, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to second that. Articles with titles like Library of Earth and Sky, Subsection Animals, L, really don't fit with the agreed upon naming conventions. I think what you're trying to do here could be better accomplished by the use of categories or lists. The goal in naming Wikipedia articles is that the names are easy to find, and that, when they search for a particular name, they quickly find what they were looking for. If someone was looking for a list of animals in the Edge Chronicles, they would probably be better served by, for instance, having an article Animals of the Edge Chronicles, rather than the "great library".

The article The Great Library of Earth and Sky doesn't ever explain what the "Great Library of Earth and Sky" is, which it would be better if it did in the first sentence. See the Manual of style on article titles.

Lastly, if the Great Library is something which exists in the books themselves, then feel free to have an article on it (though please include some verifiable information on it). However, if it is something you made up, then it shouldn't be in the Wikipedia. Wikipedia has a policy of not including original research, or in simpler terms, things which a single person made up, and that haven't been accepted by the wider community.

I really appreciate the work you're putting into this, and I hope I haven't sounded too aggressive. I just think that you may have been misplacing your efforts. Please take a little time to read the policy pages I've mentioned, and then please continue with your project. :) -Kieran 12:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've seen that you've at least mentioned what the library is, but you're continuing to do things that don't fit within Wikipedia conventions, and people are probably going to spend a lot of time and effort undoing when they start noticing. It is entirely possible that your entire library, in all its subsections, will be nominated for deletion, and further possible that they will all be deleted (though more moderate Wikipedians will probably try and salvage the information from them).

Let me be more specific, since you don't seem to want to read the style guide. A Wikipedia article should refer to a single entity or concept, in existence (in popular fiction is allowed). What you are creating, while creative, is not encylopaedic. Also, they way in which you are creating subcategories is definitely not the standard way in Wikipedia. Rather create lists, such as the List of Pokémon by National Pokédex number, for the animals in the world, or, better still, use categories (they're really easy). These are the two acceptable ways of creating groupings of articles in the Wikipedia.

By creating the grouping articles that you are creating, you are damaging the encyclopaedia. Please read the manual of style, and try and stick to it (and restructure your categorisation to conform to the standards). You can blank your pages by editing them, and deleting all text, and nominate them for quick deletion by placing the {{delete}} template on them. If you continue to create these pages, it may be necessary for an admin to ban you temporarily. -Kieran 19:59, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to echo the concerns of the two posters above. It seems to me like you're trying to create an encyclopedia of your own about this fictional world, which sits kind of strangely inside the real encyclopedia. In fact, I would venture to suggest that, even if the information about these fictional subjects itself is encyclopedic (I think not, but that's just my opinion), the presentation you're using is emphatically not. I'm tempted to suggest merging all the articles you've created for the Library, or at least the ones which serve no purpose but to provide additional levels of categorization. - squibix (talk) 18:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(re comment on my talk page) If you don't mind your first efforts being deleted, you can nominate them for speedy deletion by adding text like the following to the top of the unwanted pages: {{db|CSD G7: Author requests deletion}}. That will insert a template at the top of the page saying that the page is nominated for speedy deletion, give speedy deletion criterion G7 as your reason, and add the article to a list of articles nominated for speedy deletion. Eventually an admin will check the nomination and delete the article. Given the large number of articles that seem to be redundant it would speed up the process if you were good enough to do this. Thanks. --Malthusian (talk) 09:37, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Library of Earth and Sky - Resolved[edit]

Hi. I just wanted to say thanks for sorting this all out, and for being so patient. Wikipedia does have a policy of not biting the newcomers, and I was a little worried that we may have been a little too reactionary (but you've taken things well). Hopefully we'll see more of you in future. Have fun and happy editing. -Kieran 17:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs[edit]

Hi Ninty. You should know that it would be better to use the {{fantasy-book-stub}} template to stub your articles - it helps people find the article. The {{stub}} template is kind of deprecated.

Also, interwiki links should only be used to link articles on the same subject in different Wikis - you seem to have been linking to the same French article in a lot of different articles. --Malthusian (talk) 23:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cotswold Savoyards[edit]

The article has been marked for speedy deletion as it does not discuss the notability of the group. Can you provide evidence of notability in order to retain the article? If so, I suggest that you add it. You can add a {{hangon}} notice to retain the article whilst you are doing so. (aeropagitica) (talk) 19:35, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have applied the tag {{merge|List of animals of the Edge Chronicles}} to a number of pages about individual creatures of the Edge Chronicles series. I would really appreciate if you could do this at some point. These articles are clogging things like the uncategorized backlog, the backlog of articles of unclear importance and so on. Per WP:FICT, the standard practice is to avoid articles about fictional characters unless they have an importance that transcends the work in which they appear. I'd appreciate your help doing this. Thanks. Pascal.Tesson 06:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of plants of The Edge Chronicles for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of plants of The Edge Chronicles is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of plants of The Edge Chronicles until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:09, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]