User talk:Docentation

Hello, Docentation, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to

Hi, I'm Salimfadhley. Docentation, thanks for creating Ingando!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. You cannot use Wikipedia (or any other Wiki site) as a source for a Wikipedia article.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on

Salimfadhley (talk) 00:14, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Docentation, Jarrvis here. You're quite right - 'self-contradictory' can appear a harsh label. However, what I suggested was self-contradictory was not the use of two different sources with two different claims. If anything, that would be sound academic practice, to point out the diversity of views. What I suggest is self-contradictory was the claim that the Ingando camps were first used in a particular context (even before the Rwandan Civil War), and then an immediate follow-up claim (with no effective caveats made whatsoever) that they were post-Civil War instruments.

Regarding your second question, it appears clear that where conflicting views from the sources exist, the views ought to be clearly set out (along with the supporting source material). Having reviewed the alleged "sources", I can find little evidence that the deleted one is genuinely any support for the claim it purportedly made. The link was at best tenuous, and quite simply superfluous. In this context, its being elided appeared eminently justifiable to me.

Jarrvis (talk) 07:24, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Docentation, I have edited your recent contribution to Aberporth. See [1]. Cheers! Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 17:26, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Gareth Griffith-Jones:; thank you for changing that. May I ask whether it’s standard practice? (I ask because it seems to be to be slightly more inelegant to have Welsh: x (y) than “the Old Welsh a (b), c (d)” &c.) If it is I shall rectify my other additions—it just occurred to me that my copy of Place-Names of Great Britain and Ireland is useful for something other than joking about possessing boring books to friends, so I intend to upload most of the etymological information from it to Wikipedia in the fullness of time. Docentation (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! No, not standard practice, but if a template is available, I tend to use it. I suppose it was the "old" that I took notice—seemed redundant as modern Welsh applies too. Does that make sense? Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 17:40, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see, @Gareth Griffith-Jones:; I have a feeling that the template was intended to be used slightly differently, though I share the desire to use templates where they exist. The example given at Template:Lang-cy is “Thuringia (German: Thüringen)”, which is different from “Welsh: aber (mouth)”; the former seems to be a reasonable use of punctuation, the latter not. As for Welsh and Old Welsh, I think that it is useful to distinguish between the two for etymological purposes, even if the words are the same. I don’t feel too strongly about this so I shan’t interfere with Aberporth. Docentation (talk) 17:58, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear back from you. Cannot disagree. Have fun with the etymology! Don't worry about pinging—you're on my watchlist since 18:26. Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 18:03, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Glad we reached consensus; I’ll revert the change to Aberporth if that’s all right with you. Docentation (talk) 18:23, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is. Wishing you a pleasing week! Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 11:13, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Docentation, hope you're doing well

Just wanted to drop you a note about

All the best, Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 16:50, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Naypta: I see; I should have read the documentation. Thank you for pointing this out. Docentation (talk) 16:53, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I've just reviewed Johan Velde van der Merwe and wanted to thank you for creating such an informative and well-sourced article. Happy editing! Mccapra (talk) 12:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created,

An article you recently created,

An article you recently created,

An article you recently created,

Hello, Docentation. It has been over six months since you last edited the

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:27, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Docentation. It has been over six months since you last edited the

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:48, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Docentation! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 21:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonathan A Jones: yes, fair enough—he who drafts inebriated had better (finalise) edit(s) sober. I suppose, apropos, that congratulations are in order. Docentation (talk) 23:32, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

On 4 March 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Yaya Dillo Djérou, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 18:57, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]