(written from a Production point of view)
Since you're new to Memory Alpha, I have a few links that you might want to check out:
- Our policies and guidelines are the best place to start. Particular items of note are the content and resource policies, the editing guidelines, our point of view, copyrights, and guidelines for proper etiquette.
- We strongly encourage you to use the "source editor" in your editing preferences, so you can use our standard formatting templates. We also recommend you click this link and save the page.
- The Manual of Style and how to write a great article can help you put together an article that might end up on our Featured Articles list someday.
- Want to help build the category tree? Check out Category suggestions.
- You can look up your past changes in the contributions log and keep track of your favorite articles through your very own watchlist.
- Create your own user page and be contacted here, on your talk page. Please make sure to sign any comments on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~) to add your user name and the date and time.
If you have any questions, please feel free to post them in one of our forums. Thanks, and once again, welcome to Memory Alpha!
--Sloan 07:08, 27 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Welcome again. Please note that Quotation marks (") must be outside the square brackets ( [[ ]] ) for a link to work. Jaz 23:54, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Please do not edit my user page. This is against policy, and very rude. If you have a suggestion put it on the talk page. Don't believe me? Read this. It is also a big "no-no" to edit other people's comments in discussions, even if its just spelling or grammar, its just not something we do here. Jaz 02:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- Note: it's fine to go back and edit your own comments for spelling and/or grammar, but it's considered bad form to change content or meaning of even your own posts. If you need to clarify (or even retract) something you've said, you should do it in a follow-up posting. -- Renegade54 14:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Hasn't been a problem. I resist the urge. Carbonari
Gotcha, Jaz. Sorry. I was unaware that I was violating rules. "It's", by the way, would be correct in both instances where "its" appears in your statement above. I will refrain from changing that though. Carbonari
Not to get on your case, by any means, but you shouldn't create links from random words in film or TV titles, company names, etc. Only create links for a title if you're linking to an article (either internal or external) on the actual film or TV series, or the actual company being referenced. And even if a link does correspond exactly as far as the text goes, please make sure the context is the same. For example, a reference to the film Julius Caesar (1953) should not link to either Julius Caesar or Julius Caesar (play), since neither are articles about that film. If anything, a link could be made to an article on the film on Wikipedia, i.e. wikipedia:Julius Caesar (film). In short, just because you can link to something doesn't mean you should. Thanks! -- Renegade54 14:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Realworld on Calendary templates
Don't put it onto the templates please. Those templates will later be included in day pages, and those pages have the realworld template. It's left off of the date templates so that they can be included in pages that should not include the realworld template. -- Sulfur 16:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ok Carbonari 16:55, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I double checked. I don't think I did that to any other templates. Thanks. Carbonari 17:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
In terms of the dies links... I agree that it might be a good idea to link "dies" and "is born" to Star Trek deaths and Star Trek birthdays (respectively). Perhaps it's something that we should bring up in Forum:Calendar proposal. I'd appreciate your input there on the matter. Thanks -- Sulfur 17:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
That sounds good. Better than linking to the "Death" page. Carbonari 17:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Links (Part 2)
A couple of suggestions/comments in adding links:
- When a link already exists, even if it's a redirect, avoid using a piped link. For example, in Hermosa Quake you added a link to "species" as [[lifeform|species]], when you could have linked species directly. And if you think the link there should specifically point to lifeform, then you'd be best changing "species" to "lifeform" in the article and linking to lifeform directly.
- You've created a number of links to the bookmark [[Earth measurements#Year]], but no such topic exists in the Earth measurements article. It would probably be best if you either created that section or stopped creating the "year" links, since you're sending folks to a non-existent topic.
- Try to view everything in a Trek context when making links, especially if you create a link to a non-existent article (i.e. a red link). In other words, there's no need to create a link to, say, [[ketchup]] if there's no specific Trek significance. That red link will just encourage someone (typically an anon user) to create an unnecessary, dictionary-type article that usually ends up being deleted. Now, if it was something like "Klingon ketchup", it should have a link. Just keep in mind that not every noun needs a link! :)
Thanks! -- Renegade54 04:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- "Species" seems to be used for intelligent lifeforms in Memory Alpha, and "lifeforms" to just living things in general, so marine life of the coast of California would be considered lifeforms.
- Well, a year is a measurement of time, and all time measurements in Starfleet are based on Earth measurements according to some article in Memory Alpha, but I can stop making those. No problem.
- I rarely make red links, and only do so if it has an obvious Star Trek context. And if no one makes red links, pages for those topics don't get made. But still, I am very careful I believe about making a red link.
Carbonari 08:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- Cool. Some people do seem to use "lifeform" and "species" differently, as you say, and others seem to use them interchangeably. If you feel, like in the case of Hermosa Quake, that "lifeform" is a better word there, then by all means change "species" to "lifeform" and create the link directly, is all I'm saying there. As far as "year" goes, I agree with your premise, and ultimately "year" should probably fall under Earth measurements. It's a little different, though, when you create a link to a non-existent bookmark in an article that does exist, as opposed to creating a red link. In the latter case, someone will eventually see the red link and create an article for it, and until someone does, it will show up in the list of needed pages. In the former case, though, no one will ever see that the topic doesn't exist since the link is a good one; the browser doesn't care if the bookmark is good or not, just that the link to the referenced article is good. Thus, the topic may never get created (unless you create it yourself, which would be a good thing :) And lastly, there's nothing wrong about creating a red link per se, just be judicious about doing so (as you mentioned you are. Please don't take offense at my comments here; I'm just trying to provide constructive criticism so we can produce the most professional Star Trek reference that we can. Thanks! -- Renegade54 16:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Renegade54. Thank you for the response. I certainly don't take offense, and Memory Alpha is collaborative, so I expect changes to my changes. The dialogue is nice, and appreciated. Carbonari 10:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- No reason that it shouldn't to my mind. Yes, different POV, but build the web, and that's what the "realworld" tag is for. -- Sulfur 18:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm talking about background information on an in-universe page. Something that can't have a realworld tag.--UTS DeLorean 18:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- We had this same discussion about places (i.e. Los Angeles, New York, etc., and languages, and concluded it's ok to link real-world articles to in-universe topics, just not the other way around. There's a thread out there somewhere on that. If it's an in-universe article that's linked to a realworld page (and not just in the Background section), then the link should be removed. -- Renegade54 18:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Go read this: Forum:Link Context. The links must be specifically related to be meaningful. Insectoid ship is not any more related to time than any other article on MA. It is old, but so is everything. We are not trying to turn every link blue. There has to be a logical flow in the links. The logic flow is through the link "years". Just because a word appears, or a sequence of letters, does not mean there is a specific reference. The links must fit the context and connect the two ideas in a meaningful, specific way. They should not be linked because, by chance, a common phrase using that word appears in the text. --Bp 20:28, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- I am done. Carbonari 22:09, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's all we ask. --Alan del Beccio 22:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Talk page deletion
I see it's been awhile since you've been on, but there have been some policy changes since '07 on talk pages. The current policy is that talk pages are archived instead of deleted, so other people's comments are preserved. Also, inactive users are no longer deleted either, to avoid having red links in page histories and archived talk pages. You may want to take it up with an admin if you really want your pages deleted, but under the current policy your talk page was restored. - Archduk3 06:56, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Hey Carbonari! I realize you probably won't be back to respond or anything, but how have you been? I for one have missed you these last few years. Didn't like what that pair did to get rid of you, particularly when they gloated about it elsewhere... --OuroborosCobra talk 08:14, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
Thank you OuroborosCobra for the kind thoughts. Carbonari