The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
About your message on my talk page:
There are 2 versions of telling the plot of the film: in one version, you retell the whole film and naturally reveal the end. But if you just give short info what the film is about, it's not good to reveal the ending 'cause when one starts to read short info, he'll not be happy to read the ending.
In this case you give short info what the film is about and, without retelling the whole film, you wrote the ending of the film. Gevorg89 (talk) 17:52, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I see your point after more carefully reviewing the text. Thank you for discussing this with me, I do not like undoing constructive non controversial edits from reputable editors. It makes me really uneasy to be put in that situation of not knowing if a revert is aiding or just maintaining the status quo of an article. Cheers! Lazh (ɮ) 23:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Twinkle
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Per the comment on your user page,
WP:TWINKLE. Cheers! "Pepper"@ 23:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Lofça
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I don't know if I understood your intent correctly, but I redirected
Thank you, I went into it with the intent to make a disambiguation but ended up butchering a redirect. I'll be sure to read more into it before playing with one again. Thanks!
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Rollback
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I wasn't so sure about this, a five days old account wanting to "abandon" Twinkle, I assume your account is an attempt at a clean start despite your username. You did not disclose your last account, but based on a review of your contributions so far, I have accepted your request for rollback. Remember that it can be removed at any time in case of abuse. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 08:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the level of trust you have put in me. I promise to never abuse this tool.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Your signature
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi there. You should change your signature to
Contact
)
Your current signature will redirect every user to their own user or user talk page instead of your user page / talk page. Regards SoWhy 20:12, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Disambiguation link notification
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi. When you recently edited
Phenopicolinic Acid, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Inhibitor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject
.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Casimir Effect: improvement
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Dear Illusive,
I've added a brief paragraph explaining how the Casimir effect works, and also added a note and changed a title, from "Casimir's calculation", since this section differs significantly from Casimir's original approach. I tried following your suggestion to describe these changes after made, but I don't see my description anywhere.
Illusive, Thanks for the encouragement. Following your recommendation, I've created an account. I don't know if it's possible to sign my previous (basically two) changes. Am gradually learning how to edit without leaving an infinity of versions! David in Cincinnati (talk) 14:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
What COI?
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Ground Zero. I can imagine you thought Ground Zero Official (talk·contribs) was the one with the COI. However, their edits removed an important part of the article and was in fact simple vandalism. Thank you for flagging up important issues such as COI, but you should first check the editor in question is actually making constructive edits. Astronaut (talk) 10:26, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
OK, thanks. From the snapshot context I took before editing the page I did not even realize that the page was about something other than a musical aggregate. This will serve as an example for a long time for me to slow way down when reviewing edits for vandalism. Thank you for noticing and removing the offending content I completely missed. I have not edited Wikipedia for quite a while, I am currently working my way back into a routine and hopefully back into a more effective vandal sweeper. Thank you.
Wow. I didn't even notice the thing about the band; I only saw the net change to remove a large part of the ground zero article. Now, what to do about
ask at the help desk. Astronaut (talk) 12:18, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
File:Pindobind Formula.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered,
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. Leyo 14:22, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Re: Jason Leonard
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please see both links, Jason Leonard is stated at absolutely nowhere near 137kg in either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.70.3 (talk) 00:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Let me research this
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Inappropriate speedy tagging
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Your placement of a speedy deletion tag on Don Shields was quite inappropriate; the article was obviously under active construction by a new user. While listing references before providing text may not be the standard approach, it certainly shows a quite admirable interest is satisfying RS and BLP requirements. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 01:48, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Wolfowitz - I see you are a great deal more experienced than I ever was in the process. I do take a rather unapologetic deletionist stance on pop culture, media and persons and an inclusionist stand on history, science and mathematics; This pisses many people off. I agree with your main point, however, I disagree with the removal of the speedy deletion tag. While I won't spin the wheel against a better educated editor, I believe that article will remain context-devoid unless another editor picks it up. I am just coming back up to speed from an extended Wikibreak, and a considerable deal of the wording surrounding CSD has changed since my departure. If articles like this meet the standard nowadays, perhaps it is best I back off and watch CSD through a window for the time. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Cheers!
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thank you for your contribution. Could I request that you have a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Chemistry/Structure drawing, if you need to do any more. The structure is already present in the system (in the preferred format(svg), on the preferred server(commons), and with the correct license {{PD-chem}}), so the new image has been tagged as "vector version available". Ronhjones (Talk) 00:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
File:Phenopicolinic Acid.png listed for deletion
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A file that you uploaded or altered,
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. Leyo 07:45, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Saunders Valkyrie
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please point out the content I removed on Saunders Valkyrie. --91.10.34.158 (talk) 20:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved, with error on my part being the case. Thank you for noticing and reverting this fallacious revert.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
LE WHAT
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Admins/Crats, I have no idea what is going on but there is a sock chewing up huge blocks of dynamic IP. Is it allowed under 3RR for me to keep reverting the copy/pasted message? I have decided to stop either way, hoping not to screw up the rule huge. Cheers!
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A barnstar for you!
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for your contributions and removing the vandalism at my talkpage. Cheers! SwisterTwistertalk 21:13, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
ICS 205-930
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read
section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify
their content.
If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit
-Page was found to both identify the subject and meet notability guidelines.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Edit tests on Denver International Airport
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
-The Rollback was to a vandalized copy of the page, and as the Rollbacker my signature replaced the vandals.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Your recent edits
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
Resolved
I broke the HTML on my signature. Will work correctly from here on in.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
hi
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
phone
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Sorry Pal, but I am The Illusive Man. I would be happy to answer any of your questions about Wikipedia here on my talk page, or get you talking to someone who can.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thanks
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thanks for the revert on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:27, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thanks for !voting
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
at my successful RFA
Thank you, The Illusive Man, for !voting at my successful RFA; I am humbled that you put your trust in me. I grant you this flower, which, if tended to properly, will grow to be the fruit of Wikipedia's labours. I shall remember to take it slow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:33, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Right to Vanish versus Cleanstart
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi. Unless you were explicitly given permission by the Arbitration Committee to do so, you cannot return to editing under a new account if you have vanished (i.e. if you account was renamed to something else). If you did vanish and want to return, you must have a bureaucrat unvanish (restore the original name) of the old account. If you instead are doing a cleanstart' (you left your old account but it was not renamed, and you waited a while before starting the new account) then you should never describe yourself as "vanished", because they are two very different processes, and Right to Vanish has become a politically charged issue after several users abused it.
Either way, you must inform ArbCom (in private, of course), as this protects you should someone link the two accounts and accuse you of sockpuppetry. You do not have to link the two accounts yourself though.
Thank you for telling me this! I completely had the two muddled. I will contact ArbCom and see to getting these two accounts linked. However, I had the past account hardbanned for being compromised falsely, sort of to avoid this drama if I reappeared. Let me formally say here with a better degree of confidence that I am the result of a Cleanstart, not a Vanished user. Cheers!
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
your Request for Filemover
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, I was writing you a reply when i found that you had deleted your
wp:RFP/F request. You had said that you might need file mover as you will be uploading files. While I have no reason to believe you will not upload the files. But the question remains, should n't you use proper names before uploading ? I mean you will have to rename it any way , why not do it before uploading scans if at all a renaming is required and save the logs some space, and file movers some trouble. :) File mover right is for rectifying inadvertent errors not for dliberately making an error and rectifying it, hope you got my point. regards--ÐℬigXЯaɣ 17:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
Why can't the files you're planning to scan be uploaded to Commons instead? --
I agree with Stefan2 can you also answer Stefan2's question ? --ÐℬigXЯaɣ 17:57, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean for this to get tracked back onto my userspace, but I still owe you all answers to your questions. In response to DBigXray's question, yes, I should name them correctly the first time - I was kind of counting on myself to make more than a few mistakes though, considering I would be using alien hardware. That probably reflects more on me than it does my necessity to get the flag. In response to Stefan2, I really don't like the people at Commons, I hope this isn't insulting, but anytime I've worked with them in the past they are kind of callous arses to me. I may or may not be uploading it to the Commons depending on how the Extrava-SCAN-za type event runs. (If I have a say, we won't be.)
You may have your opinion, but the files you upload here will eventually be moved by a Bot to commons. So its destined to end up there. So its better to upload yourself at commons, so that your attribution (as an uploader) will remain there. apologies if you felt tracked, Had honest intentions of clarifying your doubts regarding the rights.--ÐℬigXЯaɣ 21:05, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thats's cool Pal, thank you for going out of the way to educate me! I am sure that your last comment will stick with me for some time. I honestly did not think that en-Wiki syncronized free images to Commons - that alone will help me substantially as I actually start to work with files again. To clarify, this is a Clean Start account, and as an old fart we never had as many scripts running as the RfA page involved in file manipulation. Thank you!
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
My use name doesnot violate any policys of yours
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Sir,
The name of our group is SWASTHAYA KALYAN GROUP. The name SWASTHYA KLAYAN means to work for welfare of people,to work for good health of people.
The engineering college SWASTHYA KALYAN TECHNICAL CAMPUS is also a part of this group which ensures that the technical education can affordable and available to each section of people. There should to no social and financial barrier which stops any individual to learn such professional and technical course.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Robertson Field (Connecticut)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi,
You may be interested in questions that I raised regarding the Robertson Field article. I think the article needs to be reverted back to a 8 June 2012 version. If interested, please check out Talk:Robertson Field (Connecticut). Thanks,--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:29, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Your reviewer request
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thank you for taking my declining of your reviewer request in good stead. It was a tough decision to make, and I felt it best to give you a decent rationale for my decision. I notice you haven't edited since your post on my talk page...I hope everything's okay. Best. Acalamari 08:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Disambiguation link notification for October 10
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:04, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Personal Note
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Check out what happened at article "Cordless phone" today. Looked like an author blank, but need to be sure.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Wrong Service award
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thank you
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thank you for taking the time to participate in my RfA. I hope that I will be able to improve based on the feedback I received and become a better editor.
Thank you for taking the time to write me a reply on my talk page. There was no reason in my mind the RFA failed but for a political gong show, I wish you the best of luck going forward and hope to support a new RFA nomination in a few months. Mayhaps the trolling opposers will cool their jets by then, but somehow I doubt it.
Cheers!
TIM
Well, I knew coming in that the lack of experience would be a problem. Next time I run, it won't be an issue.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
AFC Backlog Elimination Drive
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi there, I see that you have shown interest in participating in the October - November 2012 BED for the AFC WikiProject. Because you have already seen the page you may think that the drive will begin on November 1, but due to the rapid increase in submissions these past few days, I am pushing the start date to October 22, 2012.--Dom497 (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
afc and speedy
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Only the general reasons for deletion-- copyvio, abuse, and the like are reasons for deletion of AfC pages. Lack of notability is not--in fact, it's not a reason for speedy deletion of anything at all. Lack of any plausible good faith indication of importance is a reason for speedy deletion of articles, but AfC pages are not articles.
DGG; Thank you for catching these pages, which, when critiqued using the written policy, were certainly marked inappropriately for deletion. While I would like to say this was a bug or software glitch, policy clearly states that I am responsible for all edits using Semi/Automated tools. In addition, I have not been able to recreate this error, so there are overwhelming odds I was negligent and liberal in my use of the tool. I am glad you did not let this slide, and that you informed me I slipped up. I have looked at every article I have evaluated before and since (not a huge amount at this point, like 15) and this error was not made in the past and will not happen again in the future. I admit wrongdoing and pledge to not let it happen again. Cheers mate!
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I don't think this was supposed to happen
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Smjg (talk) 10:23, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
Smjg, this was an anomaly. I was meaning to remove the AfC process tags when I accepted the article and moved to mainspace... Props for pointing out the error. I don't think a level one warning was really appropriate though, I am somewhat competent in the process. Cheers,
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Review of article about "Jozef Matejka",
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Dear " Illusive man", you have recently review my article about the Slovak writer Jozef Matejka, link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jozef_Matejka
and have not accepted it for submission. I would like to ask , what have I done wrong, for my article to not be submitted? I have followed the guidelines and I put in as many references
to reliable sources as possible,big national newspapers and Tv stations. I had spoken to someone in the web chat help and they had told me that you did not find the article notable enough.
Jozef Matejka is a well know, respectable writer who has many fans in Slovakia, and I do not understand what you mean by not notable enough? Is it not important?
He has 4 published books,many fans, and often does various appearances. Why is this not notable? because I have seen far less "notable" things on Wikipedia before...
Could you please tell me what was wrong with my article and why you did not find it notable enough?
Nikoma, thank you for seeking additional clarification. You're a bright person it seems, so I won't child you. Here on Wikipedia, our
Notability guidelines for the inclusion of persons
are a little bit less about content, and more about whether or not this person was covered widely by multiple independent, highly visible sources. While I did look up all of the references you provided (excellent by the way, few editors go to that trouble at first), most of them appear to be anthologies or passages of work, and they don't explicitly state an overt significance of the subject. I know, it's a terrible terrible set of rules IMO; I myself make a habit of trying to get pages that are even less notable deleted. What's important to take away from this, is that a)Your contributions are noted and appreciated (please don't take this in a bad way, it isn't personal), b)The article itself is good enough to stand as an article, if even one or two news articles link to the cite notes. That's the real killer here, your citations don't seem to be linking to what you think they should, because if what you say is on the page I saw in the references, I wouldn't have hesitated to pass it. I would be happy to personally approve of it if you could fix those references.
Thank you for seeking my input. If you have any further clarification, I would be pleased to explain further or justify any of the actions I have taken.
Thank you for editing Wikipedia!
Cheers!
Thank you for your reply, I sincerely appreciate your time! However I am not a native English speaker and I failed to understand the last part about what the real killer was. What do you mean by " your citations don't seem to be linking to what you think they should " . Do you mean that the references are not enough ? Do there need to be more outside links to photos from events and stuff like that??
I'm only 20 and not really a big fan of technology, and it's the first time I'm doing this and nobody from my friends really understands these things either so I'm really struggling to understand what exactly I have to fix ! But thank you for your compliments, I really did try to write a good article, with just enough information to give people a general idea about the author ! I put in as many things as I could find, unfortunately in our country not every thing is medialised on the internet yet ! I chose to write this article as I am attending a poetry group at my university, and we have come across many of his poems and I was inspired and wanted more people to be aware that modern poetry still exists in our country, and that there still are people who take great interest in it.
But anyway, I would be very thankful if you could spare some time to guide me through what I could to maybe get this article up to an acceptable standard and fix what you thought was wrong ! I am determined to get this right! :)
Thank you very very much again,
Sorry to be such a pain,
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
My wiki entry
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I just saw your submission. I don't completely understand your decline. I follow the dc real estate world and this company has become a little famous in the area through its coverage on huffington and cnbc. I am not affiliated with the company at all (I work for the govt). Any specific feedback? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psv108 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Psv108, allow me to explain in more in depth. This article falls on many of the grey lines of what we consider
The article [[1]] does have a lot of verifiable evidence of the Department's notability: notable faculty (national award winners; even people who discovered methods bearing their names in textbooks), participation and leadership in international research collaborations, etc. All those are described in the article and have references both to The department had thousands of students since its creation, after all! How can you claim that it is not notable?
I would appreciate a more developed explanation of your rejection. I believe the article passes the notability requirement, as described in the Wikipedia guidelines.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Disapproval of article about Socialbakers
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello,
you declined the submission of my article about Socialbakers (here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Socialbakers) and I have to ask you why. If you could, please, specifically state, which sentences of parts of the text don`t comply with the Wikipedia`s rules. If I don`t know what to change, I could be rewriting the article forever. If I don`t know what to change/what to do, I don`t like the writing anymore and it`s a shame, because I would like to dedicate myself to other topics on Wikipedia.
Michal, I appreciate your obvious effort and ethusiasm in reapplying to the AfC process. However, specific phrasing pervading the article seem to inflate the company itself, giving the article an (IMO) promotional tone that violates policy. While this would only result in a tag on existing articles that were rewritten by an incoming editor, the AfC process requires that articles reasonably conform to the critical Article Space rules. I would be pleased to pass this article if it used direct language that avoided exaggeration of claims established in the reputed sources. I might even do this myself in the new future if I can find the time. If you have any further questions, please feel free to follow up. Thank you for asking me for clarification. Cheers!
Thank you for your reply. I will re-read and re-write my article once more so I wouldn't neglect any part of the text to sound promotional. I understand that the AfC process has many rules, I just wanted a little clarification on that matter. Thanks again for your reply. Michal Smetana (talk) 14:51, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Lürzer's Archive page
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello, you've just declined this submission and I wondered if you could shed a bit more light as to why. The problem before was lack of verifiable sources; however, I've cited a newspaper article talking about the magazine. If you could explain further about what is needed that would be very helpful, maybe there's something I'm doing wrong.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Greetings and thanks
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thanks for your review of my first Wiki entry. Looking forward to contributing more, and becoming more skilled with HTML. --Staceydfla (talk) 14:49, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Liu Wanchuan Article
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Dear The Illusive Man,
I completely understand the need to catch up on the backlog of submission entries, but I would like to sincerely ask for your reconsideration in the case of Liu Wanchuan's article. Liu Wanchuan is considered to be only one of two students of Ma Gui (the other being Wang Peisheng) to pass on his unique lineage, a lineage which would otherwise be lost forever. I would be more than happy to make this more clear in the article so that readers truly understand Liu Wanchuan's significance to the art. I thank you deeply for your time and understanding on this. OpenMind 16:12, 29 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by OpenMind (talk • contribs)
OpenMind, that openness to change is noted and appreciated. I will re-review the article accordingly.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Novocastrians RFC article
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Dear T.I.M.
I have changed my article again and i hope you feel that it is better than before. I hope that it will be accepted as it is better referenced than other rugby clubs of similar stature in the region.
Regards
ZeeGuv 30 October
ZeeGuv (talk) 16:16, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Request to userfy Leatt-Brace entry
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
My entry for Leatt-Brace was deleted. Can you please userfy it so I can upload edited text? I reviewed the guidelines and have text that is more encyclopedic in nature. Thank you!
Raven2277 (talk) 19:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Raven, I'm sorry, if that text was deleted by an admin per my request, I cannot restore that text to your user page. I simply do not have the technical ability to do that. You can contact any Administrator and ask if they can help you. I'm sorry if you lost all of your work.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Undoing Edits to pages about Bob Brillante and Florida's News Channel
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello, I am writing to request your assistance with the article about Bob Brillante and a linked article about Florida's News Channel. Another editor is making egregious, unwarranted, and factually untrue edits to these articles. This editor removed both content and references. Since I am new to Wikipedia's community of editors, would you please advise me about what course of action to take? Thank you for your assistance.--Danabrillante (talk) 20:11, 1 November 2012 (UTC)Danabrillante[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Wikipedia Entry
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
"I see a clear effort to add reliable sources, however, please include some impartial, third party sources or quotations from experts in the field. Magazine slices are not adequate. Thank you."
Hello Illusive Man,
I saw that you have declined the submission for Emin Kadi. However, there are third party sources that have been provided. Being that the page is for a photographer, could you give me some specific examples of what it is that the article needs?
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
HUSITA article copyright
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi TIM...With reference to my proposed article on
HUSITA
and your notice re deletion in seven days if copyright permission is not confirmed. I posted an email from Prof Dick Schoech giving permission for reuse of his content to permissions-en on 1st November. I've had no reply yet. I'm a bit concerned that the article will be deleted before OTRS have had time to respond. Any suggestions?
Howdy Neil, to be clear, this article would never have been deleted, it perhaps would have been denied and kicked back to the authorship phase, but the content itself would not be lost or unreachable in any sense. No editor I know of would ever delete an article at AfC for something like sourcing, unless unambiguously promotional. (This does not seem anything like that.) You can expect the review will stay open until at least such a time as an OTRS team member evaluates the message (which I believe exists, by the way), at which point the article will probably be more than good enough to go live. Thank you for your efforts in securing licensing! Cheers!
Many thanks for the clarification TIM NeilBallantyne (talk) 22:43, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright clearance on the article has now been approved. How do I get this back in the queue? NeilBallantyne (talk) 00:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi TIM...well you did ask to be bugged abut cleaning up the HUSITA article ;-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NeilBallantyne (talk • contribs) 08:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)NeilBallantyne (talk) 08:25, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi TIM...if you let me know what needs to be cleaned up in the
HUSITA article I'll get on with it. It would be nice to see this in the main article space soon. ThanksNeilBallantyne (talk
)`
Thanks for approving the article ;-) NeilBallantyne (talk) 08:13, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
MP&Silva article for creation
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
hi illusive,
if at first...
i've put this article up on behalf of my wife who's afraid of mediawiki (tho i have little idea how to use it either!). this time i edited it myself - english isn't her first language and the prohibition on 'peacock' terms doesn't seem to have computed...
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Cable (club) article.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi there! I noticed you reviewed my article and denied its approval on the grounds of non-credible references. Firstly, I do believe that most of them are indeed correct, but I was hoping you could point me in the direction of the 'not so credible' references as they are all valid from my perspective! That way I can go about changing/removing them accordingly.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Zheng Yongnian AFC
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi. I saw this AFC
WP:HISTMERGE. Please let me know. Thank you. --Odie5533 (talk) 19:40, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estakhr's Constant (physics) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. §FreeRangeFrog 20:12, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello The Illusive Man. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Estakhr's Constant (physics), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: this has a tangled history, but I don't see that it has been blanked by a sole author - it's the work of several IPs. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 22:21, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okie dokie... Just thought it was a personal mistake to make it go live. I was sure I was the one who copypasted the (as it turns out) bullshit AfC request. -
I thought about G3 blatant hoax but I don't think the guy is trying to deceive; it's clearly unverifiable OR and the AfD will fix it. I used to worry about having things like this on display in the encyclopedia but, as long as the AfD template is there, the casual reader will see that we do have quality-control processes. JohnCD (talk) 23:00, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Disambiguation link notification for November 19
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:03, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Editing to Hinsdale Central
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The edits I have made are based off of my knowlege of the school. I am a junior at hinsdale central. Please do not revert any more edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.16.217 (talk) 16:24, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a place for original research. Please ensure any future edits are verifiable by referencing a published source, difficult as it may be to find for a North American School. Thank you for your contributions! --
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello Illusive Man,
I am a bit baffled with the decline of article for Johnny Angel Wendell. The first decline said it was not in the correct format and too peacocked. Completely took out all the fan type reviews/raves and cleaned it up just to state FACTS as instructed. Also took care of some references.
There is nothing left in the information that I can cut out. All professional details one would fine in an encyclopedia.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thank you
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Approval of
HUSITA
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, in the future if there is an AfC submission with a {{
WP:OTRS/N and wait for a response from an agent before approving the article. If the permission wasn't sufficient, you just approved a copyright violation for the main space. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 07:23, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
I'll pull the original editor in, and fix this myself if need be. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, as I am only minorly competent with complex permissions cases. Cheers,
Hi T.I.M....I suspect that this is a timing issue. No copyright has been violated. It's just that OTRS took three weeks to let me know that an email forwarded by me from the rights holder was insufficient. Prof Schoech will now email OTRS directly and we can take it from there. Thanks again for your help with this. NeilBallantyne (talk) 08:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A quick update. Professor Dick Schoech has now sent an email directly to OTRS (according to their instructions) giving wikipedia permission to reuse any content from the HUSITA website. I hope this will now allow OTRS to remove the unconfirmed permission notice from the article. I have several colleagues who want to add material to the article but are hesitant to do so because of the notice. NeilBallantyne (talk) 18:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Some bubble tea for you!
Thanks! Or should I say sorry? ;-)
I'll leave it to you now, for a couple of hours. Widr (talk) 00:09, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You're welcome! §h₳un9∞76 00:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Alexis Neiers pregnant
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
That's her twitter and there's tons of pictures of her pregnant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Girllove (talk • contribs) 21:28, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thanks
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Many thanks, The Illusive Man, for keeping an eye out for vandalism on my personal pages. Regards, Pinethicket (talk) 23:02, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Twilight revisions
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, I just wanted to address your comments.
First, I don't have any particular opinion on Twilight. What I was correcting were extremely biased edits made by someone else, which also happened to include false information. If you take a look at the revision history, it said, "The film has received mostly positive reviews from critics and is the best movie in the series." The latter is a pure opinion and the former is a blatant lie. Also, this person said Rottentomatoes critics gave the film 88%, that Metacritic gave it 80/100, and that Roger Ebert rated it three and a half stars. These are all inaccurate as well, according to the source material (that is, the official websites). The correct ratings/statistics are much lower.
I also included some negative reviews which were originally on the page but were edited out by another biased person. Those reviews were not written by me. Currently, the only reviews on the page are positive ones.
A sentence was shortened to read, "the consensus stating: "It is the most enjoyable chapter in The Twilight Saga." The real sentence says, "It's the most entertaining Twilight, but that's not enough to make Breaking Dawn Part 2 worth watching for filmgoers who don't already count themselves among the franchise converts." Do you see why this might be an issue?
I said the film had mostly negative reviews because it does. However, I see that that might be a statement one should reserve for a film that is more strongly panned.
76.91.30.193 (talk) 05:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A Barnstar for You!
The AFC Backlog Buster Barnstar
Congratulations, The Illusive Man! You're receiving The Articles for Creation Barnstar because you reviewed 121 articles during the recent
talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! Mdann52 (talk) 13:36, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
Kripalu
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I am not badtalking. It is the truth. If you can't stand the truth go an get a life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.90.32.25 (talk) 18:46, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A cup of coffee for you!
Thanks!
I've seen you around quite often as well. Widr (talk) 19:01, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't slap me with a trout.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello Illusive Man,
Thank you for reviewing my article for submission on Jonathan Sanger. I have made a few changes, you suggested that I used too many peacock terms. Please have another look at it for me, I have tried hard to be as neutral and formal as I can. I'm not really sure where I went wrong.
I see that you suggest to to put an article back up for review if one disagrees with you, I'm not sure how to do that and have spent ages trying, but then I'm a bit of an eejit. Please don't slap me with a trout, or any other aquatic creature.
Ahahaha, Done. If you would like help with any of the review procedures in the future, feel free to ask. I appreciate the changes you made and will just add, your great Wikiquette is greatly appreciated. AfC is often a stressful time for a new page creator, and golly, I hardly expect someone I turn down to turn back and say "thank you for reviewing my article!". It's very refreshing. At this time, I've pushed the article through, and it is now live. Thank you for your contributions. Cheers!
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Vincent van Gogh
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi man :)
Well I changed the name naturally since this painting actually has it's own name. Changing the name rather then just putting a translation behind it does not fit an encyclopedia in my opinion.
If you look at the current page about this Dutch painting, it would seem Vincent actually gave this painting an English name.
So I would suggest we would change at least all the inner titles to their actual title and put a translation behind them.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Vincent van Gogh
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I just saw your second message, don't get mad, I am new to this and I thought something was going wrong.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.83.140.181 (talk) 19:19, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved
on my talk page. No harm done, thank you for the explanation! In the future, providing an edit summary may help to alleviate confusion. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! --
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A barnstar for you!
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
And I thought I was quick. ;-)
Thanks! Widr (talk) 20:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Erich Raeder
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
With the Raeder article, I've just broke up into a bunch of new articles as per the request on the talk page. Hope that is Ok.--216.249.56.23 (talk) 23:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.56.23 (talk) 23:51, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Huggle Revert Gone Wrong
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thanks for pointing that out! It's embarrassing, I just went ahead and undid the revert. I thought I had restored that page to the 80.x clean version, but apparently that did not stick? ClueBot NG was reverting to a damaged copy of the article. Cheers! -
Don't worry, it happens to everyone. It's happened to me too. Vacationnine 03:15, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
my edit on Zygman Ajdukiewicz
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
u sed that won uf my eiditashins was rong.i wil edmit my ferst eidit waz 2 trol u harde but dat is behinde mi. i disagry with u fuly and intiearly in ur choise 2 chanj hiz nam bak 2 Zygmunt. i think that u shud ricunsider ur change beecuz i waz rite and u dunt no hisories lik i du.no harm iz intendid wen i sey wat i sey i jus want u 2 bee awere
eidit:i all so wantid 2 tel u that i magerd in hisories so i no wat i em taking abowt
urs truely
-Monkyheffa —
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Yes you made a mistake. My suggestion is that you don't edit articles that you are not involved in. My edit was clearly not vandalism. It was your revision that was not constructive. 75.14.213.94 (talk) 19:16, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A little more politeness would be appreciated, but I see your point, and it is correct? You already undid my revision, and I'm not interested in wheel warring, so congrats, you win pal! Have a merry Holiday season. Cheers!
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Bravest Warriors revisions.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Yes you made a mistake on reverting to the old Bravest Warriors page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donjuaninhell (talk • contribs) 19:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
About 24.222.243.248/UrbanDictionary902
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Block 24.222.243.248 for a long amount of time since he constantly flames me and vandalizes my page, and also block UrbanDictionary902 for a long amount of time because he vandalized my page too. Zakawer (talk) 10:33, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(
Je vous invite à me parler) 11:04, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
Huh, I've always suspected he was working with the Reapers. --illythr (talk) 00:10, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Welcome to STiki!
Hello, The Illusive Man, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- See how you are faring against other STiki users!
Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!
We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (talk) 05:06, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merry Christmas!
Pratyya(have a chat?) is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Orphaned non-free media (File:2012 Indonesian Model Honda CRV, production unit.jpg) Thanks for uploading
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media
).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
Hello The Illusive Man: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 16:28, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've edited Wikipedia a couple of times and I want to keep doing it but I got a message from you saying I vandalised which was my immature 11 year old son. Will I get my I.P address banned? Please don't I want to make contributions so I can get awards and rewards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.96.169.22 (talk) 22:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am aware of that particular goof. That was me slipping up on Hot Keys, there is no "Rollback the rollback" button on STiki. :p I will undo both of my edits, the one on the page and the invalid user warning. I'm glad someone is following what I'm doing so I don't go off the rails and blow up Wikipedia in my anti-vandalism zeal. :) Excelsior! -
Congratulations, The Illusive Man! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using
leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and TheStrikeΣagle 05:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
Golly gosh... Thank you guys!! I have immense respect for each of the three of you! I promise to keep doing my very best. This is only a start, I promise! :) -
physics.org comes up as a page trying to install malware on viewers machines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.78.188.110 (talk) 17:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, please provide a citation to a valid source! Otherwise, one might think you were dabbling in
Why was "Josh Mease" Article Declined?I am new to Wikipedia. This is my first article. I have tried to research this on my own, so my apologies if this is explained somewhere and I missed it.
I have been told that my article reads too much like an ad. The copy I wrote feels very neutral and I have compared it to other similar articles. I do include quotes from press under a "critical reception" section of the page, but all of these are cited and they come from reputable sources like NPR and The New York Times. Are these quotes why you considered it an ad?
Would adding more biographic information be helpful? I believe that Mease qualifies as a notable person, and I thought that the basic bio and links to reputable sources would be enough to prove that. So please let me know what I am missing so I can get this page approved
Hi Lauren; Yes, in fact, those quotes felt a bit cherry picked and were pretty one sided in painting him a certain way. I saw indications of notability though, like you said, those quotes were in fact sourced! It puts me in an unusual situation. If you want, you could put it back up for review as is, and see if another reviewer likes it... I have no actual authority! At least, just as much authority as any other Wikipedia editor. Or, you could tone down those quotes, and I'd be happy to personally approve it for article space! Thank you for your edits to Wikipedia. Cheers! -
Ok, thanks for the advice. I will rework. Much appreciated! Laurenwebby (talk) 16:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
\Undoing Portuguese liking in the UKIlusive it is a disgrace only people who are listed as current portuguese living in the UK are football players... There are many others, scientists, engineers, managers, for example lloyds manager (instead of undoing please add him up)... etc etc..
The information o left online was true... although i can agree it might not be important for everyone to know it yet.. it will be one day so might as well pull it up now. But we will talk in a few years... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.133.11.3 (talk) 03:01, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Howdy: I'll double check the questioned reverts in the next 12 hours. I'm currently shutting down for the night locally. All the best, -
I have now re-evaluated my revert on the concerned page; I remain steadfast in my belief that the edit in question was not of neutral point of view, and reverted in a manner I believe is just. If you, the editor 139.133.11.3 have any concern about this, it can be brought up on the articles talk page, or dealt with through some form of dispute resolution. While all contributions are appreciated, this is just one that Wikipedia is not ready for. All the best. Cheers! -
Hehehe, as this is written, I have no idea what we're talking about. I don't have time to figure it out right now either, but I promise I'll try in the morning locally. Best Regards, -
Dear IP friend; While I am entirely sure that this is probably the case, that him being a suspected pedophile is in fact a key mention in the biography of his personal life, we can
Hi, again. Thanks for those community standards. I've read them. I don't think the edit is in breach of any of them. He is not a living person. The New York Times is cited as the source in note 27. His family's denials are also mentioned and cited from two Mormon publications with two separate notes. It could hardly be more above board. This information was already in the article. I did not put it there. I merely extracted a summary into the first sentence of the articel and into a subheading. 92.24.83.61 (talk) 05:46, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
I feel like an idiot, of course he's dead... Hahahaha, Done, my edits have been rolled back. Sorry for the run around mate, it turns out I had less knowledge of what I was talking about than I originally thought! Have a great night. Cheers! -
Thanks. But within minutes someone else has now reverted your roll back! What should I do? 92.24.83.61 (talk) 06:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
I'm getting resistance from uninvolved parties now it seems, saying that consensus exists on the talkpage. I see no evidence of this in any credible way, but
Dear IP friend, is your friend currently a student or serviceman that would give him extra special knowledge I wouldn't have access to on Google? Because the first three websites I found, that are completely devoted to factually spec-ing World War I tank cannons, seem to refer to it as semi-automatic like or semi automatic (proper). Maybe the template was a bit harsh, but I really think the current version of the page, as edited by another user who seems informed on the topic (not me), should remain. Let me know what you think. All the best, -
Congratulations, The Illusive Man! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 5,000 classification threshold using STiki.
We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool.
We hope you continue your ascent up the
leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (talk) 05:29, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
FIBA All-Star Games reversal editHi there. I noticed you reverted some additions made to
FIBA_All-Star_Games
. I also noticed a rather cryptic reference to good faith which I fail to understand.
Since I happen to be the one that added the information that got deleted I would like to point out that I added the information with a very clear reference to verify it. Could you please elaborate on your reversal decision? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.68.92.243 (talk) 21:47, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your work against vandalism!
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I hadn't heard of the STiki tool before this, but it sounds useful!
Thanks for your prompt reversion of vandalism in the Heliograph article! Good work! Macchess (talk) 01:14, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Macchess!! I really appreciate barnstars. I hope you love STiki as much as I do! Currently 28th on the
Participation: Out of 19 people who signed up for this blitz, 9 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: During the six-day blitz, we removed over twenty articles from the
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:01, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sign up for the March drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 14:27, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sign up for the April blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:26, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Re: abuse-filter-helper questionHello, I'm definitely not among the founders of the project and I doubt en.wiki needs my help with abuse filters. :)
You actually need them, see Wikipedia:Edit filter, "The assignment of the edit filter manager user right" etc. --Nemo 17:59, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for accepting our invitation to the Wikipedia Contribution event in London - ON .
I just want to know whether you can also take part as a Wikipedian and help in explaining the different aspects of the editing process.
You can send me an email at "concept.clear" "at" yahoo.com .
Do you mind sending me my text as well as informing me of my faults? Jessica Babos (talk) 18:21, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
GeonoticeHi,
Sorry for the delay in replying - away from the computer most of the day! I'm happy to put up a notice but not actually clear what the notice is for; there's two events for London ON listed on
Wikipedia:Contribution Month in Canada - FAQ
(24/4 and 27/4) and there doesn't seem to be a clear place for users to sign up, etc. I've put up something relatively vague and pointed people towards the talkpage for more details.
If you could use the form at Wikipedia:Geonotice for any future requests, it'll really help - apart from anything else, it lets us know what you want the notice to say! (Feel free to also let me know you've listed something there, though) Andrew Gray (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
ACC
Sorry if I'm buggering your system, I've been commenting(?) my rationales, I hope! Dropped one request for requesting through a server with a rangeblock, and placed another back on hold because it was in the queue and wasn't sure how to fully process it. Would you like me to reset the requests and stop breaking your stuff? :( Again, sorry. -
I've already reversed them. They're in the CU queue, which means they shouldn't be touched until a CU comments. You don't drop requests if they have a rangeblock. They get deferred to CUs.—
Can you please elaborate on why the article I submitted called Information Technology Empowerment Center (ITEC) was declined? I would like to edit it and try to re-submit. Thank you!
Resolved
Hello, and thank you for 
or 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Done. Cheers mate! Contact) 22:35, 16 October 2012 (UTC)]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Estakhr's Constant (physics) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
ResolvedContact) 05:54, 17 December 2012 (UTC)]
