User talk:Dbynog

Welcome!

Hello, Dbynog, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Fondren library, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! I dream of horses (talk) 14:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Fondren library[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Fondren library, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Article doesn't state notability of building.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. I dream of horses (talk) 14:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Histoire du tango[edit]

The article Histoire du tango has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not clear if it's a notable composition

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:40, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Sonata for Viola and Piano, Op.147 (Shostakovich)[edit]

Hello, Dbynog,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Sonata for Viola and Piano, Op.147 (Shostakovich) should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonata for Viola and Piano, Op.147 (Shostakovich) .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, — Ṟ Ṉ™ 06:34, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016[edit]

Hello! Thank you for your recent contributions to Louis Svećenski. I did have one note for you. I am working on a maintenance project to clean up Category:Pages using infoboxes with thumbnail images. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this: |image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]], instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do: |image=SomeImage.jpg. There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recetly added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks!! Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:28, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Johnnie Swearingen) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Johnnie Swearingen.

User:John M Wolfson while reveiwing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

I noticed this page is an orphan, which means that no other pages link to it. While this doesn't impact the article's suitability of Wikipedia, it would be better in the future if you made sure that other articles link to a page before creating it, usually by creating a link on another page and then creating it from the redlink. Otherwise, good work and I'm glad you decided to contribute to Wikipedia!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|John M Wolfson}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

– John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:34, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring[edit]

Hello. As you are evidently an inexperienced Wikipedia editor I hope you will find it useful if I explain some basics:

you don't remove existing references without good reason and due explanation

you stick to the citation style already in use in any article

you don't falsely sneak statements in under an existing citation if that citation does not mention them – I refer to some of your additions to the recordings section

if an alternative reliable source exists it is, I suggest, better to cite that rather than oneself, however expert one supposes oneself to be.

you don't edit war, but if changes you make are reverted or challenged you discuss them on the article talk page.

We are civilised people, on the whole, and will always listen to good arguments for amending articles. Personally I believe some of your wished-for changes may well be improvements, but they must be properly cited to the best available sources. I hope this is helpful. Tim riley talk 19:05, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Refs for the viola pieces[edit]

Thank you for adding the Zeyringer refs to the viola pieces! Please:

Once the reference is defined by a name, call it by that name. I named it after the author, because the "one" I found appears in many words. The code to call the ref is <ref name = "Zeyringer" />.
Don't leave a space between fact and ref.

Your help is much appreciated! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:28, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks; as an occasional editor I am always grateful for the improvements that those with more experience make (I did experiment with citation styles last night, but I always struggle with some of the finer points of formatting). I should be able to incorporate this formatting moving forward. Dbynog (talk) 19:02, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's just meant to make things easier. You can format a ref once and then call it by its name. Whenever you want to add something to the definition (a url, an ISBN number) you just change it once, instead of hundreds of times. I explained to an IP doing referencing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:09, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]