![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
At the time when the 10 soldiers were reported wounded no soldiers were reported killed (read source), so it could be said that the three who died were among the 10 initially reported wounded. Than its 7 wounded, most certainly not 13. It would be 13 if it was first reported three died than later that 10 were still wounded. In any case we simply cann't know and its not up to us to speculate, we edit per what the sources say. EkoGraf ( talk) 17:10, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
For you work on the article Westgate shopping mall shooting, I give you this barnstar! -- L o g X 18:45, 24 September 2013 (UTC) |
Hey, Linaas. I was wondering if you could undo my actions and restore your original note. This is what I am referring to. I thought they were referring to the CBS Evening News episode for today instead of the morning news. --Sorry for the inconvenience, Super Goku V ( talk) 01:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
I didn't like this. -- John ( talk) 22:04, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Insteaf od partakin gin discussion since I last posted on your waqll (and I havent edited the part in question since then), the user has now insisted on refuting discussion based consensus and goes to ANI. What are we supposed to do if discussion are not followed and this is legitimised/? GHow do I even try to generate a dsicssuion if it is dismissed in favour of such wars without consensus?( Lihaas ( talk) 10:51, 26 September 2013 (UTC)).
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 02:42, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Edi Rama may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 17:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give
MILF (disambiguation) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "
cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the
page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. GB fan 22:14, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Foreign relations of Qatar may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:38, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
General debate of the sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:41, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
General debate of the sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:48, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Moana Carcasses Kalosil may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:55, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Irish constitutional referendums, 2013 may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 18:34, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
General debate of the sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:07, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Typos aside, kindly explain what you mean by "wrong reflinks, one is thre with more data per consistency". Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 13:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
No offence, but I see absolutely no point in including "The sixty-seventh session of the United Nations General Assembly" written in all or any of the official languages in the UN – just too much clutter. If you can't be bothered to place the translations, using this comment (<!--official langauges needed--> ) isn't likely to get others to do it for you either. ;-) -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 14:41, 28 September 2013 (UTC)<ref>Charbonneau, Louis. (8 June 2012) [http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/06/08/uk-un-serbia-idUKBRE8570V520120608 Bitter fight for U.N. post ends with Serbian victory | Reuters]. Uk.reuters.com.
WP uses official languages for such topics, I dont know the official translation so I left th enote for OTEHR editors since WP is colloborative.( Lihaas ( talk) 14:55, 28 September 2013 (UTC)).
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eleventh hour ( 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) 11:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Lihaas, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of 2013 Mumbai building collapse, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 15:50, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
If I see you change "Results" to "Result" again, I'm afraid it will result in a report for tenditious editing. We've been through this several times before. This is before we get onto the issue of blind reverts. Number 5 7 21:34, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Twice today you have used CSD in a blatantly inappropriate matter. Once you have misused the notability tag. Please end you pointy disruption. Ryan Vesey 00:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at United States federal government shutdown of 2013 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 00:43, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
APEC Indonesia 2013 may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:04, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate
your contributions, including your edits to
Barack Obama, but we cannot accept
original research. Original research also encompasses
combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a
reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you.
Scjessey (
talk)
13:10, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Please stop adding these to election articles. They are completely unnecessary because the article is about the election, and the one you keep adding to the Austrian article is doubly redundant because the information in it is already in the results table (in a more precise format - i.e. the exact number rather than saying "about 6.4 million"). Per BRD, please discuss rather than keep adding it (I think so far you've tried to do it four times). Number 5 7 20:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
The IPO section was trimmed because it is basically a rehash of news coverage which is unencyclopedic WP:RECENTISM. There is also a large element of WP:CRYSTAL and the quote from Darren Chervitz is totally unnecessary speculation. This should not have been re-added without an explanation on the talk page, see WP:BRD.-- ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
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) 11:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
If you add something to an article and another editor removes it, the onus is on you to seek consensus to get it added into the article. I am getting very tired of you trying to force rules like BRD and "seek consensus" on others, but then completely ignoring them when it comes to you doing what you want. If you revert again at the Austrian election article, it will result in a report for tenditious editing. Number 5 7 16:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Lihaas, there's a dab cleanup template which can be used instead of this sort of edit. What's your concern with those entries? Cheers Widefox; talk 14:13, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:
The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 23:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of terrorist incidents, July–December 2013, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rawa ( 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) 12:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Please don't use male pronouns here, there has been a strong consensus to use female pronouns in the article. The article is under Sexology discretionary sanctions, so it's good to be extra careful when editing it. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Please read the closing rationale. The reasons you cite are covered under NTEMP; regardless of your personal beliefs, this is a matter of policy. Multiple reliable sources have covered the subject extensively, and that is enough to establish notability.
Also, next time, don't revert an AFD closure without talking to the closer first. Best, m.o.p 13:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Disagree it was speedy ckeep. In 1 day alone there was 2-5 indicating opposition. That is not speedy keep as it is not unanimous. AFD's stay for a week unless overwhelming. Not to mention the "speedy keep" "vote" came for an admin who is invovled at ITN. And what then was the reason for speedy keep? Lihaas ( talk) 13:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
No apology necessary. I've just seen that referenced twice now, so I was curious as to where the accusation was coming from. m.o.p 17:00, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
The article is now linked from the Main Page. That is a valid reason for a speedy keep. Before starting the deletion process again, the link from the main page should first be removed--please see WP:ERRORS. — rybec 18:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
by The Interior ( talk · contribs), Ocaasi ( talk · contribs)
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. -- The Interior 20:02, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of terrorist incidents, July–December 2013 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terrorist incidents, July–December 2013 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 notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 13:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
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) 12:08, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
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) 20:20, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
What addition? It's not on my watchlist atm. Number 5 7 20:20, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Check out this notice. RashersTierney ( talk) 23:01, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2118 at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
BlueMoonset (
talk)
17:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
I have again reverted your recent "Issues" edit to Black people. It's completely out of place in the article and is poorly sourced. If you want to have something of that nature incorported into the article then please discuss it on the article talk page, don't just WP:Edit War. Tobus2 ( talk) 01:34, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
When you get a moment can you give your approval here, so we can call the issue “resolved” – Many Thanks FOX 52 ( talk) 05:42, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Wikimedia Community User Group Pakistan | ||
---|---|---|
Hi Lihaas! We are currently in the process of establishing a User Group for Pakistani Wikimedians with the following objectives;
As an approved User Group, we will be recognised by the Wikimedia Foundation and officially supported by the Wikimedia movement. If you reside in Pakistan or actively work on Pakistan-related topics and can help in functional activities of the Pakistani User Group, please join the official planning group mailing list. For more details about the proposed user group, please visit the official page at http://pk.wikimedia.org. |
You are receiving this message because you are a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan. This message was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 17:27, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
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) 09:30, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Acather96 ( click here to contact me) 18:42, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2118 at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
BlueMoonset (
talk)
16:53, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2011 Cricket World Cup Semifinal: India v Pakistan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011 Cricket World Cup Semifinal: India v Pakistan 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 notice from the top of the article. – Pee Jay 01:18, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
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) 09:13, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 17:28, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
At the time when the 10 soldiers were reported wounded no soldiers were reported killed (read source), so it could be said that the three who died were among the 10 initially reported wounded. Than its 7 wounded, most certainly not 13. It would be 13 if it was first reported three died than later that 10 were still wounded. In any case we simply cann't know and its not up to us to speculate, we edit per what the sources say. EkoGraf ( talk) 17:10, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
For you work on the article Westgate shopping mall shooting, I give you this barnstar! -- L o g X 18:45, 24 September 2013 (UTC) |
Hey, Linaas. I was wondering if you could undo my actions and restore your original note. This is what I am referring to. I thought they were referring to the CBS Evening News episode for today instead of the morning news. --Sorry for the inconvenience, Super Goku V ( talk) 01:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
I didn't like this. -- John ( talk) 22:04, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Insteaf od partakin gin discussion since I last posted on your waqll (and I havent edited the part in question since then), the user has now insisted on refuting discussion based consensus and goes to ANI. What are we supposed to do if discussion are not followed and this is legitimised/? GHow do I even try to generate a dsicssuion if it is dismissed in favour of such wars without consensus?( Lihaas ( talk) 10:51, 26 September 2013 (UTC)).
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 02:42, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Edi Rama may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 17:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give
MILF (disambiguation) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "
cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the
page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. GB fan 22:14, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Foreign relations of Qatar may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:38, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
General debate of the sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:41, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
General debate of the sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:48, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Moana Carcasses Kalosil may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:55, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Irish constitutional referendums, 2013 may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 18:34, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
General debate of the sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:07, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Typos aside, kindly explain what you mean by "wrong reflinks, one is thre with more data per consistency". Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 13:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
No offence, but I see absolutely no point in including "The sixty-seventh session of the United Nations General Assembly" written in all or any of the official languages in the UN – just too much clutter. If you can't be bothered to place the translations, using this comment (<!--official langauges needed--> ) isn't likely to get others to do it for you either. ;-) -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 14:41, 28 September 2013 (UTC)<ref>Charbonneau, Louis. (8 June 2012) [http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/06/08/uk-un-serbia-idUKBRE8570V520120608 Bitter fight for U.N. post ends with Serbian victory | Reuters]. Uk.reuters.com.
WP uses official languages for such topics, I dont know the official translation so I left th enote for OTEHR editors since WP is colloborative.( Lihaas ( talk) 14:55, 28 September 2013 (UTC)).
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eleventh hour ( 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) 11:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Lihaas, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of 2013 Mumbai building collapse, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 15:50, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
If I see you change "Results" to "Result" again, I'm afraid it will result in a report for tenditious editing. We've been through this several times before. This is before we get onto the issue of blind reverts. Number 5 7 21:34, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Twice today you have used CSD in a blatantly inappropriate matter. Once you have misused the notability tag. Please end you pointy disruption. Ryan Vesey 00:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at United States federal government shutdown of 2013 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 00:43, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
APEC Indonesia 2013 may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:04, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate
your contributions, including your edits to
Barack Obama, but we cannot accept
original research. Original research also encompasses
combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a
reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you.
Scjessey (
talk)
13:10, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Please stop adding these to election articles. They are completely unnecessary because the article is about the election, and the one you keep adding to the Austrian article is doubly redundant because the information in it is already in the results table (in a more precise format - i.e. the exact number rather than saying "about 6.4 million"). Per BRD, please discuss rather than keep adding it (I think so far you've tried to do it four times). Number 5 7 20:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
The IPO section was trimmed because it is basically a rehash of news coverage which is unencyclopedic WP:RECENTISM. There is also a large element of WP:CRYSTAL and the quote from Darren Chervitz is totally unnecessary speculation. This should not have been re-added without an explanation on the talk page, see WP:BRD.-- ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
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) 11:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
If you add something to an article and another editor removes it, the onus is on you to seek consensus to get it added into the article. I am getting very tired of you trying to force rules like BRD and "seek consensus" on others, but then completely ignoring them when it comes to you doing what you want. If you revert again at the Austrian election article, it will result in a report for tenditious editing. Number 5 7 16:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Lihaas, there's a dab cleanup template which can be used instead of this sort of edit. What's your concern with those entries? Cheers Widefox; talk 14:13, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:
The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 23:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of terrorist incidents, July–December 2013, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rawa ( 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) 12:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Please don't use male pronouns here, there has been a strong consensus to use female pronouns in the article. The article is under Sexology discretionary sanctions, so it's good to be extra careful when editing it. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Please read the closing rationale. The reasons you cite are covered under NTEMP; regardless of your personal beliefs, this is a matter of policy. Multiple reliable sources have covered the subject extensively, and that is enough to establish notability.
Also, next time, don't revert an AFD closure without talking to the closer first. Best, m.o.p 13:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Disagree it was speedy ckeep. In 1 day alone there was 2-5 indicating opposition. That is not speedy keep as it is not unanimous. AFD's stay for a week unless overwhelming. Not to mention the "speedy keep" "vote" came for an admin who is invovled at ITN. And what then was the reason for speedy keep? Lihaas ( talk) 13:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
No apology necessary. I've just seen that referenced twice now, so I was curious as to where the accusation was coming from. m.o.p 17:00, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
The article is now linked from the Main Page. That is a valid reason for a speedy keep. Before starting the deletion process again, the link from the main page should first be removed--please see WP:ERRORS. — rybec 18:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
by The Interior ( talk · contribs), Ocaasi ( talk · contribs)
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. -- The Interior 20:02, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of terrorist incidents, July–December 2013 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terrorist incidents, July–December 2013 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 notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 13:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
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) 12:08, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
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) 20:20, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
What addition? It's not on my watchlist atm. Number 5 7 20:20, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Check out this notice. RashersTierney ( talk) 23:01, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2118 at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
BlueMoonset (
talk)
17:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
I have again reverted your recent "Issues" edit to Black people. It's completely out of place in the article and is poorly sourced. If you want to have something of that nature incorported into the article then please discuss it on the article talk page, don't just WP:Edit War. Tobus2 ( talk) 01:34, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
When you get a moment can you give your approval here, so we can call the issue “resolved” – Many Thanks FOX 52 ( talk) 05:42, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Wikimedia Community User Group Pakistan | ||
---|---|---|
Hi Lihaas! We are currently in the process of establishing a User Group for Pakistani Wikimedians with the following objectives;
As an approved User Group, we will be recognised by the Wikimedia Foundation and officially supported by the Wikimedia movement. If you reside in Pakistan or actively work on Pakistan-related topics and can help in functional activities of the Pakistani User Group, please join the official planning group mailing list. For more details about the proposed user group, please visit the official page at http://pk.wikimedia.org. |
You are receiving this message because you are a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan. This message was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 17:27, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
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) 09:30, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Acather96 ( click here to contact me) 18:42, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2118 at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
BlueMoonset (
talk)
16:53, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2011 Cricket World Cup Semifinal: India v Pakistan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011 Cricket World Cup Semifinal: India v Pakistan 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 notice from the top of the article. – Pee Jay 01:18, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
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) 09:13, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 17:28, 19 November 2013 (UTC)