User talk:RA0808/Archives2018/June

File:Capital Pride (Ottawa) logo as of 2018.svg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

From CatChasingAMouse
Can you give me some info about Wikipedia? Thanks- CatChasingAMouse (talk) 23:49, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi and thanks for your message! The best way to get acquainted with Wikipedia is to go on The Wikipedia Adventure, which is an interactive tutorial that teaches you how to do various basic editing tasks. You can start the tutorial by going to WP:TWA. After you're done that, if you have any further question you can post in the Wikipedia Teahouse which is always staffed by experienced editors who specialize in helping new users. Hope this helps! RA 0808  talkcontribs 00:04, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you, RA0808! That is very interesting infomation! CatChasingAMouse (talk) 00:13, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Re: Vernon White (politician)
Hi

I just edited a page and you deleted my changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crayola50 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As was noted in the message posted to your talk page, your edits were reverted because they removed content without adequate explanation. If you have concerns about content on the page please discuss at Talk:Vernon White (politician). Happy editing! RA 0808  talkcontribs 15:06, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Ecodesk revision
Hi ... I just changed the profile to be more in one with what this business is doing but my edit was deemed as not neutral. Can you please review and reconsider? There are no sales or marketing messages. Thank you John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecojr (talk • contribs) 15:17, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi and thanks for your message! There were several portions that had serious neutrality issues, especially "The future of ESG-driven decision making" which read like it had come out of ad copy. Additionally, the edits changed the name of the company's CEO and the founding date without explanation. RA 0808  talkcontribs 00:13, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Re: OpenTimestamps
Hi RA0808, I made some changes to OpenTimestamps that you reverted. I would like to improve that page, so I am asking you what I did wrong and which is the correct procedure I should follow to edit that page in a nice way.

I quickly recall the content of my edit, along with some motivations: I left the remaining parts almost untouched.
 * Improved the introduction, to avoid common misunderstanding;
 * Reorg the structure, to be more consistent with the software;
 * Improved timestamp description, to provide an abstract description of what a timestamp is;
 * Add notes, to answer common doubts, while not complicating too much a first read of the article;
 * Remove a note that contained a link, that if clicked lead to a Not Found page.

You said that my changes seemed not neutral, which of them caused the problem?

I fear that (at least) the last one had an issue; in case of a missing link should I look for another link for the same reference and substitute it?

Then I would like to ask you a general question: when editing, should be preferred to do a big edit including several things or it is better to do more small edit to address each single issue?

Thanks for your help and your service to Wiki! LeoComandini (talk) 10:01, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi and thanks for your message! Taking a look at your edit there were some issues with the wording coming off as non-neutral (i.e. the unsourced claim "this represents an enhancement in term of security, since it excludes the possibility of a malicious (or careless) notary to compromise the timestamp"). It's not to say that your contributions were poor... simply that you may want to review some of Wikipedia's guidelines on tone (like WP:TONE). Also don't forget that Wikipedia is a hyperlinked online encyclopedia so you don't need to put as much explanatory info about related concepts, just link them! It might be good to take "The Wikipedia Adventure", an interactive tutorial, just to get a handle on editing.


 * Your edit will still be visible in the page history, so you can come back and work from it again! Re: the missing link, your gut feeling is right. Wikipedia's policy on dead links is to not remove them. We try to find an archived version of the page on the Internet Archive or Archive.is... and if that doesn't work we find a similar source and substitute.


 * When editing it is your choice whether to do one big edit, or a series of smaller ones. As far as I know there is not a consensus on which one is preferable. Just make sure to use an edit summary!


 * Apologies if I'm either rambling too much or trying to cram too much information into one message. If you have any other questions please let me know or visit the Wikipedia Teahouse, which is always staffed with volunteers who specialize in helping new editors. RA 0808  talkcontribs 00:22, 7 June 2018 (UTC)r