FANDOM

Gral and Shran call a truce

Welcome!

Welcome to Memory Alpha, RayBell! I've noticed that you've already made some contributions to our database – thanks for your edit to the "Scotland" page! We all hope that you'll enjoy our activities here and decide to join our community.

If you'd like to learn more about working with the nuts and bolts of Memory Alpha, I have a few links that you might want to check out:

One other suggestion: if you're going to make comments on talk pages or make other sorts of comments, please be sure to sign them with four tildes (~~~~) to paste in your user name and the date/time of the comment.

If you have any questions, please feel free to post them in our Ten Forward community page. Thanks, and once again, welcome to Memory Alpha! Jörg (talk) 15:34, March 24, 2015 (UTC)

The above named user is the most currently available administrator to contribute to Memory Alpha; their signature was automatically added by User:Wikia. If you have any immediate questions or concerns, you may contact that user through their talk page.

LinlithgowEdit

Please note that this town name is from a novel, not an accepted resource here on Memory Alpha. -- sulfur (talk) 16:08, March 24, 2015 (UTC)

There was an argument as to whether it was Aberdeen or Linlithgow some years ago, and I believe it was settled as Linlithgow. Made big news in Scotland, in papers and on television, but it is unclear what the original official source was. My understanding was that this had been approved by whoever controls the brand/franchise these days.-RayBell (talk) 16:16, March 24, 2015 (UTC)

For our purposes, we only use what's been stated (or shown) on-screen. We do mention things in background information (like the Linlithgow bit on Scotty's page). We don't rely on any single production person for material, as currently a corporation controls the franchise, and (unlike when Gene was "running the show") no single person is making decisions for what is and what is not.

Our purpose is to document what is shown, and to give peripheral information in background/apocrypha sections to fill out the knowledge. -- sulfur (talk) 16:26, March 24, 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough. As I understood it, this had appeared on screen, but obviously not.-RayBell (talk) 16:50, March 24, 2015 (UTC)

New categoriesEdit

Please note that we have a very particular way by which we create these found at MA:CS. Please also note that we are very careful to separate the "real world" from the Star Trek world. Thanks. -- sulfur (talk) 17:28, April 13, 2015 (UTC)

I didn't have any idea how to go about this...-RayBell (talk) 17:44, April 13, 2015 (UTC)

External link(s)Edit

One link in the list? External link.

Two (or more) links in the list? External links.

Just FYI. -- sulfur (talk) 15:38, April 17, 2015 (UTC)

Two thingsEdit

Two things I happened to notice regarding your recent edits. Firstly, regarding your background note that says "Unlike some of the other 20th century works that appear on screen, this is a real novel" - how many books have really appeared in the background that weren't real? I have worked a bit on books, and except for for things like the stories featured in far beyond the stars, I can't really think of examples. So I'm not sure if that note is really all that relevant... Just an opinion though, that, feel free to disagree if you think you have reason to.

And secondly, regarding the changing of Puck from an internal red link to a wikipedia link: I have no idea whether Puck was mentioned, but there's really only two possible cases : either he was and the link deserves to stay as is, because eventually someone will have to create an article on him and red links in articles are not in themselves a problem. Or, he wasn't mentioned and he shouldn't be mentioned in the in-universe part of the article in any way, let alone be linked to wikipedia. -- Capricorn (talk) 14:57, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

"how many books have really appeared in the background that weren't real?" - Quite a few, like Chicago Mobs of the 20th Century (or whatever it's called) etc. It's sometimes hard working out which ones are real and which ones aren't. I'd never heard of Carpool before, but apparently it's a real book, plenty of the others aren't.-RayBell (talk) 15:01, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

Love your talk page comment! Edit

"Totally disagree, but I can't be bothered debating this.-RayBell (talk) 15:45, June 5, 2015 (UTC)"

I just wanted to say, I read your reply to a post on the Lady Macbeth talk page and it made me chuckle! It totally epitomizes the way I feel on occassion. Lots of discussion about small things making me wonder why I bother sometimes! Thank you for making me smile! Ha. --| TrekFan Open a channel 20:28, June 5, 2015 (UTC)

GutenbergEdit

Please note that we have a {{gutenberg}} template here on MA/en, and this template should be used for linking to that website.

Please also note that linking to a search page is bad, and the author page should be linked directly to instead. -- sulfur (talk) 16:08, April 5, 2016 (UTC)

That only works for links to individual books, not for the author pages... I'm finished for today anyway.-RayBell (talk) 16:20, April 5, 2016 (UTC)

It works for authors also. For example:

RayBell at Project Gutenberg

This links to Herman Melville. -- sulfur (talk) 17:31, April 5, 2016 (UTC)

It didn't work on some of the links I tried early on, and I *did* try it. TBH I find these templates not that easy to use. -RayBell (talk) 15:26, April 6, 2016 (UTC)

Multiple edits Edit

Please make use of the Preview button when making edits. This allows you to see what your edit looks like before you save it, which reduces the load on the database and makes the Recent Changes page easier to read. Thanks. - Archduk3 (on an unsecure connection) 15:57, August 20, 2019 (UTC)

I already use the preview button on nearly every edit, thanks.-RayBell (talk)

58 edits so far to add speculation and a bunch of detail to the non-Star Trek subject of Stargate, which will most likely be removed later, suggest otherwise. - Archduk3* 16:18, August 20, 2019 (UTC)

I suspect that your comments are more based on your recent beef with me, rather than a professional concern. If I have an opinion, I tend to stick up for myself and try and defend it, instead of just giving in to the other side.
If you wish to know why exactly I have split up many of the edits, the reason is quite simple... I made some of those edits on a mobile, and also edit like that to avoid content being lost due to bad internet connection, computer problems etc.
If someone works hard on something, then they should not be condemned for it, even if you do not particularly like them for whatever reason.-RayBell (talk) 16:30, August 20, 2019 (UTC) p.s. Also while I do have numerous edits on here, they are nowhere near your number, in fact I'm away from here for long stretches. I see you've made at least twenty edits today alone.

No, my comments are based on the default recent changes being 50-100 edits, where you are either all or most of that on a single page, and the fact that I know people will remove "similar to" comparisons without citations, because everyone has done everything and there are no new ideas. Get over yourself. - Archduk3* 16:55, August 20, 2019 (UTC)

As a peace offering, I am going to leave that page alone for the rest of the day. In fact, I'm tempted to leave it alone permanently if it means you stop "nippin ma heid". -RayBell (talk) 17:03, August 20, 2019 (UTC)

Block Edit

If you actually get around to reading the page we're been mentioning, feel free to eat crow here to be unblocked. Or you can just wait till it expires, but continue to flaunt not follow MA polices and guidelines and the blocks will increase. Good day. - Archduk3 17:38, September 13, 2019 (UTC)

So basically, it's alright for people to be rude to me, but not for me to respond appropriately to that. That seems to be the general rule round here. No idea what "eating crow" refers to, but I've got a life offline, so I'll pursue that for a while instead.-RayBell (talk) 16:53, September 14, 2019 (UTC) p.s. Looked up your idiom there - I do not see why I should be penalised for expressing my own opinions, and standing up for myself. p.p.s. I note you are also the individual who seems to have a vendetta going on against me. It clearly seems to mean more to you, than to me, because I'd forgotten about it until I looked at the discussion above. Please move on, and deal with these matters professionally. I had.
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.