User talk:SJMNY
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, SJMNY, 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! --Tom 18:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Note placement
The relevant guideline is here Wikipedia:Lead section#Citations in the lead section. The reason you couldn't find it is that, obviously, it's not part of the main WP:MOS page. All of these style guideline pages are generically referred to by many users (such as me) as part of the MOS. I often forget what's in the MOS proper and what's in the larger web of style pages.
As for the content of this specific guideline, I believe it's changed quite a bit in the last couple years and, at any rate, since whenever I last looked at it. I believe there used to be a stronger suggestion to minimize footnoting of lead sections. At any rate, that's the style I prefer--if a statement in the lead is supported by the well-sourced content of the article's main text, our citation requirements are fully satisfied and the lead can be kept cleaner for ease of reading. I'm certainly not militant on the issue and if the general feeling is that the footnote should return to the lead, I'm fine with that (though there's no reason it can't go at the end of the sentence, rather than ungainly popping up in the middle, right after the word "sensational").
Thanks for your P.S. All the best, Dan.—DCGeist (talk) 06:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Example creep
I don't doubt that the claim is verifiable. However,
(a) it was not supported by the cited sources in the article and, even more pertinently,
(b) in this very long article, we don't need to add additional examples onto relatively minor points when the point has been clearly made. What you say is true of Texas is also true of New York, of Florida, surely of other states. But the point has already been adequately made by giving the most populous state as an example. Adding excess examples is what we call "example creep" here at Wikipedia. Note also that in this specific case,
(c) there is a topical article (Languages of the United States) that can accommodate all this sort of detail.—DCGeist (talk) 07:41, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] anonymous users
You are right, I was gitting mad at that user, for comming close to 3RR and also I have reason to believe that user is a Sockpuppet. And have reported them to WP:admin. So we shal see what the outcome is. [1] Best to you.--Duchamps_comb MFA 21:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] How are you doing?
Just wanted to check in ans dee if you were having any difficulties or needed some info. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 23:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
