![]() | 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 80 | ← | Archive 85 | Archive 86 | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | Archive 89 | Archive 90 |
Hi Ritchie, I believe you need to fix this. You specifically notified MaranoFan of the AN thread you opened on Winkelvi's IBan violation, and pointed her directly to the specific thread [1], which, like all notifications of noticeboard discussions, especially from admins, appears to be a direct invitation to participate in it. She then posted there four times [2], [3], [4] (self-reverted), [5], and got blocked by 28bytes for a month for her trouble. All of her posts, even her comment to MONGO, seem to be covered by WP:BANEX and by your notification to her of the thread. Please fix this. Softlavender ( talk) 09:55, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
I think 28bytes blocked simply to make things fairer towards Winkelvi. As for the near-gushing attitude, I have already said that MaranoFan has been disruptive and continued to mention Winkelvi after being asked not to. Therefore a block is within the bounds of administrator discretion and stops accusations of bias against Winkelvi. I was hoping there would be a consensus to unblock MaranoFan, but unfortunately there isn't. The principal reason I want her unblocked is, of course, to complete the actions (including fixing the maintenance tags I have put on the article) on Talk:Meghan Trainor/GA3; however, any other uninvolved editor can do that. If all the action points listed on the review are dealt with, I can pass it. As Meghan's notability rests entirely in the internet era, it should be possible to find sources for everything I have queried as failing verification. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:14, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Talking about the blocking Admin's actions in this thread is not "casting aspirations across multiple other editors talkpages". I'm giving 28bytes every opportunity to reverse their error but they don't want to it seems. Admins expect editors to admit their errors (real or imagined) before unblocking, but again 28bytes has not admitted any wrong doing or lapse in judgement for blocking MF. Admins need to be held to the same standard as Editors. If Richie is correct that the block was to make things "fairer" for the indef'd editor, sorry but that is not appropriate or effective. It just feeds the false narritive that there was a two problem when MF did nothing to cause WV to breach the IBAN. There is another unblock request posted - MF is being extrememly reasonable admitting wrongdoing even though he only responded to Richie's invitation to post at AN. 28bytes has another chance to undo his/her mistake. Legacypac ( talk) 17:53, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
On 6 November 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Catherine Kerrison, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that historian Catherine Kerrison (pictured) thinks beauty is still important for any woman in the public eye? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Catherine Kerrison. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Catherine Kerrison), 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.
Alex Shih ( talk) 00:01, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
this article on catherine talks about "non traditional sources" but doesnt say what that actually means so i put the clarify tag on them — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:4023:D900:203C:81D:F174:42CA ( talk • contribs)
you sound a bit angry — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:4023:D900:203C:81D:F174:42CA ( talk • contribs)
if an article needs citations and clarification; an article needs citations and clarifications; doesnt matter if someone tried to delete it or if theres hard work put into the article; besides; me and you have just made the article better with our edits; good for us!!
the creator was blocked for sockpuppeting; are you defending sockpuppeting?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:4023:D900:203C:81D:F174:42CA ( talk • contribs)
I've got
Loham watchlisted, so my attention was recently drawn to what appears to be suspicious IP activity by
User:2405:205:6203:B55E:0:0:27E8:68A5 who added
Joy Badlani as one of the cast in some 50+/- films. See their edit contribs. Before I reverted the IP the first time, I tried to find something (anything) to verify Badlani having appeared in Loham and couldn't find anything. The same for a few other random selections I made from the IP's edit contribs, and also on Joy Badlani where I found this
removal by
Cyphoidbomb. It appears to me we may have a connected user adding his own name for parts he may or may not have played as an extra. A Google search shows that he promotes himself using YouTube, FB, other social media and unreliable sources. I'm curious to see what Cyphoidbomb thinks about all the other articles, and then I'll create an AfD for Badlani but in the interim, will you semi-p Loham?
Atsme
✍🏻
📧
15:18, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
When this War Is Over
When this war is over
It will be a better day
When this war is over
It will be a better day
But it won't bring back
Those poor boys in their graves
- J. J. Cale (2006)
Did you know that... The Road to Escondido (2006) - features the last recordings of notable Hammond organ player Billy Preston. Martinevans123 ( talk) 22:58, 6 November 2018 (UTC) .... "When it happens on the street, We call that a crime"
I have notice that the page Tu Maza Jeev has been created in paid advocacy. I was checking its creators profile (Mr Tiven) and IMDB records of same film https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6317992/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast its noticed that Tiven's name has been listed as Social media marketing manager. It seems upfront like its a paid advocacy after scrutinised his profile it has been notice he have created few more pages in such way, which has been tried to edit under there own names, fortunately those users got ban and then user has re-edited it. I think we should stop paid advocacy and take necessary action, to stop vandalism as well. ( 106.78.214.200 ( talk) 06:37, 8 November 2018 (UTC))
I can't believe you deleted my hard work. I work REALLY hard on it and instead of enjoying the work that Idid, you delete it! HOW WOULD YOU LIKE IT IF I DELETED YOUR HARD WORK? YOU WOULDN'T LIKE IT, RIGHT? SO, DON'T DO IT AGAIN!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJAlexander408 ( talk • contribs) 14:49, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
User:Ritchie333, you deleted my work again. WHY DOES THIS KEEP HAPPENING!!!!! I'm not doing anything wrong. DJAlexander408 ( talk) 17:48, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
It's all about ingenuity right
there, slick Ritchie.
- A
Atsme
✍🏻
📧
18:28, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I mentioned you here. —— SerialNumber 54129 16:34, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Here's the thing: I see Wikipedia's content under continual threat from POV warriors, vandals, and other folks NOTHERE to contribute. They deface the edifice of knowledge we've collectively built. I have tried (as part of the necessary countervandalism effort protecting the articles we've written) to prevent the damage they cause. If my past perceived wrongs will never be forgiven I will sooner quit the field rather than risk being punished by the mob. I don't agree that I was uncivil or edit-warring in this case but I guess good editors can disagree on those points. Perhaps I deserve a warning for how I handled that incident; message received. It's bad enough the WMF treats all of us with contempt but I really can't abide being treated in this manner by my fellow editors. I genuinely hope this makes sense. If I earned a warning, fine. Bringing up an incident a year ago feels like shooting inside the tent, especially when it seems you're eager for a fellow admin to block me. I don't have to edit here if the consensus doesn't want me here. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) Chris Troutman ( talk) 16:08, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
{{
harvnb}}
correctly without ever making a mistake?The reason I didn't is because I would also have to block DaveC1967 in order to be fairI don't think you've need to, since DaveC1967 hasn't been warned about civility (nor has he been uncivil that I see) or edit warring while Chris very well knows the rules on that. Galobtter ( pingó mió) 17:09, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
King's Cross St. Pancras tube station you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
17:00, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
The article
King's Cross St. Pancras tube station you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:King's Cross St. Pancras tube station for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
18:40, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
The article
King's Cross St Pancras tube station you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:King's Cross St Pancras tube station for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
19:00, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
The article
King's Cross St. Pancras tube station you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:King's Cross St. Pancras tube station for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
19:02, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Ritchie333, I am a bit confused. I listed 2 reverts within 24 hours. nableezy - 21:00, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
If you look at the talk page you can see that this is something that has been discussed and argued over for a good long while. Im not sure how I can proceed when the discussions continue to get closed as "no consensus" and then people argue that those "no consensus" closes make it so that there is consensus for the status quo. If you have a way forward I am all ears. nableezy - 21:06, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
In this case, Nableezy, you have spent some time at the talk page arguing about the neutrality and scope of the article, but as far as I can tell nobody has agreed with you. Sometimes (like when everybody else thinks the Pall Mall square on a London Monopoly board is pink while you think it's purple) consensus just doesn't go your way. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:15, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
With WorldCat as a "reference"? Tsk tsk. Drmies ( talk) 15:45, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. |
Hello Ritchie333,
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
As we are all aware, WP technology baffles me. I have zero clue where to even post what just happened and am hoping you can help me. We are doing the final edits on Sirimavo Bandaranaike to nominate it for GA. So when everyone said I think we're done, I ran the dash thingy and date thingy. The problem was that the date thing took out the as and bs on the sources where there are multiple articles by the same author. Not even sure if I am explaining this well, but for these two
*{{cite news |ref=harv |last1=Fernando |first1=Tilak S. |title="Operation Holdfast" & Consequences |date=7 May 2015a |url=http://www.sriexpress.com/article/2922-life-abroad-pt-125-operation-holdfast-consequences.html |accessdate=1 November 2018 |newspaper=Sri Express |location=Colombo, Sri Lanka |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20181101180325/http://www.sriexpress.com/article/2922-life-abroad-pt-125-operation-holdfast-consequences.html |archivedate=1 November 2018}}
*{{cite news |ref=harv |last1=Fernando |first1=Tilak S. |title=Remembering Dr. Sivali Ratwatte |date=16 November 2015b |url=http://www.sriexpress.com/article/2963-remembering-dr-sivali-ratwatte.html |accessdate=29 October 2018 |newspaper=Sri Express |location=Colombo, Sri Lanka |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20181029190050/http://www.sriexpress.com/article/2963-remembering-dr-sivali-ratwatte.html |archivedate=29 October 2018}}
It took out the a after 7 May 2015 and the b after 16 November 2015, breaking the link between the anchor and the citation. How do I report this problem? Do I need to tell someone, other than you? (Basically, I'm hoping you will just wave your magic wand and fix it :) ) Thanks! SusunW ( talk) 18:53, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Karen Carpenter you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
22:01, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Would you like to substantiate
this claim so I have an idea of exactly what the hell you're talking about? So there's no confusion, I'm referring directly to although Praxidixae is not named nor the specific person responsible for Donna Strickland, I know from first-hand experience they are close to it.
You're either being fed lies by someone or outright bullshitting and this is tantamount to childish gossip.
Praxidicae (
talk)
17:29, 20 November 2018 (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 80 | ← | Archive 85 | Archive 86 | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | Archive 89 | Archive 90 |
Hi Ritchie, I believe you need to fix this. You specifically notified MaranoFan of the AN thread you opened on Winkelvi's IBan violation, and pointed her directly to the specific thread [1], which, like all notifications of noticeboard discussions, especially from admins, appears to be a direct invitation to participate in it. She then posted there four times [2], [3], [4] (self-reverted), [5], and got blocked by 28bytes for a month for her trouble. All of her posts, even her comment to MONGO, seem to be covered by WP:BANEX and by your notification to her of the thread. Please fix this. Softlavender ( talk) 09:55, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
I think 28bytes blocked simply to make things fairer towards Winkelvi. As for the near-gushing attitude, I have already said that MaranoFan has been disruptive and continued to mention Winkelvi after being asked not to. Therefore a block is within the bounds of administrator discretion and stops accusations of bias against Winkelvi. I was hoping there would be a consensus to unblock MaranoFan, but unfortunately there isn't. The principal reason I want her unblocked is, of course, to complete the actions (including fixing the maintenance tags I have put on the article) on Talk:Meghan Trainor/GA3; however, any other uninvolved editor can do that. If all the action points listed on the review are dealt with, I can pass it. As Meghan's notability rests entirely in the internet era, it should be possible to find sources for everything I have queried as failing verification. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:14, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Talking about the blocking Admin's actions in this thread is not "casting aspirations across multiple other editors talkpages". I'm giving 28bytes every opportunity to reverse their error but they don't want to it seems. Admins expect editors to admit their errors (real or imagined) before unblocking, but again 28bytes has not admitted any wrong doing or lapse in judgement for blocking MF. Admins need to be held to the same standard as Editors. If Richie is correct that the block was to make things "fairer" for the indef'd editor, sorry but that is not appropriate or effective. It just feeds the false narritive that there was a two problem when MF did nothing to cause WV to breach the IBAN. There is another unblock request posted - MF is being extrememly reasonable admitting wrongdoing even though he only responded to Richie's invitation to post at AN. 28bytes has another chance to undo his/her mistake. Legacypac ( talk) 17:53, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
On 6 November 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Catherine Kerrison, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that historian Catherine Kerrison (pictured) thinks beauty is still important for any woman in the public eye? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Catherine Kerrison. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Catherine Kerrison), 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.
Alex Shih ( talk) 00:01, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
this article on catherine talks about "non traditional sources" but doesnt say what that actually means so i put the clarify tag on them — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:4023:D900:203C:81D:F174:42CA ( talk • contribs)
you sound a bit angry — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:4023:D900:203C:81D:F174:42CA ( talk • contribs)
if an article needs citations and clarification; an article needs citations and clarifications; doesnt matter if someone tried to delete it or if theres hard work put into the article; besides; me and you have just made the article better with our edits; good for us!!
the creator was blocked for sockpuppeting; are you defending sockpuppeting?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:4023:D900:203C:81D:F174:42CA ( talk • contribs)
I've got
Loham watchlisted, so my attention was recently drawn to what appears to be suspicious IP activity by
User:2405:205:6203:B55E:0:0:27E8:68A5 who added
Joy Badlani as one of the cast in some 50+/- films. See their edit contribs. Before I reverted the IP the first time, I tried to find something (anything) to verify Badlani having appeared in Loham and couldn't find anything. The same for a few other random selections I made from the IP's edit contribs, and also on Joy Badlani where I found this
removal by
Cyphoidbomb. It appears to me we may have a connected user adding his own name for parts he may or may not have played as an extra. A Google search shows that he promotes himself using YouTube, FB, other social media and unreliable sources. I'm curious to see what Cyphoidbomb thinks about all the other articles, and then I'll create an AfD for Badlani but in the interim, will you semi-p Loham?
Atsme
✍🏻
📧
15:18, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
When this War Is Over
When this war is over
It will be a better day
When this war is over
It will be a better day
But it won't bring back
Those poor boys in their graves
- J. J. Cale (2006)
Did you know that... The Road to Escondido (2006) - features the last recordings of notable Hammond organ player Billy Preston. Martinevans123 ( talk) 22:58, 6 November 2018 (UTC) .... "When it happens on the street, We call that a crime"
I have notice that the page Tu Maza Jeev has been created in paid advocacy. I was checking its creators profile (Mr Tiven) and IMDB records of same film https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6317992/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast its noticed that Tiven's name has been listed as Social media marketing manager. It seems upfront like its a paid advocacy after scrutinised his profile it has been notice he have created few more pages in such way, which has been tried to edit under there own names, fortunately those users got ban and then user has re-edited it. I think we should stop paid advocacy and take necessary action, to stop vandalism as well. ( 106.78.214.200 ( talk) 06:37, 8 November 2018 (UTC))
I can't believe you deleted my hard work. I work REALLY hard on it and instead of enjoying the work that Idid, you delete it! HOW WOULD YOU LIKE IT IF I DELETED YOUR HARD WORK? YOU WOULDN'T LIKE IT, RIGHT? SO, DON'T DO IT AGAIN!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJAlexander408 ( talk • contribs) 14:49, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
User:Ritchie333, you deleted my work again. WHY DOES THIS KEEP HAPPENING!!!!! I'm not doing anything wrong. DJAlexander408 ( talk) 17:48, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
It's all about ingenuity right
there, slick Ritchie.
- A
Atsme
✍🏻
📧
18:28, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I mentioned you here. —— SerialNumber 54129 16:34, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Here's the thing: I see Wikipedia's content under continual threat from POV warriors, vandals, and other folks NOTHERE to contribute. They deface the edifice of knowledge we've collectively built. I have tried (as part of the necessary countervandalism effort protecting the articles we've written) to prevent the damage they cause. If my past perceived wrongs will never be forgiven I will sooner quit the field rather than risk being punished by the mob. I don't agree that I was uncivil or edit-warring in this case but I guess good editors can disagree on those points. Perhaps I deserve a warning for how I handled that incident; message received. It's bad enough the WMF treats all of us with contempt but I really can't abide being treated in this manner by my fellow editors. I genuinely hope this makes sense. If I earned a warning, fine. Bringing up an incident a year ago feels like shooting inside the tent, especially when it seems you're eager for a fellow admin to block me. I don't have to edit here if the consensus doesn't want me here. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) Chris Troutman ( talk) 16:08, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
{{
harvnb}}
correctly without ever making a mistake?The reason I didn't is because I would also have to block DaveC1967 in order to be fairI don't think you've need to, since DaveC1967 hasn't been warned about civility (nor has he been uncivil that I see) or edit warring while Chris very well knows the rules on that. Galobtter ( pingó mió) 17:09, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
King's Cross St. Pancras tube station you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
17:00, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
The article
King's Cross St. Pancras tube station you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:King's Cross St. Pancras tube station for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
18:40, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
The article
King's Cross St Pancras tube station you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:King's Cross St Pancras tube station for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
19:00, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
The article
King's Cross St. Pancras tube station you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:King's Cross St. Pancras tube station for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
19:02, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Ritchie333, I am a bit confused. I listed 2 reverts within 24 hours. nableezy - 21:00, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
If you look at the talk page you can see that this is something that has been discussed and argued over for a good long while. Im not sure how I can proceed when the discussions continue to get closed as "no consensus" and then people argue that those "no consensus" closes make it so that there is consensus for the status quo. If you have a way forward I am all ears. nableezy - 21:06, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
In this case, Nableezy, you have spent some time at the talk page arguing about the neutrality and scope of the article, but as far as I can tell nobody has agreed with you. Sometimes (like when everybody else thinks the Pall Mall square on a London Monopoly board is pink while you think it's purple) consensus just doesn't go your way. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:15, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
With WorldCat as a "reference"? Tsk tsk. Drmies ( talk) 15:45, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. |
Hello Ritchie333,
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
As we are all aware, WP technology baffles me. I have zero clue where to even post what just happened and am hoping you can help me. We are doing the final edits on Sirimavo Bandaranaike to nominate it for GA. So when everyone said I think we're done, I ran the dash thingy and date thingy. The problem was that the date thing took out the as and bs on the sources where there are multiple articles by the same author. Not even sure if I am explaining this well, but for these two
*{{cite news |ref=harv |last1=Fernando |first1=Tilak S. |title="Operation Holdfast" & Consequences |date=7 May 2015a |url=http://www.sriexpress.com/article/2922-life-abroad-pt-125-operation-holdfast-consequences.html |accessdate=1 November 2018 |newspaper=Sri Express |location=Colombo, Sri Lanka |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20181101180325/http://www.sriexpress.com/article/2922-life-abroad-pt-125-operation-holdfast-consequences.html |archivedate=1 November 2018}}
*{{cite news |ref=harv |last1=Fernando |first1=Tilak S. |title=Remembering Dr. Sivali Ratwatte |date=16 November 2015b |url=http://www.sriexpress.com/article/2963-remembering-dr-sivali-ratwatte.html |accessdate=29 October 2018 |newspaper=Sri Express |location=Colombo, Sri Lanka |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20181029190050/http://www.sriexpress.com/article/2963-remembering-dr-sivali-ratwatte.html |archivedate=29 October 2018}}
It took out the a after 7 May 2015 and the b after 16 November 2015, breaking the link between the anchor and the citation. How do I report this problem? Do I need to tell someone, other than you? (Basically, I'm hoping you will just wave your magic wand and fix it :) ) Thanks! SusunW ( talk) 18:53, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Karen Carpenter you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
22:01, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Would you like to substantiate
this claim so I have an idea of exactly what the hell you're talking about? So there's no confusion, I'm referring directly to although Praxidixae is not named nor the specific person responsible for Donna Strickland, I know from first-hand experience they are close to it.
You're either being fed lies by someone or outright bullshitting and this is tantamount to childish gossip.
Praxidicae (
talk)
17:29, 20 November 2018 (UTC)