User talk:Dazzpedian

A cup of coffee for you!
Absolutely love your user name. It made me laugh. Welcome on board! Stan mact (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:39, 9 July 2011 (UTC).

Welcome to Wikipedia!
On behalf of Wikipedia, I would like to welcome you to the community! My role as Wikipedia Ambassador serves to assist professors and editors working to incorporate the encyclopedia into the classroom. I would like to offer my assistance with any questions you may have with writing and editing, along with clarification and direction pertaining to community policies and guidelines. If you need a mentor, I can also help by recruiting an Ambassador to work with you on a one-on-one basis. Please consider me a resource and let me know how I can help. Best regards,  Cind. amuse  23:16, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Article for peer review
Hi Dazzpedian, Would you have a look at my article and make suggestions? At the top of my userpage there is an icon to get you to my sandbox, where my proto-article is taking shape! thanks! --Ncsjfreed (talk) 15:33, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Lucasfilm Limited v Ainsworth
Feel free to submit this if you want. It is a while since I have submitted a DYK and I'm not entirely sure what I'm doing over there! I think it is an interesting article though - the type that DYK is for. Francium12 18:48, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks Francium 12! While I have to admit that I too am new to the DYK submission process, and I certainly do not know all of the DYK protocols (I am working to better understand them though), the article piqued my interest and, I think, would be of interest to others who visit the main page. Dazzpedian (talk) 04:50, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Before submitting for DYK recognition, make sure to support each paragraph and section with at least reliable source. Let me know if you have questions. Best regards, Cind.   amuse  (Cindy) 12:42, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice Cindamuse. I went back to Francium12's article and noted that two citations were required. To that end I added a current reference and, also, the original judgement which supports the claims in the article. Please let me know if there are other details that I should consider.  Best, Dazzpedian (talk) 04:50, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it looks sufficiently cited at this point. I think you should go for it and submit it to DYK. Let me know if you need help! Cind.   amuse  (Cindy) 21:32, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought I had a handle on how to put this DYK nomination forward but now I am not so sure. I copied the template to my DYK nomination sandbox but, after saving the template in my sandbox I seem to have lost some of the template's elements -- is this normal?  (Perhaps this is just me...).  If this is correct, though, would I then proceed to submit this nomination through the new nomination listing process?  Thanks, Cindamuse for the kind offer to help! Dazzpedian (talk) 22:54, 2 August 2011 (UTC).
 * The software is not set up to edit the template separate from the process. Enter the nomination here and follow the steps noted. A couple of other things. When the article creator was one individual and the nominator another, it is not a self-nom. When asked what article you reviewed, add "new editor/first time DYK nomination", instead of writing "Lucasfilm Limited v Ainsworth". I edited the hook in your sandbox. Be prepared for DYK regulars to suggest alternate hooks. Let me know if you have questions. Cind.   amuse  (Cindy) 23:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Your instructions were very helpful and I ended up moving through the DYK process in a very straightforward way. I did find, however, and it took me a little while to understand what had happened, that the article's author had already submitted a selfnom for that article.  This didn't quite make sense to me given the discussion above.  Still, I did not change the selfnom (I assume that it would be bad form to do so).  In any event I will watch this article's status to see if other editors ask for additional references or information that I might be able to find.  Thanks again,Dazzpedian (talk) 03:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I checked out the July 27 nomination. Apparently the DYK nom filled out by Francium 12 was submitted incorrectly, so it was removed from the queue. I would honestly opt for nominating a different article for DYK and leave this one to Francium. Just my opinion. Cind.   amuse  (Cindy) 00:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Article review and assessment
It has come to the attention of several Ambassadors and mentors that some students are attempting to participate in official review and assessment of articles, primarily for Good Article status or in attempts to review the work of their classmates. Others are offering second opinions to an official review being performed by other editors. Unrequested second opinions oftentimes lead to disputes. While the enthusiasm and initiative is admirable, it is actually inappropriate for new or inexperienced editors to review or assess articles in any capacity. The Good Article process, review, and assessment requires thorough understanding of the project's policies and guidelines, specifically pertaining to the Manual of Style, verifiability, neutral point of view, and the ability to accurately identify copyright violations, reliable sources, and topical, as well as general notability guidelines. With all sincerity, please do not attempt to review or assess any articles. If you have questions, please don't hesitate to contact me either on my talk page or through email. Best regards, Cind.   amuse  (Cindy) 18:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Adoption
Is an adoption program something you are still interested in? If you would like you could go through my adoption program in which I would give you lessons and tests as well as any assistance with questions or editing problems you may have. Please leave a message on my talk page if you are interested. Ryan Vesey  Review me!  00:19, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Adoption request
Hi Dazzpedian, I notice you've had a request for adoption up for a little while. As you are not currently active, I've removed the current request. If you would still like to be adopted, can I suggest that you contact one of the editors on the list of adopters? Perhaps take up Ryan Vesey's offer above? As Wikipedia is a volunteer project and many adopters are busy, a more pro-active approach would mean that you are more likely to be noticed. If you've got any questions, feel free to leave me a message. WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)