User talk:Eventer: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 08:23, 29 June 2014

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am amazed to find your talk page empty... because you have made some very nice contributions to Wikipedia. However, I wanted to ask you for a huge favor: could you please tag them for proper category and proper stub? It's very simple. Most articles would go with {{horse-stub}}. if you have any questions - drop a line on my talk page. Thank you in advance! And thanks for those amazing articles you've created! Renata3 01:00, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Welcome back!

Hey! You're back! Welcome back! Hooray! Good to see you here. What's been happening since you were last over here, several years ago...? Montanabw^(talk) 20:15, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's been a while! Working, school, etc… now in vet school. Hoping to add to some of the veterinary articles! I have been doing a few edits here-and-there just using an IP address, but now that I have access to good resources I will probably come on more often and contribute!

I do need to get a refresher course on internal citation… where on wikipedia would I look for that information? Although I may just be able to figure it out by opening an article in "edit" and see how it is done there. Eventer (talk) 20:01, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vet school ! Yay for you! (bows) Yeah, the thing that has changed a lot is that they are way more anal about citation now than they used to be, particularly the science-oriented articles. Folks really like to see the citation templates used now too, which makes formatting more consistent. WP:CITE isn't a real great page for explaining the current state of the art but does list the basics. IMHO, the best way to do citations these days is to click on the "cite" link in the edit box and then use the pull down "templates" menu to just fill in all the parameters and it will build a citation template for you. Or, another quick and dirty method, though you often have to do some touching up is to use the interactive mode in reflinks: http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/view/Reflinks You just put the raw URLs between ref tags, then run reflinks on the article, and it formats everything, though it uses web page data, so sometimes you still have to do manual fixes. If you want to steal a copy and paste, the last article I took through WP:FA was Mucho Macho Man, and you can certainly swipe any style or formatting there. For science oriented articles, I helped review rainbow trout for FAC, which used some science sources. It's now a few years old, but a person working on her advance degree in genetics worked with me and she got dominant white to GA, and that used a lot of peer-reviewed literature, though the formatting of the citations is not quite the way we'd do them now. WikiProject Equine (WT:EQUINE) (aka WPEQ) definitely needs/wants work done on the main colic and laminitis articles, they are high importance, but suck-egg quality. I'd be more than glad to birddog the formatting stuff if you want to do the tech. Montanabw^(talk) 08:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 Hey!  You're back!  Welcome back!  Hooray! Good to see you here. What's been happening since you were last over here, several years ago...?  [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|<font color="purple">(talk)</font>]]</sup> 20:15, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
-Yes, it's been a while! Working, school, etc… now in vet school. Hoping to add to some of the veterinary articles! I have been doing a few edits here-and-there just using an IP address, but now that I have access to good resources I will probably come on more often and contribute!
+:Yes, it's been a while! Working, school, etc… now in vet school. Hoping to add to some of the veterinary articles! I have been doing a few edits here-and-there just using an IP address, but now that I have access to good resources I will probably come on more often and contribute!
-I do need to get a refresher course on internal citation… where on wikipedia would I look for that information? Although I may just be able to figure it out by opening an article in "edit" and see how it is done there. [[User:Eventer|Eventer]] ([[User talk:Eventer#top|talk]]) 20:01, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
+:I do need to get a refresher course on internal citation… where on wikipedia would I look for that information? Although I may just be able to figure it out by opening an article in "edit" and see how it is done there. [[User:Eventer|Eventer]] ([[User talk:Eventer#top|talk]]) 20:01, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
+::Vet school !  Yay for you! (bows) Yeah, the thing that has changed a lot is that they are way more anal about citation now than they used to be, particularly the science-oriented articles.  Folks really like to see the citation templates used now too, which makes formatting more consistent.  [[WP:CITE]] isn't a real great page for explaining the current state of the art but does list the basics.  IMHO,  the best way to do citations these days is to click on the "cite" link in the edit box and then use the pull down "templates" menu to just fill in all the parameters and it will build a citation template for you.  Or, another quick and dirty method, though you often have to do some touching up is to use the interactive mode in reflinks:  http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/view/Reflinks  You just put the raw URLs between ref tags, then run reflinks on the article, and it formats everything, though it uses web page data, so sometimes you still have to do manual fixes.  If you want to steal a copy and paste, the last article I took through [[WP:FA]] was [[Mucho Macho Man]], and you can certainly swipe any style or formatting there.  For science oriented articles, I helped review [[rainbow trout]] for FAC, which used some science sources.  It's now a few years old, but a person working on her advance degree in genetics worked with me and she got [[dominant white]] to GA, and that used a lot of peer-reviewed literature, though the formatting of the citations is not quite the way we'd do them now.  WikiProject Equine ([[WT:EQUINE]]) (aka WPEQ) definitely needs/wants work done on the main colic and laminitis articles, they are high importance, but suck-egg quality. I'd be more than glad to birddog the formatting stuff if you want to do the tech.  [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|<font color="purple">(talk)</font>]]</sup> 08:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)