Hi Sarnya, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!
Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :
Wikiprojects - So many to join, so many to choose from...Take your pick!
Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)
Latest comment: 18 January 20062 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, I just wanted to say, the existence of other ridiculous articles that should absolutely also be deleted does not justify keeping the Saugeen Stripper. It would be more useful to get them all deleted rather than be overwhelmed by crap. (I, however, am only one man and it was beyond my abilities even to get the Stripper article deleted.) Adam Bishop21:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
This is what I was referring to. Have you heard about it? It actually made the front page of several major newspapers, and really shook things up here. It's one reason why we can't have unverified information, especially anything naming people, and especailly if it's negative. -R. fiend23:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
Meatpuppet vs. Sockpuppet
I did not accuse you of sockpuppetry; I was merely pointing out that we were getting a few new users commenting on the AfD for the article and wanted others reading the discussion to be on the lookout for meatpuppetry (that being a number of different people creating accounts for the purpose of trying to curry favour one way or the other in discussion)
Image copyright problem with Image:Beanies1949.jpeg
Latest comment: 20 January 20061 comment1 person in discussion
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. --OrphanBot08:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
Zanta
Latest comment: 6 December 20061 comment1 person in discussion
An image you uploaded, Image:P e logo.gif, was tagged with the Template:Tl copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as Template:Tl. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 01:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Sarnya in the news
Latest comment: 6 January 20071 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading Image:Pecrest.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Pecrest1.jpg
Latest comment: 5 December 20071 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading Image:Pecrest1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
File:Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Image:Pecrest1.jpg, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. βcommand16:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 January 20081 comment1 person in discussion
It is not sufficient on Wikipedia to assert that the person challenging a statement could have found references themselves by doing a Google search. If you're adding the material, then the onus is on you to provide the source. Bearcat (talk) 20:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply
Kissing Capital
Latest comment: 13 March 20081 comment1 person in discussion
If the Sarnia claims on its welcome sign that it is (or was) the kissing capital of the world, a picture of that sign would be a great addition to this article. It would solve the citation problem, to boot. I do wonder if it is of sufficient importance to appear so high up in the article, however. Maybe moving it to the culture (or athletics?) section would be more suitable. Roregan (talk) 14:59, 13 March 2008 (UTC)Reply