![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Hello. I know my edit to Limp Bizkit's Significant Other was recently reverted by you. I just do not know why-it doesn't seem wrong; as I've seen Wiki album pages put the band name next to featured artists. Is there something wrong with what I did? I did not mean to cause trouble.
I'm just wondering why I wasn't allowed to do that.
65.185.86.64 ( talk) 15:11, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Take tracks one and seven of The Wrong Side of Heaven and the Righteous Side of Hell, Volume 1 by Five Finger Death Punch. I guess Judas Priest next to Rob Halford wasn't always true, but it is now. 65.185.86.64 ( talk) 15:50, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
You provide another good point, I suppose you're right. I meant that you were right from that last post, just saying that there are those around here. But I agree, and I see where you're going with this. Thank you. Can we call this resolved now? 65.185.86.64 ( talk) 16:04, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Knockout Ned (Mane Galinha) may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:41, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi, the move I made I am quite happy to see undone using a technical request. I believe in good faith the original meaning of Blackwater Park is the primary topic, but quite happy to see the album restored as primary topic. If you use Wikipedia:RM#Uncontroversial_technical_requests, or I will do it myself. In ictu oculi ( talk) 23:28, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
"statement reflects a very minority viewpoint" ... not quite as small a minority as the vociferous and often -- sadly -- disingenuous supporters of open access would like the rest of the world to believe. Given that the sentence I originally added seems to be the only critical voice in the article -- amounting to less than 0.5% of the whole in terms of word count -- the strength of that minority still seems to be underrepresented. One might legitimately ask whether the article as a whole has a truly neutral point of view. Ankababel ( talk) 21:04, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Please be accurate. "You should not re-add content to an article after it has been reverted multiple times by other editors" -- the new content was originally placed in another section, and at the suggestion of Lawsonstu was, in modified form, placed in a more appropriate section, where it seemed to be acceptable. Ankababel ( talk) 11:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dierry Jean, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orthodox ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:03, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Permafrost46, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB ( talk) 20:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 07:19, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Avenged sevenfold is a heavy metal and previously a metal core band. All of their albums are metal core or heavy metal and none are rock. So please let the genre be heavy metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohansamudra3 ( talk • contribs) 16:47, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello Permafrost46. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled " Dierry Jean".
The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply {{db-afc}}
or {{db-g13}}
code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia
mainspace.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dierry Jean}}
, paste it in the edit box at
this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo ( talk) 02:22, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Permafrost46. 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)
Hi you recently reverted my edit on the kraftwerk album page. All pages regardless of the subject have to meet WP:GNG and music pages have to meet WP:NMUSIC. Just being a kraftwerk album does not make it automatically notable. Please read WP:NALBUM and ask yourself which of the criteria it fulfills and which of the sources back this up. It says clearly that an album requires it's own notability and that it has been released by a notable artist is not by itself a reason for a standalone article. Happy editing. Domdeparis ( talk) 20:51, 30 May 2017 (UTC) Domdeparis ( talk) 20:51, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
At the time of my tagging it there were no sources to back up the notability. So the explanation that should have been used was "the sources needed have now been added" and not "clearly a kraftwerk album is notable". Add the sources and remove the prod is the way forward. The article creator should have done that first. As a new pages reviewer I do not always have the time to correct the shoddy work of each and every editor and so I prod them sometimes and that usually gives them the wake-up call needed. And sometimes they are just editors who presume that because the band is well known the article doesn't need to be correctly sourced. Hope you now understand what I am getting at. Domdeparis ( talk) 21:26, 30 May 2017 (UTC) Domdeparis ( talk) 21:26, 30 May 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. |
Archive 1 |
Hello. I know my edit to Limp Bizkit's Significant Other was recently reverted by you. I just do not know why-it doesn't seem wrong; as I've seen Wiki album pages put the band name next to featured artists. Is there something wrong with what I did? I did not mean to cause trouble.
I'm just wondering why I wasn't allowed to do that.
65.185.86.64 ( talk) 15:11, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Take tracks one and seven of The Wrong Side of Heaven and the Righteous Side of Hell, Volume 1 by Five Finger Death Punch. I guess Judas Priest next to Rob Halford wasn't always true, but it is now. 65.185.86.64 ( talk) 15:50, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
You provide another good point, I suppose you're right. I meant that you were right from that last post, just saying that there are those around here. But I agree, and I see where you're going with this. Thank you. Can we call this resolved now? 65.185.86.64 ( talk) 16:04, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Knockout Ned (Mane Galinha) may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:41, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi, the move I made I am quite happy to see undone using a technical request. I believe in good faith the original meaning of Blackwater Park is the primary topic, but quite happy to see the album restored as primary topic. If you use Wikipedia:RM#Uncontroversial_technical_requests, or I will do it myself. In ictu oculi ( talk) 23:28, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
"statement reflects a very minority viewpoint" ... not quite as small a minority as the vociferous and often -- sadly -- disingenuous supporters of open access would like the rest of the world to believe. Given that the sentence I originally added seems to be the only critical voice in the article -- amounting to less than 0.5% of the whole in terms of word count -- the strength of that minority still seems to be underrepresented. One might legitimately ask whether the article as a whole has a truly neutral point of view. Ankababel ( talk) 21:04, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Please be accurate. "You should not re-add content to an article after it has been reverted multiple times by other editors" -- the new content was originally placed in another section, and at the suggestion of Lawsonstu was, in modified form, placed in a more appropriate section, where it seemed to be acceptable. Ankababel ( talk) 11:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dierry Jean, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orthodox ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:03, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Permafrost46, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB ( talk) 20:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 07:19, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Avenged sevenfold is a heavy metal and previously a metal core band. All of their albums are metal core or heavy metal and none are rock. So please let the genre be heavy metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohansamudra3 ( talk • contribs) 16:47, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello Permafrost46. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled " Dierry Jean".
The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply {{db-afc}}
or {{db-g13}}
code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia
mainspace.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dierry Jean}}
, paste it in the edit box at
this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo ( talk) 02:22, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Permafrost46. 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)
Hi you recently reverted my edit on the kraftwerk album page. All pages regardless of the subject have to meet WP:GNG and music pages have to meet WP:NMUSIC. Just being a kraftwerk album does not make it automatically notable. Please read WP:NALBUM and ask yourself which of the criteria it fulfills and which of the sources back this up. It says clearly that an album requires it's own notability and that it has been released by a notable artist is not by itself a reason for a standalone article. Happy editing. Domdeparis ( talk) 20:51, 30 May 2017 (UTC) Domdeparis ( talk) 20:51, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
At the time of my tagging it there were no sources to back up the notability. So the explanation that should have been used was "the sources needed have now been added" and not "clearly a kraftwerk album is notable". Add the sources and remove the prod is the way forward. The article creator should have done that first. As a new pages reviewer I do not always have the time to correct the shoddy work of each and every editor and so I prod them sometimes and that usually gives them the wake-up call needed. And sometimes they are just editors who presume that because the band is well known the article doesn't need to be correctly sourced. Hope you now understand what I am getting at. Domdeparis ( talk) 21:26, 30 May 2017 (UTC) Domdeparis ( talk) 21:26, 30 May 2017 (UTC)