User talk:WizardOfTheNorth

Welcome
 Hello, and Welcome to Wikipedia!  Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

--- Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:


 * Table of Contents


 * Department directory

Need help?


 * Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
 * Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.
 * Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations
 * Article Wizard — a Wizard to help you create articles


 * The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.
 * Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia.

How you can help:


 * Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.


 * Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...


 * Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes ( ~ ). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The [[Image:Signature_icon.png]] or [[File:Insert-signature.png]] button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.


 * If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

, good luck, and have fun.

Reference sources
I notice that you have removed reference information from several railway station articles, such as these:, , , ,. Why was this? -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:25, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I have been correcting and expanding a number of entries. One of the issues that arose with corrections of fact was that it was not obvious what the source of the orignal information had been, since there were no inline references. Subsequently one of these errors was traced to a book which had been listed as a general reference. As at least one of the station entries has a correct inline reference to a book, so it seems to me that if books are going to be referenced they should be by that method, and not by a generic reference.WizardOfTheNorth (talk) 12:28, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Some articles may contain what may appear to be general references, but which are in fact the second stage of a citation style known as "shortened footnotes", see WP:CITESHORT. This is quite a common method, mainly used where various facts have been drawn from several different pages in the same book, because it saves cluttering up the page with full citations every time. See, for example, Canadian federal election, 1957, which is today's main page featured article. -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:03, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I have looked at Canadian federal election, 1957 and I note that it contains over 130 inline references. I can see that the use of "shortened footnotes" is desirable for a piece of that length and complexity. What I don't see is the point of using it for entries of only a few lines. The problem remains that if the fairly short entries that I have been editing contain factual errors and only a generic reference, then I see no reason why they should not be replaced by a factual correction with an inline reference. I have already come across a number of instances where incorrect information from Wikipedia entries has been repeated in other media, and its accuracy has been (correctly) challenged so I would say that the priority should be on factual accurancy rather than the style of presentation.WizardOfTheNorth (talk) 19:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

West Hoathly
Hi Wizard I see you have been editing for some time so you should know we do not use Wikipedia as a reference for Wikipedia. I changed the url to an internal link.--Charles (talk) 17:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)