xat away, I'm listening, honest...
just one thing: dont forget to sign your name date and time with 4 of these ~
Hi, I don't know if I'm doing this right! I've been looking at the Wiki Wine project lately and am keen to participate but not sure how to go about it. You have time to set me on the right path? Fabio
Great! Thanks for adopting me! Yes, i think it's a good idea that you keep an eye on my posts and edits until I get the hang of it. -- BodegasAmbite 10:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Refs are important and were the first thing I looked for in your edit: in general, don't add info you can't quote a published reference for. Best way is to use the <ref></ref> link in the "wiki markup" list beneath the edit box. Either type (or copy/paste) your citation into the edit box, highlight it, then click the <ref></ref> link text; or click the link text first and type/copy/paste in afterwards.
This code leaves a neat [1] number after your edit, which links to a footnote at the bottom of the page (natch) - but only if there's a "References" section there with a {{reflist}} tag in it. This tag (also conveniently available in the wiki markup list) lets you add not only a reference but a note to go with it; for example, I just added a ref to Sherry (ref number 2) this way - have a look at the code and the resulting footnote in "References". If there's no {{reflist}} you'll see no reference, so you'll need to add the new "References" section as well as the inline ref.
You can find other inline ref methods by clicking the Editing help link, next to the "Show changes" button below the edit box. They're not as neat but do the same job if there's no {{reflist}}. Don't use the last one (without square brackets) unless it's within an "External links" section.
If you get red link text in your edits, you've not linked to a "live" article. Red links are generally a Bad Thing. Two main ways around this, plus a more radical third way:
I'd suggest you do one of the first two of these things for the remaining red links in your edit and play with the redirect at a more appropriate time.
Happy editing; let me know how you get on! - mikaul talk 23:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all that above. That's a lot of stuff there for me to get to grips with! I see myself doing 2 things in the near future: 1) getting to grips with the nitty-gritty formatting (like those red links) and 2) writing that organic wine article. I already have a LOT of material already written because a few months ago I started writing up stuff for my own web page for the vineyard and bodega. I suppose it´ll be a question of cutting and pasting really, modyfying the content a bit and then tidying up the format. PS I hope I didn't offend Charleen with my vandalism comment. I didn't realise it was her that had edited the page (just recently discovered the History tab!) and I can see that she's a major contributor to the Wine project. I suppose least said the better and hope she understands (me being a newbie and all that) -- BodegasAmbite 17:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I really have jumped in at the deep end! and am floundering a bit! maybe I should have held bach for a bit. I just looked through all that material I was thinking of cutting and pasting, and, well, there's not so much as I thought that is appropriate. Most of it is in fact relevant only to the future web page, and not really encyclopaedic at all. However there is some salvagable material. I'll try to post something soon and I'll try to do the references as well.-- BodegasAmbite 09:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
No no, you didn't push me! I jumped! I tend to be a bit impulsive in life, and I've done it again!!!! I'll just plod along and do it slowly but surely!
Thanks for your latest comments. OK, I won't translate/copy the vintages. I won't copy the wineries either, until the jury gets back. I'm beginning to get the hang of things, slowly! I think I'd rather fiddle around doing little things (ie, getting to grips with formatting, editting, etc) for the time being, as opposed to writing a main article from scratch. What should I do about the Organic Wine article I started (a bit too hastily!)? Now that I understand a bit more, I don't feel I'm ready to do a good job yet. And the material I had thought to use is not really suitable except for selected bits. Is it OK just to abandon it and let it get deleted? and make another attempt in the future?
I was thinking of changing my user name, as I see that everyone has a sort of personal one, whereas I just chose the first thing that came to mind, and it sounds a bit to corporate! Is this important or does it not matter? Should I bother, is it worth the effort and possible complications?
Thanks for that tip. I've just done it, and yes, it is a lot neater!
I presume that we're still adopter-adoptee for the time being, no? I've been learning bits and pieces, beavering away on the Spanish wine regions, and generally exploring and reading! -- BodegasAmbite 09:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
You wouldn't have any photos of "Airén" grapes would you? or know where I could get some for the article I'm writing (I'm trying to take it up to a B) -- BodegasAmbite 09:11, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I have a fairly standard Olympus digital camera, and it takes OK photos if I put the resolution to its maximum setting. I do in fact have lots of photos already of the vines, vineyard, bodega etc. I'm sure there must be some of a bunch of Airén and Tempranillo! I will look them out and see if there are any decent ones. -- BodegasAmbite 10:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Would you like to try a bottle of my wine? I would very much appreciate your feedback. At the moment I only have the Blanco joven available (100% Airén from October 2006). The Tinto joven (100% tempranillo) is finished, and the tinto crianza is not ready for bottling yet. If you send me an address, I'll send a bottle to you by post. -- BodegasAmbite 10:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Where is 'above'? I'm just back from a long lunch and coundn't see an address after a 10 second glance!!!!! Sorry about the young tempy! next year!! -- BodegasAmbite 15:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, I followed your directions but there's no email address, just this message "This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users." :( -- BodegasAmbite 08:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I did it! I looked out my photos (on CD) and uploaded two of them into WikiCommons and then inserted them into my test page, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BodegasAmbite/sandbox. If you have time, please have a look and maybe fix anything that needs to be fixed! It was quite straight-forward really but basically I just copied the source code (or whatever its called) from other pages with photos already inserted. -- BodegasAmbite 12:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC) (PS. there's no email address where you said!)
Thanks for cropping, enhancing and tweaking the photos! I've sent you an email. -- BodegasAmbite 08:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the comments, but I don't quite understand them :(
Wot this mean?
Surely you jest?? The text in the History section I translated from a web page, but I think it's a pretty horrible overly formal wordy style, and certainly not very 'encyclopedic'. Another problem is that said webpage (imianet.org) has disappeared! I think the organisation in question was reorganised and absorbed/merged into another offical body and all that info has gone! So I'm not quite sure what to do with regard to the references and sources etc. Could I cite the original texts?
Please keep butting in :) all encouragement/criticism/etc most welcome. Will be keeping an eagle-eye on letterbox in anxious expectation :) -- BodegasAmbite 09:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
By all means, cite original texts. Some argue it's "better" than online refs, more academic. I'll come to that later.
Formal is good and wordy is bad, but your style seems very to-the-point, which is perfect for an encyclopedia. Quotes aren't a bad idea, don't get me wrong, just you would normally use them sparingly, either to express a contentious opinion (as opposed to a fact), or recite a well-known text, or to back up something you've written which might seem unlikely, or anywhere that a basic descriptive passage would be inadequate. Looking again at the Airén article, tha fact is you've just been incredibly thorough and the quotes in the History section are actually quite appropriate – apologies for not seeing this earlier!. However, as you get nearer modern texts, like Peñin (he needs an article, there's not even a Spanish wiki one!) and Robinson, I think you should avoid quoting them directly. There may even be a copyright issue! Don't worry about using phrases used in the source text, but don't copy it verbatim either. I've had a go at transcribing his quote, to give you an idea:
(They used to make us do this in English Comprehension at school, as it really forces you to understand a text. I find it etches it into my (appalling) memory much better than just reading. ANYway...)
Have a look at some of these "style" guides, which might give you some more pointers:
This
footnotes guide is useful. If you can cite original texts (and you really do need to if you're quoting them) use
Template:Reflist. You place your reference between <ref></ref> tags at the nd of the quote, and it magically places the ref at the foot of the page – but only if you've put the {{Reflist}} template at the bottom of the page!
Quotations – check out the Blockquote link, nice way of doing it;
The
Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles might give you a few tips too.
If any of this isn't clear, just let me know. I'll happily copyedit the finished thing; I do think the Airén article is shaping up to be one of the best grape articles we have, so there's incentive all round!
Cheers for now,
mikaul
talk 10:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help and guidance. What do you suggest I do with the current nomination? Regards Muhammad Mahdi Karim ( talk) 11:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
xat away, I'm listening, honest...
just one thing: dont forget to sign your name date and time with 4 of these ~
Hi, I don't know if I'm doing this right! I've been looking at the Wiki Wine project lately and am keen to participate but not sure how to go about it. You have time to set me on the right path? Fabio
Great! Thanks for adopting me! Yes, i think it's a good idea that you keep an eye on my posts and edits until I get the hang of it. -- BodegasAmbite 10:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Refs are important and were the first thing I looked for in your edit: in general, don't add info you can't quote a published reference for. Best way is to use the <ref></ref> link in the "wiki markup" list beneath the edit box. Either type (or copy/paste) your citation into the edit box, highlight it, then click the <ref></ref> link text; or click the link text first and type/copy/paste in afterwards.
This code leaves a neat [1] number after your edit, which links to a footnote at the bottom of the page (natch) - but only if there's a "References" section there with a {{reflist}} tag in it. This tag (also conveniently available in the wiki markup list) lets you add not only a reference but a note to go with it; for example, I just added a ref to Sherry (ref number 2) this way - have a look at the code and the resulting footnote in "References". If there's no {{reflist}} you'll see no reference, so you'll need to add the new "References" section as well as the inline ref.
You can find other inline ref methods by clicking the Editing help link, next to the "Show changes" button below the edit box. They're not as neat but do the same job if there's no {{reflist}}. Don't use the last one (without square brackets) unless it's within an "External links" section.
If you get red link text in your edits, you've not linked to a "live" article. Red links are generally a Bad Thing. Two main ways around this, plus a more radical third way:
I'd suggest you do one of the first two of these things for the remaining red links in your edit and play with the redirect at a more appropriate time.
Happy editing; let me know how you get on! - mikaul talk 23:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all that above. That's a lot of stuff there for me to get to grips with! I see myself doing 2 things in the near future: 1) getting to grips with the nitty-gritty formatting (like those red links) and 2) writing that organic wine article. I already have a LOT of material already written because a few months ago I started writing up stuff for my own web page for the vineyard and bodega. I suppose it´ll be a question of cutting and pasting really, modyfying the content a bit and then tidying up the format. PS I hope I didn't offend Charleen with my vandalism comment. I didn't realise it was her that had edited the page (just recently discovered the History tab!) and I can see that she's a major contributor to the Wine project. I suppose least said the better and hope she understands (me being a newbie and all that) -- BodegasAmbite 17:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I really have jumped in at the deep end! and am floundering a bit! maybe I should have held bach for a bit. I just looked through all that material I was thinking of cutting and pasting, and, well, there's not so much as I thought that is appropriate. Most of it is in fact relevant only to the future web page, and not really encyclopaedic at all. However there is some salvagable material. I'll try to post something soon and I'll try to do the references as well.-- BodegasAmbite 09:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
No no, you didn't push me! I jumped! I tend to be a bit impulsive in life, and I've done it again!!!! I'll just plod along and do it slowly but surely!
Thanks for your latest comments. OK, I won't translate/copy the vintages. I won't copy the wineries either, until the jury gets back. I'm beginning to get the hang of things, slowly! I think I'd rather fiddle around doing little things (ie, getting to grips with formatting, editting, etc) for the time being, as opposed to writing a main article from scratch. What should I do about the Organic Wine article I started (a bit too hastily!)? Now that I understand a bit more, I don't feel I'm ready to do a good job yet. And the material I had thought to use is not really suitable except for selected bits. Is it OK just to abandon it and let it get deleted? and make another attempt in the future?
I was thinking of changing my user name, as I see that everyone has a sort of personal one, whereas I just chose the first thing that came to mind, and it sounds a bit to corporate! Is this important or does it not matter? Should I bother, is it worth the effort and possible complications?
Thanks for that tip. I've just done it, and yes, it is a lot neater!
I presume that we're still adopter-adoptee for the time being, no? I've been learning bits and pieces, beavering away on the Spanish wine regions, and generally exploring and reading! -- BodegasAmbite 09:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
You wouldn't have any photos of "Airén" grapes would you? or know where I could get some for the article I'm writing (I'm trying to take it up to a B) -- BodegasAmbite 09:11, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I have a fairly standard Olympus digital camera, and it takes OK photos if I put the resolution to its maximum setting. I do in fact have lots of photos already of the vines, vineyard, bodega etc. I'm sure there must be some of a bunch of Airén and Tempranillo! I will look them out and see if there are any decent ones. -- BodegasAmbite 10:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Would you like to try a bottle of my wine? I would very much appreciate your feedback. At the moment I only have the Blanco joven available (100% Airén from October 2006). The Tinto joven (100% tempranillo) is finished, and the tinto crianza is not ready for bottling yet. If you send me an address, I'll send a bottle to you by post. -- BodegasAmbite 10:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Where is 'above'? I'm just back from a long lunch and coundn't see an address after a 10 second glance!!!!! Sorry about the young tempy! next year!! -- BodegasAmbite 15:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, I followed your directions but there's no email address, just this message "This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users." :( -- BodegasAmbite 08:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I did it! I looked out my photos (on CD) and uploaded two of them into WikiCommons and then inserted them into my test page, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BodegasAmbite/sandbox. If you have time, please have a look and maybe fix anything that needs to be fixed! It was quite straight-forward really but basically I just copied the source code (or whatever its called) from other pages with photos already inserted. -- BodegasAmbite 12:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC) (PS. there's no email address where you said!)
Thanks for cropping, enhancing and tweaking the photos! I've sent you an email. -- BodegasAmbite 08:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the comments, but I don't quite understand them :(
Wot this mean?
Surely you jest?? The text in the History section I translated from a web page, but I think it's a pretty horrible overly formal wordy style, and certainly not very 'encyclopedic'. Another problem is that said webpage (imianet.org) has disappeared! I think the organisation in question was reorganised and absorbed/merged into another offical body and all that info has gone! So I'm not quite sure what to do with regard to the references and sources etc. Could I cite the original texts?
Please keep butting in :) all encouragement/criticism/etc most welcome. Will be keeping an eagle-eye on letterbox in anxious expectation :) -- BodegasAmbite 09:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
By all means, cite original texts. Some argue it's "better" than online refs, more academic. I'll come to that later.
Formal is good and wordy is bad, but your style seems very to-the-point, which is perfect for an encyclopedia. Quotes aren't a bad idea, don't get me wrong, just you would normally use them sparingly, either to express a contentious opinion (as opposed to a fact), or recite a well-known text, or to back up something you've written which might seem unlikely, or anywhere that a basic descriptive passage would be inadequate. Looking again at the Airén article, tha fact is you've just been incredibly thorough and the quotes in the History section are actually quite appropriate – apologies for not seeing this earlier!. However, as you get nearer modern texts, like Peñin (he needs an article, there's not even a Spanish wiki one!) and Robinson, I think you should avoid quoting them directly. There may even be a copyright issue! Don't worry about using phrases used in the source text, but don't copy it verbatim either. I've had a go at transcribing his quote, to give you an idea:
(They used to make us do this in English Comprehension at school, as it really forces you to understand a text. I find it etches it into my (appalling) memory much better than just reading. ANYway...)
Have a look at some of these "style" guides, which might give you some more pointers:
This
footnotes guide is useful. If you can cite original texts (and you really do need to if you're quoting them) use
Template:Reflist. You place your reference between <ref></ref> tags at the nd of the quote, and it magically places the ref at the foot of the page – but only if you've put the {{Reflist}} template at the bottom of the page!
Quotations – check out the Blockquote link, nice way of doing it;
The
Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles might give you a few tips too.
If any of this isn't clear, just let me know. I'll happily copyedit the finished thing; I do think the Airén article is shaping up to be one of the best grape articles we have, so there's incentive all round!
Cheers for now,
mikaul
talk 10:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help and guidance. What do you suggest I do with the current nomination? Regards Muhammad Mahdi Karim ( talk) 11:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)