User talk:Lensman003

Frank Gasperik restored
Done. I restored the page to its revision directly before my deletion. Good luck! Jmlk 1  7  08:31, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Your edits
A few points:

1) When you split comments you're are not using proper talk page etiquette. You should reply to their entire post, below their post (usually indented, as you mentioned). One of the reasons for this is because people sign their name at the bottom of their whole comment, not after every paragraph. If someone inserts posts (especially multiple comments, each of which has multiple replies) between the paragraphs of someone else, if becomes difficult to know who said what. Regardless, even if you don't agree with the reasoning, that's what everyone else does, so it's just polite to follow the common convention.

2) I was the one who originally grouped up your comments, but when you undid me, I wasn't the one who reverted you. If you click the "page history" button, you can see who made which edits on the page you're currently viewing. It's a handy feature:).

3) I've noticed that you don't seem to know how to use mediawiki software very well (that's the software that Wikipedia runs on, that we're using right now). Don't worry, that's normal:); everyone goes through an adjustment period when they first stumble upon wikipedia. You'll get more familiar with it as time goes on. Here's one thing that you're doing wrong: when trying to contact someone, you edit their user *talk* page, not their userpage. If you edit their user talk page, they get a message informing them that you left a message. That doesn't happen if you edit their userpage. Userpages are intended to be profiles, not communication pages. Gopher65talk 17:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Lensman series
Hi, Thanks for your comment on the Novels Project page. I am happy to keep an eye out for your edits, though I have to say, I don't know about usual Sci-fi article protocol and preferences. Looking at the page I would say the section Planets and Places, Technology and Weapons should all be cut as they give over-specific detail for a small audience. Any big changes you propose would be worth floating on the article talk page first. I'd recommend having a look at the editing basics before starting. Feel free to drop me a line if you have questions or worries. Best wishes Span (talk) 00:34, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Lensman series
Having never actually read the series, I'm of little use for any actual expansion. I did read the article, however, and I do agree with the author in the previous section that it is awfully specific in terms of technologies and planets and so for. If you are interested, I'd be happy to collaborate with you in a sandbox on a rewrite or refactoring.

And don't worry about violating protocol. It's best to just Ignore All Rules and do whatever; if you do something wrong, someone will wander by and let you know. (And either way, someone will notice and respond.)

(If you reply here, please leave a talkback notice on my talk page. Thanks.) -- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 21:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Sandboxing sounds like a good idea. No, I wouldn't worry too much about protocols, except it can be disheartening to have to undo lots of work, I find. I'm happy to sandbox with you both. Best wishes Span (talk) 06:28, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * (I'm not in the project.) Your request sent me to the article on Smith himself, which among other things quotes a Navy man saying a bit of Lensman equipment was used to design some significant WWII naval equipment, helping defeat Japan. It would seem to me that instead of removing the material, the lists should be turned into list articles referenced from the main article; such articles are pretty common in Wikipedia. (Look at any popular TV show.) Some of the material on the importance of the series from the author article should be added into the article; I'm not sure if the references need to be rechecked. Thank you for allowing me to put my two centi-credits worth in.Mzk1 (talk) 22:45, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get | live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! — ΛΧΣ  21™  04:59, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Fuzzy Ergo Sum (novel), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Mdann52 (talk) 18:27, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Disambiguation link notification for October 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fuzzy Ergo Sum (novel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Analog (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get | live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:39, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I noticed that there was a big issue with sources on the pages for the Fuzzy series and I just wanted to elaborate a little more. Flayrah isn't really what Wikipedia would consider to be a reliable source, as it falls more into the "non-notable blog" type group than anything else. This isn't a zing against the website, it's just that the vast majority of websites out there aren't usable as reliable sources. Even some of the more notable and well-known book blogs in general out there aren't considered to be RS. The same thing goes for "Jonathan Edward Feinstein's News (and Reviews!)". A good rule of thumb is that if the site is run through Blogger, WordPress, or any blog website, it won't be usable as a reliable source that can show notability. I know it's hard to find sources for books that fall into smaller niche genres and don't attract the attention of the flashier mainstream books, but the books still have to pass WP:NBOOK. What I do recommend is that you look into writing an article about the Fuzzy series as a whole rather than focusing on the individual entries. That way you can compile the usable sources into one main article and work from there. It's easier to show notability overall than individually, after all. I won't bring the articles up for AfD at this point in time, although I'll warn you that right now the entry for Fuzzy Ergo Sum would probably fail AfD if it was nominated. If you need or want any help, let me know- I'm willing to help out with this. I can't guarantee that other editors won't delete the entries currently in the mainspace, so I recommend keeping a copy of the articles in your userspace as well.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:39, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning. How do I put a copy in my "userspace", whatever that is?Lensman003 (talk) 21:26, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * There's two ways you can do it. One is to hit the little down arrow button next to the search bar and move it into your userspace that way, but I usually do it this way: type in your username and then do a backslash with the title that you want (User:Lensman003/test) It's a little quicker and easier to create the page that way and then just cut and paste the content over- this way you won't have a redirect from the older page to your username to deal with.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:06, 7 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Just wanted to state, I see that someone has approved FES, but I'll be honest and say that there are a lot of people who don't really check the RS properly and approve articles that get deleted as soon as they hit the main article space. It looks like the user who approved it is relatively new and isn't as aware of RS.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:40, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caveat Fuzzy (novel) concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caveat Fuzzy (novel), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caveat Fuzzy (novel) concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caveat Fuzzy (novel), a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caveat Fuzzy (novel) concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caveat Fuzzy (novel), a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:30, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caveat Fuzzy (novel) concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caveat Fuzzy (novel), a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caveat Fuzzy (novel)


Hello, Lensman003. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Caveat Fuzzy (novel)".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13. An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 08:00, 8 August 2015 (UTC)