User talk:Paperino45

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! ♠ TomasBat  20:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Vespa
Hi! I note your edit to the Vespa article and your edit summary comments to editor Rally180 as: ''Rally180 didn't read summary before making an uninformed edit. Read before making unnecessary deletions.'' On checking your edit versus your earlier addition of Transformers to the film section, I note you did not add the additional information re the competition previously. Please can you note the Wiki precedence of Assume Good Faith, and further that we are a friendly bunch of editors who maintain the Vespa article, and such comments are not useful to maintaining the quality of the article or common purpose. Rgds, --Trident13 07:12, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, In regards to the "Transformers" movie, I did put: (Look at vespa dot com and you'll see the Transformers tie in. A Vespa Transformer would be pretty sweet.) in the summary part that's found in the history page.  I guess that was not clear enough, so I made it more clear by putting it as a reference.  I will make sure to put references (when possible) by additions that might seem out of the ordinary.  However, when there is no reason to put a link (ie. the link is overkill or not adding much), is it enough to just put it in the summary part?  Do people read the summary part on the history page to see the reason why someone put an addition in, or is that not the case?  I am sorry if the comment was taken the wrong way. - Cheers  Paperino45 23:10, 23 June 2007


 * In simple summary - I think your thoughts are right, and when in doubt its always best to leave more information than less, particularly if a reference is available. But your edit summary is where you got it wrong on this occasion, and could have created a major row/edit war. You are a good editor we would hate to lose from the article, so please watch your edit summaries! Look after yourself. Rgds, --Trident13 22:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Whit Stillman
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Whit Stillman. — James Estevez (talk) 19:59, 26 May 2013 (UTC)