Hello. You reverted me in Ronni Ancona with a bad faith edit. see here: Assume good faith You didn't even try to use the talk page. This is unacceptable. Dava4444 ( talk) 22:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Good cleanup on Friday. I looked up
Bentley and the "Marxist" comment sounds more plausible coming from him
. I would love to know how you are so sure of your info; do you have a hard copy? Page numbers are supposed to be provided - can you identify the pages?
Mark
Dask
20:56, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to
Bicycle wheel: you may already know about them, but you might find
Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the
sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a
vandal when they've been previously warned. You might also find
WP:TWINKLE useful. With this tool, you can automatically place such warnings. (see also
Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc#Warn (user talk warnings) --
TheImaCow (
talk)
18:13, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Adding the Wikilink to "Huguenots" was an excellent idea. Thanks for catching my omission! -- 2603:6081:8004:DD5:6451:2AC4:EB73:1BE ( talk) 23:42, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting to Alcohol rather than 'denatured alcohol' which is an absurdity for the reasons given. Dave 3142 ( talk) 00:42, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The 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 2022 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)
01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Could you take a look at the Battle of Krasnoi? It took seven years to improve this article. Taksen ( talk) 14:18, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
I did refer to the source. DuncanHill ( talk) 14:14, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Please stop your superfluous edits and edit warring. And please take part in the discussion on the talk page there. The Banner talk 13:41, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
I've blocked for 48 hours. For future reference, WP:SPI might be a better venue as they can potentially look at other IPs and see if they are related. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:49, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
"Brief link cleanup per MOS:LINK. First few sections only. More to do"; in the interests of fairness, it should be all or nothing, you can't leave it half done. JackkBrown ( talk) 15:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
I don't think so, the lowercase initials are correct; why on two very famous pages ("Messi" and "Cristiano Ronaldo") is this not the case? Then a question: are you stalking me? Obviously in the last question I'm joking, or maybe not. JackkBrown ( talk) 01:44, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Greylag goose is about Anser anser, but contains no information on the grey Landes goose, which based on information at Foie gras I guess is a breed of it. Could you add some? Hairy Dude ( talk) 15:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Let's talk about the things I should improve. I consider myself a useful user, but I should improve, I am tired of the warnings other users leave me. Write me a list and I will try to correct my faults one by one. JackkBrown ( talk) 16:00, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Hey Jean-de-Nivelle! Here's the paragraph I was editing:
"Von Braun had a charismatic personality and was known as a ladies' man. As a student in Berlin, he often was seen in the evenings in the company of two girlfriends at once. He later had a succession of affairs within the secretarial and computer pool at Peenemünde."
First, thanks so much for your help. Happy to talk.
1. I think that "Ladies' Man" could comfortably fall into the category of gendered language, and I know we're trying to work on that.
2. Heartthrob was my first pass at it to indicate he had charisma and good looks, which I think is synonymous.
3. I'm not even sure this is supported-- the source is unavailable so I can't verify. Maybe you have access?
Assuming that it can be, I think the best total edit would be:
"Von Braun was noted in having a charming and charismatic personality. When he was a student in Berlin, he was frequently seen in the evenings in the company of two girlfriends at once. Later, he was involved in a succession of affairs within the secretarial and computer pool at Peenemünde."
thoughts/suggestions? Doctor165 ( talk) 15:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi I’m sorry for changing redirect links to piped links because they actually link to the correct article for example in Edward VI Henry VIII of England redirects to Henry VIII. I will never do any of these mistakes again.
KevinNov3 ( talk) 3:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
...just seems petty to me. Cavrdg ( talk) 17:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
@ Cavrdg and DuncanHill: Gentlemen, since the three of us are here, why don't we continue the discussion here? I'm happy to host. I'm sure we're all acting in good faith, but please let's keep it civil.
There's a principle, expressed here, that "anyone is free to revert any edits made in violation of a ban or block, without giving any further reason", so DuncanHill was quite within his rights to act as he did. Cavrdg was following WP:NOPIPE (and on this occasion, so was Harry the house), and had a right to do so. My stance is that Harry's edits weren't harmful in this instance, so I'd noted them but let them pass. I also didn't revert DuncanHill's edits because, while I don't think Harry's edits were harmful in isolation, I understand the broader context, and I don't want to encourage a disruptive block-evader, or allow him to trigger an edit war between well-meaning editors with different approaches. If Harry made only edits of this type, he wouldn't be a problem.
Cavrdg, Would you have undone DuncanHill's edits if you'd been aware he was reverting block evasion? Jean-de-Nivelle ( talk) 21:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
I am absolutely at a loss why Jean thinks he is improving Wikipedia with what I call a useless hobby. The Banner talk 09:56, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
[Moved from the section above by Jean-de-Nivelle with the edit summary: This isn't really the moment for it, The Banner. Please try to exercise some self-restraint. Happy new year, by the way.] Jean-de-Nivelle ( talk) 10:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Can you a) stop using this script and b) self-revert your recent run of edits, as they seem to introduce links to redirects, which is discouraged. For example, on Ed Stewart, you added a link to the redirect Junior Choice. ( [1]). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
[[Junior Choice]]
is preferable to [[Children's Favourites|Junior Choice]]
for a number of reasons. Let me check my recent edits again, and I'll get back to you.
Jean-de-Nivelle (
talk)
12:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
[[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]]
[[Mozart]]
[[B|A]]
, which he will simplify to [[A]]
. This was causing strife between a couple of editors
here when one editor was reverting the edits on principle, while another felt they should be retained.[[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]]
[[Mozart]]
[[Polydor Records|Polydor]]
[[Polydor]]
[[Acton High School|Acton County Grammar School]]
[[Acton County Grammar School]]
[[Marshall Stack|Marshall stack]]
[[Marshall stack]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|King Henry the VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|King Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII]]
. If they'd been constructed as redirects to
Henry VIII in the first place, they would still point there, rather than going through redundant redirects to [[Henry VIII of England]]
first.
MOS:NOPIPE says, "do not use a piped link where it is possible to use a redirected term that fits well within the scope of the text". That looks like good advice to me.[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII]]
Thanks for that. Seems good to me. (Fwiw, I think Wikipedia is absolutely right to lead with the real name, rather than the obscurantist 'title'.) 86.177.202.175 ( talk) 21:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
[[Crossbencher|crossbench]]
→ [[crossbench]]
per
WP:NOPIPE. Best wishes,
Jean-de-Nivelle (
talk)
13:37, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Hi,
It appears your edit to John Mason's page: 18:10, 9 January 2024 was libellous vandalism - for example, added 'Glasgow Anti-LGBTQ rights' to the education section 195.188.14.222 ( talk) 15:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Jean-de-Nivelle. Thank you for your work on Mrs Bennet. MPGuy2824, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
would suggest that you convert this into a disambiguation page and include all the real-life Mrs. Bennets
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
- MPGuy2824 ( talk) 08:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
I recall that you have a good eye for detail and context. If you are interested in reviewing this topic, it is a Featured Article Candidate here. Please comment there if you see any errors/omissions, etc. All the best! -- Ssilvers ( talk) 17:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
King of Scots is necessary because Kings of Scots does not refer to the same link.
Yes, I see the need for the pipe now, thanks. I hadn't realised that the King of Scots redirect went to the UK monarchy article instead of the list of Scottish kings. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
2001:18C0:61E:D100:B4DE:3C19:488B:3D59 ( talk) 00:22, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
[[List of Scottish monarchs|King of Scots]]
is only "necessary" if, for some reason, you want to take readers to the page [[List of Scottish monarchs]]
when they click on the text "
King of Scots". I'm not sure that's always a good idea. For example, if we look at
the changes you made at "
Alexander II of Scotland", the two links are actually serving different functions. The first, succession = [[List of Scottish monarchs|King of Scotland]]
, makes sense because the context is the line of succession of Scottish kings. In the second case, I think the link [[King of Scotland]]
("
King of Scotland") would make more sense as a link to the general section article about the Scottish monarchy. A list of monarchs isn't always the most relevant target.Hello. You reverted me in Ronni Ancona with a bad faith edit. see here: Assume good faith You didn't even try to use the talk page. This is unacceptable. Dava4444 ( talk) 22:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Good cleanup on Friday. I looked up
Bentley and the "Marxist" comment sounds more plausible coming from him
. I would love to know how you are so sure of your info; do you have a hard copy? Page numbers are supposed to be provided - can you identify the pages?
Mark
Dask
20:56, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to
Bicycle wheel: you may already know about them, but you might find
Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the
sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a
vandal when they've been previously warned. You might also find
WP:TWINKLE useful. With this tool, you can automatically place such warnings. (see also
Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc#Warn (user talk warnings) --
TheImaCow (
talk)
18:13, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Adding the Wikilink to "Huguenots" was an excellent idea. Thanks for catching my omission! -- 2603:6081:8004:DD5:6451:2AC4:EB73:1BE ( talk) 23:42, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting to Alcohol rather than 'denatured alcohol' which is an absurdity for the reasons given. Dave 3142 ( talk) 00:42, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The 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 2022 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)
01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Could you take a look at the Battle of Krasnoi? It took seven years to improve this article. Taksen ( talk) 14:18, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
I did refer to the source. DuncanHill ( talk) 14:14, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Please stop your superfluous edits and edit warring. And please take part in the discussion on the talk page there. The Banner talk 13:41, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
I've blocked for 48 hours. For future reference, WP:SPI might be a better venue as they can potentially look at other IPs and see if they are related. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:49, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
"Brief link cleanup per MOS:LINK. First few sections only. More to do"; in the interests of fairness, it should be all or nothing, you can't leave it half done. JackkBrown ( talk) 15:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
I don't think so, the lowercase initials are correct; why on two very famous pages ("Messi" and "Cristiano Ronaldo") is this not the case? Then a question: are you stalking me? Obviously in the last question I'm joking, or maybe not. JackkBrown ( talk) 01:44, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Greylag goose is about Anser anser, but contains no information on the grey Landes goose, which based on information at Foie gras I guess is a breed of it. Could you add some? Hairy Dude ( talk) 15:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Let's talk about the things I should improve. I consider myself a useful user, but I should improve, I am tired of the warnings other users leave me. Write me a list and I will try to correct my faults one by one. JackkBrown ( talk) 16:00, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Hey Jean-de-Nivelle! Here's the paragraph I was editing:
"Von Braun had a charismatic personality and was known as a ladies' man. As a student in Berlin, he often was seen in the evenings in the company of two girlfriends at once. He later had a succession of affairs within the secretarial and computer pool at Peenemünde."
First, thanks so much for your help. Happy to talk.
1. I think that "Ladies' Man" could comfortably fall into the category of gendered language, and I know we're trying to work on that.
2. Heartthrob was my first pass at it to indicate he had charisma and good looks, which I think is synonymous.
3. I'm not even sure this is supported-- the source is unavailable so I can't verify. Maybe you have access?
Assuming that it can be, I think the best total edit would be:
"Von Braun was noted in having a charming and charismatic personality. When he was a student in Berlin, he was frequently seen in the evenings in the company of two girlfriends at once. Later, he was involved in a succession of affairs within the secretarial and computer pool at Peenemünde."
thoughts/suggestions? Doctor165 ( talk) 15:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi I’m sorry for changing redirect links to piped links because they actually link to the correct article for example in Edward VI Henry VIII of England redirects to Henry VIII. I will never do any of these mistakes again.
KevinNov3 ( talk) 3:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
...just seems petty to me. Cavrdg ( talk) 17:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
@ Cavrdg and DuncanHill: Gentlemen, since the three of us are here, why don't we continue the discussion here? I'm happy to host. I'm sure we're all acting in good faith, but please let's keep it civil.
There's a principle, expressed here, that "anyone is free to revert any edits made in violation of a ban or block, without giving any further reason", so DuncanHill was quite within his rights to act as he did. Cavrdg was following WP:NOPIPE (and on this occasion, so was Harry the house), and had a right to do so. My stance is that Harry's edits weren't harmful in this instance, so I'd noted them but let them pass. I also didn't revert DuncanHill's edits because, while I don't think Harry's edits were harmful in isolation, I understand the broader context, and I don't want to encourage a disruptive block-evader, or allow him to trigger an edit war between well-meaning editors with different approaches. If Harry made only edits of this type, he wouldn't be a problem.
Cavrdg, Would you have undone DuncanHill's edits if you'd been aware he was reverting block evasion? Jean-de-Nivelle ( talk) 21:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
I am absolutely at a loss why Jean thinks he is improving Wikipedia with what I call a useless hobby. The Banner talk 09:56, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
[Moved from the section above by Jean-de-Nivelle with the edit summary: This isn't really the moment for it, The Banner. Please try to exercise some self-restraint. Happy new year, by the way.] Jean-de-Nivelle ( talk) 10:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Can you a) stop using this script and b) self-revert your recent run of edits, as they seem to introduce links to redirects, which is discouraged. For example, on Ed Stewart, you added a link to the redirect Junior Choice. ( [1]). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
[[Junior Choice]]
is preferable to [[Children's Favourites|Junior Choice]]
for a number of reasons. Let me check my recent edits again, and I'll get back to you.
Jean-de-Nivelle (
talk)
12:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
[[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]]
[[Mozart]]
[[B|A]]
, which he will simplify to [[A]]
. This was causing strife between a couple of editors
here when one editor was reverting the edits on principle, while another felt they should be retained.[[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]]
[[Mozart]]
[[Polydor Records|Polydor]]
[[Polydor]]
[[Acton High School|Acton County Grammar School]]
[[Acton County Grammar School]]
[[Marshall Stack|Marshall stack]]
[[Marshall stack]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|King Henry the VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England]]
[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII of England|King Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII]]
. If they'd been constructed as redirects to
Henry VIII in the first place, they would still point there, rather than going through redundant redirects to [[Henry VIII of England]]
first.
MOS:NOPIPE says, "do not use a piped link where it is possible to use a redirected term that fits well within the scope of the text". That looks like good advice to me.[[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]]
[[Henry VIII]]
Thanks for that. Seems good to me. (Fwiw, I think Wikipedia is absolutely right to lead with the real name, rather than the obscurantist 'title'.) 86.177.202.175 ( talk) 21:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
[[Crossbencher|crossbench]]
→ [[crossbench]]
per
WP:NOPIPE. Best wishes,
Jean-de-Nivelle (
talk)
13:37, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Hi,
It appears your edit to John Mason's page: 18:10, 9 January 2024 was libellous vandalism - for example, added 'Glasgow Anti-LGBTQ rights' to the education section 195.188.14.222 ( talk) 15:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Jean-de-Nivelle. Thank you for your work on Mrs Bennet. MPGuy2824, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
would suggest that you convert this into a disambiguation page and include all the real-life Mrs. Bennets
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
- MPGuy2824 ( talk) 08:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
I recall that you have a good eye for detail and context. If you are interested in reviewing this topic, it is a Featured Article Candidate here. Please comment there if you see any errors/omissions, etc. All the best! -- Ssilvers ( talk) 17:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
King of Scots is necessary because Kings of Scots does not refer to the same link.
Yes, I see the need for the pipe now, thanks. I hadn't realised that the King of Scots redirect went to the UK monarchy article instead of the list of Scottish kings. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
2001:18C0:61E:D100:B4DE:3C19:488B:3D59 ( talk) 00:22, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
[[List of Scottish monarchs|King of Scots]]
is only "necessary" if, for some reason, you want to take readers to the page [[List of Scottish monarchs]]
when they click on the text "
King of Scots". I'm not sure that's always a good idea. For example, if we look at
the changes you made at "
Alexander II of Scotland", the two links are actually serving different functions. The first, succession = [[List of Scottish monarchs|King of Scotland]]
, makes sense because the context is the line of succession of Scottish kings. In the second case, I think the link [[King of Scotland]]
("
King of Scotland") would make more sense as a link to the general section article about the Scottish monarchy. A list of monarchs isn't always the most relevant target.