User talk:OldManO

Here's some reading material that might help if you're interested: ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:04, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Tutorial
 * Cleanup resources
 * Help desk
 * Five pillars

Welcome food enthusiast
Hi there fellow food lover! Take a look at this Cincinnati chili. Also, I left some comments on the Fred and Red's discussion page for you. And you might want to click on the "article for deletion" tag link and comment on the discussion. It would be appropriate to say you are the article's creator and to explain why the article should be kept (assuming you want to the article you made kept). I think it will be okay anyway, there are enough foodies out there who appreciate a classic pit stop! Still, it might be helpful for you to see how the process works and to read the discussion there and the issues raised by editors. Have fun and leave any questions you have for me here. I'm going to watch this page in case you want to holler back, and I'm glad you're adding delicious information to Wikipedia. Thanks and welcome aboard. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:57, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, ChildofMidnight! you're helping me with my first 2 articles. Old dog, new tricks you know. My favorite place to eat, and I want to do it proud, and want others to learn about it. Any google search can find multiple references. Having trouble knowing exactly how to respond to bot messages and interpret comments, so any advice is appreciated. OldManO (talk) 18:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I stand ready to translate. You're doing great. Wikipedia is a maze of terminology, rules and regulations, but ultimately it's about building an encyclopedia with good information. So you've already made substantial contributions to that effort as the Fred and Red's article demonstrates. There aren't enough experienced editors, so that's why there are bots, templates and automated responses. Just remember that people are trying to help and the "tags" and such serve a purpose. It's unfortunate that the experience isn't more friendly (especially to new editors), but it's still humans that ultimately do the writing and that built this rather amazing resource. You can use colons to indent your responses to others. One colon indents once, two twice, etc. Have you had a chance to check out the deletion discussion? ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again Old Man. This: "goodness of the food, its great value" and "crowds of people who flock there, the cleanliness of the diner, the quality" are not going to last long in the article. Keep in mind the type of information you would expect to find in an encyclopedia. Maybe look up some articles on a similar subject.


 * Also, the article needs more references, meaning citations from newspapers, magazine or books. So that would be the best way to improve the article at this point, and make sure it doesn't get deleted. Have you looked at the deletion discussion (clicked on the link in the "tag" at the top of the article page)?ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:45, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Someone else deleted the poem as a possible copyright violation, so I wanted to summarize what the poem talked about without quoting it. OldManO (talk) 23:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Well you might be able to quote some of it. You can certainly mention the poem being on the placemat. Maybe you want to take a picture of them next time you're there in case someone challenges whether they exist. :) But seriously, something along the lines of, "Smallville local Fred Smith's poem about the restaurant appears on Red and Fred's placemats. The poem includes the line 'no pain, no gain when it comes to eating chili'," seems okay to me. Sorry I don't remember the name of the town (or any of the poem) so I had to improvise. Although from what I can remember, the poetry down in that area could use some spiffing up... ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * oh, come on...don't start a regional bias thing....Yeah, it's cheesy and sing-songy, but don't blame it on the region. So what's the process to get rid of the warning boxes? Who makes that decision? Obviously, I can't just go in there and start deleting them...


 * Okay, I won't engage in any further poetry commentary... at least for now. When the templates have been addressed they can be removed.  Do you think they've been addressed?  Have you read the comments at the article deletion discussion?


 * Would you consider taking out or revising your non-encyclopedic language that I mentioned? And if you can add a couple more sources I will remove the references needed tag. But if someone wants more references they can add back the template or add a specific tag to the text they are questioning.


 * It's a give and take here that is meant to push editors to back up the content of articles with sources, and to include the most reliable and encyclopedic language. And yes you can delete the templates. But I don't think it would be wise at this point in time...ChildofMidnight (talk) 09:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I think you've done a great job cleaning up the article and adding some in-line references. The big remaining issue as I see it is that the entire notable history section is unsourced.  Where is this information from?  I think it would be best to add some kind of references, even if it's "signed photograph on wall" or something.  At least that indicates where the information is from and suggests it's not made up.


 * FYI I disagree with editors who challenge everything in an article, but if someone want to question something or requests a citation, it generally needs one. I think if it's written without opinion and appears to be good and reliable information, unless there's reason to question it (let alone remove it) I think it's best to assume good faith by the contributor. If something is taken out you disagree with, you can always put it back.  Try to explain yourself in your edit summary, and consider anythign they've written in their.  And make sure you don't "edit war" or do a reversion or the same change more than once in a 24-hour period.  The idea is basically that this is a collaboration, so as with tags and edits, people have to come to agreements and compromises on how articles should be written.  I'm just trying to give you a sense of how it all works.  I think it's a great article, but I'm partial to famous and historic independent eateries that are special and unique.  Many editors seem to think the only food articles worth writing are about big chains...  If we can add some references to the "notable history section" I'm willing to remove some of the tags. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:13, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * How do I "combine" references? 3 or 4 facts can be verified by same source, but how do I list them correctly? Also, check out my comment on the Spaghetti Red article about American Chop Suey OldManO (talk) 21:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Also...ChildofMidnight....sorry! Looks like we were hammering on it at the same time!


 * Yeah, sorry about that. It's all yours. Remember that people are giving you suggestions based on guidelines. But guidelines are just that, the goal is the best encyclopedia. So you don't have to take out anything you don't want to (although someone else may) if you think it makes it a better encyclopedia article. And finally, I think the suggestion about references was to improve the way they are organized. If you type in wp: thetopicyouwanttoreadabout you can usually find the Wikipedia instruction article on what guidelines to follow. So you can check out wp: references and it should explain how to do them properly. There's a way to do it once and then refer to it again. But I'm notoriously bad at doing the references properly and to me the most important thing is to provide the reader with the appropriate reference if they want to look up the information. I also like to show the complete web address which is discouraged, but I think it's useful, although sometimes a bit long, as it shows where the references actually link to. As references sometimes get moved and deleted, it's not my favorite area to invest oodles of time in. But don't tell anyone I told you that. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I couldn't find the comment you mentioned. Can you give me a bigger hint where to find it? Have a great day. I thought of you because I went to my Chili-burger place last night. It's not this one actually but an offshoot of Tommy's. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, Spaghetti Red discussion page.


 * Nice job on the references. You've inspired me to do them properly in the future! Keep up the good work. I had seen the comment you are referring to, I just didn't respond. I didn't realize the dishes were significantly different, but I accept your explanation that they are. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Galloway.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Galloway.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 03:07, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Spaghetti Red for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spaghetti Red is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Spaghetti Red until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —valereee (talk) 14:54, 12 November 2021 (UTC)