![]() | This page 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. |
Thanks, for the immediate response. -- A.R.V. Ravi ( talk) 03:18, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
He wrote a section which must have taken him hours which is not relevant.
CPU bit ratings are simply NOT determined by "the instruction set architecture" he insists on diverting to. You will notice almost everything he wrote was not about the topic of that page, most of what he wrote was about a completely different system, the IBM 360. That whole section has no relevance to the discussion. I removed it because it is just a waste of time, it should be removed. Vapourmile ( talk) 05:25, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
moved thread from protected talk page 03:39, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Would you mind taking a look at Goffstown High School#"The Big Fizz incident"? It seem to be a complete fabrication. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 11:27, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for leaving them warnings like Special:Diff/1015206714 and Special:Diff/1015206892. -- Ashley yoursmile! 05:36, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
>
These are the Italian IPs which have been disrupting Gaudie. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 14:10, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello friend, I hope and you can help me, on the page of Hips don't lie and Waka Waka they have other numbers but here they downloaded them? I ask you to update the data well, Waka Waka is already at 15 million and Hips don't lie already at 13 million. Links: https://www.sonymusicpub.com/en/songwriters/741/shakira and Waka Waka: https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2019/06/235646/shakira-waka-waka-this-time-for-africa-world-cup-song-history-meaning . If these sources are used as verifiable for their respective pages I hope and they can be used as reliable sources also in that section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexanderShakifan29 ( talk • contribs) 15:49, April 6, 2021 (UTC) AlexanderShakifan29 ( talk) 21:15, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I had 2 accounts but I lost the password for one, the Bey-have account was not me, that was another account. Only Alejandro Ortiz and I are my accounts. And in fact I could not eliminate Alejandro Ortiz's, I did not understand very well why it cannot be updated. I'm confused. AlexanderShakifan29 ( talk) 01:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Okay, sorry but Bey's account is not mine, it must be because I have a friend Shakifan who had the idea of singles, he must be the one who is that account, I only have Alejandro Ortiz and this one. Sorry if I caused any inconvenience. I just wanted to see if some data can be updated. AlexanderShakifan29 ( talk) 01:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Its a drinking game. What sort of citation is needed for house rules? Other drinking games dont have such citations. Bobaxos ( talk) 22:07, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Like 2 years ago I vandalized some shit so sorry. 23winandym ( talk) 02:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Is 89.242.99.209 now editing as 82.132.184.170? See edits to Bob Moran. aeschyIus ( talk) 21:00, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
I just started editing and didn't really know the definition of minor edit. Thank you for defining it for me!
TubbDoose (
talk) 04:28, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
Here's a barnstar for reverting a recent 81KB vandalism! SufficientChipmunk3 ( talk) 19:45, 3 May 2021 (UTC) |
Thank you for answering my question so quickly. Does that explanation mean it was removed because I talked about cryptocurrency? I'm confused on why I can't talk about NFTs in digital fashion when they are so important to their distribution. Do you have any suggestions on how I can go about this?
I also contacted user:David Gerald like you suggested.
Thanks again,
Nathannghiya ( talk) 23:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Meters, just to let you know that 71.191.251.153 has reverted your edit. It seems they don't want to use the discussion page at all. Is there anything that can be done about this? Cheers. English Prof 17 ( talk) 19:45, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
This is in response to your comment regarding other users engaging in edit warring with the Bruce Nuclear Generating Station . If you disagree with the edit feel free to discuss it in the talk section. If you have any questions feel free to leave me a message and we can discuss it further. Until then, stop edit warring and leave it alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.12.28.237 ( talk • contribs) 08:14, May 10, 2021 (UTC)
Stop doing what? You do realize Montezuma Jones ( talk · contribs) is not me?-- Countryboy603 ( talk) 14:20, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your edit of Donte Hickman. To be honest I wasn’t fully aware of what was happening in the process of the edits as citations and links were removed. I couldn’t tell if it was in draft space or not. I’d appreciate if you could put it back as it needs to be. I won’t make further disruptive edits. To be clear do I wave it in draft and others will edit to prepare for article? Or should I continue to edit with proper quotes and citations?
RestoringPeople ( talk) 02:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Two copies of this page have been created, in draft space and in article space. It is not necessary to create two copies of the same page, and it annoys the reviewers. This is sometimes done in order to bypass Articles for Creation review. However, if a submitter is ready to have the article in article space, it can be moved into article space, rather than creating a copy. It is common for a page that has been duplicated in draft space and in article space to be nominated for deletion or proposed for deletion. If the article is kept, this draft should be redirected to the article. If the article is deleted, this draft may be kept for future improvement.
I'm sorry for what I did earlier but I want to rename the page Gimli Glider to Air Canada Flight 143. Reason being that flight 143 is a straightforward name rather than giving the page a special name For e.g. Air Transat Flight 236 isn't given a separate name i.e. Azores Glider. You can however mention Gimli Glider in Bold and/or insert a redirect. Also, Gimli glider is not exactly a flight number or an incident but rather just a nickname given to a plane whereas Flight 143 is a proper flight number. It is also not true that there are many flights with the number 143. I could only find Philippine Airlines Flight 143. There are also many pages, mostly in the 'See Also' which still state the older name i.e. Air Canada Flight 143 such as the one in Air Transat Flight 236, a very similiar accident. If you are not comfortable with my opinion, you can let me know why in my talk page. If you are satisfied with my response, then please make the desired changes. Thanks! Username006 ( talk) 13:40, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey Meter! Let me know what you want to do next. It would be a fun collab to work with U. User: Brent — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brent Severnie ( talk • contribs) 19:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Hi Meters! I appreciate all of your helpful feedback as I gain my footing as a Wikipedia contributor! Sdekk ( talk) 02:15, 2 June 2021 (UTC) |
![]() |
Thank you for helping protect my talk page against a vandal. Much appreciated. Mattplaysthedrums ( talk) 03:05, 2 June 2021 (UTC) |
Hi! You removed a sentence from my edit on the Old Scona Academic Article. The sentence was "It is unfair to compare Old Scona Academic to other Edmonton High schools however as Old Scona's entrance exam manufactures a population of students already likely to score high on the diploma." Your note said the clarification was pointless but I kinda feel like its needed. Without it the page gives a long list of the successes of the school without giving any reason why. I don't think the responsibility of connecting the pieces should be on the reader. You are a much more experienced editor than I am though so I respect your decision either way. Thanks! TubbDoose ( talk) 02:25, 7 June 2021 (UTC).
Hi Meters. I think there are two things at play here. Whether the article should be redirected or deleted, and whether the IP has the right to remove their post from the WT:AFD page. The IP bodly redirected the article, but was subsequently reverted. This means the redirect is contentious and the IP should start an AFD about the article if they want it redirected or simply remove the AFD template and leave the article as is; the IP can have it both ways and the edit warring over that is wrong. IRegarding the stuff on the talk page, the IP removal of their post seems completely fine; nobody had responded to it and it was only a request for the file to be nominated. The editor who re-added that post did so in good faith, but there was no discussion removed and thus no need to re-add the post. The subsequent edit warring that happened is quite unfortunate and is might lead to more editors than the IP getting warned. The IP is likely going to end up blocked, but they did have the right to remove their talk page comment, at least in my opinion. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Okay I get it, and it was removed, but I wanted some kind of source saying how many there might be left, as the original part of that section was way too vague. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbl1975 ( talk • contribs) 04:00, June 8, 2021 (UTC)
Hello Meters,
Just seeing your message now about changes to the Souhegan Cooperative High School webpage. I appreciate the advice to leave better documentation on the changes. I will say, I am trying to restore that page to the March 2020 version. I am the former Chair of the Souhegan Cooperative School board, and former curator for this page. The board did a substantial amount of work to update this page over the last 3-4 years but changes were made after that time period by an editor who removed significant a substantial and inappropriate amount of information on the page. The edit I made was in reference to a former student who ran for state representative that included himself as a "notable alumnus". By the standard of the school administration and the board, this person does not qualify as a notable alumnus, and should not be allowed to use the Wikipedia page as a vehicle for their own self-promotion. I'm not criticizing that person per se, other than to say their inclusion into the list was inappropriate. I believe this person removed that information. Please change the removal back to the way it was at your time of editing if you would. Thank you kindly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wutzu9 ( talk • contribs) 12:55, June 20, 2021 (UTC)
Cheerful Squirrel (
talk) has given you
a cup of tea. Tea promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day ever so slightly better.
Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a tea, especially if it is someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!
Spread the lovely, warm, refreshing goodness of tea by adding {{ subst:wikitea}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
![]() |
On my redirect "Princess Elizabeth of Clarence" |
ok thank you for letting me know. I thought I was helping. T.cal.69 ( talk) 22:21, 29 June 2021 (UTC) |
![]() |
On my redirect about "Henry, Duke of Cornwall" |
ok. thank you for letting me know. i thought i was helping. T.cal.69 ( talk) 22:22, 29 June 2021 (UTC) |
Hi, you undid my edit with the explanation that it was not an improvement, but the text is grammatically incorrect and I rectified it, without deleting the content. Johnnytest5 ( talk) 09:38, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi, i did add the link to the wikipedia page, many other us states have the same link. It is an important piece of information. Johnnytest5 ( talk) 02:21, 13 July 2021
Hello. First sorry to undoing edits. I just saw an inaccurate image being used and decided to edit it. Previously used images have some problems. About the body shape and size of Anthropornis. It is talked in the page, Wikipedia:WikiProject Palaeontology/Paleoart review/Archive 13. The image I replaced was made on that page and is probably accurate, but it might have been better to delete the image than to post it. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 07:21, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Meters. I just talked to Bink and Escape about my new editing with removed colorful words sentence. We will discuss about my new editing. Until a final consensus is reached. please don't change anything on the first paragraph Phạm Huy Thông ( talk) 23:38, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
I do not want a war-edit. I just deleted tabloids And remove unsourced sentences and @ilovetati91 has been trying to damage these two pages and remove my questions on her talk page. Am I wrong for that? Do you think that's fair?
Phạm Huy Thông (
talk) 04:49, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I removed the twitter citation. Please explain the objections, though. The student attended Trinity School at River Ridge, one of three Trinity Schools. The alleged assault was performed by her teacher immediately after she graduated. The teacher later became a second in command at the school. The school administrators found out about it and did nothing. Would love to get other editors involved here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marshal277 ( talk • contribs) 04:26, August 1, 2021 (UTC)
I noticed that you discussed with DisneyMetalhead about his interpretation of the Infobox guidelines.
DisneyMetalhead is very active in his editing of franchise and film series articles and I have had problems with his interpretations of the guidelines before. In this case I think he is mostly making his reasonable point unclear by mixing separate issues. He said he would take the matter elsewhere, but it wasn't clear where he planned to take it. He took the matter to Template_talk:Infobox_media_franchise#Functionality_of_this_Infobox in case you care to comment, but I understand if you don't have any further interest in it. I made a comment, his suggestion is not unreasonable but personally think it would be better to keep more detail. -- 109.79.80.88 ( talk) 00:51, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.69.189.65 ( talk • contribs) 22:36, August 8, 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
I bought this beer with my latest paycheck from CNN/Chloe Melas. Cheers! Marquardtika ( talk) 01:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC) |
Hi Meters. Is there a problem with my edit? The ethnic/racial data on the table did not reflect the 2016 census. The numbers and percentages for Filipino and Arab are way off, and the percentages for the other groups are slightly off because in the code they were calculated using the wrong total population count. In the census, the data in the Visible Minority section uses a different total population count from the one on the main census page. This is because the information in the Visible Minority section is based on the long-form questionnaire which uses a different methodology compared to the short-form questionnaire used on the main page. YukonPhantasma ( talk) 02:57, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I wanted to stop by and thank you for your recently-added contribution to my talk page. I don't know how much you know about me or my editing history here on Wikipedia, but I have recently become a targeted subject for comments that were vandalistic and/or constituted spam/personal attacks. The instances of that happening have increased quite sharply of late. I appreciate you looking out for me in this case. Thanks again. -- Jgstokes ( talk) 03:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
In retrospect, I was too AGF-ish and not aware enough of deeper BLP policies such as WP:BLPCrime and those relating to low-profile individuals in general. Novellasyes ( talk) 18:49, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi again! I see you left a message on my talk page regarding minor edits, Okay I understand that now, My apologies as I'm new to the Wikipedia and I didn't knew that, I'll make sure to follow up your explanation in the future and use minor edits when necessary. and just to know on which article did you noticed that? (asking out of curiosity) and I have like put minor edit tag on many edits, although those edits were reasonably correct but I can't undo that action but would make sure to keep in mind when to use it and when to not. Thank you! HimuTheEditor ( talk) 19:06, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
So that went off the rails spectacularly. What happened? I just happened to see an IP removing vast amounts of text from the talk page claiming "REDACTED FOR "OR"" and that seemed worth investigating. Notfrompedro ( talk) 23:09, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Photo is 100% from 2020 on the date specified - Meta data can be supplied as proof. The billboard article was also updated recently as per our request to use this more recent approved image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OceanRockLegend ( talk • contribs) 17:48, August 23, 2021 (UTC)
You are incorrect in your statement that a request was made for Billboard to update the date, The info supplied to you was that Billboard have recently updated that image to an article from 2017. SIGNED OceanRockLegend. FN — Preceding unsigned comment added by OceanRockLegend ( talk • contribs) 18:28, August 23, 2021 (UTC)
The billboard article was also updated recently as per our request to use this more recent approved image.That seems quite clear. Your company asked Billboard to update the webpage. I'm really not interested in bandying words with an SPA COI editor who now appears to be less than forthcoming. Please address the rest of the issue I raised. Meters ( talk) 18:33, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure how things work round here. I attempted to reword my statements in order to be more "civil" The fact remains, if it is the consensus is that the opening paragraph remain misleading, what does this say about those who make the consensus that it remain so ?
One is lead to believe that all of those in the thread pointing out the factual errors in the article are being stone walled. Far be it for me expect that my edit be accepted. This is not the point. The point is that the error must be addressed.
I mean no offence, but the question remains. Who makes this consensus? Is there no agreement at least that the paragraph in question is not acceptable and needs revision?
Why has nobody been able to make headway on such an obvious flaw? What is the meaning of this?
Yours sincerely, Quinn— Preceding unsigned comment added by Quinnjin78 ( talk • contribs) 06:03, August 28, 2021 (UTC)
which comment are you talking about? Catchpoke ( talk) 22:11, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
I meant to get it as like currently inhabited like not no people there. Welp Mystic880 ( talk) 05:06, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
![]() | This page 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. |
Thanks, for the immediate response. -- A.R.V. Ravi ( talk) 03:18, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
He wrote a section which must have taken him hours which is not relevant.
CPU bit ratings are simply NOT determined by "the instruction set architecture" he insists on diverting to. You will notice almost everything he wrote was not about the topic of that page, most of what he wrote was about a completely different system, the IBM 360. That whole section has no relevance to the discussion. I removed it because it is just a waste of time, it should be removed. Vapourmile ( talk) 05:25, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
moved thread from protected talk page 03:39, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Would you mind taking a look at Goffstown High School#"The Big Fizz incident"? It seem to be a complete fabrication. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 11:27, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for leaving them warnings like Special:Diff/1015206714 and Special:Diff/1015206892. -- Ashley yoursmile! 05:36, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
>
These are the Italian IPs which have been disrupting Gaudie. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 14:10, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello friend, I hope and you can help me, on the page of Hips don't lie and Waka Waka they have other numbers but here they downloaded them? I ask you to update the data well, Waka Waka is already at 15 million and Hips don't lie already at 13 million. Links: https://www.sonymusicpub.com/en/songwriters/741/shakira and Waka Waka: https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2019/06/235646/shakira-waka-waka-this-time-for-africa-world-cup-song-history-meaning . If these sources are used as verifiable for their respective pages I hope and they can be used as reliable sources also in that section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexanderShakifan29 ( talk • contribs) 15:49, April 6, 2021 (UTC) AlexanderShakifan29 ( talk) 21:15, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I had 2 accounts but I lost the password for one, the Bey-have account was not me, that was another account. Only Alejandro Ortiz and I are my accounts. And in fact I could not eliminate Alejandro Ortiz's, I did not understand very well why it cannot be updated. I'm confused. AlexanderShakifan29 ( talk) 01:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Okay, sorry but Bey's account is not mine, it must be because I have a friend Shakifan who had the idea of singles, he must be the one who is that account, I only have Alejandro Ortiz and this one. Sorry if I caused any inconvenience. I just wanted to see if some data can be updated. AlexanderShakifan29 ( talk) 01:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Its a drinking game. What sort of citation is needed for house rules? Other drinking games dont have such citations. Bobaxos ( talk) 22:07, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Like 2 years ago I vandalized some shit so sorry. 23winandym ( talk) 02:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Is 89.242.99.209 now editing as 82.132.184.170? See edits to Bob Moran. aeschyIus ( talk) 21:00, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
I just started editing and didn't really know the definition of minor edit. Thank you for defining it for me!
TubbDoose (
talk) 04:28, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
Here's a barnstar for reverting a recent 81KB vandalism! SufficientChipmunk3 ( talk) 19:45, 3 May 2021 (UTC) |
Thank you for answering my question so quickly. Does that explanation mean it was removed because I talked about cryptocurrency? I'm confused on why I can't talk about NFTs in digital fashion when they are so important to their distribution. Do you have any suggestions on how I can go about this?
I also contacted user:David Gerald like you suggested.
Thanks again,
Nathannghiya ( talk) 23:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Meters, just to let you know that 71.191.251.153 has reverted your edit. It seems they don't want to use the discussion page at all. Is there anything that can be done about this? Cheers. English Prof 17 ( talk) 19:45, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
This is in response to your comment regarding other users engaging in edit warring with the Bruce Nuclear Generating Station . If you disagree with the edit feel free to discuss it in the talk section. If you have any questions feel free to leave me a message and we can discuss it further. Until then, stop edit warring and leave it alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.12.28.237 ( talk • contribs) 08:14, May 10, 2021 (UTC)
Stop doing what? You do realize Montezuma Jones ( talk · contribs) is not me?-- Countryboy603 ( talk) 14:20, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your edit of Donte Hickman. To be honest I wasn’t fully aware of what was happening in the process of the edits as citations and links were removed. I couldn’t tell if it was in draft space or not. I’d appreciate if you could put it back as it needs to be. I won’t make further disruptive edits. To be clear do I wave it in draft and others will edit to prepare for article? Or should I continue to edit with proper quotes and citations?
RestoringPeople ( talk) 02:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Two copies of this page have been created, in draft space and in article space. It is not necessary to create two copies of the same page, and it annoys the reviewers. This is sometimes done in order to bypass Articles for Creation review. However, if a submitter is ready to have the article in article space, it can be moved into article space, rather than creating a copy. It is common for a page that has been duplicated in draft space and in article space to be nominated for deletion or proposed for deletion. If the article is kept, this draft should be redirected to the article. If the article is deleted, this draft may be kept for future improvement.
I'm sorry for what I did earlier but I want to rename the page Gimli Glider to Air Canada Flight 143. Reason being that flight 143 is a straightforward name rather than giving the page a special name For e.g. Air Transat Flight 236 isn't given a separate name i.e. Azores Glider. You can however mention Gimli Glider in Bold and/or insert a redirect. Also, Gimli glider is not exactly a flight number or an incident but rather just a nickname given to a plane whereas Flight 143 is a proper flight number. It is also not true that there are many flights with the number 143. I could only find Philippine Airlines Flight 143. There are also many pages, mostly in the 'See Also' which still state the older name i.e. Air Canada Flight 143 such as the one in Air Transat Flight 236, a very similiar accident. If you are not comfortable with my opinion, you can let me know why in my talk page. If you are satisfied with my response, then please make the desired changes. Thanks! Username006 ( talk) 13:40, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey Meter! Let me know what you want to do next. It would be a fun collab to work with U. User: Brent — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brent Severnie ( talk • contribs) 19:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Hi Meters! I appreciate all of your helpful feedback as I gain my footing as a Wikipedia contributor! Sdekk ( talk) 02:15, 2 June 2021 (UTC) |
![]() |
Thank you for helping protect my talk page against a vandal. Much appreciated. Mattplaysthedrums ( talk) 03:05, 2 June 2021 (UTC) |
Hi! You removed a sentence from my edit on the Old Scona Academic Article. The sentence was "It is unfair to compare Old Scona Academic to other Edmonton High schools however as Old Scona's entrance exam manufactures a population of students already likely to score high on the diploma." Your note said the clarification was pointless but I kinda feel like its needed. Without it the page gives a long list of the successes of the school without giving any reason why. I don't think the responsibility of connecting the pieces should be on the reader. You are a much more experienced editor than I am though so I respect your decision either way. Thanks! TubbDoose ( talk) 02:25, 7 June 2021 (UTC).
Hi Meters. I think there are two things at play here. Whether the article should be redirected or deleted, and whether the IP has the right to remove their post from the WT:AFD page. The IP bodly redirected the article, but was subsequently reverted. This means the redirect is contentious and the IP should start an AFD about the article if they want it redirected or simply remove the AFD template and leave the article as is; the IP can have it both ways and the edit warring over that is wrong. IRegarding the stuff on the talk page, the IP removal of their post seems completely fine; nobody had responded to it and it was only a request for the file to be nominated. The editor who re-added that post did so in good faith, but there was no discussion removed and thus no need to re-add the post. The subsequent edit warring that happened is quite unfortunate and is might lead to more editors than the IP getting warned. The IP is likely going to end up blocked, but they did have the right to remove their talk page comment, at least in my opinion. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Okay I get it, and it was removed, but I wanted some kind of source saying how many there might be left, as the original part of that section was way too vague. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbl1975 ( talk • contribs) 04:00, June 8, 2021 (UTC)
Hello Meters,
Just seeing your message now about changes to the Souhegan Cooperative High School webpage. I appreciate the advice to leave better documentation on the changes. I will say, I am trying to restore that page to the March 2020 version. I am the former Chair of the Souhegan Cooperative School board, and former curator for this page. The board did a substantial amount of work to update this page over the last 3-4 years but changes were made after that time period by an editor who removed significant a substantial and inappropriate amount of information on the page. The edit I made was in reference to a former student who ran for state representative that included himself as a "notable alumnus". By the standard of the school administration and the board, this person does not qualify as a notable alumnus, and should not be allowed to use the Wikipedia page as a vehicle for their own self-promotion. I'm not criticizing that person per se, other than to say their inclusion into the list was inappropriate. I believe this person removed that information. Please change the removal back to the way it was at your time of editing if you would. Thank you kindly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wutzu9 ( talk • contribs) 12:55, June 20, 2021 (UTC)
Cheerful Squirrel (
talk) has given you
a cup of tea. Tea promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day ever so slightly better.
Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a tea, especially if it is someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!
Spread the lovely, warm, refreshing goodness of tea by adding {{ subst:wikitea}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
![]() |
On my redirect "Princess Elizabeth of Clarence" |
ok thank you for letting me know. I thought I was helping. T.cal.69 ( talk) 22:21, 29 June 2021 (UTC) |
![]() |
On my redirect about "Henry, Duke of Cornwall" |
ok. thank you for letting me know. i thought i was helping. T.cal.69 ( talk) 22:22, 29 June 2021 (UTC) |
Hi, you undid my edit with the explanation that it was not an improvement, but the text is grammatically incorrect and I rectified it, without deleting the content. Johnnytest5 ( talk) 09:38, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi, i did add the link to the wikipedia page, many other us states have the same link. It is an important piece of information. Johnnytest5 ( talk) 02:21, 13 July 2021
Hello. First sorry to undoing edits. I just saw an inaccurate image being used and decided to edit it. Previously used images have some problems. About the body shape and size of Anthropornis. It is talked in the page, Wikipedia:WikiProject Palaeontology/Paleoart review/Archive 13. The image I replaced was made on that page and is probably accurate, but it might have been better to delete the image than to post it. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 07:21, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Meters. I just talked to Bink and Escape about my new editing with removed colorful words sentence. We will discuss about my new editing. Until a final consensus is reached. please don't change anything on the first paragraph Phạm Huy Thông ( talk) 23:38, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
I do not want a war-edit. I just deleted tabloids And remove unsourced sentences and @ilovetati91 has been trying to damage these two pages and remove my questions on her talk page. Am I wrong for that? Do you think that's fair?
Phạm Huy Thông (
talk) 04:49, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I removed the twitter citation. Please explain the objections, though. The student attended Trinity School at River Ridge, one of three Trinity Schools. The alleged assault was performed by her teacher immediately after she graduated. The teacher later became a second in command at the school. The school administrators found out about it and did nothing. Would love to get other editors involved here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marshal277 ( talk • contribs) 04:26, August 1, 2021 (UTC)
I noticed that you discussed with DisneyMetalhead about his interpretation of the Infobox guidelines.
DisneyMetalhead is very active in his editing of franchise and film series articles and I have had problems with his interpretations of the guidelines before. In this case I think he is mostly making his reasonable point unclear by mixing separate issues. He said he would take the matter elsewhere, but it wasn't clear where he planned to take it. He took the matter to Template_talk:Infobox_media_franchise#Functionality_of_this_Infobox in case you care to comment, but I understand if you don't have any further interest in it. I made a comment, his suggestion is not unreasonable but personally think it would be better to keep more detail. -- 109.79.80.88 ( talk) 00:51, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.69.189.65 ( talk • contribs) 22:36, August 8, 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
I bought this beer with my latest paycheck from CNN/Chloe Melas. Cheers! Marquardtika ( talk) 01:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC) |
Hi Meters. Is there a problem with my edit? The ethnic/racial data on the table did not reflect the 2016 census. The numbers and percentages for Filipino and Arab are way off, and the percentages for the other groups are slightly off because in the code they were calculated using the wrong total population count. In the census, the data in the Visible Minority section uses a different total population count from the one on the main census page. This is because the information in the Visible Minority section is based on the long-form questionnaire which uses a different methodology compared to the short-form questionnaire used on the main page. YukonPhantasma ( talk) 02:57, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I wanted to stop by and thank you for your recently-added contribution to my talk page. I don't know how much you know about me or my editing history here on Wikipedia, but I have recently become a targeted subject for comments that were vandalistic and/or constituted spam/personal attacks. The instances of that happening have increased quite sharply of late. I appreciate you looking out for me in this case. Thanks again. -- Jgstokes ( talk) 03:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
In retrospect, I was too AGF-ish and not aware enough of deeper BLP policies such as WP:BLPCrime and those relating to low-profile individuals in general. Novellasyes ( talk) 18:49, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi again! I see you left a message on my talk page regarding minor edits, Okay I understand that now, My apologies as I'm new to the Wikipedia and I didn't knew that, I'll make sure to follow up your explanation in the future and use minor edits when necessary. and just to know on which article did you noticed that? (asking out of curiosity) and I have like put minor edit tag on many edits, although those edits were reasonably correct but I can't undo that action but would make sure to keep in mind when to use it and when to not. Thank you! HimuTheEditor ( talk) 19:06, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
So that went off the rails spectacularly. What happened? I just happened to see an IP removing vast amounts of text from the talk page claiming "REDACTED FOR "OR"" and that seemed worth investigating. Notfrompedro ( talk) 23:09, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Photo is 100% from 2020 on the date specified - Meta data can be supplied as proof. The billboard article was also updated recently as per our request to use this more recent approved image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OceanRockLegend ( talk • contribs) 17:48, August 23, 2021 (UTC)
You are incorrect in your statement that a request was made for Billboard to update the date, The info supplied to you was that Billboard have recently updated that image to an article from 2017. SIGNED OceanRockLegend. FN — Preceding unsigned comment added by OceanRockLegend ( talk • contribs) 18:28, August 23, 2021 (UTC)
The billboard article was also updated recently as per our request to use this more recent approved image.That seems quite clear. Your company asked Billboard to update the webpage. I'm really not interested in bandying words with an SPA COI editor who now appears to be less than forthcoming. Please address the rest of the issue I raised. Meters ( talk) 18:33, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure how things work round here. I attempted to reword my statements in order to be more "civil" The fact remains, if it is the consensus is that the opening paragraph remain misleading, what does this say about those who make the consensus that it remain so ?
One is lead to believe that all of those in the thread pointing out the factual errors in the article are being stone walled. Far be it for me expect that my edit be accepted. This is not the point. The point is that the error must be addressed.
I mean no offence, but the question remains. Who makes this consensus? Is there no agreement at least that the paragraph in question is not acceptable and needs revision?
Why has nobody been able to make headway on such an obvious flaw? What is the meaning of this?
Yours sincerely, Quinn— Preceding unsigned comment added by Quinnjin78 ( talk • contribs) 06:03, August 28, 2021 (UTC)
which comment are you talking about? Catchpoke ( talk) 22:11, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
I meant to get it as like currently inhabited like not no people there. Welp Mystic880 ( talk) 05:06, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |