|
|
I was disappointed in your edit to Mary Ramsey. You did a disservice to readers by creating a disambiguation paged where there was only one other Mary Ramsey. A Hatnote at the top of Mary Ramsey would have been far more effective WP:Hatnote WP:D2D. BuffaloBob ( talk) 14:37, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
disservice to readers. If we want to change it back it shouldn't be to difficult. Cakelot1 ( talk) 14:45, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
On which wiki could be the additional details that were in the Natural Disaster Survival article, although I am concerned about the images that may be being used in the article. ~ Alex | Leave me a message on my talk page! 16:46, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
understandyou mean be able to learn how to play the game, then that's not the goal. Instead, a reader should be able to read the article and understand how it's been used to in Disaster Preparedness Education [Per (Findlay 2017)] or what windows central has to say about it, ( [1]). It is on the basis of these sources that the article looks like it's going to be kept at [ AFD] with the understanding that the article be re-worked to use them. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 17:04, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Natural Disaster Survival, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 21:01, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 ( talk) 05:59, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Since you recently participated in the Charles III requested move discussion, I thought you might like to know that there are two other discussions currently going on about other British monarch article titles here and here. Cheers. Rreagan007 ( talk) 22:21, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
McDonald's recently brought them back, Here is the source. https://www.today.com/today/amp/rcna111457 23.245.47.124 ( talk) 21:03, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
The reason is because Teletoon became Cartoon Network on March 27th. 23.245.47.124 ( talk) 01:15, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Unawoken ( talk) 18:15, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Cakelot1. Thank you for your work on Smoky (Olympic mascot). User:Skynxnex, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for the nice little article about a fun subject!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Skynxnex}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Skynxnex ( talk) 03:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Dear User
Even if the latest edit I had made to the article related to NNN is not supported by the source, it makes sense in the article and for the reader. Please kindly revert the edit.
Thank you Y-7.html ( talk) 04:39, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
makes sense in the article and for the readerwhen they aren't supported by the sources. Too explain it further we prohibit original research and require that every claim made be Verifiable by a Reliable sources (see WP:V). I'll also point you too some essays that may be helpful: Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth and Wikipedia:You are not a reliable source.
as per
MOS:LEAD, In Wikipedia, the lead section is an introduction to an article and a summary of its most important contents.
that is why
Destroy Dick December is there at the start, and if it is in the start then (per
MOS:BOLDREDIRECT) Terms which redirect to an article or section are commonly bolded when they appear in the first couple of paragraphs of the lead section
hope this make sense
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 19:18, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
confused, when they may just disagree with you. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 20:19, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
familiarise yourselfwith WP:BRD. You may notice it's not Bold, Revert, Revert & Chastise.
treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject.I just don't see how one WP:DAILYDOT twitter trend piece with about as much to say about the Far-right & NNN as it does about DDD, justified what in my view are extremely trivial and pretty WP:ORish sentence about the total number of ejaculations a challenge involves (when that isn't in the source). Now I know Routine calculations are allowed but I wouldn't consider these routine and if the one middling quality source we have for this doesn't think it worthy of motioning we shouldn't either. I also don't think usefulness is a good argument to keep the content when that's not how we decide what goes into articles.
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi Cakelot1. Thank you for your work on Flag of Exmoor. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 16:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Killing of Laken Riley.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
Gottagotospace ( talk) 22:13, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Cakelot1/Bar I was disappointed by your edit. You do a disservice to readers by omitting a summary of the BBC File on 4, and excluding errors made in the report. You do a disservice to everyone with these chronic conditions by ommitting the recovery story alongside the stories of people who didn't get change. There are many of these recovery stories in the press and research which are being frequently ignored. The rapid recovery stories are important as they show that there is a system capable of rapid change involved in at least some people alongside other physical issues identified by research. This needs to be researched as part of the process of understanding and for developing medications for helping people to recover from this condition/group of conditions. Unfortunately almost no research has been happening into how patients are recovering. Verity Verity&Science1 ( talk) 08:56, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Cakelot1. Thank you for your work on Scoria brick. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
|
|
I was disappointed in your edit to Mary Ramsey. You did a disservice to readers by creating a disambiguation paged where there was only one other Mary Ramsey. A Hatnote at the top of Mary Ramsey would have been far more effective WP:Hatnote WP:D2D. BuffaloBob ( talk) 14:37, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
disservice to readers. If we want to change it back it shouldn't be to difficult. Cakelot1 ( talk) 14:45, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
On which wiki could be the additional details that were in the Natural Disaster Survival article, although I am concerned about the images that may be being used in the article. ~ Alex | Leave me a message on my talk page! 16:46, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
understandyou mean be able to learn how to play the game, then that's not the goal. Instead, a reader should be able to read the article and understand how it's been used to in Disaster Preparedness Education [Per (Findlay 2017)] or what windows central has to say about it, ( [1]). It is on the basis of these sources that the article looks like it's going to be kept at [ AFD] with the understanding that the article be re-worked to use them. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 17:04, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Natural Disaster Survival, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 21:01, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 ( talk) 05:59, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Since you recently participated in the Charles III requested move discussion, I thought you might like to know that there are two other discussions currently going on about other British monarch article titles here and here. Cheers. Rreagan007 ( talk) 22:21, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
McDonald's recently brought them back, Here is the source. https://www.today.com/today/amp/rcna111457 23.245.47.124 ( talk) 21:03, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
The reason is because Teletoon became Cartoon Network on March 27th. 23.245.47.124 ( talk) 01:15, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Unawoken ( talk) 18:15, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Cakelot1. Thank you for your work on Smoky (Olympic mascot). User:Skynxnex, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for the nice little article about a fun subject!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Skynxnex}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Skynxnex ( talk) 03:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Dear User
Even if the latest edit I had made to the article related to NNN is not supported by the source, it makes sense in the article and for the reader. Please kindly revert the edit.
Thank you Y-7.html ( talk) 04:39, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
makes sense in the article and for the readerwhen they aren't supported by the sources. Too explain it further we prohibit original research and require that every claim made be Verifiable by a Reliable sources (see WP:V). I'll also point you too some essays that may be helpful: Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth and Wikipedia:You are not a reliable source.
as per
MOS:LEAD, In Wikipedia, the lead section is an introduction to an article and a summary of its most important contents.
that is why
Destroy Dick December is there at the start, and if it is in the start then (per
MOS:BOLDREDIRECT) Terms which redirect to an article or section are commonly bolded when they appear in the first couple of paragraphs of the lead section
hope this make sense
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 19:18, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
confused, when they may just disagree with you. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 20:19, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
familiarise yourselfwith WP:BRD. You may notice it's not Bold, Revert, Revert & Chastise.
treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject.I just don't see how one WP:DAILYDOT twitter trend piece with about as much to say about the Far-right & NNN as it does about DDD, justified what in my view are extremely trivial and pretty WP:ORish sentence about the total number of ejaculations a challenge involves (when that isn't in the source). Now I know Routine calculations are allowed but I wouldn't consider these routine and if the one middling quality source we have for this doesn't think it worthy of motioning we shouldn't either. I also don't think usefulness is a good argument to keep the content when that's not how we decide what goes into articles.
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi Cakelot1. Thank you for your work on Flag of Exmoor. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 16:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Killing of Laken Riley.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
Gottagotospace ( talk) 22:13, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Cakelot1/Bar I was disappointed by your edit. You do a disservice to readers by omitting a summary of the BBC File on 4, and excluding errors made in the report. You do a disservice to everyone with these chronic conditions by ommitting the recovery story alongside the stories of people who didn't get change. There are many of these recovery stories in the press and research which are being frequently ignored. The rapid recovery stories are important as they show that there is a system capable of rapid change involved in at least some people alongside other physical issues identified by research. This needs to be researched as part of the process of understanding and for developing medications for helping people to recover from this condition/group of conditions. Unfortunately almost no research has been happening into how patients are recovering. Verity Verity&Science1 ( talk) 08:56, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Cakelot1. Thank you for your work on Scoria brick. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)