SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
3,266
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 38:
Line 38: + + Line 44:
Line 46: + + Line 63:
Line 67: + + + + + + + + + +
Various.
That makes some sense, but here's my problem with that: Perhaps I should not compare this site to wikipedia, but it's hard not to. Take Xenon for example. It's perhaps a minor element, right? Therefore you're thinking I shouldn't write any article about it. But if you look at Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenon) You see a huge article--much larger that the side table, which is also much larger that ours. If I write something, even if it does restate some info, at least it's a foundation for others to add to. Maybe they never will, so I shouldn't though--I don't know.
That makes some sense, but here's my problem with that: Perhaps I should not compare this site to wikipedia, but it's hard not to. Take Xenon for example. It's perhaps a minor element, right? Therefore you're thinking I shouldn't write any article about it. But if you look at Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenon) You see a huge article--much larger that the side table, which is also much larger that ours. If I write something, even if it does restate some info, at least it's a foundation for others to add to. Maybe they never will, so I shouldn't though--I don't know.
:My advice: ''Do not worry about the fact that our articles are less extensive and "encyclopedic" than those at Wikipedia.'' If you do, you will just give up in despair. WP's articles, especially in math and science, try to be "world class encyclopedic references". Just look at them! WP is the place to go if you really want to see a 38,600 character article on Quantum Chromodynamics. But if, like many people, you want to know what Hafnium is used for, a less grandiose article is the thing. The [[Tin]] article says some interesting things about it. That's the sort of thing you should aim for. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 20:40, 30 December 2015 (EST)
==Citations==
==Citations==
[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 9:39, 28 December 2015 (EST)
[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 9:39, 28 December 2015 (EST)
:You're worrying too much about this. We're extremely informal about such things. Look around, and you'll see. Just put in citations in whatever format you think is natural. A web address or book title is usually just fine. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 20:40, 30 December 2015 (EST)
== Interest to user ==
== Interest to user ==
And again, thanks for all your efforts. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:51, 30 December 2015 (EST)
And again, thanks for all your efforts. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:51, 30 December 2015 (EST)
:I also thank you for your work. But I'd offer slightly different advice. (Cons, you know what's coming!) Put in categories, but you don't need to fill your articles with lots of incestuous links, the way the above author does. If someone wants to read more on a related page, he will click on the category and see what's there. It's that simple.
:Also, don't use "plus" as a conjunction, the way Cons did above. I've complained about this to him on several occasions. The sentence should have been "... add category tags to all your articles, '''and''' have another page or pages link ...". It is a compound sentence. "And" is the correct conjunction. And, since it is a compound sentence, there should be a comma.
:As far as stubs, write articles as you see fit. Don't worry about what will be noticed by search engines. If it's in the category, people will find it.
:One complaint: Whenever you see "it's" with an apostrophe, say "it is" to yourself. If it doesn't sound right, it's wrong. "It's" is a contraction of those two words. I've complained about this many times to various people. It's not that hard to put each apostrophe in its proper place. Another pet peeve: You're (you are) going to be more successful as a writer if your (possessive) apostrophes are properly used.
:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 20:40, 30 December 2015 (EST)