{{
talkback}}
template or quote the previous message.This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Saschaporsche. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{ helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.
Again, welcome! Wikih101 ( talk) 03:14, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
I cannot see any reason for your edit summary in this edit. / Pieter Kuiper ( talk) 09:07, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
@pieter kuiper, i disagree with you. On the english wikipedia there may be a "star" system, on dutch wikipedia there is no such system! That's because everybody is contributing to an article, and the article becomes the work of the community! So, i think mdd is wrong in pretending on linkedin that he is the author of a featured article!
@mdd, i am prepared to discuss this item with you, however as you know there are RULES on wikipedia which quote " it is strongly recommended not to write about your own person or company you work for" So, writing about yourself on wikiquote/wikipedia is not recommended/desired. You know that! And that's why your page on wikiquote has been removed since you did write it by yourself. There is nothing more to discuss about this. Saschaporsche ( talk) 12:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Saschaporsche, isn't it just possible to put the picture back in the article without the text? I do not think there's anything wrong with the picture as such. The Wiki ghost ( talk) 08:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello Saschaporsche,
see Talk:Jewish Defense League#Attribution of the picture (and most of the discussion above). There seems to be some kind of deadlock. Do you think you can mediate in some way or do you happen to know others who could? I ask you this because you know most of the users involved and because I think that if those problems could be solved somehow on this wiki, there may also come a solution for the similar problems on nl:wiki. Best regards, The Wiki ghost ( talk) 19:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
(P.S. by the way, I apologize for not reading the discussion above well enough before I asked something).
Hi Sascha – sorry for the delay in replying; I have only just seen your message.
I think that generic Western Australian Museum link was a result of to the information being on a non-linkable/" deep web" page. Whatever the case, you can find relevant pages through the website's search system, such as Carnot Bay DC3 PK-AFV Pelikaan (1942/03/03) and Zero Hour & Carnot Bay.
Unfortunately I can't fix it myself right now as my internet connection is extremely slooooow today and I have a lot of work to do. I will try to do it soon though.
Grant | Talk 09:26, 15 January 2015 (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) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (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) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Saschaporsche. 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)
Please stop deleting images because you cannot see the article properly. If you're having problems, change your display settings. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 20:09, 26 March 2017 (UTC) Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 20:09, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
In which case the image will be updated accordingly, as it has been in previous years. You're also ignoring the way that the article lead will grow, and the suggestion that you change your settings if you are having trouble viewing the article.
Then why don't you look at some of them, such as 2017 World Rally Championship and 2017 Supercars Championship?
And the existing practice says that the current championship leader's picture should be included in the article lead.
Unfortunately, you're going to need a consensus to change it. You have been directed to the relevant WikiProjects, but have made no attempt to start a discussion there. What you are doing amounts to edit-warring. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 06:16, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
In an edit summary, since that was where you were most active.
And you can change the settings on your device. Please bear in mind that although you can now see the article "properly", your edits have changed the way other people can see it. Don't assume that what is "proper" for you is "proper" for everyone.
What? We have always included the championship leader and defending champion in the article lead. Since Rosberg isn't defending his title, there is no need to include him there.
That's not the way it works. We've included the images for years, and it has been applied to dozens of articles. I don't need a consensus to keep doing what we have always done because one person disagrees with it. Your edits represent the bigger change, so the burden of consensus rests with you. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 06:52, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Please read this before you continue any further: do not disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point. Your edits at 2017 World Rally Championship are disruptive; the image is a visual representation of the calendar, and so the calendar section is the most appropriate place to put it. Your decision to move it elsewhere is motivated by an attempt to make your case at 2017 Formula One season (and it doesn't, since you have changed just one of dozens of articles). If this continues, you may be taken to the administrators' noticeboard for your disruptive editing. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 09:02, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Please get a consensus before making changes to the articles. Moving the images around might make the article layout more aesthetically appealling to you, but your changes negatively affect the articles for mobile and tablet users because your changes put images in the middle of articles with no context and no explanation as to why they are relevant to that part of the article. You have been repeatedly told not to do this, several editors have taken issue with your editing decisions and you have either ignored directions to talk pages, or refused to engage in those discussions. If you continue to make these edits, it may be considered disruptive and you may be referred to the administrators. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 09:58, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Marty Rathbun has returned to Scientology. I am on my phone and can't do much editing this week. He has posted on YouTube and probably his site - has changed his story completely. Sorry I can't cite sources this week. If you could please help me with this I would be very grateful. Sh33na 19:07, 10 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sh33na ( talk • contribs)
Marty himself on video stating he has returned is not enough? Then I will wait and correct the article to how it should be updated when I can instead of hoping you might do one minute of research with me. Thank you. Sh33na 21:56, 10 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sh33na ( talk • contribs)
Hey, I saw you undid my last revision on the page for The Yellow House, but I didn't see a reason given in your edit summary. Just wanted confirmation on why the picture was reduced in size. Thanks, Tkbrett ( talk) 05:32, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Saschaporsche. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
~Swarm~ {talk} 07:09, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for removing that controversal section. Even I was confused about it and removed it but the sourcing to me I thought was adequate. Thank you for removing that, reliablity is key! OrbitalEnd48401 ( talk) 21:04, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
It’s all buddy. Other contributors keep adding stuff like that heck I got very confused by that. But yes let’s see were the investigation goes. OrbitalEnd48401 ( talk) 22:38, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
This was problematic. You had to observe the source which says "32 lakh" which means 32,00,000. Information is correctly supported by the source. 119.160.69.15 ( talk) 03:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person ( Steve Novak), but that you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist ( talk) 09:33, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi! Just wanted to let you know I reverted a change you made. I talked a bit in the edit summary at that link about why. Thanks! —{{u| Goldenshimmer}} (they/their)|😹|✝️|John 15:12|☮️|🍂| T/ C 12:26, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
I see you recently accepted a pending change to May 19 that did not include a direct source.
You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.
All the pages in the Days of the Year project have had pending changes protection turned on to prevent vandalism and further addition of entries without direct sources. As a pending changes patroller, please do not accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that day of year page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 ( talk) 13:40, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, could you please explain why you reverted my edit? Banana Republic ( talk) 22:39, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I am sure you will not appreciate this, but I need to ask you what steps you make when accepting revisions in WP:PC. Specifically, I need to ask you why you accepted this change? An anonymous IP removes information from a WP:BIOLEAD with the edit summary of "rm irrelevant information" and you just accept that? If you had even glanced at the Talk:Carl Benjamin page you would have known the lede/lead is the key subject. But you didn't, so it makes me wonder. What do you do in evaluating which WP:PC edits to accept? -- SVTCobra ( talk) 04:33, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Developed_country&diff=899950642&oldid=899949872
( Pradillus ( talk) 15:51, 8 June 2019 (UTC))
Gentle notice that you didn't sign your message over at User_talk:1.144.105.225. Googol30 ( talk) 13:02, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello, the reason why it is a fact and not an opinion is clearly stated in the sources that I have provided. His goals per game are the best in the premier league era, he is the 6th highest goalscorer in the History of the Premier league and is also the highest non European goalscorer. He has been in the premier league for 9 years, enough to grant him legendary status. He has won the premier league 4 times and has also won the golden boot. He is also the highest goalscorer for Manchester City, one of the biggest football clubs in the world. He was ranked 9th in the Independent's greatest premier league players of all time. He has also been in the top 10 goal scorers in the world, in terms of goals since 2011. He has often been credited with the single greatest moment in English football history, his 93rd minute goal against QPR to win City the PL All of this provides enough evidence to suggest that a player of his stature should get the respect that he deserves by adding what I added to his wikipedia page, which is viewed by millions online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.56.151.213 ( talk) 10:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
A polite heads-up, I rolled back the pending edit you approved here [1]. The linked Gallup Poll inserted by the editor indicates that support has remained stable ( U.S. Support for Gay Marriage Stable, at 63%), whereas the editor used the source to indicate incorrectly that support had dropped. It was a misleading edit (and there were also MoS problems).-- Goldsztajn ( talk) 09:19, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Saschaporsche, the Cara Buono article was protected specifically to prevent the edits your approved here. I'm assuming this was just an accidental oversight as the protection clearly states the article is protected due to persistent WP:DOB violations.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:12, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Several folks including me (above) have counseled you about correctly using Pending Changes rights. Yet you continue to accept additions like this. See User_talk:Saschaporsche#Sources_needed_for_Days_of_the_Year_pages above. WTF?
Please request that the privilege be removed from your account before this is taken forcibly from you on WP:ANI. You clearly are not understanding the coaching you've received and have demonstrated a significant lack of competence using it. Toddst1 ( talk) 22:57, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I know other users have been giving you a hard time for your pending change reviews, and I sympathize with what you said in the above section about how people make mistakes and whatnot, but your edits on Robin Williams were really pretty careless considering the line above the change was a comment about how 'committed' should not be changed; you could have also viewed the history to see that other people who were trying to change it have been reverted by experienced editors too. Please try to be more careful in the future. Thanks. -- SacredDragonX ( talk) 10:23, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
I'm really not understanding your reasons for restoring the IPs edit. The article is worse for not having Holland since it is now less specific. I'm not going to revert you since there's no point edit waring over it, but "dunes of the Netherlands' North Sea coastline" is less descriptive than "dunes of the Holland's North Sea coastline". If you prefer I suppose we could wikilink to Holland in case people might be confused. I will also grant that "the German invasion of the Netherlands" should probably stay as The Netherlands since it could be considered misleading. In summary I only reverted in the first place since in the context (in the first sentence) it really isn't talking about the country but the region. A7V2 ( talk) 09:47, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I'd like to suggest keeping the change you reverted here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Max_Verstappen&oldid=prev&diff=982553040 I don't agree that it is unnecessary info. Actually, it is a very unique record for him and totally worth mentioning, I was in fact surprised the article did not mention this very interesting fact about him - that the FIA actually cemented his record and he will hold it forever (unless they revert the rule). I properly sourced it too, and phrased it so that it fits the surrounding text naturally. -- Peepay ( talk) 14:58, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
On the Charlemagne page I found OLD VANDALISM and corrected it, explaining it well in the corrections tab. Reverted because there was no talk page. So I added a talk page and remade the correction. The talk discussion explains the NEEDED changes very well. Reverted and told to "make a talk page" which ALREADY EXISTED! Asked for justification for this and they just brush it off with "I didn't read it". So make the edit again and quote the talk page and YOU DIDN'T READ THE TALK PAGE BEFORE REVERTING! And warn me for "vandalism" because I'm correcting vandalism.
What is the point of talk pages if NO ONE READS THEM? It explains the vandalism I am correcting PERFECTLY and lists the addition citations I am adding. It would take literally 2 minutes to read and verify.
I'm messaging resolution disputation after this. Hansel reinhart ( talk) 18:58, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
You should know that Peter Brock is not Pete Brock. -- Falcadore ( talk) 11:21, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the acceptance of my edit. But even more important is your page. You have just opened my eyes to the Auden poetry. The "Funeral blues" is so sad and beautiful. I even found the [ audio version]. Another discovery is /info/en/?search=File:Lady_Godiva_by_John_Collier.jpg - so beautiful, modest and innocent. Thank you :-) 85.193.228.103 ( talk) 14:48, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Saschaporsche,
Can you change the citation on the 1912 Targa Florio time you changed (I don't have that book myself)? It appears to be an error in Auto Course as checking the average speed calculation the 23 hours 37 minutes time is right. Thanks. A7V2 ( talk) 22:18, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blackie Dammett (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
John B123 ( talk) 20:20, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Please read the rest of the text in the summary section, most of which has been written by me. I have been consistently putting lower numbers in front in cases such as "XX was trailing by 1–3". Also see MOS:Snooker. AmethystZhou ( talk) 09:15, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
They were tied at 2–2 at the mid-session interval, and Vafaei made breaks of 100 and 71 to lead by 5–3. Murphy narrowed the score to 5–4 by winning the ninth frame, but Vafaei made a break of 67 to clinch the tenth frame and a 6–4 victory.
{{
talkback}}
template or quote the previous message.This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Saschaporsche. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{ helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.
Again, welcome! Wikih101 ( talk) 03:14, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
I cannot see any reason for your edit summary in this edit. / Pieter Kuiper ( talk) 09:07, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
@pieter kuiper, i disagree with you. On the english wikipedia there may be a "star" system, on dutch wikipedia there is no such system! That's because everybody is contributing to an article, and the article becomes the work of the community! So, i think mdd is wrong in pretending on linkedin that he is the author of a featured article!
@mdd, i am prepared to discuss this item with you, however as you know there are RULES on wikipedia which quote " it is strongly recommended not to write about your own person or company you work for" So, writing about yourself on wikiquote/wikipedia is not recommended/desired. You know that! And that's why your page on wikiquote has been removed since you did write it by yourself. There is nothing more to discuss about this. Saschaporsche ( talk) 12:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Saschaporsche, isn't it just possible to put the picture back in the article without the text? I do not think there's anything wrong with the picture as such. The Wiki ghost ( talk) 08:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello Saschaporsche,
see Talk:Jewish Defense League#Attribution of the picture (and most of the discussion above). There seems to be some kind of deadlock. Do you think you can mediate in some way or do you happen to know others who could? I ask you this because you know most of the users involved and because I think that if those problems could be solved somehow on this wiki, there may also come a solution for the similar problems on nl:wiki. Best regards, The Wiki ghost ( talk) 19:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
(P.S. by the way, I apologize for not reading the discussion above well enough before I asked something).
Hi Sascha – sorry for the delay in replying; I have only just seen your message.
I think that generic Western Australian Museum link was a result of to the information being on a non-linkable/" deep web" page. Whatever the case, you can find relevant pages through the website's search system, such as Carnot Bay DC3 PK-AFV Pelikaan (1942/03/03) and Zero Hour & Carnot Bay.
Unfortunately I can't fix it myself right now as my internet connection is extremely slooooow today and I have a lot of work to do. I will try to do it soon though.
Grant | Talk 09:26, 15 January 2015 (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) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (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) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Saschaporsche. 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)
Please stop deleting images because you cannot see the article properly. If you're having problems, change your display settings. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 20:09, 26 March 2017 (UTC) Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 20:09, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
In which case the image will be updated accordingly, as it has been in previous years. You're also ignoring the way that the article lead will grow, and the suggestion that you change your settings if you are having trouble viewing the article.
Then why don't you look at some of them, such as 2017 World Rally Championship and 2017 Supercars Championship?
And the existing practice says that the current championship leader's picture should be included in the article lead.
Unfortunately, you're going to need a consensus to change it. You have been directed to the relevant WikiProjects, but have made no attempt to start a discussion there. What you are doing amounts to edit-warring. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 06:16, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
In an edit summary, since that was where you were most active.
And you can change the settings on your device. Please bear in mind that although you can now see the article "properly", your edits have changed the way other people can see it. Don't assume that what is "proper" for you is "proper" for everyone.
What? We have always included the championship leader and defending champion in the article lead. Since Rosberg isn't defending his title, there is no need to include him there.
That's not the way it works. We've included the images for years, and it has been applied to dozens of articles. I don't need a consensus to keep doing what we have always done because one person disagrees with it. Your edits represent the bigger change, so the burden of consensus rests with you. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 06:52, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Please read this before you continue any further: do not disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point. Your edits at 2017 World Rally Championship are disruptive; the image is a visual representation of the calendar, and so the calendar section is the most appropriate place to put it. Your decision to move it elsewhere is motivated by an attempt to make your case at 2017 Formula One season (and it doesn't, since you have changed just one of dozens of articles). If this continues, you may be taken to the administrators' noticeboard for your disruptive editing. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 09:02, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Please get a consensus before making changes to the articles. Moving the images around might make the article layout more aesthetically appealling to you, but your changes negatively affect the articles for mobile and tablet users because your changes put images in the middle of articles with no context and no explanation as to why they are relevant to that part of the article. You have been repeatedly told not to do this, several editors have taken issue with your editing decisions and you have either ignored directions to talk pages, or refused to engage in those discussions. If you continue to make these edits, it may be considered disruptive and you may be referred to the administrators. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 09:58, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Marty Rathbun has returned to Scientology. I am on my phone and can't do much editing this week. He has posted on YouTube and probably his site - has changed his story completely. Sorry I can't cite sources this week. If you could please help me with this I would be very grateful. Sh33na 19:07, 10 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sh33na ( talk • contribs)
Marty himself on video stating he has returned is not enough? Then I will wait and correct the article to how it should be updated when I can instead of hoping you might do one minute of research with me. Thank you. Sh33na 21:56, 10 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sh33na ( talk • contribs)
Hey, I saw you undid my last revision on the page for The Yellow House, but I didn't see a reason given in your edit summary. Just wanted confirmation on why the picture was reduced in size. Thanks, Tkbrett ( talk) 05:32, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Saschaporsche. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
~Swarm~ {talk} 07:09, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for removing that controversal section. Even I was confused about it and removed it but the sourcing to me I thought was adequate. Thank you for removing that, reliablity is key! OrbitalEnd48401 ( talk) 21:04, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
It’s all buddy. Other contributors keep adding stuff like that heck I got very confused by that. But yes let’s see were the investigation goes. OrbitalEnd48401 ( talk) 22:38, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
This was problematic. You had to observe the source which says "32 lakh" which means 32,00,000. Information is correctly supported by the source. 119.160.69.15 ( talk) 03:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person ( Steve Novak), but that you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist ( talk) 09:33, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi! Just wanted to let you know I reverted a change you made. I talked a bit in the edit summary at that link about why. Thanks! —{{u| Goldenshimmer}} (they/their)|😹|✝️|John 15:12|☮️|🍂| T/ C 12:26, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
I see you recently accepted a pending change to May 19 that did not include a direct source.
You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.
All the pages in the Days of the Year project have had pending changes protection turned on to prevent vandalism and further addition of entries without direct sources. As a pending changes patroller, please do not accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that day of year page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 ( talk) 13:40, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, could you please explain why you reverted my edit? Banana Republic ( talk) 22:39, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I am sure you will not appreciate this, but I need to ask you what steps you make when accepting revisions in WP:PC. Specifically, I need to ask you why you accepted this change? An anonymous IP removes information from a WP:BIOLEAD with the edit summary of "rm irrelevant information" and you just accept that? If you had even glanced at the Talk:Carl Benjamin page you would have known the lede/lead is the key subject. But you didn't, so it makes me wonder. What do you do in evaluating which WP:PC edits to accept? -- SVTCobra ( talk) 04:33, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Developed_country&diff=899950642&oldid=899949872
( Pradillus ( talk) 15:51, 8 June 2019 (UTC))
Gentle notice that you didn't sign your message over at User_talk:1.144.105.225. Googol30 ( talk) 13:02, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello, the reason why it is a fact and not an opinion is clearly stated in the sources that I have provided. His goals per game are the best in the premier league era, he is the 6th highest goalscorer in the History of the Premier league and is also the highest non European goalscorer. He has been in the premier league for 9 years, enough to grant him legendary status. He has won the premier league 4 times and has also won the golden boot. He is also the highest goalscorer for Manchester City, one of the biggest football clubs in the world. He was ranked 9th in the Independent's greatest premier league players of all time. He has also been in the top 10 goal scorers in the world, in terms of goals since 2011. He has often been credited with the single greatest moment in English football history, his 93rd minute goal against QPR to win City the PL All of this provides enough evidence to suggest that a player of his stature should get the respect that he deserves by adding what I added to his wikipedia page, which is viewed by millions online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.56.151.213 ( talk) 10:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
A polite heads-up, I rolled back the pending edit you approved here [1]. The linked Gallup Poll inserted by the editor indicates that support has remained stable ( U.S. Support for Gay Marriage Stable, at 63%), whereas the editor used the source to indicate incorrectly that support had dropped. It was a misleading edit (and there were also MoS problems).-- Goldsztajn ( talk) 09:19, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Saschaporsche, the Cara Buono article was protected specifically to prevent the edits your approved here. I'm assuming this was just an accidental oversight as the protection clearly states the article is protected due to persistent WP:DOB violations.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:12, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Several folks including me (above) have counseled you about correctly using Pending Changes rights. Yet you continue to accept additions like this. See User_talk:Saschaporsche#Sources_needed_for_Days_of_the_Year_pages above. WTF?
Please request that the privilege be removed from your account before this is taken forcibly from you on WP:ANI. You clearly are not understanding the coaching you've received and have demonstrated a significant lack of competence using it. Toddst1 ( talk) 22:57, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I know other users have been giving you a hard time for your pending change reviews, and I sympathize with what you said in the above section about how people make mistakes and whatnot, but your edits on Robin Williams were really pretty careless considering the line above the change was a comment about how 'committed' should not be changed; you could have also viewed the history to see that other people who were trying to change it have been reverted by experienced editors too. Please try to be more careful in the future. Thanks. -- SacredDragonX ( talk) 10:23, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
I'm really not understanding your reasons for restoring the IPs edit. The article is worse for not having Holland since it is now less specific. I'm not going to revert you since there's no point edit waring over it, but "dunes of the Netherlands' North Sea coastline" is less descriptive than "dunes of the Holland's North Sea coastline". If you prefer I suppose we could wikilink to Holland in case people might be confused. I will also grant that "the German invasion of the Netherlands" should probably stay as The Netherlands since it could be considered misleading. In summary I only reverted in the first place since in the context (in the first sentence) it really isn't talking about the country but the region. A7V2 ( talk) 09:47, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I'd like to suggest keeping the change you reverted here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Max_Verstappen&oldid=prev&diff=982553040 I don't agree that it is unnecessary info. Actually, it is a very unique record for him and totally worth mentioning, I was in fact surprised the article did not mention this very interesting fact about him - that the FIA actually cemented his record and he will hold it forever (unless they revert the rule). I properly sourced it too, and phrased it so that it fits the surrounding text naturally. -- Peepay ( talk) 14:58, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
On the Charlemagne page I found OLD VANDALISM and corrected it, explaining it well in the corrections tab. Reverted because there was no talk page. So I added a talk page and remade the correction. The talk discussion explains the NEEDED changes very well. Reverted and told to "make a talk page" which ALREADY EXISTED! Asked for justification for this and they just brush it off with "I didn't read it". So make the edit again and quote the talk page and YOU DIDN'T READ THE TALK PAGE BEFORE REVERTING! And warn me for "vandalism" because I'm correcting vandalism.
What is the point of talk pages if NO ONE READS THEM? It explains the vandalism I am correcting PERFECTLY and lists the addition citations I am adding. It would take literally 2 minutes to read and verify.
I'm messaging resolution disputation after this. Hansel reinhart ( talk) 18:58, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
You should know that Peter Brock is not Pete Brock. -- Falcadore ( talk) 11:21, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the acceptance of my edit. But even more important is your page. You have just opened my eyes to the Auden poetry. The "Funeral blues" is so sad and beautiful. I even found the [ audio version]. Another discovery is /info/en/?search=File:Lady_Godiva_by_John_Collier.jpg - so beautiful, modest and innocent. Thank you :-) 85.193.228.103 ( talk) 14:48, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Saschaporsche,
Can you change the citation on the 1912 Targa Florio time you changed (I don't have that book myself)? It appears to be an error in Auto Course as checking the average speed calculation the 23 hours 37 minutes time is right. Thanks. A7V2 ( talk) 22:18, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blackie Dammett (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
John B123 ( talk) 20:20, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Please read the rest of the text in the summary section, most of which has been written by me. I have been consistently putting lower numbers in front in cases such as "XX was trailing by 1–3". Also see MOS:Snooker. AmethystZhou ( talk) 09:15, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
They were tied at 2–2 at the mid-session interval, and Vafaei made breaks of 100 and 71 to lead by 5–3. Murphy narrowed the score to 5–4 by winning the ninth frame, but Vafaei made a break of 67 to clinch the tenth frame and a 6–4 victory.