![]() | 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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
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) 01:18, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to add
defamatory content, as you did at
WP:ITNC, you may be
blocked from editing.
Calidum
Talk To Me
20:49, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
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) 23:30, 25 September 2014 (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, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Stumbled here via the ITN South Sudan article, just in case you want to know.
Anyway, I see you're a Wiki Fairy, and wondered if you'd like to wave your magic wand over an article I just created: San Vito (Costa Rica). If that's too much to ask in your state of semi-retirement, I'll completely understand. I'll watch here.
Buenas, Awien ( talk) 21:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello. How do you edit the "top" of an article, such as the intro only, as you have done in this edit? Much thanks. Pristino ( talk) 13:56, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, and
welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an
edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at
2014 in LGBT rights. Although repeatedly
reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the
normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a
consensus on the
talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you.
Please consider Dispute resolution if you are unable to win consensus on the article's talk page. I think you should stick with the talk page and stop reverting. What are you going to accomplish by reverting over and over? Where does that end? Other editors have discussed this and they agree the NFL event should be included here, and your defintion of "list of rights" is not what this article is supposed to be. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 03:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
2014 in LGBT rights. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Dennis Bratland ( talk) 03:04, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Besides me, TWO more editors have come along and told you that "2014 in LGBT rights" is not the same as "a list of rights". Two others, besides me, have told you that this list, and all the other similar lists, are events IN LGBT rights. "In" means "related to". Pertaining to. Connected with. Not simply a list of rights. Wikipedia operates by consensus and the consensus is against you. This is simple English. You need to seek dispute resolution so more editors can explain basic English to you. I'm sorry but you don't understand the title or the intro of this article. Seek more editors. They will help you understand. --
Dennis Bratland (
talk)
03:09, 7 October 2014 (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) 09:26, 8 October 2014 (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) 09:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I started a talk page discussion on the topic. Your input will be welcome. Abecedare ( talk) 20:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Haryana Legislative Assembly election, 2014, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Democratic Alliance. 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) 09:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
The thing I'd ask you to take notice of is that the article about honorary Canadian citizenship is located at the "honorary" spelling, whereas the honourary Canadian citizenship spelling is a redlink. You're certainly free to propose that we move the article to the other spelling on ENGVAR grounds, but in the meantime it needs to link to the spelling that actually links to the intended article rather than the one that just links nowhere. Bearcat ( talk) 01:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Imangali Tasmagambetov may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:07, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
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) 23:41, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Just made a brief update. I don't think it requires a substantial change to the lede as the rhetoric is currently far less intense than it was in 2010 or early 2013. It's not been in the news much, but according to datastream, China actually spent $100Bn of its reserves these last 3 months, effectively cooperating with the downwards pressure Japanease and Euro authorities are putting on their own currencies. US has been increasing its exports despite the $ appreciation , and it seems unlikely it will push back much at Euro/Japan given the Russia situation. So I'll leave any further rewriting to you for now.
My wiki times mostly going on researching a rewrite to Technological unemployment. Rather challenging and once Im done I'll give you a ping, as if you have the time some attention from someone with your global perspective would be much appreciated. Great to see you're still around, and hope all is going well for you. FeydHuxtable ( talk) 12:53, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
I saw that you added some SEA countries. You know there is a section for SEA, right? Or did you mean to put those countries in a different section? Thanks, I was just wondering. Supersaiyen312 ( talk) 10:17, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Oops, I guess that I misread it. My bad. Supersaiyen312 ( talk) 21:52, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Reflinks isn't the only way that it's possible for a reference to be converted to the template, because it's also possible and in fact quite easy to manually convert a reference from one format to another — and as valuable as consistency of reference formatting may be, it's ultimately far more important that the required citation details (title, name of publication, date) be present than it is that every single citation in an entire article is using the same template for formatting. So it's not necessary or appropriate to convert a reference back to a bare URL format pending somebody else reconverting it back to the templated citenews format — if a reference isn't in the citenews format but does have the key citation details provided, then you should either directly convert it by manually cutting and pasting the details into the citenews template, or leave it alone until somebody else does that for you, rather than reverting it back to a bare URL. Bearcat ( talk) 23:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Foreign rebel fighters in the Syrian Civil War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khmer. 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) 14:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I tried to explain the meaning of the text to you in the edit summaries, but in case you're not reading them, the "then-president" refers to the fact that he was president at the time of the constitutional changes in 2000 - it is not in any way related to his current status as president (as far as I am aware, he still is). Hope this clarifies. Cheers, Number 5 7 19:33, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello Lihaas, and thank you for your message. I was actually planning on waiting until things had cooled down to reach out to you, so this is a good sign that we both want to put a stop to this.
What I was going to say is that I suggest we reach agreement on certain things with regards to election articles. I really appreciate your additions to election articles - not many other people edit election articles for the smaller countries, so any additional content is more than welcome.
Many of our disagreements are about relatively trivial things, particularly headings, and this is something I would really like to stop arguing about. I now work almost exclusively on election articles these days, and having created most of the "missing" articles, one of my main goals at the moment is to try and get some consistency across all of them. For other WikiProjects I am part of (e.g. the football one), there is a clear Manual of Style for different types of articles (e.g. clubs, players etc). However, possibly due to the low number of people editing election articles (and some ownership problems by editors who only edit articles on their own country's election), there has never been something similar for election articles.
Some time ago I drafted a proposed manual of style for election articles, based on what I saw was the general layout of longer articles (I usually create very basic articles with only the results and sometimes the electoral system). I think the first thing to note about this list of headings is that it is not my work - I came relatively late to the election sphere (a couple of years after I started editing). By this time, the style was already in place, so I merely adopted what was already there. The only thing that I think might have been my idea was the "Conduct" heading - I had seen various ways of putting this (Election Observers, Observers, Voting issues etc), but as I pointed out in an earlier comment on your talk page, this does seem to be the most appropriate catch-all term for a heading.
Perhaps as a start, we can agree on this list of heading for election articles - that would take away one of our main areas of disagreement and hopefully allow us to interact more positively. Number 5 7 17:30, 3 November 2014 (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) 16:21, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
List of country-name etymologies 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Nariman House 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 01:38, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
On Abdul Hamid (soldier) and Sandeep Unnikrishnan, while removing POV language, you also removed the official citations as released by the government of india.
Much like Medal of Honor citations for Dakota Meyer and Ryan Pitts, these are direct quotes of the entire citation. Please do not remove them without seeking consensus on talk page. Myopia123 ( talk) 02:04, 12 November 2014 (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) 09:34, 14 November 2014 (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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
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) 01:18, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to add
defamatory content, as you did at
WP:ITNC, you may be
blocked from editing.
Calidum
Talk To Me
20:49, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
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) 23:30, 25 September 2014 (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, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Stumbled here via the ITN South Sudan article, just in case you want to know.
Anyway, I see you're a Wiki Fairy, and wondered if you'd like to wave your magic wand over an article I just created: San Vito (Costa Rica). If that's too much to ask in your state of semi-retirement, I'll completely understand. I'll watch here.
Buenas, Awien ( talk) 21:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello. How do you edit the "top" of an article, such as the intro only, as you have done in this edit? Much thanks. Pristino ( talk) 13:56, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, and
welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an
edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at
2014 in LGBT rights. Although repeatedly
reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the
normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a
consensus on the
talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you.
Please consider Dispute resolution if you are unable to win consensus on the article's talk page. I think you should stick with the talk page and stop reverting. What are you going to accomplish by reverting over and over? Where does that end? Other editors have discussed this and they agree the NFL event should be included here, and your defintion of "list of rights" is not what this article is supposed to be. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 03:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
2014 in LGBT rights. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Dennis Bratland ( talk) 03:04, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Besides me, TWO more editors have come along and told you that "2014 in LGBT rights" is not the same as "a list of rights". Two others, besides me, have told you that this list, and all the other similar lists, are events IN LGBT rights. "In" means "related to". Pertaining to. Connected with. Not simply a list of rights. Wikipedia operates by consensus and the consensus is against you. This is simple English. You need to seek dispute resolution so more editors can explain basic English to you. I'm sorry but you don't understand the title or the intro of this article. Seek more editors. They will help you understand. --
Dennis Bratland (
talk)
03:09, 7 October 2014 (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) 09:26, 8 October 2014 (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) 09:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I started a talk page discussion on the topic. Your input will be welcome. Abecedare ( talk) 20:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Haryana Legislative Assembly election, 2014, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Democratic Alliance. 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) 09:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
The thing I'd ask you to take notice of is that the article about honorary Canadian citizenship is located at the "honorary" spelling, whereas the honourary Canadian citizenship spelling is a redlink. You're certainly free to propose that we move the article to the other spelling on ENGVAR grounds, but in the meantime it needs to link to the spelling that actually links to the intended article rather than the one that just links nowhere. Bearcat ( talk) 01:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Imangali Tasmagambetov may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:07, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
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) 23:41, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Just made a brief update. I don't think it requires a substantial change to the lede as the rhetoric is currently far less intense than it was in 2010 or early 2013. It's not been in the news much, but according to datastream, China actually spent $100Bn of its reserves these last 3 months, effectively cooperating with the downwards pressure Japanease and Euro authorities are putting on their own currencies. US has been increasing its exports despite the $ appreciation , and it seems unlikely it will push back much at Euro/Japan given the Russia situation. So I'll leave any further rewriting to you for now.
My wiki times mostly going on researching a rewrite to Technological unemployment. Rather challenging and once Im done I'll give you a ping, as if you have the time some attention from someone with your global perspective would be much appreciated. Great to see you're still around, and hope all is going well for you. FeydHuxtable ( talk) 12:53, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
I saw that you added some SEA countries. You know there is a section for SEA, right? Or did you mean to put those countries in a different section? Thanks, I was just wondering. Supersaiyen312 ( talk) 10:17, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Oops, I guess that I misread it. My bad. Supersaiyen312 ( talk) 21:52, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Reflinks isn't the only way that it's possible for a reference to be converted to the template, because it's also possible and in fact quite easy to manually convert a reference from one format to another — and as valuable as consistency of reference formatting may be, it's ultimately far more important that the required citation details (title, name of publication, date) be present than it is that every single citation in an entire article is using the same template for formatting. So it's not necessary or appropriate to convert a reference back to a bare URL format pending somebody else reconverting it back to the templated citenews format — if a reference isn't in the citenews format but does have the key citation details provided, then you should either directly convert it by manually cutting and pasting the details into the citenews template, or leave it alone until somebody else does that for you, rather than reverting it back to a bare URL. Bearcat ( talk) 23:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Foreign rebel fighters in the Syrian Civil War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khmer. 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) 14:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I tried to explain the meaning of the text to you in the edit summaries, but in case you're not reading them, the "then-president" refers to the fact that he was president at the time of the constitutional changes in 2000 - it is not in any way related to his current status as president (as far as I am aware, he still is). Hope this clarifies. Cheers, Number 5 7 19:33, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello Lihaas, and thank you for your message. I was actually planning on waiting until things had cooled down to reach out to you, so this is a good sign that we both want to put a stop to this.
What I was going to say is that I suggest we reach agreement on certain things with regards to election articles. I really appreciate your additions to election articles - not many other people edit election articles for the smaller countries, so any additional content is more than welcome.
Many of our disagreements are about relatively trivial things, particularly headings, and this is something I would really like to stop arguing about. I now work almost exclusively on election articles these days, and having created most of the "missing" articles, one of my main goals at the moment is to try and get some consistency across all of them. For other WikiProjects I am part of (e.g. the football one), there is a clear Manual of Style for different types of articles (e.g. clubs, players etc). However, possibly due to the low number of people editing election articles (and some ownership problems by editors who only edit articles on their own country's election), there has never been something similar for election articles.
Some time ago I drafted a proposed manual of style for election articles, based on what I saw was the general layout of longer articles (I usually create very basic articles with only the results and sometimes the electoral system). I think the first thing to note about this list of headings is that it is not my work - I came relatively late to the election sphere (a couple of years after I started editing). By this time, the style was already in place, so I merely adopted what was already there. The only thing that I think might have been my idea was the "Conduct" heading - I had seen various ways of putting this (Election Observers, Observers, Voting issues etc), but as I pointed out in an earlier comment on your talk page, this does seem to be the most appropriate catch-all term for a heading.
Perhaps as a start, we can agree on this list of heading for election articles - that would take away one of our main areas of disagreement and hopefully allow us to interact more positively. Number 5 7 17:30, 3 November 2014 (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) 16:21, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
List of country-name etymologies 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Nariman House 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 01:38, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
On Abdul Hamid (soldier) and Sandeep Unnikrishnan, while removing POV language, you also removed the official citations as released by the government of india.
Much like Medal of Honor citations for Dakota Meyer and Ryan Pitts, these are direct quotes of the entire citation. Please do not remove them without seeking consensus on talk page. Myopia123 ( talk) 02:04, 12 November 2014 (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) 09:34, 14 November 2014 (UTC)