User talk:Gangster Octopus

Inline citations

An inline citation is one that matches up encyclopedic content with the reliable source that verifies it. There are three types of inline citation that are acceptable for Good Articles. One is simply to stick embedded HTML links in the content like this.[1] You will note that there's a lot of typographic garbage in the content, which is somewhat disruptive when you read the article, so it's discouraged by many (including me.) A second is to use Harvard referencing. That means putting a a partial citation — the author's name and year of publication within parentheses - at the end of the sentence it backs up, and the complete citation in a list at the end. This also disrupts the reading.

The third type - the one that most of us prefer - is Cite.php. In this case, there's just a superscript number where you make the cite, and a complete list of citations at the bottom of the page. You enclose a citation in REF tags (<ref>Citation here</ref>) and at the bottom of the page, you put <references/> in a ++References== section. If you have a lot of references, as any good article will, you can use <div class="references-small"><references/></div> at the bottom to put the references in small type. If there are a hundred or more citations, people tend to use multiple columns, such as <div class="references-small" style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;"><references/></div>

You can use Chicago style, or APA style, or any other standard means of formatting your references. I don't like any of them; I use APA because I have that manual handy. (Actually, APA doesn't use footnotes, so it's not really APA, but....) The big thing with GA reviewers is that for URLs, you need to include a retrieval date, so that if the link goes bad, someone can go to the Wayback Machine and find the original page you used as source. Since multiple styles are acceptable, though, it's unlikely that you're going to be jigged for difficulties in punctuation, the order you include things in a citation, etc., as long as you are consistant, because the reviewer will think you're following a style he is unfamiliar with. And if you have a consistant style that gives all the information, that will meet all of Wikipedia's objectives anyway, so it's no big deal.

Here's an example of an APA-style footnote. <ref>''The Johnny Appleseed Tree'' '''Retrieved September 12, 2006''' from [http://www.historictrees.org/produ_ht/johnappl.htm http://www.historictrees.org/produ_ht/johnappl.htm]</ref>

which will appear at the bottom of the page as

I hope this helps a bit. You can check out Wikipedia:Citing Sources and Wikipedia:Footnotes for more information. ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 18:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Guinness Toucan-ad.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Guinness Toucan-ad.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 18:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

File:Guinness Toucan-ad.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Guinness Toucan-ad.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 20:39, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Gangster Octopus. 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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)