User talk:Charlesdrakew/Archives/2014/September

please help me completing my page
HELOO

I AM TRYING TO CREATE A PAGE FOR SHARJAH CHARITY INTERNATIONAL,A NON PROFIT ORGANISATION IN UAE.WE ALSO HOLD GUINESS RECORD FOR THE LARGEST WOODEN CHEST.CAN YOU PLEASE HELP ME IN PUBLISHING THE PAGE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sharjah_Charity_International#References — Preceding unsigned comment added by SCI RIZWIN (talk • contribs) 11:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello Sci


 * I have never worked on charity articles so I am not sure if it will be regarded as notable. You have some good sources so it may be. Dubai Cares is another UAE charity which may be useful as a comparison. You need to put citations into the text to which they apply. I am too busy to do much right now but I will look at it.Charles (talk) 21:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Can you be my mentor please
Please. I have done so many violations on it that I need help fixing my mistakes. People are kinda worried because I'm not suppose to create categories. Maybe you could speak on my behalf. I'm wondering if you what categories are suitable to create and not suitable to create. I'm not banned yet you see; I just can't create categories I do have some mental health issues. Please Venustar84 (talk) 13:54, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I am too busy to be much help at the present. Good luck.Charles (talk) 20:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected
I had a message regarding a change to a page about Balcombe (or similar)

I've never edited a Wiki, and this isn't a shared laptop, so I've no idea what's happened. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.152.4.244 (talk) 08:15, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The system shows that somebody has made two edits from your IP address to Barcombe and one to Platoon. Is your wi-fi secure?Charles (talk) 08:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Aristotle-"Hyperbole"
As far as the "hyperbole" is concerned, I would urge you to take a look at these:, , ,. It's not hyperbole when it's true. Gtrbolivar (talk) 12:40, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * You need to look up the definition of hyperbole. It was off-topic for that page.Charles (talk) 13:26, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Believe me, I don't need to look up the definition of hyperbole because I am a Greek and the word hyperbole is a Greek word, the word υπερβολή υπέρ hyper "over" and βολή voli "throw/toss/shot". I use this word everyday in my native language. You need to look up the definition and apparently the origin and the etymology of that word. I don't see how the word "towering" was off-topic for this page. When the reader is informed that Alexander the Great was educated by one of the greatest Greek Philosophers, by a man whose influence on Western Philosophy was immense, he can draw conclusions about the character and the quality of this man's education on the spot. Gtrbolivar (talk) 13:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Those who know about Aristotle will appreciate his importance anyway. Those who do not may think towering means he was very tall. "the towering intellect of Aristotle" would work but is still not needed in that article.Charles (talk) 16:56, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

St Alban's Head
Sorry if this is a dumb question but why did you delete the Gallery on the St Alban's Head entry? Stalbanswatchkeeper (talk) 16:33, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi watchkeeper. There is a general policy of not using galleries in articles unless it is for some specific purpose. We have Commons for photo galleries and categories. I have linked to the relevant categories. It is a great place to keep watch.Charles (talk) 16:51, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

topics
hey... I was wondering if you had any ideas on a topic that would be cool to cover. it can be anything. I just don't want to look lame to everyone who might happen to look upon my page. comment on my talk page Kendall 21:14, 27 August 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kendanne (talk • contribs)
 * My preference is to reply here. I don't care a jot about being cool. Do whatever you find interesting to improve Wikipedia and never mind what others think.Charles (talk) 22:05, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks and encouragement are appreciated SovalValtos (talk) 14:57, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Question
Hey Charles- I haven't spoken to you in a while. I was just wondering how you were doing. And also if you knew of anything that would be a really interesting topic for me to write an article about. My page is looking kind of blank, I need to add something to it. If you could just respond on my talk page, that would be great. Thanks,Kendall (talk) 21:10, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

I know this is probably none of my business, but if I may ask, what is a sockpuppet? You don't have to answer, I was just wondering. :) Kendall (talk) 21:19, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi. Thanks for enquiring. I am fine thanks. Very busy with work and ballroom dancing. I am in a ballroom formation team which is a heavy commitment.


 * I used to read through the articles that come up on the front page in the "on this day" section, then edit to improve grammar and style as set out in the Manual of style. It is useful to gain experience editing existing articles before tackling new article creation. Gets you used to the ways of editing here in small stages. It is difficult to be more specific without knowing your detailed interests and what resources you have access to to find material and references.


 * Sockpuppetry is a user creating multiple accounts or using multiple IP addresses. It is everybody's business to detect and counter this as it is usually done to manipulate discussions to promote a particular point of view. Meatpuppets are groups of real people working in concert to push a POV. It is permissable to use different accounts for editing in different areas as long as they are separate and used in good faith.Charles (talk) 22:56, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Photomontage
About your edits on Sutton, I am confused about what constitutes image clutter, particularly in relation to photomontages. If a photomontage is clutter, how come there are so many of them in other articles about places? I know "other stuff exists" is not justification in itself, but there does seem to be some inconsistency here. A P Monblat (talk) 09:36, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * A photomontage is a composite image made from a number of images and displays as a single image. What you added was a gallery of images which are all in the article already. I regard that as pointless duplication. I have pointed out before that policy on infoboxes is to keep them minimal. Less is more.Charles (talk) 13:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this. I agree that a photomontage is usually produced as you describe, but they can be arranged the way mine was, eg the one for the Los Angeles article. I used Photomontage to produce mine. This saves creating a single file montage, which I can't do. The policy on infoboxes does not say that photomontages are not acceptable, and, if it had done, the LA article would need changing. The guidance says the infobox should not contain too much info - it says "the less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance". I agree wholeheartedly with that, because it is about facts, not images. But I would like you to tell me why you thought the montage was cluttered: by their very nature montages have multiple pictures. I could produce one with slightly fewer images, if you think that would be more acceptable. A P Monblat (talk) 14:18, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It was the infobox that was cluttered. Extra images push it down the page below the lead section which is undesirable. I see no need for more than one image. Los Angeles is more equivalent to Greater London than to Sutton. A few large cities, composed of many districts, may have more but San Francisco manages very well with one.Charles (talk) 17:44, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, I understand. The single image your chose is quite effective, and is fine for the time being. A P Monblat (talk) 14:15, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

The Feathers Hotel, Ludlow
All the information I added to this article was factually accurate, and therefore I do not understand why it has been moved. I feel that on a global website like Wikipedia, a hotel's lack of civilised bedding needs to be addressed. I used quotes from real people, one of whom nearly went there until he discovered that ŷ would have to share his bed with material similar to that used by trainee soldiers in barracks. Rather than painting the hotel as he idyllic English inn, it needs to be portrayed for what it really is, as a duvet-less institution with minimal respect for bed-related hygiene.

Mr Charles, I trust you will reconsider your decision as I worked hard to find the sources relevant to the information I posted.

Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.137.191 (talk) 21:56, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * When you can provide published secondary sources to show the verifiability and long term notability of the claims you can put it back perhaps.Charles (talk) 09:01, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * You might want to recommend Uncyclopedia to people like 81.178.137.191. They can be as daft as they like there - and actually get praise for it too! A P Monblat (talk) 20:19, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Good point. I have seen that wiki but had forgotten about it.Charles (talk) 21:16, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank You
thanks Charles. sorry it took me so long to respond. I didn't understand what you meant when I saw sockpuppet on one of your talk pages. thank you for informing me. I appreciate it. Kendall (talk) 21:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)