![]() | 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. |
Hi Mps1992 - The information that you cut from Dylan Wruck's profile was forwarded from wikiwand-dylan Wruck and can be referenced from the wikiwand cite. Also information can be referenced from the Saskatchewan Hockey Association cite as well as Hockey Canada 2009 U17 world tournament cite. So Information that you cut is from a second source in which you are looking. So infact the information was added from a referenced source and is accurate. So could you please put back what you cut. Thank -you
![]() |
Hi MPS1992! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Worm That Turned ( I'm a Teahouse host) This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot ( talk) 17:24, 22 November 2015 (UTC) |
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Link 22, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Compatibility. 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) 09:03, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grant Shapps, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bingo. Such links are almost always ujdnxnxxkxbdkdhnintended, 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) 09:27, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello, MPS1992, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Justice007 ( talk) 10:42, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
It's very nice of you. Thank you ( Mona778 ( talk) 22:24, 18 January 2016 (UTC))
![]() |
Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award |
Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:53, 1 February 2016 (UTC) |
![]() |
Brianhe RfA Appreciation award |
Thank you for participating at my RfA. Your support was very much appreciated even if I did get a bit scorched. Brianhe ( talk) 07:59, 6 February 2016 (UTC) |
Hi,
Thank you for being so handy. You are such a blessing and understand so much. But regarding Commons, no, They don't have different rules. I checked it myself, exactly the same rules applies there as they do in Wiki English. [1] "Can I do whatever I want to my own user talk page? Most users treat their user talk pages like regular talk pages, and archive the contents periodically to a personal subpage -- either when the page gets too large, on a regular schedule, or when they take a wikivacation. Others delete comments after they have responded to them." But I wonder, can we ask an administrator from Wiki English who is also in charge at Commons to intervene? Since we have a decision in our favor from the noticeboard/Incident?--- Thanks again, and god bless You dear. ( Mona778 ( talk) 04:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC))
Hi Thibaut, I'm Taichi from Spanish Wikipedia. I'm notifying you about the constant blankings from the user Mona778, in his archive, including a message sending by you few days ago. The user believes that blanking all the messages is OK in Commons, but I don't find any policy or rule that permits the blanking as "courtesy". If I'm wrong please tell me, because the user persists about blanking all the messages. Thanks. --Taichi (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2016 (UTC) I'm really fed up of these people, please do something about these provocations, and harassments.---Thank You ( Mona778 ( talk) 03:27, 6 February 2016 (UTC))
( Mona778 ( talk) 21:13, 6 February 2016 (UTC))
Turkey? All this inter language confusion is very strange.
I said, "Do you speak my language?"
But he just smiled and gave me a Vegemite sandwich
- Down Under (song), audio at File:Down Under by Men at Work.ogg
MPS1992 ( talk) 18:18, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Craig Harrison (sniper), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dog handlers. 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) 12:42, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Dear MPS1992, Thanks for your input on Administration notice board/incidents, it's greatly appreciated. I closed my user page account at their project couple of days ago as I said I will do [6], and as long as those people are in charge there I will stay away from that project. Therefore, I hope that finally they will leave me alone and move on! With regards, ( Mona778 ( talk) 19:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC))
Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia. I recently posted a short article on the NSA page, but it got taken down. The message I recieved made it sound like I was just making an experimental edit. I was wondering what I did wrong in the process of uploading my article. September5453 ( talk) 05:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello. In response to this [7], I found an example. Here: [8].
On the 15th of October I user the following ip address: 94.253.23.60 . On the next day I used: 194.152.253.49 when I was editing via cell phone. You can see what the admin had said: "Now we have an IP-hopping editor from 194.152.*...This is considered abuse of multiple accounts". I replied: "EdJohnston, if you didn't notice, all my posts today are done over mobile editing, thus not surprising my Ip is changing..." but nothing had changed.
Best regards. PS my ip is again changed from 141..to 89..and I had not changed it myself. IPs are changed by some ISPs more often. If you turn off/on your router you will get another ip assigned (at least I am). If you have a bridge connection, you can change ip in an instant by disconnecting and connecting. Mobile users have their ip changed very often. Also you can do it yourself by turning off/on mobile data. 89.164.142.196 ( talk) 19:13, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Had you looked at the case. I'm interested in your opinion on the matter. I don't know if you noticed but the RfC on the talk page that was in the 3RR report was closed by a random editor who had closed because he had disagreed with it. Then I tried to revert that and that had led to the referenced report. I really couldn't do anything although I had only tried to introduce a source to the article. There are no sources opposing it and there are really no valid opposition apart from nationalistic stand on the matter. That's the worst situation to edit as an ip. In that case one side often prevails and builds a fort. Anyways, seems you are more interested in the cases I actually got banned without any report and without any misdeed apart from the accusation that I'm a sock, so here: [9]. It's quite long but to sum it up: User Shokatz started a discussion. FkpCascais was extremely hostile to him and even tried to ban him which caused him to leave that discussion. I took part and FkpCascais immediately started to get rid of me as well by accusing me to be a sock. He often called admin HighInBC to block my ip. That was done without any report or any cause on my side. I hadn't done anything wrong apart from disagreeing with FkpCascais. No other editors apart from him had any complaints against me. Not only that but it was me who managed to bring arguments and sources to close the RfC. It was even formally closed by an experienced editor according to what I had brought to the table. I can say that was extremely hard with my posts being deleted and me getting blocked for no reason. What I'm trying to say is that any IP can be accused to be a sock and with an admin on your side you can block him with no report, no questions asked. I tried to complain so I reported that admin but that was, of course, futile. I tried to insist that by behavior is exemplary but that was not enough. I was blocked only because of those 2, although I was always discussing in good faith following every rule that there is. Notice that no other editors in that discussion had any problems with me. Not only that but they agreed with me and my sources and arguments. You can even see that one editor had changed own opinion on the subject matter because of my arguments. So with an exemplary editing I was blocked with no report. I guess I can't be editing with an exemplary behavior because someone living in my region was disruptive by using the same IP which is assigned to majority of computers in that general area. My only misdeed was using proxies when I got blocked for no reason, but I'm not sorry since I managed to bring that RfC to other editors who then took over and agreed with me. Without me being persistent and them noticing I really couldn't have done anything as an ip. Sorry if this is too much for you, but you seemed interested. I'll understand. 141.138.22.141 ( talk) 00:03, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
still not done with the FAC and also some other important discussion MPS1992 ( talk) 21:45, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for taking so long to look at this. I have started looking. Only started. And it is still a mess. I have begun at the top. But do not worry, I will get to everything in the end.
So, where there is edit-warring then unregistered editors (including you) have one small advantage and one major disadvantage.
The small advantage is that if you revert twice with two different IP addresses, maybe the two reverts will not be connected and no-one will complain. Admittedly this is not much of an advantage because registered editors can also revert at least twice, and sometimes three times, without action being taken against them.
The major disadvantage is that when there is edit-warring happening, or even a suspicion of it, then unregistered editors cannot be "measured" in the same way that registered editors can. Registered editors can be told not to revert more than three times (but also can be blocked for less), and on some articles they are restricted to one not three. Because some unregistered editors change IP address frequently, the same structure does not work for them and therefore the easy thing to do is to semi-protect the page so that only editors with identifiers that do not change can edit.
Is this unfair? I suggest that it is not unfair, it is just necessary to keep things under control.
For this particular instance, if you had been a registered editor (and using the same account each time) then User:EdJohnston would of course have had no reason to suggest "abuse of multiple accounts". I would also like to suggest that, if you had prefixed every single comment or edit summary by saying "same person as the 141 ip above" or something equivalent, then EdJohnston would in fact not have suggested that there was abuse of multiple accounts. Whether it is fair for ordinary Wikipedia practice to put such a burden on unregistered editors, I do not know - I guess it depends on arguments about whether it is reasonable to expect people to register in order to participate in heated disputes, when there are supposedly no disadvantages to registration.
Those are my thoughts on your first example, but not on the contents of the dispute itself or who should have closed what -- I guess I will look at that aspect of it later. MPS1992 ( talk) 00:38, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Cheers for such a detailed reading and the many copyedits. I'm a bit embarrassed that I didn't know what a split infinitive is, but will survive. Ceoil ( talk) 19:24, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
As you are an univolved party. A non admin action can be defended here as it clearly is consensus to close and proceed to Arbcom. There is no clear support for an indef block. Irondome ( talk) 21:32, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
MPS1992, are you still contesting the close? 173.228.123.194 ( talk) 23:38, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi I was talking about removal of my comments. Please make your comment here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arman ad60 ( talk • contribs) 19:05, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 22, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Mona778 (
talk) has given you a
Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{ subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. |
No, It's not about those. But I can't tell you now, because I'm really tired and need to sleep. Tomorrow I'll tell you about it in detail. So for now, have a good night, and thanks for your prompt response. ( Mona778 ( talk) 04:05, 9 April 2016 (UTC))
Hello again, Neither. It's about a rough attitude yesterday at Commons, that did really hurt my feelings. I mean, I tried to be nice, but instead all I've got was a slap by a rude User! ( Mona778 ( talk) 13:45, 9 April 2016 (UTC))
I think Commons is a no-go zone for women! Especially the young and fragile one. ( Mona778 ( talk) 13:59, 9 April 2016 (UTC))
No problem. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. ( Mona778 ( talk) 20:54, 12 April 2016 (UTC))
![]() |
I think after "that talkpage" perlava we both need a drink or 5!
![]() I've noticed on more than one occasion I've had a go at you and so I apologize if I have in any way upset or offended you - It's never my intention to offend or upset anyone (well except the trolls lol), |
![]() |
My unending gratitude for your support and kindness.-- Mona778 ( talk) 18:21, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
I've restored the thread, as I explicitly advised him to take it to ANI if he wasn't happy so it seems a little unfair to him to send him on a wild-goose-chase. If he wants to make an allegation of admin abuse ANI is the place to go, unless you want to inflict Arbcom on him; just because I think it's groundless doesn't mean the grievance isn't genuine to him. ‑ Iridescent 20:41, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
I saw a while back you had posted a query about the issue on which you based your removal of that text to the BLP noticeboard. No one seems to have responded. So you chose to act unilaterally.
I understand that BLP supports this kind of boldness, but nonetheless I think you should have tried harder to get some sort of consensus, perhaps posting on the article talk page before you made that edit?
In any case, your query was really one that should have been taken to WP:RSN, since you were wondering about whether The Lantern, Ohio State's student newspaper, is a sufficiently reliable source. If you'd like, we can take it up there, since by extension we would be considering this question for all college student newspapers.
Personally, I feel that general-interest student newspapers on major North American college campuses meet our definition of reliable sources. They are subject to editorial oversight, often have lawyers on retainer and generally have the same self-imposed constraints in favor of accurate reporting that real-world (so to speak) newspapers do. I mean, consider that OSU's student/faculty/staff community comes to about 40,000 people or so, larger than some smaller cities whose daily newspapers we would have no problem considering RSes. This was my grounds for reverting your edit. Daniel Case ( talk) 04:27, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
As for the rest of your critique, though, I see some of your points. I will consider it more carefully when I'm less tired than I am now, and edit the article appropriately. Daniel Case ( talk) 05:48, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
I have tried my level best to improve the article as per your advice. Please have a look and suggest me any further improvements required. Thank You.-- KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 04:51, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
For all the fine work that you have carried out here. Cheers, Nairspecht Converse 09:55, 17 June 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm
Nairspecht. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
HCL Technologies without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Hello! Thanks for your inputs on the page, but would request you to consider the content thoroughly before blanking it. I found that you removed all the awards from the said title, which I understand. Although, some of the awards ARE noteworthy. No worries, since I have edited and polished it since. Cheers,
Nairspecht
Converse
06:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
You are misquoting the article, because it does not say she was "a tireless campaigner". The headline describes her as someone who "campaigned tirelessly", which is slightly different. I have gone to the trouble of taking an actual quote from the piece about her, which should be ok. Please do not add this statement again, because it is misleading. This is Paul ( talk) 13:11, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Good catch here! I'd moved the word but not checked that it should be there at all - well done for doing so! Cheers 82.36.105.25 ( talk) 09:31, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your message on my page. Just a few questions! Some of them have had tags put on them with improvement suggestions. If I don't think these suggestions are sensible can I just remove them ? Also what are the project tags on the talk pages for ? Should I create pages with these tags for categorisation ? RMSN1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rmsn1 ( talk • contribs) 17:25, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
Just to say thank you for your prose edits over at Vladimir Lenin; it's good stuff. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 22:14, 26 June 2016 (UTC) |
![]() |
Thanks for your kind words
here, Quite frankly I've stayed away from that editor as well as the AFD as it's more than trouble than it's worth but anyway thanks for your kind words :), |
You're welcome! If you've got an interest, God knows that history section needs even more... The Warlord Era is such a mess... — LlywelynII 22:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diplomacy |
A belated barnstar for all the help you have given me. Mona778 ( talk) 09:01, 2 August 2016 (UTC) |
... for your appreciation, which I must reciprocate. There should also be a barnstar for obsessive-compulsive... oh, wait a bit; that's me in a nutshell. Haploidavey ( talk) 19:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
I must add this; "verifiable and historically meaningful reality" was particularly pleasant to read. It's exactly what I aim for. Haploidavey ( talk) 19:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, MPS1992.
Bocca di Lupo, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's
Main Page as part of
Did you know
. You can see the hook and the discussion
here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you.
APersonBot (
talk!)
12:02, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Well, your user interface is not friendly at all. I typed 3 times and lost my text till I could publish it the first time. then it got deleted and my original text was not included in your messages. and I had to type it 2 more times, till I found the link to my original text. I was really p***d off. I am trying to give information and improve the site, and they just delete myy work without any reference to it (I thought !) sorry about that.
Anyhow, I had a very bad experience with my stop over in mexico.; I was expecting to go from one gate to another, just as I did in any other international airport, and it's not like that in mexico. they have even damaged myy luggage, opening and searching my stuff without my consent. They did the same to all other nationalities (Venezuela, ...) who needed a visa to mexico, because basically you had to cross the immigration to go in the transit hall to board your next flight.
Please put this information in any fashion you like. And please add this information to all those countries where they are required to have a visa to enter Mexico city. They all will face the same problem. I have witnessed others having problems and arguing with Mexican authorities.
If you don't do this, I have the right to advertise that your website is biased and unfair, and hiding critical information from people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moskovitskaya ( talk • contribs) 19:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello there, I would like to kindly ask you to check an edit I made to an article and give your opinion. Thanks Mona778 ( talk) 19:18, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
How is removing a single, redundant parameter from an image "better wording and other improvements"? Or removing a stray apostrophe and a space "better wording and things"? Also, it might be an idea to tick the minor edit box for such superficial changes in future to reduce watchlist clutter. Joe Roe ( talk) 23:54, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Please see the group's " To do" section. You may work accordingly to ensure group's progress. To unsubscribe, remove your username from the participants list.
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 11:35, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
On 3 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bocca di Lupo, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bocca di Lupo (pictured) serves chocolate pudding with pig's blood? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bocca di Lupo. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Bocca di Lupo), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass ( talk) 00:01, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your edit, MPS, and compliments for the article. As Italian, I am now worried that the owners of the alleged best Italian restaurant in London are not proficient in their own mother tongue... ;-) Cheers, Alex2006 ( talk) 16:45, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Since when two people alone, make a consensus? Editor who inists in changing official name, condradicting given sources says it is. To me it seems his POV. - B.Lameira ( talk) 20:51, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for welcoming me! As you (or the template) correctly surmised, I’ve been around for donkey’s years, indeed for far longer than my first edit, but registered only on nl.wikipedia before that. I don’t think will ever be a regular contributor — at least since 2004 I’ve been looking at discussions here when I noticed problems or curious things going on with articles, and I’ve come off each time with the definite impression that Wikipedia (or at least en.wikipedia) is an unhealthy place for someone with a brain who doesn’t suffer fools gladly. That being said, I sometimes correct some small obvious errors when I see them on stuff I use and know something about, or point out things being lopsided when I’m not quite sure of the best and most correct way to put them right. Otherwise, I direct my energy at places where my specialist knowledge is more relevant, and there are less fools about or more easily dealt with, such as Tolkien Gateway. Mithrennaith ( talk) 03:47, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about the confusing edit summary. :) It should have read "...remove refs. pls see talk..." I'm tired and should take a break. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 23:41, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi - just to say that this is the blocked racist Mikemikev. Doug Weller talk 16:27, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
I found your comment here interesting and thought-provoking. Do you know if there have ever been any formal proposals made related to any suggested mechanisms for administrator accountability? I've always found it odd that we scrutinize the heck out of editors during RFAs, but once someone has the bit, they apparently need to do something incredibly egregious to be held accountable. I think we might have it a bit backwards--perhaps it should be somewhat easier to become an admin but also easier to desysop someone. Once someone is an admin, whether they became one years ago or yesterday, there don't seem to be any formal mechanisms for making sure they are doing a good job. Possible ideas to assuage this issue would be something akin to retention elections, or votes of confidence/no confidence at pre-determined intervals (every two years, say). That way we could ensure that admins retain the confidence of their peers. Anyway, I thought your comment was interesting and could spur a larger dialogue about ways to ensure administrators are formally and regularly held accountable apart from flagrant misuse of their tools. Safehaven86 ( talk) 00:09, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Can you please do something about Agunaghi? They are removing sourced content and pushing nationalistic POV on the articles. The user is an Azerbaijani and he/she is pushing nationalistic POV on the articles Ismail I, Jalil_Mammadguluzadeh and Shusha. They are not even stating why they are removing said phrases, they just keep undoing others reverts. Ninetoyadome ( talk) 20:50, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For your unrelenting contributions to the project. Mona778 ( talk) 00:20, 7 November 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, MPS1992. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
What are the steps to take if an editor rejects academic work in favor for his own opinion on articles? The user also adds content in which citations prove to be falsely attributed. Duqsene ( talk) 12:04, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks for your note. I made the edit to Kelli Ward last August, and it seems someone is trying to remove relevant information. It was already there before said user started reverting. Ideally we could reach a consensus on it, but the user who opposed is not interested in discussing further. I've opened conversation on the talk page, but they have not and probably will not reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.14.99.194 ( talk) 13:50, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I appreciate your contribution to the article on Dubai English Speaking College - being a new editor that I am, I did not realize that some of the content on the page might be considered promotional. I have looked over the NPOV guideline, and revised the article. The problem is - due to the absence of any notes except the template added, I am still unsure whether the article adheres to the standards, so do not wish to remove the template, as my view may be considered biased. I'd appreciate it if you took a couple of minutes to look over the article again, removing the template if you consider the problem to be resolved, or leaving a note on either the article's or mine talk page in case I've missed something. Feel free to delete this message once read. Regards, VB00 ( talk) 12:07, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
![]() | On 9 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Salade niçoise, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the mayor of Nice implored cooks to "never, never, I beg you, include boiled potato or any other boiled vegetable in your salade niçoise"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Salade niçoise. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Schwede 66 00:01, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello: Thank you for your thanks! And thanks for chipping in on the discussion about this at The Banner's talk page. I'm still in the dark over what his/her problem was with this; I can't decide if he didn't understand the explanations, or was deliberately misinterpreting them. Either way, it isn't worth losing sleep over! Anyway, thanks again: Happy editing! Moonraker12 ( talk) 20:03, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
I reverted your change. As far as both the schools project and the Indiana project are concerned (I am a coordinator at WPSCH and an active member at INDIANA), this article does not meet the start criteria. For political geography articles (like settlements and schools), a History section is nearly a must. Now not having any history for a ten year old school may not keep it from being a start (because there isn't any history), this school is over 130 years old. Please keep that in mind when rating school articles. Thanks. John from Idegon ( talk) 02:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Wikimedia India is advocating for release of Images from Indian Army & Indian Air force under Commons Acceptable licenses. Please see the discussion on WMIN's domain. Also share this message among your fellow Wikimedians. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:42, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Indian military history topic area gets its first good topic with the promotion of Field marshal (India) to good topic status today. The topic comprises of three articles including the main article—Field marshal (India), and the two holders of the rank— Sam Manekshaw and Kodandera M. Cariappa. Happy editing. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:38, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi - if some of this is copyright that text needs deleting and rev/deleting as well, which I can do. The editor is spamming this author's self-published material into articles. Doug Weller talk 09:07, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
Drmies (
talk)
22:23, 14 April 2017 (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. |
Hi Mps1992 - The information that you cut from Dylan Wruck's profile was forwarded from wikiwand-dylan Wruck and can be referenced from the wikiwand cite. Also information can be referenced from the Saskatchewan Hockey Association cite as well as Hockey Canada 2009 U17 world tournament cite. So Information that you cut is from a second source in which you are looking. So infact the information was added from a referenced source and is accurate. So could you please put back what you cut. Thank -you
![]() |
Hi MPS1992! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Worm That Turned ( I'm a Teahouse host) This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot ( talk) 17:24, 22 November 2015 (UTC) |
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Link 22, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Compatibility. 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) 09:03, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grant Shapps, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bingo. Such links are almost always ujdnxnxxkxbdkdhnintended, 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) 09:27, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello, MPS1992, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Justice007 ( talk) 10:42, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
It's very nice of you. Thank you ( Mona778 ( talk) 22:24, 18 January 2016 (UTC))
![]() |
Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award |
Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:53, 1 February 2016 (UTC) |
![]() |
Brianhe RfA Appreciation award |
Thank you for participating at my RfA. Your support was very much appreciated even if I did get a bit scorched. Brianhe ( talk) 07:59, 6 February 2016 (UTC) |
Hi,
Thank you for being so handy. You are such a blessing and understand so much. But regarding Commons, no, They don't have different rules. I checked it myself, exactly the same rules applies there as they do in Wiki English. [1] "Can I do whatever I want to my own user talk page? Most users treat their user talk pages like regular talk pages, and archive the contents periodically to a personal subpage -- either when the page gets too large, on a regular schedule, or when they take a wikivacation. Others delete comments after they have responded to them." But I wonder, can we ask an administrator from Wiki English who is also in charge at Commons to intervene? Since we have a decision in our favor from the noticeboard/Incident?--- Thanks again, and god bless You dear. ( Mona778 ( talk) 04:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC))
Hi Thibaut, I'm Taichi from Spanish Wikipedia. I'm notifying you about the constant blankings from the user Mona778, in his archive, including a message sending by you few days ago. The user believes that blanking all the messages is OK in Commons, but I don't find any policy or rule that permits the blanking as "courtesy". If I'm wrong please tell me, because the user persists about blanking all the messages. Thanks. --Taichi (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2016 (UTC) I'm really fed up of these people, please do something about these provocations, and harassments.---Thank You ( Mona778 ( talk) 03:27, 6 February 2016 (UTC))
( Mona778 ( talk) 21:13, 6 February 2016 (UTC))
Turkey? All this inter language confusion is very strange.
I said, "Do you speak my language?"
But he just smiled and gave me a Vegemite sandwich
- Down Under (song), audio at File:Down Under by Men at Work.ogg
MPS1992 ( talk) 18:18, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Craig Harrison (sniper), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dog handlers. 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) 12:42, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Dear MPS1992, Thanks for your input on Administration notice board/incidents, it's greatly appreciated. I closed my user page account at their project couple of days ago as I said I will do [6], and as long as those people are in charge there I will stay away from that project. Therefore, I hope that finally they will leave me alone and move on! With regards, ( Mona778 ( talk) 19:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC))
Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia. I recently posted a short article on the NSA page, but it got taken down. The message I recieved made it sound like I was just making an experimental edit. I was wondering what I did wrong in the process of uploading my article. September5453 ( talk) 05:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello. In response to this [7], I found an example. Here: [8].
On the 15th of October I user the following ip address: 94.253.23.60 . On the next day I used: 194.152.253.49 when I was editing via cell phone. You can see what the admin had said: "Now we have an IP-hopping editor from 194.152.*...This is considered abuse of multiple accounts". I replied: "EdJohnston, if you didn't notice, all my posts today are done over mobile editing, thus not surprising my Ip is changing..." but nothing had changed.
Best regards. PS my ip is again changed from 141..to 89..and I had not changed it myself. IPs are changed by some ISPs more often. If you turn off/on your router you will get another ip assigned (at least I am). If you have a bridge connection, you can change ip in an instant by disconnecting and connecting. Mobile users have their ip changed very often. Also you can do it yourself by turning off/on mobile data. 89.164.142.196 ( talk) 19:13, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Had you looked at the case. I'm interested in your opinion on the matter. I don't know if you noticed but the RfC on the talk page that was in the 3RR report was closed by a random editor who had closed because he had disagreed with it. Then I tried to revert that and that had led to the referenced report. I really couldn't do anything although I had only tried to introduce a source to the article. There are no sources opposing it and there are really no valid opposition apart from nationalistic stand on the matter. That's the worst situation to edit as an ip. In that case one side often prevails and builds a fort. Anyways, seems you are more interested in the cases I actually got banned without any report and without any misdeed apart from the accusation that I'm a sock, so here: [9]. It's quite long but to sum it up: User Shokatz started a discussion. FkpCascais was extremely hostile to him and even tried to ban him which caused him to leave that discussion. I took part and FkpCascais immediately started to get rid of me as well by accusing me to be a sock. He often called admin HighInBC to block my ip. That was done without any report or any cause on my side. I hadn't done anything wrong apart from disagreeing with FkpCascais. No other editors apart from him had any complaints against me. Not only that but it was me who managed to bring arguments and sources to close the RfC. It was even formally closed by an experienced editor according to what I had brought to the table. I can say that was extremely hard with my posts being deleted and me getting blocked for no reason. What I'm trying to say is that any IP can be accused to be a sock and with an admin on your side you can block him with no report, no questions asked. I tried to complain so I reported that admin but that was, of course, futile. I tried to insist that by behavior is exemplary but that was not enough. I was blocked only because of those 2, although I was always discussing in good faith following every rule that there is. Notice that no other editors in that discussion had any problems with me. Not only that but they agreed with me and my sources and arguments. You can even see that one editor had changed own opinion on the subject matter because of my arguments. So with an exemplary editing I was blocked with no report. I guess I can't be editing with an exemplary behavior because someone living in my region was disruptive by using the same IP which is assigned to majority of computers in that general area. My only misdeed was using proxies when I got blocked for no reason, but I'm not sorry since I managed to bring that RfC to other editors who then took over and agreed with me. Without me being persistent and them noticing I really couldn't have done anything as an ip. Sorry if this is too much for you, but you seemed interested. I'll understand. 141.138.22.141 ( talk) 00:03, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
still not done with the FAC and also some other important discussion MPS1992 ( talk) 21:45, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for taking so long to look at this. I have started looking. Only started. And it is still a mess. I have begun at the top. But do not worry, I will get to everything in the end.
So, where there is edit-warring then unregistered editors (including you) have one small advantage and one major disadvantage.
The small advantage is that if you revert twice with two different IP addresses, maybe the two reverts will not be connected and no-one will complain. Admittedly this is not much of an advantage because registered editors can also revert at least twice, and sometimes three times, without action being taken against them.
The major disadvantage is that when there is edit-warring happening, or even a suspicion of it, then unregistered editors cannot be "measured" in the same way that registered editors can. Registered editors can be told not to revert more than three times (but also can be blocked for less), and on some articles they are restricted to one not three. Because some unregistered editors change IP address frequently, the same structure does not work for them and therefore the easy thing to do is to semi-protect the page so that only editors with identifiers that do not change can edit.
Is this unfair? I suggest that it is not unfair, it is just necessary to keep things under control.
For this particular instance, if you had been a registered editor (and using the same account each time) then User:EdJohnston would of course have had no reason to suggest "abuse of multiple accounts". I would also like to suggest that, if you had prefixed every single comment or edit summary by saying "same person as the 141 ip above" or something equivalent, then EdJohnston would in fact not have suggested that there was abuse of multiple accounts. Whether it is fair for ordinary Wikipedia practice to put such a burden on unregistered editors, I do not know - I guess it depends on arguments about whether it is reasonable to expect people to register in order to participate in heated disputes, when there are supposedly no disadvantages to registration.
Those are my thoughts on your first example, but not on the contents of the dispute itself or who should have closed what -- I guess I will look at that aspect of it later. MPS1992 ( talk) 00:38, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Cheers for such a detailed reading and the many copyedits. I'm a bit embarrassed that I didn't know what a split infinitive is, but will survive. Ceoil ( talk) 19:24, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
As you are an univolved party. A non admin action can be defended here as it clearly is consensus to close and proceed to Arbcom. There is no clear support for an indef block. Irondome ( talk) 21:32, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
MPS1992, are you still contesting the close? 173.228.123.194 ( talk) 23:38, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi I was talking about removal of my comments. Please make your comment here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arman ad60 ( talk • contribs) 19:05, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 22, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Mona778 (
talk) has given you a
Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{ subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. |
No, It's not about those. But I can't tell you now, because I'm really tired and need to sleep. Tomorrow I'll tell you about it in detail. So for now, have a good night, and thanks for your prompt response. ( Mona778 ( talk) 04:05, 9 April 2016 (UTC))
Hello again, Neither. It's about a rough attitude yesterday at Commons, that did really hurt my feelings. I mean, I tried to be nice, but instead all I've got was a slap by a rude User! ( Mona778 ( talk) 13:45, 9 April 2016 (UTC))
I think Commons is a no-go zone for women! Especially the young and fragile one. ( Mona778 ( talk) 13:59, 9 April 2016 (UTC))
No problem. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. ( Mona778 ( talk) 20:54, 12 April 2016 (UTC))
![]() |
I think after "that talkpage" perlava we both need a drink or 5!
![]() I've noticed on more than one occasion I've had a go at you and so I apologize if I have in any way upset or offended you - It's never my intention to offend or upset anyone (well except the trolls lol), |
![]() |
My unending gratitude for your support and kindness.-- Mona778 ( talk) 18:21, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
I've restored the thread, as I explicitly advised him to take it to ANI if he wasn't happy so it seems a little unfair to him to send him on a wild-goose-chase. If he wants to make an allegation of admin abuse ANI is the place to go, unless you want to inflict Arbcom on him; just because I think it's groundless doesn't mean the grievance isn't genuine to him. ‑ Iridescent 20:41, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
I saw a while back you had posted a query about the issue on which you based your removal of that text to the BLP noticeboard. No one seems to have responded. So you chose to act unilaterally.
I understand that BLP supports this kind of boldness, but nonetheless I think you should have tried harder to get some sort of consensus, perhaps posting on the article talk page before you made that edit?
In any case, your query was really one that should have been taken to WP:RSN, since you were wondering about whether The Lantern, Ohio State's student newspaper, is a sufficiently reliable source. If you'd like, we can take it up there, since by extension we would be considering this question for all college student newspapers.
Personally, I feel that general-interest student newspapers on major North American college campuses meet our definition of reliable sources. They are subject to editorial oversight, often have lawyers on retainer and generally have the same self-imposed constraints in favor of accurate reporting that real-world (so to speak) newspapers do. I mean, consider that OSU's student/faculty/staff community comes to about 40,000 people or so, larger than some smaller cities whose daily newspapers we would have no problem considering RSes. This was my grounds for reverting your edit. Daniel Case ( talk) 04:27, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
As for the rest of your critique, though, I see some of your points. I will consider it more carefully when I'm less tired than I am now, and edit the article appropriately. Daniel Case ( talk) 05:48, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
I have tried my level best to improve the article as per your advice. Please have a look and suggest me any further improvements required. Thank You.-- KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 04:51, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
For all the fine work that you have carried out here. Cheers, Nairspecht Converse 09:55, 17 June 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm
Nairspecht. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
HCL Technologies without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Hello! Thanks for your inputs on the page, but would request you to consider the content thoroughly before blanking it. I found that you removed all the awards from the said title, which I understand. Although, some of the awards ARE noteworthy. No worries, since I have edited and polished it since. Cheers,
Nairspecht
Converse
06:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
You are misquoting the article, because it does not say she was "a tireless campaigner". The headline describes her as someone who "campaigned tirelessly", which is slightly different. I have gone to the trouble of taking an actual quote from the piece about her, which should be ok. Please do not add this statement again, because it is misleading. This is Paul ( talk) 13:11, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Good catch here! I'd moved the word but not checked that it should be there at all - well done for doing so! Cheers 82.36.105.25 ( talk) 09:31, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your message on my page. Just a few questions! Some of them have had tags put on them with improvement suggestions. If I don't think these suggestions are sensible can I just remove them ? Also what are the project tags on the talk pages for ? Should I create pages with these tags for categorisation ? RMSN1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rmsn1 ( talk • contribs) 17:25, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
Just to say thank you for your prose edits over at Vladimir Lenin; it's good stuff. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 22:14, 26 June 2016 (UTC) |
![]() |
Thanks for your kind words
here, Quite frankly I've stayed away from that editor as well as the AFD as it's more than trouble than it's worth but anyway thanks for your kind words :), |
You're welcome! If you've got an interest, God knows that history section needs even more... The Warlord Era is such a mess... — LlywelynII 22:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diplomacy |
A belated barnstar for all the help you have given me. Mona778 ( talk) 09:01, 2 August 2016 (UTC) |
... for your appreciation, which I must reciprocate. There should also be a barnstar for obsessive-compulsive... oh, wait a bit; that's me in a nutshell. Haploidavey ( talk) 19:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
I must add this; "verifiable and historically meaningful reality" was particularly pleasant to read. It's exactly what I aim for. Haploidavey ( talk) 19:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, MPS1992.
Bocca di Lupo, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's
Main Page as part of
Did you know
. You can see the hook and the discussion
here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you.
APersonBot (
talk!)
12:02, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Well, your user interface is not friendly at all. I typed 3 times and lost my text till I could publish it the first time. then it got deleted and my original text was not included in your messages. and I had to type it 2 more times, till I found the link to my original text. I was really p***d off. I am trying to give information and improve the site, and they just delete myy work without any reference to it (I thought !) sorry about that.
Anyhow, I had a very bad experience with my stop over in mexico.; I was expecting to go from one gate to another, just as I did in any other international airport, and it's not like that in mexico. they have even damaged myy luggage, opening and searching my stuff without my consent. They did the same to all other nationalities (Venezuela, ...) who needed a visa to mexico, because basically you had to cross the immigration to go in the transit hall to board your next flight.
Please put this information in any fashion you like. And please add this information to all those countries where they are required to have a visa to enter Mexico city. They all will face the same problem. I have witnessed others having problems and arguing with Mexican authorities.
If you don't do this, I have the right to advertise that your website is biased and unfair, and hiding critical information from people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moskovitskaya ( talk • contribs) 19:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello there, I would like to kindly ask you to check an edit I made to an article and give your opinion. Thanks Mona778 ( talk) 19:18, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
How is removing a single, redundant parameter from an image "better wording and other improvements"? Or removing a stray apostrophe and a space "better wording and things"? Also, it might be an idea to tick the minor edit box for such superficial changes in future to reduce watchlist clutter. Joe Roe ( talk) 23:54, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Please see the group's " To do" section. You may work accordingly to ensure group's progress. To unsubscribe, remove your username from the participants list.
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 11:35, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
On 3 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bocca di Lupo, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bocca di Lupo (pictured) serves chocolate pudding with pig's blood? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bocca di Lupo. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Bocca di Lupo), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass ( talk) 00:01, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your edit, MPS, and compliments for the article. As Italian, I am now worried that the owners of the alleged best Italian restaurant in London are not proficient in their own mother tongue... ;-) Cheers, Alex2006 ( talk) 16:45, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Since when two people alone, make a consensus? Editor who inists in changing official name, condradicting given sources says it is. To me it seems his POV. - B.Lameira ( talk) 20:51, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for welcoming me! As you (or the template) correctly surmised, I’ve been around for donkey’s years, indeed for far longer than my first edit, but registered only on nl.wikipedia before that. I don’t think will ever be a regular contributor — at least since 2004 I’ve been looking at discussions here when I noticed problems or curious things going on with articles, and I’ve come off each time with the definite impression that Wikipedia (or at least en.wikipedia) is an unhealthy place for someone with a brain who doesn’t suffer fools gladly. That being said, I sometimes correct some small obvious errors when I see them on stuff I use and know something about, or point out things being lopsided when I’m not quite sure of the best and most correct way to put them right. Otherwise, I direct my energy at places where my specialist knowledge is more relevant, and there are less fools about or more easily dealt with, such as Tolkien Gateway. Mithrennaith ( talk) 03:47, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about the confusing edit summary. :) It should have read "...remove refs. pls see talk..." I'm tired and should take a break. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 23:41, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi - just to say that this is the blocked racist Mikemikev. Doug Weller talk 16:27, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
I found your comment here interesting and thought-provoking. Do you know if there have ever been any formal proposals made related to any suggested mechanisms for administrator accountability? I've always found it odd that we scrutinize the heck out of editors during RFAs, but once someone has the bit, they apparently need to do something incredibly egregious to be held accountable. I think we might have it a bit backwards--perhaps it should be somewhat easier to become an admin but also easier to desysop someone. Once someone is an admin, whether they became one years ago or yesterday, there don't seem to be any formal mechanisms for making sure they are doing a good job. Possible ideas to assuage this issue would be something akin to retention elections, or votes of confidence/no confidence at pre-determined intervals (every two years, say). That way we could ensure that admins retain the confidence of their peers. Anyway, I thought your comment was interesting and could spur a larger dialogue about ways to ensure administrators are formally and regularly held accountable apart from flagrant misuse of their tools. Safehaven86 ( talk) 00:09, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Can you please do something about Agunaghi? They are removing sourced content and pushing nationalistic POV on the articles. The user is an Azerbaijani and he/she is pushing nationalistic POV on the articles Ismail I, Jalil_Mammadguluzadeh and Shusha. They are not even stating why they are removing said phrases, they just keep undoing others reverts. Ninetoyadome ( talk) 20:50, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For your unrelenting contributions to the project. Mona778 ( talk) 00:20, 7 November 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, MPS1992. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
What are the steps to take if an editor rejects academic work in favor for his own opinion on articles? The user also adds content in which citations prove to be falsely attributed. Duqsene ( talk) 12:04, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks for your note. I made the edit to Kelli Ward last August, and it seems someone is trying to remove relevant information. It was already there before said user started reverting. Ideally we could reach a consensus on it, but the user who opposed is not interested in discussing further. I've opened conversation on the talk page, but they have not and probably will not reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.14.99.194 ( talk) 13:50, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I appreciate your contribution to the article on Dubai English Speaking College - being a new editor that I am, I did not realize that some of the content on the page might be considered promotional. I have looked over the NPOV guideline, and revised the article. The problem is - due to the absence of any notes except the template added, I am still unsure whether the article adheres to the standards, so do not wish to remove the template, as my view may be considered biased. I'd appreciate it if you took a couple of minutes to look over the article again, removing the template if you consider the problem to be resolved, or leaving a note on either the article's or mine talk page in case I've missed something. Feel free to delete this message once read. Regards, VB00 ( talk) 12:07, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
![]() | On 9 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Salade niçoise, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the mayor of Nice implored cooks to "never, never, I beg you, include boiled potato or any other boiled vegetable in your salade niçoise"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Salade niçoise. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Schwede 66 00:01, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello: Thank you for your thanks! And thanks for chipping in on the discussion about this at The Banner's talk page. I'm still in the dark over what his/her problem was with this; I can't decide if he didn't understand the explanations, or was deliberately misinterpreting them. Either way, it isn't worth losing sleep over! Anyway, thanks again: Happy editing! Moonraker12 ( talk) 20:03, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
I reverted your change. As far as both the schools project and the Indiana project are concerned (I am a coordinator at WPSCH and an active member at INDIANA), this article does not meet the start criteria. For political geography articles (like settlements and schools), a History section is nearly a must. Now not having any history for a ten year old school may not keep it from being a start (because there isn't any history), this school is over 130 years old. Please keep that in mind when rating school articles. Thanks. John from Idegon ( talk) 02:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Wikimedia India is advocating for release of Images from Indian Army & Indian Air force under Commons Acceptable licenses. Please see the discussion on WMIN's domain. Also share this message among your fellow Wikimedians. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:42, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Indian military history topic area gets its first good topic with the promotion of Field marshal (India) to good topic status today. The topic comprises of three articles including the main article—Field marshal (India), and the two holders of the rank— Sam Manekshaw and Kodandera M. Cariappa. Happy editing. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:38, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi - if some of this is copyright that text needs deleting and rev/deleting as well, which I can do. The editor is spamming this author's self-published material into articles. Doug Weller talk 09:07, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
Drmies (
talk)
22:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)