Well== Welcome! ==
Welcome to Wikipedia, Antipastor! I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{ helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{ helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!
Marek. 69 talk 15:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for all you've done to combat vandalism in your brief stint as Wikipedia editor. You may want to check out WP:VAND for more information on vandalism and tools to revert it more quickly and efficiently. Cheers, Dabomb87 ( talk) 02:28, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Antipastor! Firstly, thanks for helping out in CSD areas. I just wanted to inform you that I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on User:Chitresh verma- because: the page is not blatantly vandalism or a hoax. If you have any questions or other message, please contact me. Thanks Kingpin 13 ( talk) 16:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
My mistake on Macedonian language. Sorry! Jingby ( talk) 13:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I have removed the prod template in favor of the AfD debate. I agree that we should remove this article once and for all. Regards, WWGB ( talk) 12:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your so speedy clean-up of my article on Rita Atria. Soler97 ( talk) 07:13, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Antipastor. Could enable emailing on your account, at Special:Preferences? I wish to contact you via email. Thanks, Jamie S93 03:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
This source is not just a link to an author and historians' website. It leads to a 1 hour podcast discussion, aired in the UK, with two other boni fide historians. I think it is at least at importance as some of the other links, such as art exhibits, etc., therefore I must respectfully disagree. Why do you not at least listen to the podcast before making an opinion? Mugginsx ( talk) 11:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, I was Wiki-Bold and took out one of the segment I thought was irrelevent and conjecture. I hope I don't get verbally hammered! Wish me luck! Mugginsx ( talk) 16:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Dear antipastor read the edit history before you start making claims. I restored the ORIGINAL version that was agreed upon and that does not make dubious claims. Wandalstouring ( talk) 13:22, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
YOUR ACCUSATIONS on my Talk page: Why you have such "impression"? I think because you are just fulfilling your patriotic duties. I suspect, please excuse me if I am wrong, that you are either employed by FYROM (what is less likely) or by Greece (what is more likely) and acting in concordance with 3 or 4 similar professionals or patriots. That “gang” is replacing “Macedonia” with “Greece” all over the places. I can not grasp why and how these are profiting from this: FYROM may be by reserving for that state the name of “Macedonia”, or Greece, may be is attracted by a kind of pan-Hellenism? Anyway, in the meantime, history pages on Wikipedia suffer enormously from bias. Last year my password was even broken, I complained (see may Talk page), no ADMINISTRATOR intervened and I stopped being interested for editing for more then a year. I suspect then that even the "administrator" is in the gang. I just started again last month, and you and your collaborators (my hypothesis only) are reacting. I find it very patriotic and quite normal. But damaging for Wikipedia. I will have to abandon Wikipedia for some time again if nobody would stop this gang in their destructive activity. Draganparis ( talk) 11:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
I think that our dear friend Draganparis has put into play some more sock accounts. See here [1], [2], [3] for the history of the accounts as well as here [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] for their modus operandi and phraseology used. As I see it, in the first investigation, the sock account was banned, Draganparis was not (his ban was about disruptive editing) and the case now is closed. I sincerely think that it should reopen with new evidence of yet more sock accounts. He also trolls Wikipedia in a crusade against us, stating his usual lies and POVS, although his utterly aggressive style and conspiracy theories have only attracted scorn. I don't really worry about this but I confess I am a bit wary as to how he can disrupt future discussions. See what should be done, thx GK1973 ( talk) 22:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you realise that this is a magazine aimed at the upper end of the antiques/arts magazine, and not a scholarly journal. Dougweller ( talk) 18:59, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Alexander the Great is being reviewed for Good Article listing. It has been put on hold for an initial 14 days to allow for minor issues related to coverage and authorial tone to be addressed. Any assistance would be welcomed. SilkTork * YES! 23:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.
On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (
consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true
. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false
in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.
For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.
Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot ( talk) 19:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
Thank you for your note of encouragement in my early days. (see 11 January 2010 (UTC) I still read it if I get discouraged and remember there are kind editors like you. Mugginsx ( talk) 14:20, 23 July 2011 (UTC) |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Well== Welcome! ==
Welcome to Wikipedia, Antipastor! I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{ helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{ helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!
Marek. 69 talk 15:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for all you've done to combat vandalism in your brief stint as Wikipedia editor. You may want to check out WP:VAND for more information on vandalism and tools to revert it more quickly and efficiently. Cheers, Dabomb87 ( talk) 02:28, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Antipastor! Firstly, thanks for helping out in CSD areas. I just wanted to inform you that I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on User:Chitresh verma- because: the page is not blatantly vandalism or a hoax. If you have any questions or other message, please contact me. Thanks Kingpin 13 ( talk) 16:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
My mistake on Macedonian language. Sorry! Jingby ( talk) 13:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I have removed the prod template in favor of the AfD debate. I agree that we should remove this article once and for all. Regards, WWGB ( talk) 12:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your so speedy clean-up of my article on Rita Atria. Soler97 ( talk) 07:13, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Antipastor. Could enable emailing on your account, at Special:Preferences? I wish to contact you via email. Thanks, Jamie S93 03:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
This source is not just a link to an author and historians' website. It leads to a 1 hour podcast discussion, aired in the UK, with two other boni fide historians. I think it is at least at importance as some of the other links, such as art exhibits, etc., therefore I must respectfully disagree. Why do you not at least listen to the podcast before making an opinion? Mugginsx ( talk) 11:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, I was Wiki-Bold and took out one of the segment I thought was irrelevent and conjecture. I hope I don't get verbally hammered! Wish me luck! Mugginsx ( talk) 16:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Dear antipastor read the edit history before you start making claims. I restored the ORIGINAL version that was agreed upon and that does not make dubious claims. Wandalstouring ( talk) 13:22, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
YOUR ACCUSATIONS on my Talk page: Why you have such "impression"? I think because you are just fulfilling your patriotic duties. I suspect, please excuse me if I am wrong, that you are either employed by FYROM (what is less likely) or by Greece (what is more likely) and acting in concordance with 3 or 4 similar professionals or patriots. That “gang” is replacing “Macedonia” with “Greece” all over the places. I can not grasp why and how these are profiting from this: FYROM may be by reserving for that state the name of “Macedonia”, or Greece, may be is attracted by a kind of pan-Hellenism? Anyway, in the meantime, history pages on Wikipedia suffer enormously from bias. Last year my password was even broken, I complained (see may Talk page), no ADMINISTRATOR intervened and I stopped being interested for editing for more then a year. I suspect then that even the "administrator" is in the gang. I just started again last month, and you and your collaborators (my hypothesis only) are reacting. I find it very patriotic and quite normal. But damaging for Wikipedia. I will have to abandon Wikipedia for some time again if nobody would stop this gang in their destructive activity. Draganparis ( talk) 11:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
I think that our dear friend Draganparis has put into play some more sock accounts. See here [1], [2], [3] for the history of the accounts as well as here [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] for their modus operandi and phraseology used. As I see it, in the first investigation, the sock account was banned, Draganparis was not (his ban was about disruptive editing) and the case now is closed. I sincerely think that it should reopen with new evidence of yet more sock accounts. He also trolls Wikipedia in a crusade against us, stating his usual lies and POVS, although his utterly aggressive style and conspiracy theories have only attracted scorn. I don't really worry about this but I confess I am a bit wary as to how he can disrupt future discussions. See what should be done, thx GK1973 ( talk) 22:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you realise that this is a magazine aimed at the upper end of the antiques/arts magazine, and not a scholarly journal. Dougweller ( talk) 18:59, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Alexander the Great is being reviewed for Good Article listing. It has been put on hold for an initial 14 days to allow for minor issues related to coverage and authorial tone to be addressed. Any assistance would be welcomed. SilkTork * YES! 23:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.
On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (
consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true
. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false
in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.
For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.
Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot ( talk) 19:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
Thank you for your note of encouragement in my early days. (see 11 January 2010 (UTC) I still read it if I get discouraged and remember there are kind editors like you. Mugginsx ( talk) 14:20, 23 July 2011 (UTC) |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)