Wow Scotland !

Welcome!

Hello, Wow Scotland !, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --The Legendary Sky Attacker 08:59, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Edinburgh

Hi!

You're adding a great deal of images to Edinburgh (which is fine, though I'd caution you against adding too many - the goal is to illustrate, not decorate) however I do have a few concerns:

• At least one of the images was a non-free image of the Scottish Parliament in session. Images like this can be used under fair-use rules to illustrate the topic they represent, so this image, for example, could be used on the Scottish Parliament article but not on the Edinburgh article;
• Some images don't seem related to the sections they're illustrating. For example you added a picture of the Royal Mile to a section about demographics - it's difficult to see how a picture showing lots of shoppers illustrates Edinburgh's demographic mix!
• Some sections now have so many images that the text is squashed between two columns of images. In general I'd suggest no more that two images per section, unless there's sufficient text to create lines of text between two images on one side of the article.

Hope that's OK, Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 13:01, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Michigan &c.

I reverted the changes you made to Michigan - you'd removed some content altogether and substituted other content that was already summarized later in the article. More generally, I see that you're making a lot of edits rather quickly - you might benefit by slowing down to check to see that what you're doing actually improves the article. For example I note you are adding people to the "Scottish American" category when they are already in the "Scots-Irish American" category. If your category is better than what's already there, feel free to make the substitution. That would be better than cluttering the article with redundant and confusing material. In any case do think about whether you're making the right edit. Thanks! JohnInDC (talk) 18:55, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I see too that at least one of your edits in that vein, to Andrew Johnson, was reverted but you re-added it. That should serve as another clue to take greater care. Persistently making the same edit without discussing it is not good form! Thanks again. JohnInDC (talk) 19:03, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Template:Largest cities of Argentina ‎

I reverted your changes. They were substantial and unsourced - indeed you removed any source at all from the Template. Please do not make unsourced changes. Have a look at Wikipedia:Verifiability, which will give you an idea of the standards that you need to keep in mind. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 01:19, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Peter Fox (German musician)

I reverted your edit. The birthdate that you (redundantly) supplied doesn't match the one already in the article. It is tiresome to have to clean up after you. If you don't start taking greater care in your edits I am going to have to seek some kind of administrator intervention. JohnInDC (talk) 12:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Your edits to Copenhagen

I have reverted your edits for the reasons set forth in the edit summary there. You made extensive textual changes without explanation or sourcing; you changed out several photos, added others, and set the thumbnails to a size that made the article appear cluttered and clumsy. I appreciate that you are spending a lot of time and effort on these edits but they are *not* making Wikipedia better. You must take better care with your edits. Please. JohnInDC (talk) 15:00, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Wow-Scotland

You seem eager to contribute to the project, but it must be tiring to you that all your edits are reverted. I suggest strongly that you start using the talk pages of the articles to edit to explain what you add and why. This will make it easier for other editors to object to parts of your edits that they don't find to be improving articles without removing all the content that you add. You mus note that wikipedia is a colaborative project ans it is of utmost necessity that you engage in discussion with other editors about how best to improve articles. If you don't your edits are unlikely to last long once a group of editors have decided that the article is better off without them. 1. Use talk pages. 2. Make good well sourced edits. 3. think about how your edits fit into the overall article.·Maunus·ƛ· 15:31, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Images: pixel size and the preview button

When using images you can change their sizes by adding the number of pixels that you want them to occupy to the code for example like this [[Image:xxxxx.jpg|thumb|100px|right]] this code gives a size of 100 pixels thumbnails in article should rarely be larger than 200 pixels and usually smaller than 150. You can check how your edit is going to look by using the preview button before submitting your edit - this will allow you to see if the images are to large, if they "crowd" a section or if disturb section breaks making the article look "choppy". using the preview button is also a very good idea in order to check ones owns typoes etc. ·Maunus·ƛ· 15:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)