User talk:SmallCheez

Talk away. XD

I just had a minor question
I'm just curious, is all. The dispute section of Wild Kratts was removed, and I want to know why you feel it's irrelevant. It seems to be a pretty big issue, and that's the only reason I bothered to create the section (also because certain people, who I feel are the *same* people from elsewhere, keep posting unverified information, and I just wanted to address the issue). I'm not mad or anything, I'm simply curious. ^_^ (You've been here longer than I have, so I trust your judgment as to what's relevant and what's not.) SmallCheez (talk) 18:23, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Despite what you might think, the reason I reverted the dispute section was not about whether or not I personally think Martin and Aviva should be together, but whether or not your section is relevant to the article. From what I’ve read, the whole section is more opinion than it is fact, not to mention it has almost nothing to do with the series, or the characters. Instead, it’s almost entirely about the fan’s clashing opinions, which is something that’s usually kept out of Wikipedia articles (see WP:REL and WP:ROC). I’m sorry, I really am, but this an online encyclopedia, not a fan blog or forum, it’s a place for facts and not opinions. Articles must remain 100% neutral at all time, to make sure we don’t offend any other readers, and if I hadn't removed it, someone else would have. But if it’s any consolation, I don’t believe Martin and Aviva have a crush on each other either, and I always try to point this out whenever I’m off the record. However, besides that one section, you're doing pretty good as an editor to say you're just starting out, you just need a little help learning about Wikipedia's basic guidelines. If there's anything else you have any questions about, feel free to send a message, though I don't usually check my e-mail or Wikipedia account until saturdays. TCK 15:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry it took me so long to reply, I've been taking a three week break from Wikipedia for the holidays. Yes, it probably would be deleted soon after. I hope the rules of Wikipedia don't seem too strict to you, they've been holding me back for years. TCK 14:48, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

A quick guide to refs

 * 1) Edit the whole article, not just a section. "Show Preview" will then show the reference section, the only place where errors in reference formatting can be seen
 * 2) Copy-paste the quick version of the ref template to the sentence be cited
 * 3) Don't forget the !
 * 4) Fill in the blanks:
 * 5) Preview your edit:
 * 6) * "Common Sense Media gave Wild Kratts 4 out of 5 stars overall, with a 4 out of 5 in educational value."
 * 7) Fill in your edit summary
 * 8) * If you want to be specific about the section you edited, use /* */ around the section name, as in
 * 9) ** /* Reception */ +reference
 * 10) Save the edit
 * 1) ** /* Reception */ +reference
 * 2) Save the edit

Citation templates gives a complete list with links to each template page and their explanations. I used Cite web for the example.

By the way, do not use that reference in the article. I do not know if Common Sense Media is a reliable source, and/or if the addition would be viewed as trivial. I could not find any other reviews for the show, however, so I used it for an example. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 08:37, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

PS - I did not remove the post. It just is not showing up for some reason. I hope this edit makes it visible. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 00:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

List of Wild Kratts episodes
Hey there! Thanks for the Barnstar, it was a lot of work but I think it looks much better now (at least it has less empty space). There's still plenty of work to be done with the content. I removed all the copyright violations I could find but now there are some episodes that have aired that don't have episode summaries. Just rewriting the summaries from the PBS site would be fineit's just copying and pasting them into the article that is against Wikipedia policy. Also I'm sure I made some typos that have screwed up some formatting so please feel free to fix any of those you might find. Thanks again. SQGibbon (talk) 01:48, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

A Jimbo-ism for you
Howdy, re our recent conversation about deletion v tagging - this might interest you. Cheers Manning (talk) 05:01, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!