User talk:Cedders

Please leave a message for me below by clicking here. Happy Tuesdays.

/Archive

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions

... Again, welcome! --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 11:49, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced its a sockpuppet and they aren't even really editing. I'm watching the page and will take action as I feel justified. Cheers. Sasquatch t|c 23:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After a lenghty, but much-needed Wikibreak, I'm happy to announce that version 1.2 of VandalProof is now available for download! Beyond fixing some of the most obnoxious bugs, like the persistent crash on start-up that many have experienced, version 1.2 also offers a wide variety of new features, including a stub-sorter, a global user whitelist and blacklist, navigational controls, and greater customization. You can find a full list of the new features

AmiDaniel (talk) 02:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

please reply at: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Editing_tags

Hi, not to be rude to the person who originally designed them, but I think the tags over the editing box are really quite ugly. Also not very discriptive, when they should be to screamingly obvious to highlight how helpful they really are. After activly editing for over 6 months now, I have only just taken it apon myself to check out what they all actually do. Some of them are agreeably useless (to me), but things like signing and redirect are just amazing! The amount of times I have searched for a redirect page just to copy and paste the template to create various new redirect pages is rediculas, and could have been helped only if the tags were sufficiently idiot-proof, and designed to fit in with this age of pretty shiny buttons (rather than fit in with the age of windows 95). I think age they are on every edit page, and are visable to every editor, effort should be made to make them as perfect as possible. Just like the amount of time that clearly went on our wonderful Main Page --mastodon 23:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please be a bit more specific? Which symbols could be more descriptive and how? The signature one is a picture of a signature, which I think is intuitive, although it could perhaps be placed furthest to the right as it is the last thing used when editing. '#R' is esoteric until you have created a redirect, and it then becomes recognisable; it could resemble [1] but readers don't encounter that symbol often either. As for the general design, it reminds me of Netscape 6/7 chrome skin, and not Windows 95. The buttons stand out from the background of the monobook skin, which makes them more functional than aesthetic. --Cedders^tk 09:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking perhaps having simply a discriptive word on each button with an "Insert..." written above their containing line. As for how they stand out against the skin, I hadn't thought of that, you make a good point. Although, I'm sure there are other ways of increasing their contrast, such as is present in Windows XP, when your attention is needed on a button, a complimentary colour is used (in the blue luna interface, this corrisponds to orange). Perhaps a shiny dark button with a discriptive word would be appropriate? mastodon 12:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to your message on the talk page there. I thank you for your continued input and constructive criticism and look forward to gaining more input from you. Thanks, Charlie^{( t | e )} 05:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Ceeders,

thanks for your note. I'll answer the band one first, since that one's dead easy:

As for

just a note that the deletion did happen in due course, and for clarity, there is a huge difference between

Fido.net. --Cedders^tk 09:54, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for your tips on my talkpage, appreciate it! I normally do a search on articles before marking as db-bio anyhow, might have missed it on that one though! Cheers again! Poeloq 21:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A template you created,

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has added the {{

Note the main question here is whether ambiguous links to depression referring this definition can or should (a) be left ambiguous; (b) be directed to a particular definition on wiktionary (preferred option if technically possible); (c) be removed; or (d) go to a landing page at least for the time being. I've removed the prod, pending further discussion. --Cedders^tk 09:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will help you here as much as necessary, at least about the Kipling part of things--I urge you to actually find some references, as mentioned on the List talk page, since they will exist, and build up the individual articles. Consider some preemptive merging. I'm thinking of Messua's husband into Messua, When I work on video and such, I';m working on trying to keep some articles on things where a/I have no interest in the work itself and b/I am not really familiar with how to find what references there are in the specialised sources which exist. Quite the opposite here in both respects. However, it will be very difficult for me to add much in the next few days, so see what you can do till then.DGG (talk) 16:26, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...for your help with the article Common People. Should the "Shatner Version"(Folds version, really) be split off into another article? What if it gets much bigger?

Was the original also quite unknown outside of the USA? What about Canada and Australia? Chrisrus (talk) 06:11, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. Richard Gordon (film producer) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for leaving a message on my userpage, and also for clarfiying the anomality I had spotted on the talk page of the article on

I have read the article and I cannot find any saying which sounds comical. If you could state what you object to, that would really help with my correcting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MayorOfIacon (talk • contribs)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

Thanks for that, and yes that does seem to carry the message more effectively. Britmax (talk) 09:30, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cedders. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cedders. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cedders. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cedders. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cedders. I noticed that you used therichest.com as a source for

hi 👋 I was re-reading the discussion around the Talk Page Consultation when I came across the comment you made (quoted above). It stuck me that you might be curious to know, at this moment, we're working on the very thing you alluded to. That work is happening on Phabricator, in this ticket: T232780. Anyway, just thought I'd drop by to share this on the off chance this was interesting. PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 23:22, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 in the 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]