User talk:P@ddington

Adoption
Greetings , I see you're up for adoption, and I'm in the market. If ever you need advice or answers, just ask me -- any question, any time. I'd like to help however I can. Since I see you haven't been formally welcomed to Wikipedia, I'll place a welcome banner below. Happy editing - Draeco (talk) 05:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You simply add the appropriate prefix in the link, which is "fr" for the French Wikipedia. So for instance the text  États-Unis  would produce États-Unis, taking you to the French-language article for the United States. You could hide the "fr" from view with something like  États-Unis  producing États-Unis. - Draeco (talk) 20:10, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! I really thought I had tried that one... seems like I didn't! Thanks again! P@ddington (talk) 22:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, Let me take this back. This is indeed what I tried, and it is not working. Is there any reason why it might not work on my user page...? Thanks! P@ddington (talk) 22:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes indeed, your user page (like main namespace articles) is different. It will recognize those as French versions of the same page (your user page) and display them in the left sidebar under "Languages." You must preceed each fr with a colon. I made the appropriate change on your user page; see if the result is to your liking. The same thing is necessary for categories, where you must have the : prefix or the page will actually be categorized rather than showing a link. - Draeco (talk) 21:59, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

As for your userbox questions: Draeco (talk) 02:04, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) You can do it. Consolidating the userboxes is a noble but onerous task, so probably the only person you will talk into doing it is yourself.
 * 2) "Userboxes" with an "es" will actually get you some more hits, but the sad truth is that Wikipedia search is not very good in general. The whole engine needs improvement; I've always thought partnering with Google would be a good idea. Anyway, I know of no way to just fix that one search term.
 * 3) You could always go through and manually add such a link to each box, but doing it systematically with a bot would take community discussion because it would likely step on a lot of toes. The only way to see such information currently is to go to the template's page, for example Template:User incl, and click the "What links here" tab in the left sidebar, taking you here

Brown Bailout
Hello, P@ddington. I saw that you added a bit on the FedEx article about the Brown Bailout. I've just started working on a section for that article about it. Any interest in helping out? You can find it on my subpage here. And from one new user to another, welcome!--Alang814 (talk) 07:51, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Copied from Alang814's discussion page

 * First of all, my normal policy is to post replies on my own talk page, unless somebody requests otherwise, and assume people have added it to their watchlists. In case you haven't, I'll copy and paste this reply to yours as well. We certainly do have some in common. In addition to those, the philosophy and psychology aspect. Haha, yes I did edit eurotrip. I'm pretty sure it was something pretty minor that I added. Just trying to puff up the resume until I've got a lot of substantial edits and articles under my belt. I've been editing for a couple months now, but really just minor stuff, and didn't actually have a user account until last week. Anyway, this was my second article, and certainly the greater of the two undertakings (the first took me a grand total of like two hours). I would also enjoy working together again. My plan after this is to add to the actual page on Wikipedia a section on the criticism of Wikipedia. It's nothing major, there's already a pretty extensive article on it, so I'll probably just summarize that and put it on the wikipedia page. Feel free to help out. If you have any ideas on other articles, I'm certainly open to them. With an election coming up I'm sure there will be no shortage of articles to be written on politics. One final note: once we post the article in the main namespace, I was planning on putting my subpage on it up for deletion. Since you contributed heavily to the content and talk page there, I think etiquette calls for me to make sure that's cool with you if I do. I just can't imagine needing a subpage titled Brown Bailout after this, and I hate to waste the space on their servers. Anyway, as I look, this is getting to be a pretty long reply, so I'll wrap it up. Thanks again!--Alang814 (talk) 05:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Looks like we're both online, hah.

Great! It's easy to see that things get done a lot faster and better with a second set of eyes, no wonder the word collaboration is all over all the getting started pages on here. I think it's not there for the same reason we aren't posting our article as a section on the FedEx page, it just worked better as a standalone. Yeah that sounds like a good idea. It could easily be linked back and forth from an article on corruption. And I have noticed that it's almost exclusively a republican buzzword, although I think it would be smart to be fair on this one. Love that movie! I played guitar in a small-time band and we did an amazing cover of Scotty Doesn't Know. #So are you alright with me deleting the subpage after we move the article to the main namespace? Finally, Is my page on your watchlist? Just want to know so I don't keep copying and pasting responses. --Alang814 (talk) 06:14, 23 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alang814 (talk • contribs)

Hey, Bedtime!
 * 1) Yeah, standalone is the way.
 * 2) "I think it would be smart to be fair on this one." --> damn straight! Corruption is a good idea of course, but I think Rod Blagojevich and Barack Obama are good too (the word is often attached to their names.)
 * 3) Played in a band too, but Scotty doesnt know was way to punky for my friends... and I dont think I knew the movie back then...
 * Yes, Im cool with deleting the subpage.
 * Yes, your page is on my watchlist.

P@ddington (talk) 06:29, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay, Great working with you. --Alang814 (talk) 06:39, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Agreed, but it helps to have a short summary of it on the main page if it's as closely related as Wikipedia and Criticism of Wikipedia
 * 2) Both are good ideas. Let's not get ahead of ourselves though.  One article at a time is plenty for me, haha.
 * 3) Yeah? What instrument?  And my friends and I all grew up in the '90s, so it was either go the way of N'Sync and the Backstreet Boys or get into the Punk Rock and Grunge.  Easy decision.
 * 4) Okay, so tomorrow we'll put the last touches on Brown Bailout and move it to the main page, and then go from there on the other two possibilities.

Okay, I've posted the article and I'm about to link the articles for FedEx, UPS, the Teamsters' union, and probably an article on the term bailout, or the bailouts of the financial sector from last year or the one before --mentioning FedEx's misuse of the term. Have a look at the article, here. After that I'm going to delete the content of my subpage and put it up for deletion. Great work!--Alang814 (talk) 18:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Done, I linked UPS, FedEx, Bailout, and Teamsters to the Brown Bailout page. Now to delete the subpage. By the way, the talk page we had on there will be gone too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alang814 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Dude. You watch the Daily Show too! good stuff, man--Alang814 (talk) 02:22, 26 June 2010 (UTC)


 * AND I created a Daily Show userbox--so proud of myself! I like to think that I was Jon Stewart in a past life. :D P@ddington (talk) 02:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Problem is he's still alive. That bit on Glenn Beck was amazing.  Also this--Alang814 (talk) 03:28, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, yeah, the Glenn Beck thing was awesome. Not too sure about the O'Reilly interview, for several reasons. 1st of all, the first few minutes on Obama are pretty weak--Stewart could be a better (but should he? I'd rather see him be no more than an entertainer). 2nd, it seems like they both enjoy how important they are, and it's kind of awkward for the viewer (who either loves Stewart and hates O'Reilly or vice-versa). P@ddington (talk) 06:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I see where you're coming from on that. And maybe I like him more because I agree with him more than any other commentator. I think Stewart has realized how powerful (and important, for that matter) comedy and satire are to political discourse.  We live in a world where not only does the government need a monitor (the media), but the media needs a monitor, which is where The Daily Show comes in.  And he has done some important interviews and made some really good points that nobody else was talking about.  Two cases that come to mind are the Jim Cramer interview and his appearance on Crossfire.  So yes, he is a great entertainer.  But I think he's doing something important for the country that I really don't see other people doing.  As for O'Reilly, although I don't agree with him on very many issues, he is fair most of the time.  And Stewart was right that he's the voice of reason on Fox.  Sean Hannity is the worst when it comes to being fair.  He takes any shot he can at the American left.  And Beck: honestly I think he has some sort of paranoid delusion disorder.  He speaks his mind, which I respect; but he gets way too wrapped up in conspiracy theories.  I'll wrap it up on that note, cause I can go all day on conspiracy theories, haha.--Alang814 (talk) 07:32, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary&#32;for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. –BMRR (talk) 17:40, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Duly noted! P@ddington (talk) 01:18, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

"Minor edits"
Hello again: please remember to mark your edits as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Adding content to an article is not considered a minor edit. Thanks and Happy Editing, –BMRR (talk) 17:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Duly noted #2 P@ddington (talk) 01:19, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Criticism of Wikipedia
Hey there. I've finally started that subsection on the criticism of WP. It's not much, but it's late and I'm far too tired to do any extensive writing tonight. Especially when it's all the tedium that comes with doing summaries. Anyway, feel free to take a look and help out on it. I've posted one or two issues I had at the top of the page and in its section in the talk page. You can find all of it here. Thanks!--Alang814 (talk) 05:48, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Skipping lines
I don't understand your question about skipping lines. You could try posting your question on Help desk, or using the tag on your user talk page. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:43, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I have a random question... about skipping lines on Wikipedia. Especially right below tables, boxes, or titles. Let's say I want to skip one or several line(s) right below the 'Contents' box on my personal page. How would I go about doing that? Seems like just skipping a line in the code won't quite do it... Who can help me out?

P@ddington (talk) 02:59, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Pressing enter/return only once will not produce a line break in wikitext. Pressing it two or more times, however, will create line breaks.


 * For example,

this sentence has one return.
 * This sentence


 * has two.
 * (The colons at the beginning of each line only produce indents...it's like using the Tab key.)
 * Robert Skyhawk (T C B) 03:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you Robert Skyhawk for your help! It makes a lot more sense now. There seems to be an exception, though. I haven't been able to insert space directly under a title or a table, regardless of how many times I pressed enter/return. I guess that's why I was confused in the first place. Thanks so much! P@ddington (talk) 20:20, 10 July 2010 (UTC)