User talk:Michaellee4

Your submission to AfC
Thank you for submitting an article to Wikipedia. Your submission has been reviewed and has been put on hold pending clarification or improvements from you or other editors. Please take a look and respond if possible. You can find it at Wikipedia&. If there is no response within twenty-four hours the request may be declined; if this happens feel free to continue to work on the article. You can resubmit it (by adding the text to the top of the article) when you believe the concerns have been addressed. Thank you. Petrb (talk) 16:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
Your article submission has been declined, and Wikipedia& was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to resubmit once the issues have been addressed. (You can do this by adding the text to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia!  Chzz  ► 03:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Adoption request
Greetings ... I read through your message, and I would certainly consider adopting you and helping you, but before that, I do need to clarify something regarding your attempt to create an article. If you're creating an article for a work in which you have a substantial amount of personal effort invested (such as this film), then you technically would have a conflict of interest in editing it. This is the main concern of the administrators that have declined your requests to create the article; in their eyes, you're basically trying to promote your own work on Wikipedia, something for which it is not meant.

Now, all that said, you have gone to the effort of providing some potentially independent and reliable sources that discuss your work, and that is a plus, as this helps indicate its notability and thus its merits for inclusion on the project. I would be willing to help go through it and make changes that would get it closer to inclusion, but here's the kicker ... your work on the article would have to be severely restricted due to your connection to it. Even if I go through it, inclusion is not guaranteed. I know this may not be what you want to hear, but unfortunately the policies and guidelines regarding conflict of interest are pretty clear.

Again, if you would like to move forward, I will be glad to take you under my wing and assist you however I can. This also includes if you decide against being adopted ... feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns you have, because, most of all, I want to make sure you get as much out of editing Wikipedia as I do.

-- McDoob AU  93  05:53, 24 December 2010 (UTC)


 * If you wish to proceed, then welcome aboard! First off, a couple of hints for dealing with other editors. Be sure to leave comments for them on their talk pages (User talk:McDoobAU93) and not their user pages (User:McDoobAU93). Fortunately, many editors are pretty forgiving of newcomers, as it's inappropriate to attack new users for innocent errors. When posting comments on talk pages (for users or for articles), be sure to sign your comments using four tildes ( ~ ); along with time-stamping your entry, it provides links to your user and talk pages, making it easier for others to communicate with you (I've seen you use it a few times, so I know this isn't that new).


 * Again, I'll be glad to answer any questions you have. In the meantime, since it's very late for me (I'm online off and on most of the day, though), just browse around and read random articles. You'd be surprised what all is here. Also, if you're looking for a good laugh, take a look at this article, detailing some of the stranger discussions on what should appear in articles. Lastly, in the spirit of the season, here's one of my favorites: the Christmas Price Index. Merry Christmas!


 * -- McDoob AU  93  06:44, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
Your article submission has been declined, and Wikipedia& was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to resubmit once the issues have been addressed. (You can do this by adding the text to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:19, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Navigation and such
Greetings ... I noticed you initially responded to one of my questions here on your talk page, then removed it and moved it to mine. That's fine, but I did want to answer your question regarding how/if I see things you post on your own page. So that brings me to my next bit of instruction on navigating around the project, and that's the watchlist. In the upper right corner, you should see a string of items, including your user name (most likely in red; I'll explain in a moment), then "My talk", "My preferences" and, most importantly right now, "My watchlist."

As you work on articles or talk with editors, you can mark them as ones you want to follow. Next to the Search field are a group of tabs, including one with a star. For most articles, that star will be just an outline. But, if you want to track an article, click the star and it'll turn blue. You're now following that page on your watchlist. When you click on "My watchlist," you'll see the most recent edits made to the articles you follow. The info includes the number of characters added (in green) or deleted (in red) from the previous version, the time the edit was made and the edit summary (if any) left by the editor who made the change. Since I am following your page, I saw you had deleted a fair number of characters, so I took a look. So, by all means, make sure you add my user page to your watchlist (talk pages are included automatically, so just mark the article/user page).

Now, to answer why your user name up in the corner is red ... well, redlinks indicate pages that don't exist, or have no information on them. To fix that, go to your user page (User:Michaellee4) and edit away. For some ideas, check out other users' pages, especially those on articles that interest you. A couple of words of advice: your user page is not analogous to a Facebook or MySpace page, nor is it a place for advertising. Tell users about yourself, what your interests are, what you've done on Wikipedia, etc. (then again, maybe it is kinda like Facebook).

One last thing regarding communications ... some users will respond to questions posed on their talk pages there, instead of on yours, so that way they have a continuous thread. If their page is on your watchlist, you'll see the change. Also, users can post a template on your page letting you know they have said something to you on their page. I'm going to respond to the question you posed on my talk page momentarily, then I'll leave a Talkback template so you can see how it works.

-- McDoob AU  93  17:08, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
17:33, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey there. I've added a bit more to the rewrite, which you can see and help with here. -- McDoob AU  93  19:14, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

St. George and the Dragon
Hey, I responded to your question on Saint George and the Dragon by moving it to my regular talk page, and I'll answer your questions regarding the documentary article on the sandbox talk page. -- McDoob AU  93  01:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

References in Wikipedia
Hey there, sorry for the delay in getting back to you. The real world has its way of taking you one of cyberspace for a while, don't it? Anyway, I wanted to answer your question on referencing. You saw the template underneath the header for the "References" section of the article we're working on, and wondered why there was no reference information below that, other than the template. Here's how it works (since you're somewhat familiar with HTML coding, this should be easy to pick up) ...

Wikipedia prefers that citations are added "in-line". Basically, you append a section of code at the end of a sentence with the information on the source that backs up that statement. Then, the template compiles all those sections of code and generates the hyperlinked footnotes you see in the various articles (including yours). You use. Simple, eh? In the article-in-progress, I've already done that with a number of statements. Especially look in the "Reception" section, where I've added the critic's comments, and provided the reference information to back it up.

It's acceptable to use standard English to add in source information—most any writing guide tells you how to prepare footnotes—but with Wikipedia, you can go a step farther. There are special citation templates that can be used depending on the source media ... a website, a newspaper (print or online), a book or even a video. These templates have fields for metadata where you can add in all sorts of details on the source (such as a book's author and publisher, a website address, etc.). While the basic function is the same, each one has unique fields that can be used; fortunately, each one has very good documentation describing how each should be used, and which (if any) fields are required in order for it to work properly. A couple that I use most often, and are worth looking at, are   and.

One last lesson regarding citations ... if you're using information from a source throughout an article, there's a shortcut you can use to make adding later citation footnotes much faster. The tag as normal. Whatever you use needs to be enclosed in quotation marks, like I have here. Here's where it can get tricky, though: when you use it later, you only need one tag, but this one is special ... . Note the forward slash after the quotation marks; this eliminates the need for a tag, and it will have the same footnote number as the initial use. BE SURE TO USE THE FORWARD SLASH, otherwise it could mess up how the article is displayed (always use "Show preview" to see how things look, of course).

Again, I'm sure that's a lot more info than you were looking for, but I'm pretty sure it'll answer your question. But if it didn't, WP:CITE will help you, too. :)

-- McDoob AU  93  00:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi there McDoob, Wow we must be on the same wave length, as I've not been here in a while, but here you just responded here yesterday, I must be psychic! In any event, please forgive as I've been editing nearly 3 days straight on a new trailer for the Saturday Nightmares doc, (featuring some of our reviews) and I just happened to upload it to a site called "Metacafe"... I've never uploaded to this site before, but I decided it could be a potentially proactive move for marketing, etc. and low and behold once the video was fully uploaded, it miraculously appeared here, (is Wiki-Cafe actually "here" as in Wikipedia? Or is Wiki-cafe a spin-off?)  I am almost 2 days sleep deprived as that's sometimes what happens when you have to sit and edit for 12-14 hours at a stretch, but it's all good. Worth every minute. The new trailer is fun, and I wanted to share a link on the chance you thought it could somehow, (ultimately) be linked to our 'official' wiki listing for the same film, when (and if) we can finally get it listed. I am so utterly exhausted at the moment, I can barely type, (let alone process your very complicated terminology) but I wanted to attempt this correspondence so you could at least see the link. Rest assured it's not that I don't want to do the work to get the page corrected and up and running, I've just been busting my butt trying to make ends meet, and honestly a lot of your most recent message did not make a lot of sense, hopefully it will when I've actually had sleep. I will attempt to re-read it. But until then, enjoy the trailer.  Also, would you consider telling me specifically if your most recent notes were in reference to anything that already exists on the page we've created that needs to be corrected? I was under the impression it was in good shape, but your last correspondence seems to now say otherwise. Is there any possibility of getting this up before, say... Christmas??? ;-) Please advise, Michael Stever Michaellee4 (talk) 12:34, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Saturday Nightmares: The Ultimate Horror Expo Of All Time! concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Saturday Nightmares: The Ultimate Horror Expo Of All Time!, 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) 02:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Saturday Nightmares: The Ultimate Horror Expo Of All Time!


Hello Michaellee4. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Saturday Nightmares: The Ultimate Horror Expo Of All Time!".

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, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 17 February 2014 (UTC)