![]() | 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 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
I saw a report regarding Badr Jafar at WP:BLPN and took it up because the situation seemed unsatisfactory. Some problems were fixed, but then a person who is apparently a representative of the subject attempted to remove certain text from the article, but you restored it ( diff). I can understand your edit given that the text apparently has two references, however the situation is not simple. I have restored the text and posted the explanation at Talk:Badr Jafar#Jafar Jafar. I would have waited to ask your opinion but you appear to be on a short break, so I thought I would leave an alert for your consideration on return. Johnuniq ( talk) 06:47, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. 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)
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 00:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
The article
English invasion of Scotland (1400) you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:English invasion of Scotland (1400) 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
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
20:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
The article
Neville–Neville feud you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Neville–Neville feud 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
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
20:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Why did you nominatee me for deletion? I've done nothing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDMfan23! ( talk • contribs) 18:10, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Please refrain from posting idiocy in my Talk page. I am aware of all of it. Adding references that Ebell is a climate warming denier is not defamation, it is responsible and expected Wikipedia editing. BatteryIncluded ( talk) 12:54, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Since you made improvements to Arm the Homeless (its new name, because I moved it to be more standard), do you plan to !vote to Keep it in the deletion discussion? Robert McClenon ( talk) 02:28, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
The article
English invasion of Scotland (1400) 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:English invasion of Scotland (1400) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
04:41, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The article
Neville–Neville feud 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:Neville–Neville feud for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
06:41, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
2ndopinion is opted when there is complete disagreement between the reviewer and nominator- This might be an example of what FIM refers to as
some fundamental misunderstanding as to the nature of the criteria. The 2nd opinion is used for far more than what you've described, it is used when a reviewer is unable to complete a part of the review for some reason, it is used when a reviewer is unsure of how to proceed with review for some reason, it is used occassionally when a reviewer who doesn't have a lot of experience would like for someone more experienced then they are to review the reviewer - this may be acceptable the first time around, but, after a few reviews its expected that a GA reviewer will be able to do this themselves without outside assistance. In fact if you'd looked at the criteria and just copy-pasted the definition of a second opinion, you'd have found that your interpretation is incorrect. From GAN/I itself;
If you are unsure whether an article meets the good article criteria, you may call for another reviewer or subject expert to provide a second opinion by doing the following. It has little to do with disagreements, but, can of course be used to get outside help for it. I am currently having one of my GA noms reviewed by two editors, an inexperienced one who wants to participate and a highly experienced reviewer who is checking over the review and reviewer themselves. In essence, this is what FIM is asking for themselves. GA reviews are no easy task and an experienced reviewer will see things that most others will completely miss. I see BlueMoonset has added their own comments to the review for the English invasion of Scotland 1400, they are excellent at picking up phrasing and wording problems and have a strong knowledge and understanding of the GA criteria. They're perfectly capable of helping you out on that review. Mr rnddude ( talk) 03:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
References
Hello! Your submission of
English invasion of Scotland (1400) at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Yoninah (
talk)
21:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Special Barnstar | |
Thanks for reverting this on my talkpage! It looks like the sock has been put back in the drawer... :-) 2601:1C0:4401:F360:901C:10B8:EB70:E1DB ( talk) 23:50, 31 October 2016 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Neville–Neville feud 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
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
02:21, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
The article
Bonville–Courtenay feud 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:Bonville–Courtenay feud for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
SilverplateDelta --
SilverplateDelta (
talk)
16:20, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
English invasion of Scotland (1400) 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
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
02:21, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Please do not remove my edit when i am mentioning important relatives of his -- important enough for at least one to have his own wikilink. These people are not "peripheral" as you claim. Mawlidman ( talk) 09:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
If you are keeping an eye on these aristocracy articles, watch out for Harry James Albert Taylor or Taylor-Berkeley who keeps popping up with various IPs trying to insert himself as a Brisco Baronet, a Musgrave Baronet and even the 9th Earl of Berkeley. JohnCD ( talk) 11:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
@ JohnCD: > I assume this is the same editor? Muffled Pocketed 10:19, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm thinking about testing out a new sig. Since your talk page is at the top of my Watchlist currently, you get the pleasure of being the first to see it. So, what do you think? (personally I can't think of a single problem with it). Mr rnddude (talk) 12:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
I can't see any reason why you keep on disturbing the article Kottayam. Do you even know where is Kottayam. Well it is a city in Indian state of Kerala. You are simply keeping on reverting the article. You don't even know our culture. Our city Kottayam knows what it needs in it's article. But please stop deleting contents from it. Everything in it was planned and discussed among us Kottayamkar. It may seem as commercial promotion, political or vandalism to you foreigners. But please stop it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thommuvtt ( talk • contribs) 10:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Well the content is neutral in tone. Please notify me the thing you would like to alter before deleting it on large scale. I will change it if it is needed to be so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thommuvtt ( talk • contribs) 10:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
I think you havent told me what was wrong. Sorry for disturbing you. Please mention what was wrong here. I will edit it. Please don't completely delete it from our page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thommuvtt ( talk • contribs) 11:28, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Done. And then.nn - mass delete is a great tool. I'm tired of these socks, they keep popping up. Doug Weller talk 15:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello! I want to apologize for poaching the article Roly Bain. When I saw the conversation about him at Drmies's talk page, I somehow missed seeing that you had already started a draft. So I went ahead and created the article. I was unaware of your draft until User:Polentarion added some material to the article and cited your draft. I wish I could add you to the DYK as co-author, but I'm not sure if they'd buy it, since you do not appear as a contributor in the history. What do you think, shall I do it anyhow? -- MelanieN ( talk) 16:12, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the Autopatrol endorsement, really appreciated! Amkilpatrick ( talk) 21:47, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. Thank you.
Two more done, here and here, with some more tonight. Cassianto Talk 18:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Re your message: Thanks. I deleted it again. -- Gogo Dodo ( talk) 05:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Fortuna, please stay out. Applications in arbitration proceedings are not personal attacks. They are the oil which keeps things running smoothly. 31.54.202.183 ( talk) 02:08, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi.
Humphrey Stafford (died 1413), an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's
Main Page as part of
Did you know
. You can see the hook and the discussion
here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you.
APersonBot (
talk!)
12:00, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Dear User!
Really shocked to read your warning on my talk page regarding my additions on Inter_Services_Intelligence and their unfairly undoing by some users whose country was defamed for false allegations against ISI and their Govt. accepted that allegation were false. So this information needed to be included in article and that's what i did. But as a matter of fact, this thing was not digestible by Indians as they have a history of Blaming Pakistan for every incident. Ok, now you tell me would not it be unfair if anyone tries to conceal history which is not in his/her interests?? Wikipedia is a place to share accurate, verifiable and up to date information to those relying on Wikipedia. But revisions and warnings are not fair. Think about it. Thanks AKJatt ( talk) 05:06, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
DatGuy Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi ( talk · contribs) WHAT A HYPOCRISYYYYYYYYY???? Does 3-Revert-Rule only applies to me or to User:Spartacus too??? If i have made 8 revisions rightfully, he have made plenty of revisions wrongfully. See the revision history and you will see SPARTACUS everywhere. Perfect example of Double Standards. If u wanna block me, GO AHEAD. I will not stop making true additions to ISI. Do whatever you can. Hunhhhh AKJatt ( talk) 10:43, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Your attacks againt me will not be tolerated. This is a blocking warning. Be respectful to me and I will respect you back. Foleo ( talk) 07:45, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
It would be appreciated if you find something on the article, which as put it "makes little sense," instead of tagging it, or calling the whole nation for it, fix it yourself. Thank you, Mona778 ( talk) 22:20, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
You know you are not supposed to do that, don't you?
Wikipedia:User categories: "user categories should not be used as "bottom-of-the-page" notices.[7] If a Wikipedian wishes to have such a notice, they may edit their user page and add the notice in some other way (such as by adding text or a userbox), rather than inappropriately creating a category grouping.[8]" Rathfelder ( talk) 20:12, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
Hey little Muffled. (Perhaps I should be writing to you c/o the pocket?) If you're at home with WP:DYK, as I'm not — I find it quite thorny — have you thought of proposing this nice new article for it? I have to admit I have trouble thinking of a thrilling hook... but still. Just a thought. Bishonen | talk 10:28, 31 July 2016 (UTC).
One of our dogs has just died. Stella, on the right up there.
Hi Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, I am creating the article "Leung Tsang". You said the page appears to be a direct copy from http://web.eecs.umich.edu/~leutsang/Professional%20Services.html. Well somehow this is true. In fact this external link belongs to me. I am the owner of this link. I will put a notice on the bottom of this link and grant permission to other people. So please do not delete this article. Joestc ( talk) 14:53, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Just so you know that wasn't Keto posting in another language but re-posting this diff from Constantin, which seems to say that he's a new account of Mujtaba!. Happy laundry day, hope you have sufficient quarters! — Spaceman Spiff 17:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Please note that the website in question now carries a no copyright wikipedia recommended message. Please do not revert the article. Thanks Racingmanager ( talk) 17:28, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
You're talking rubbish as usual. I reverted the edits at RfPP. 92.8.222.87 ( talk) 16:23, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
You're unbelievable. You claimed to have reverted an edit I made at RfPP. You did no such thing. All you did was troll my talk page (twice). 92.8.222.87 ( talk) 16:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Just in case you're not familiar with this particular breed of troll: Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Vote (X) for Change. Favonian ( talk) 16:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
I can assure you that the sources used are genuine (I have all the books listed as references) but I can see your point that parts of the article in question are similar to the website. I will rewrite in due course. Thanks Racingmanager ( talk) 14:05, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please don't post on my talk page again. Thanks, Mathsci ( talk) 09:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Can we just take a moment to appreciate sine bot becoming an activist. The edit summary is lovely [3]. Mr rnddude ( talk) 10:38, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#I wish for some resolution of the harassment, wikihounding, wikistalking, and attempts to WP:OUTING of me over the approximately last 60 days by user HappyValleyEditor and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted in most arbitration pages please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant 01:14, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
I apologize for reapplying my edit without explanation--I didn't realize you'd undone my previous edit before I reapplied it (I thought I might have mixed that page up with another one). That seems to be the new format for the house section of the royalty infobox (see pages of people from more well-known houses such as the Houses of Hanover, Plantagenet, and Windsor), as the "House of" part is rather redundant. ~ Iamthecheese44 ( talk) 07:03, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it was Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist I was thinking of. Sorry I was a bit cryptic, I was dashing out of the house at the time! Still, all's well that ends well as a countryman of mine once wrote. I'm keeping an eye on {{noping|Hspa.20}] but I'm not sure yet that it's him. -- Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 16:07, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
== Some Advice RE: Your editing ==
I just thought I'd give you a little advice: Right now, it really feels like you do not understand what Wikipedia is about. You have just under 1,500 edits, and over 1,200 of them are to User or User Talk pages. You have a total of 63 149 edits to Talk and Mainspace pages combined, less than 10% of your edits.
[4] This is an encyclopedia, not a social media site. Barnstars, awards, and gussying up your User Page are all minor distractions to the main one: The Encyclopedia.
There have been users blocked in the past due to not being here to improve the Encyclopedia. You should probably take note of the second bolded line under WP:!HERE. Between the fact that your contribution percentages are so far out of balance, the fact that you are trying to keep a non-free file without even trying to understand why you can not do that, and the fact that you keep asking everyone to sign your guestbook like we are on MySpace, I am afraid you will probably head toward a block due to disruption sooner rather than later, unless you change how you are doing things. 2602:306:C41D:E880:C957:2302:5BD5:3869 ( talk) 23:55, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
If we work together, we can improve wikipedia. Keep wondering y u keep revising my edits when all I wanna do is sort the list alphabetically and add missing names. Makes it easier for people to find names and see which ones are missing. If u wanna point any mistakes I'm making, I'm open to suggestions and ways to improve 1960boy ( talk) 11:49, 22 June 2016 (UTC) |
See above ^^^ |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Please stop sending messages on my talkpage.., Hspa.22 ( talk) 09:17, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
|
Hspa.22 blocked as a sock. Surprise surprise. Muffled Pocketed 12:10, 22 June 2016 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Its between me and material scientist do not interfere old...pls DO NOT.....!! AND DK NOT SEND WIKI MESSAGES WHILE I AM IN COLEEGE LECTURE...!! Hspa.22 ( talk) 09:01, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
|
Your recent change to Dan Wagner article has been reverted by User:Techtrek. It has been reported that this user may have an undeclared interest in the subject, http://uk.businessinsider.com/techtreks-wikipedia-edits-on-powa-founder-dan-wagner-2016-3. Please can you assist? 2A02:C7F:C207:A800:B997:C880:E1FA:C5EB ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
2A02:C7F:C207:A800:B997:C880:E1FA:C5EB ( talk)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You reverted good faith edits at the Reference desk (which can only be trolling) and had the nerve to claim you were reverting a troll. Are you incapable of doing anything constructive? 79.77.28.185 ( talk) 18:02, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Trolling. Currently at An/I wishing he was wearing an anti- WP:BOOMERANG hat... Muffled Pocketed 10:04, 18 June 2016 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
You have blocked me as an Vandalism only account, why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BerendWorst ( talk • contribs) 09:49, 18 June 2016 (UTC) |
Thanks for your post at User talk:73.133.140.233, though I'll mention that Bishzilla doesn't like it when I'm edit conflicted. Go back in pocket! Bishonen | talk 19:15, 15 June 2016 (UTC).
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I'd not say hi your conduct is really very bad. you have no right to delete something from someone elses user page. Moreover ur user page says u are an apprentice editor and ur talk page says u are a tutunum or veteran editor. This is very bad and very confusing. pls correvt it and display the correct badge of service awards And pls leave my user and talk page alone If u wanna reply use ping. i am not interested in opening ur page again -- VarunFEB2003 ( talk • contribs) 09:09, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
-- VarunFEB2003 ( talk • contribs) 15:06, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nope, wrong. I only made 3 (the multiples only count as one because they were partial). Too Small a Fish to Fry ( talk) 13:36, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Imeldific bocked 24-hours by EdJohnston; also note the former's retaliatory AN3 here. Muffled Pocketed 10:41, 2 June 2016 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Please discuss at the talk page]. Those edits are with WP:SAMESURNAME. Imeldific ( talk) 22:31, 1 June 2016 (UTC) |
I hope I'm not the only one to catch the humor in this edit-- S Philbrick (Talk) 15:14, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
judging from your recent edits/comments, I was most certainly wrong to judge you and to state that your comments were not welcome on my talk page.
It seems very obvious to me, that your comments/edits are fair and designed to improve wikipedia.
I apologize for being a defensive and judgmental ass. Spacecowboy420 ( talk) 06:34, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to
Henry VI of England, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the
edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been
reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the
sandbox for that. Thank you. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
50.205.197.158 (
talk)
17:54, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hey, this might be interesting to you. -- Jayron 32 14:25, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Lourdes 12:57, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I think you probably should. Muffled Pocketed 14:31, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Hi, why'd you revert my edit to User talk:SimonTrew? It wasn't "Trolling" and you obviously didn't assume good faith. This user has been stalking Neelix's edits; I think that is a valid reason to give them a warning for harassment. Anarchyte ( work | talk) 09:26, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
{{
nac}}
or not, that would be unfair. What's this "stalking" nonsense? I think you must be mistaken.I'm going to copy/paste this to my talk page.
No if Fortuna doesn't mind us squatting at this user's talk page for a bit, I might as well just @ Anarchyte: and leave the conversation in one place.
Si Trew ( talk) 09:28, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Lourdes 12:57, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I think you probably should. Muffled Pocketed 14:31, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
can u please have a look at this page? digvijay and another editor is vandalising this page by continuing to remove valuable information Hollywoodbollywood22 ( talk) 14:56, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
please have a look at the page I have mentioned, and see how the user digvijay has removed loads of well sourced information and has violated the page? and then conveniently is calling me a vandaliser for kvb's page? it is a request Hollywoodbollywood22 ( talk) 15:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, ¿why you deleted my message?.... it was incoherent.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulof4 ( talk • contribs)
My changes to omallur were restructuring.... You accidentally reverted everything Blisspop 13:22, 21 September 2015 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rortosthanos ( talk • contribs)
I don't see why you can't respond in a polite way. Blisspop 15:59, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Once again-the word 'bloody' doesn't need to be used and blisspop is my hat for all it matters to you Blisspop 17:46, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please to stop writing in user page, amically,
thank you
signed
NotAlpArslan (
talk)
10:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC).
Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: your repeating baiting of this user is not constructive. Please stay away from them and their talk page, okay? — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 12:50, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I just to be thankful,thanks to God.mayby “thanks God haha”is wrong mind,so I change,please forgive me,and Fortuna(you) misunderstand my mind.say “...not for very long, perhaps...”so please delete,I cant delete.
Qed237 said“Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at User talk:Qed237, you may be blocked from editing.” Qed237 said
so please you delete“...not for very long, perhaps...” you misunderstand my mind.mayby “thanks God haha”let you think I am a bad men?haha,it is really mistake.I am happy,Because the thing is over.I have depression you know.I was very friendly, just afraid of injury,and afraid of injury anybody you and me......I am happy very happy everyone is ok!I think you are the same to me,right? thanks to God. Adsafe ( talk) 15:57, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Qed237 is very very very afraid to delete your edit,alas...
I am very happy to get your help but.......they are free,right?I think you can know what I say.you will be the best wiki men always(come on!). Adsafe ( talk) 16:30, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
and I am sorry to modify it always.I am a depressed patient.I am afraid of injury you, so I must do my best and perfect letter to you.and because this my edit always again and again.so sorry please fogive me. Adsafe ( talk) 16:46, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
UPDATE: Sock now [9] Blocked by User:Huon Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:14, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello (2). I have now found some material on my talk page that I think is some references that you were referring to, which I can see you have provided in good faith, but what you have sent relates to Old Buckenham which is a neighbouring parish, and aspects of the history of New Buckenham that are unrelated to the material I am trying to post. please don't be offended but could I ask if you have read the material I tried to post, in the revised and sourced/ referenced version?... are you an official editor - how does this work ? thanks Observer900 ( talk) 15:07, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for your message, if it is from you, you have said you have provided a wealth of information, can you please let me know where you have put it, how will I receive what you have sent ? I am trying to be collegiate by trying to 'talk' with the person who keeps deleting my input but they do not reply ? Observer900 ( talk) 14:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello, can you please explain why you have deleted my edit on this page, the material I have shown has sources and referencing displayed. are you an official editor, could you please explain ??, thanks....
Observer900 (
talk)
14:40, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
you have deleted an edit, please explain what you mean in your comment ?, I suspect you don't know this place, my sources are accurate, the wording is factually correct, could you please explain why you completely deleted what I carefully entered ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Observer900 ( talk • contribs) 12:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
So you deleted the full edit without a second thought. Cool, you might be a real idiot.
I'll make changes more appropriately this time.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivam8540 ( talk • contribs)
WP:DENY |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
To back Dcasey98 up, this is an editing notice posted at the top of the page, therefore I'm deleting Harry Potter from the page too: PLEASE NOTE BEFORE ADDING ITEMS TO THIS LIST: Do not add films which carry teen/adult ratings or are marketed to teens/adults. In the case of films which carry a pre-teen rating, such as the MPAA's G rating or the BBFC's PG rating, please note these are only content guidance ratings that indicate suitability for children and in most cases do not indicate whether children are the primary audience Other films with a PG-13, like The Golden Compass, should therefore be removed as well. Bellatrix2017 ( talk) 12:53, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
To back Dcasey98 up, this is an editing notice posted at the top of the page, therefore I'm deleting Harry Potter from the page too: "PLEASE NOTE BEFORE ADDING ITEMS TO THIS LIST: Do not add films which carry teen/adult ratings or are marketed to teens/adults. In the case of films which carry a pre-teen rating, such as the MPAA's G rating or the BBFC's PG rating, please note these are only content guidance ratings that indicate suitability for children and in most cases do not indicate whether children are the primary audience" Other films with a PG-13, like The Golden Compass, should therefore be removed as well. Bellatrix2017 ( talk) 12:58, 16 March 2016 (UTC) Please explain to me what you are doing right by posting films that violet the criteria of being a children's film to this list. They don't qualify. I'm following the rules. You're not. Bellatrix2017 ( talk) 12:59, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
"PLEASE NOTE BEFORE ADDING ITEMS TO THIS LIST: Do not add films which carry teen/adult ratings In the case of films which carry a pre-teen rating, such as the MPAA's G rating or the BBFC's PG rating, please note these are only content guidance ratings that indicate suitability for children and in most cases do not indicate whether children are the primary audience" Other films with a PG-13, like The Golden Compass, should therefore be removed as well. Bellatrix2017 ( talk) 14:44, 16 March 2016 (UTC) |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
What are you doing and why? I am adding good content and you guys are just deleting it as if you don't want new info in the article!! Please stop deleting info. Instead contribute information or give proper structure to the page but please stop just deleting. Just deleting is not any kind of contribution! — Preceding unsigned comment added by K Sikdar ( talk • contribs) 15:24, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
You are behaving like some wiki mafia!! You guys are just deleting new info! Please stop imposing your opinion and check the correctness of info we are adding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K Sikdar ( talk • contribs) 15:51, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Please mind your own business. You are not an administrator. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K Sikdar ( talk • contribs) 10:58, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
No???
Fortuna
Imperatrix Mundi
11:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
That rather seems to have settled that. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I don't know what your game is, but one minute you're bulk reverting real editors as "socks" and the next you're adding nonsense about London running trolleybuses in 1972. Andy Dingley ( talk) 18:22, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
|
Bocked edit-warrior. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
RevertI have given reference and explained in talk page Truth should trump ( talk) 19:27, 23 March 2016 (UTC) |
Hi Truth should trump ( talk) 19:25, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Editor was blocked at exactly the same time as your AN3 filing. Thanks for filing the report anyway - much appreciated. -- Ches (talk) (contribs) 20:01, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi,
You have recently reverted an edit on Pro-life feminism claiming that the information was unsourced. There were 4 sources in the article alone, and several more on the talk page. Please undo your reversion as there were many sources afterall. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd ( talk) 19:07, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
I am terribly sorry if I caused any trouble I was just joking with a friend and thought there would be no harm. It will not happen again. REDTMR1 ( talk) 18:48, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Just making you aware of this - when you left a comment regarding Wikicology's indef block proposal, your signature did not display correctly (precisely the "Fortuna" bit; the coding for the green writing must've been broken). I'm not sure how to fix it, otherwise I would've done it for you. Link to diff: Here. Best, -- Ches (talk) (contribs) 13:49, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi I don't want to remove my comments from the talk pages. But can you please correct my English a bit? These are the articles I have commented on: Achaemenid empire, Parthian empire, Sasanian Empire. Arman ad60 ( talk) 15:32, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Your comments at AIV are appreciated. I knew we'd crossed paths recently, at Alice Lai Nga Yu. To my minor chagrin, my usual IP was jogged to this one, at least for the moment. Cheers, 2601:188:0:ABE6:60FC:44F0:F227:C4AF ( talk) 14:09, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Can you please add a photo of Abhishek Verma to his wikipedia profile that you have been updating / editing? The photo from Abhishek Verma's Google+ profile is below. It does not have copyright issues as it is on the net.
AV photo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Authorincharge ( talk • contribs) 11:27, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, I removed passages of unacceptable content from the article again, but didn't stop to check whether that removed copyright violations, your rationale for a speedy deletion nomination. My apologies if I mucked things up. Just so tired of the crap they keep off-loading there. Thank you for your good work, 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 18:07, 11 April 2016 (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 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
I saw a report regarding Badr Jafar at WP:BLPN and took it up because the situation seemed unsatisfactory. Some problems were fixed, but then a person who is apparently a representative of the subject attempted to remove certain text from the article, but you restored it ( diff). I can understand your edit given that the text apparently has two references, however the situation is not simple. I have restored the text and posted the explanation at Talk:Badr Jafar#Jafar Jafar. I would have waited to ask your opinion but you appear to be on a short break, so I thought I would leave an alert for your consideration on return. Johnuniq ( talk) 06:47, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. 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)
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 00:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
The article
English invasion of Scotland (1400) you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:English invasion of Scotland (1400) 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
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
20:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
The article
Neville–Neville feud you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Neville–Neville feud 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
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
20:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Why did you nominatee me for deletion? I've done nothing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDMfan23! ( talk • contribs) 18:10, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Please refrain from posting idiocy in my Talk page. I am aware of all of it. Adding references that Ebell is a climate warming denier is not defamation, it is responsible and expected Wikipedia editing. BatteryIncluded ( talk) 12:54, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Since you made improvements to Arm the Homeless (its new name, because I moved it to be more standard), do you plan to !vote to Keep it in the deletion discussion? Robert McClenon ( talk) 02:28, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
The article
English invasion of Scotland (1400) 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:English invasion of Scotland (1400) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
04:41, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The article
Neville–Neville feud 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:Neville–Neville feud for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
06:41, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
2ndopinion is opted when there is complete disagreement between the reviewer and nominator- This might be an example of what FIM refers to as
some fundamental misunderstanding as to the nature of the criteria. The 2nd opinion is used for far more than what you've described, it is used when a reviewer is unable to complete a part of the review for some reason, it is used when a reviewer is unsure of how to proceed with review for some reason, it is used occassionally when a reviewer who doesn't have a lot of experience would like for someone more experienced then they are to review the reviewer - this may be acceptable the first time around, but, after a few reviews its expected that a GA reviewer will be able to do this themselves without outside assistance. In fact if you'd looked at the criteria and just copy-pasted the definition of a second opinion, you'd have found that your interpretation is incorrect. From GAN/I itself;
If you are unsure whether an article meets the good article criteria, you may call for another reviewer or subject expert to provide a second opinion by doing the following. It has little to do with disagreements, but, can of course be used to get outside help for it. I am currently having one of my GA noms reviewed by two editors, an inexperienced one who wants to participate and a highly experienced reviewer who is checking over the review and reviewer themselves. In essence, this is what FIM is asking for themselves. GA reviews are no easy task and an experienced reviewer will see things that most others will completely miss. I see BlueMoonset has added their own comments to the review for the English invasion of Scotland 1400, they are excellent at picking up phrasing and wording problems and have a strong knowledge and understanding of the GA criteria. They're perfectly capable of helping you out on that review. Mr rnddude ( talk) 03:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
References
Hello! Your submission of
English invasion of Scotland (1400) at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Yoninah (
talk)
21:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Special Barnstar | |
Thanks for reverting this on my talkpage! It looks like the sock has been put back in the drawer... :-) 2601:1C0:4401:F360:901C:10B8:EB70:E1DB ( talk) 23:50, 31 October 2016 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Neville–Neville feud 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
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
02:21, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
The article
Bonville–Courtenay feud 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:Bonville–Courtenay feud for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
SilverplateDelta --
SilverplateDelta (
talk)
16:20, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
English invasion of Scotland (1400) 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
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga --
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk)
02:21, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Please do not remove my edit when i am mentioning important relatives of his -- important enough for at least one to have his own wikilink. These people are not "peripheral" as you claim. Mawlidman ( talk) 09:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
If you are keeping an eye on these aristocracy articles, watch out for Harry James Albert Taylor or Taylor-Berkeley who keeps popping up with various IPs trying to insert himself as a Brisco Baronet, a Musgrave Baronet and even the 9th Earl of Berkeley. JohnCD ( talk) 11:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
@ JohnCD: > I assume this is the same editor? Muffled Pocketed 10:19, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm thinking about testing out a new sig. Since your talk page is at the top of my Watchlist currently, you get the pleasure of being the first to see it. So, what do you think? (personally I can't think of a single problem with it). Mr rnddude (talk) 12:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
I can't see any reason why you keep on disturbing the article Kottayam. Do you even know where is Kottayam. Well it is a city in Indian state of Kerala. You are simply keeping on reverting the article. You don't even know our culture. Our city Kottayam knows what it needs in it's article. But please stop deleting contents from it. Everything in it was planned and discussed among us Kottayamkar. It may seem as commercial promotion, political or vandalism to you foreigners. But please stop it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thommuvtt ( talk • contribs) 10:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Well the content is neutral in tone. Please notify me the thing you would like to alter before deleting it on large scale. I will change it if it is needed to be so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thommuvtt ( talk • contribs) 10:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
I think you havent told me what was wrong. Sorry for disturbing you. Please mention what was wrong here. I will edit it. Please don't completely delete it from our page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thommuvtt ( talk • contribs) 11:28, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Done. And then.nn - mass delete is a great tool. I'm tired of these socks, they keep popping up. Doug Weller talk 15:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello! I want to apologize for poaching the article Roly Bain. When I saw the conversation about him at Drmies's talk page, I somehow missed seeing that you had already started a draft. So I went ahead and created the article. I was unaware of your draft until User:Polentarion added some material to the article and cited your draft. I wish I could add you to the DYK as co-author, but I'm not sure if they'd buy it, since you do not appear as a contributor in the history. What do you think, shall I do it anyhow? -- MelanieN ( talk) 16:12, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the Autopatrol endorsement, really appreciated! Amkilpatrick ( talk) 21:47, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. Thank you.
Two more done, here and here, with some more tonight. Cassianto Talk 18:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Re your message: Thanks. I deleted it again. -- Gogo Dodo ( talk) 05:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Fortuna, please stay out. Applications in arbitration proceedings are not personal attacks. They are the oil which keeps things running smoothly. 31.54.202.183 ( talk) 02:08, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi.
Humphrey Stafford (died 1413), an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's
Main Page as part of
Did you know
. You can see the hook and the discussion
here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you.
APersonBot (
talk!)
12:00, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Dear User!
Really shocked to read your warning on my talk page regarding my additions on Inter_Services_Intelligence and their unfairly undoing by some users whose country was defamed for false allegations against ISI and their Govt. accepted that allegation were false. So this information needed to be included in article and that's what i did. But as a matter of fact, this thing was not digestible by Indians as they have a history of Blaming Pakistan for every incident. Ok, now you tell me would not it be unfair if anyone tries to conceal history which is not in his/her interests?? Wikipedia is a place to share accurate, verifiable and up to date information to those relying on Wikipedia. But revisions and warnings are not fair. Think about it. Thanks AKJatt ( talk) 05:06, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
DatGuy Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi ( talk · contribs) WHAT A HYPOCRISYYYYYYYYY???? Does 3-Revert-Rule only applies to me or to User:Spartacus too??? If i have made 8 revisions rightfully, he have made plenty of revisions wrongfully. See the revision history and you will see SPARTACUS everywhere. Perfect example of Double Standards. If u wanna block me, GO AHEAD. I will not stop making true additions to ISI. Do whatever you can. Hunhhhh AKJatt ( talk) 10:43, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Your attacks againt me will not be tolerated. This is a blocking warning. Be respectful to me and I will respect you back. Foleo ( talk) 07:45, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
It would be appreciated if you find something on the article, which as put it "makes little sense," instead of tagging it, or calling the whole nation for it, fix it yourself. Thank you, Mona778 ( talk) 22:20, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
You know you are not supposed to do that, don't you?
Wikipedia:User categories: "user categories should not be used as "bottom-of-the-page" notices.[7] If a Wikipedian wishes to have such a notice, they may edit their user page and add the notice in some other way (such as by adding text or a userbox), rather than inappropriately creating a category grouping.[8]" Rathfelder ( talk) 20:12, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
Hey little Muffled. (Perhaps I should be writing to you c/o the pocket?) If you're at home with WP:DYK, as I'm not — I find it quite thorny — have you thought of proposing this nice new article for it? I have to admit I have trouble thinking of a thrilling hook... but still. Just a thought. Bishonen | talk 10:28, 31 July 2016 (UTC).
One of our dogs has just died. Stella, on the right up there.
Hi Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, I am creating the article "Leung Tsang". You said the page appears to be a direct copy from http://web.eecs.umich.edu/~leutsang/Professional%20Services.html. Well somehow this is true. In fact this external link belongs to me. I am the owner of this link. I will put a notice on the bottom of this link and grant permission to other people. So please do not delete this article. Joestc ( talk) 14:53, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Just so you know that wasn't Keto posting in another language but re-posting this diff from Constantin, which seems to say that he's a new account of Mujtaba!. Happy laundry day, hope you have sufficient quarters! — Spaceman Spiff 17:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Please note that the website in question now carries a no copyright wikipedia recommended message. Please do not revert the article. Thanks Racingmanager ( talk) 17:28, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
You're talking rubbish as usual. I reverted the edits at RfPP. 92.8.222.87 ( talk) 16:23, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
You're unbelievable. You claimed to have reverted an edit I made at RfPP. You did no such thing. All you did was troll my talk page (twice). 92.8.222.87 ( talk) 16:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Just in case you're not familiar with this particular breed of troll: Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Vote (X) for Change. Favonian ( talk) 16:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
I can assure you that the sources used are genuine (I have all the books listed as references) but I can see your point that parts of the article in question are similar to the website. I will rewrite in due course. Thanks Racingmanager ( talk) 14:05, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please don't post on my talk page again. Thanks, Mathsci ( talk) 09:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Can we just take a moment to appreciate sine bot becoming an activist. The edit summary is lovely [3]. Mr rnddude ( talk) 10:38, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#I wish for some resolution of the harassment, wikihounding, wikistalking, and attempts to WP:OUTING of me over the approximately last 60 days by user HappyValleyEditor and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted in most arbitration pages please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant 01:14, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
I apologize for reapplying my edit without explanation--I didn't realize you'd undone my previous edit before I reapplied it (I thought I might have mixed that page up with another one). That seems to be the new format for the house section of the royalty infobox (see pages of people from more well-known houses such as the Houses of Hanover, Plantagenet, and Windsor), as the "House of" part is rather redundant. ~ Iamthecheese44 ( talk) 07:03, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it was Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist I was thinking of. Sorry I was a bit cryptic, I was dashing out of the house at the time! Still, all's well that ends well as a countryman of mine once wrote. I'm keeping an eye on {{noping|Hspa.20}] but I'm not sure yet that it's him. -- Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 16:07, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
== Some Advice RE: Your editing ==
I just thought I'd give you a little advice: Right now, it really feels like you do not understand what Wikipedia is about. You have just under 1,500 edits, and over 1,200 of them are to User or User Talk pages. You have a total of 63 149 edits to Talk and Mainspace pages combined, less than 10% of your edits.
[4] This is an encyclopedia, not a social media site. Barnstars, awards, and gussying up your User Page are all minor distractions to the main one: The Encyclopedia.
There have been users blocked in the past due to not being here to improve the Encyclopedia. You should probably take note of the second bolded line under WP:!HERE. Between the fact that your contribution percentages are so far out of balance, the fact that you are trying to keep a non-free file without even trying to understand why you can not do that, and the fact that you keep asking everyone to sign your guestbook like we are on MySpace, I am afraid you will probably head toward a block due to disruption sooner rather than later, unless you change how you are doing things. 2602:306:C41D:E880:C957:2302:5BD5:3869 ( talk) 23:55, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
If we work together, we can improve wikipedia. Keep wondering y u keep revising my edits when all I wanna do is sort the list alphabetically and add missing names. Makes it easier for people to find names and see which ones are missing. If u wanna point any mistakes I'm making, I'm open to suggestions and ways to improve 1960boy ( talk) 11:49, 22 June 2016 (UTC) |
See above ^^^ |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Please stop sending messages on my talkpage.., Hspa.22 ( talk) 09:17, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
|
Hspa.22 blocked as a sock. Surprise surprise. Muffled Pocketed 12:10, 22 June 2016 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Its between me and material scientist do not interfere old...pls DO NOT.....!! AND DK NOT SEND WIKI MESSAGES WHILE I AM IN COLEEGE LECTURE...!! Hspa.22 ( talk) 09:01, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
|
Your recent change to Dan Wagner article has been reverted by User:Techtrek. It has been reported that this user may have an undeclared interest in the subject, http://uk.businessinsider.com/techtreks-wikipedia-edits-on-powa-founder-dan-wagner-2016-3. Please can you assist? 2A02:C7F:C207:A800:B997:C880:E1FA:C5EB ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
2A02:C7F:C207:A800:B997:C880:E1FA:C5EB ( talk)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You reverted good faith edits at the Reference desk (which can only be trolling) and had the nerve to claim you were reverting a troll. Are you incapable of doing anything constructive? 79.77.28.185 ( talk) 18:02, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Trolling. Currently at An/I wishing he was wearing an anti- WP:BOOMERANG hat... Muffled Pocketed 10:04, 18 June 2016 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
You have blocked me as an Vandalism only account, why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BerendWorst ( talk • contribs) 09:49, 18 June 2016 (UTC) |
Thanks for your post at User talk:73.133.140.233, though I'll mention that Bishzilla doesn't like it when I'm edit conflicted. Go back in pocket! Bishonen | talk 19:15, 15 June 2016 (UTC).
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I'd not say hi your conduct is really very bad. you have no right to delete something from someone elses user page. Moreover ur user page says u are an apprentice editor and ur talk page says u are a tutunum or veteran editor. This is very bad and very confusing. pls correvt it and display the correct badge of service awards And pls leave my user and talk page alone If u wanna reply use ping. i am not interested in opening ur page again -- VarunFEB2003 ( talk • contribs) 09:09, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
-- VarunFEB2003 ( talk • contribs) 15:06, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nope, wrong. I only made 3 (the multiples only count as one because they were partial). Too Small a Fish to Fry ( talk) 13:36, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Imeldific bocked 24-hours by EdJohnston; also note the former's retaliatory AN3 here. Muffled Pocketed 10:41, 2 June 2016 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Please discuss at the talk page]. Those edits are with WP:SAMESURNAME. Imeldific ( talk) 22:31, 1 June 2016 (UTC) |
I hope I'm not the only one to catch the humor in this edit-- S Philbrick (Talk) 15:14, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
judging from your recent edits/comments, I was most certainly wrong to judge you and to state that your comments were not welcome on my talk page.
It seems very obvious to me, that your comments/edits are fair and designed to improve wikipedia.
I apologize for being a defensive and judgmental ass. Spacecowboy420 ( talk) 06:34, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to
Henry VI of England, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the
edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been
reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the
sandbox for that. Thank you. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
50.205.197.158 (
talk)
17:54, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hey, this might be interesting to you. -- Jayron 32 14:25, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Lourdes 12:57, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I think you probably should. Muffled Pocketed 14:31, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Hi, why'd you revert my edit to User talk:SimonTrew? It wasn't "Trolling" and you obviously didn't assume good faith. This user has been stalking Neelix's edits; I think that is a valid reason to give them a warning for harassment. Anarchyte ( work | talk) 09:26, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
{{
nac}}
or not, that would be unfair. What's this "stalking" nonsense? I think you must be mistaken.I'm going to copy/paste this to my talk page.
No if Fortuna doesn't mind us squatting at this user's talk page for a bit, I might as well just @ Anarchyte: and leave the conversation in one place.
Si Trew ( talk) 09:28, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Lourdes 12:57, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I think you probably should. Muffled Pocketed 14:31, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
can u please have a look at this page? digvijay and another editor is vandalising this page by continuing to remove valuable information Hollywoodbollywood22 ( talk) 14:56, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
please have a look at the page I have mentioned, and see how the user digvijay has removed loads of well sourced information and has violated the page? and then conveniently is calling me a vandaliser for kvb's page? it is a request Hollywoodbollywood22 ( talk) 15:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, ¿why you deleted my message?.... it was incoherent.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulof4 ( talk • contribs)
My changes to omallur were restructuring.... You accidentally reverted everything Blisspop 13:22, 21 September 2015 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rortosthanos ( talk • contribs)
I don't see why you can't respond in a polite way. Blisspop 15:59, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Once again-the word 'bloody' doesn't need to be used and blisspop is my hat for all it matters to you Blisspop 17:46, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please to stop writing in user page, amically,
thank you
signed
NotAlpArslan (
talk)
10:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC).
Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: your repeating baiting of this user is not constructive. Please stay away from them and their talk page, okay? — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 12:50, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I just to be thankful,thanks to God.mayby “thanks God haha”is wrong mind,so I change,please forgive me,and Fortuna(you) misunderstand my mind.say “...not for very long, perhaps...”so please delete,I cant delete.
Qed237 said“Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at User talk:Qed237, you may be blocked from editing.” Qed237 said
so please you delete“...not for very long, perhaps...” you misunderstand my mind.mayby “thanks God haha”let you think I am a bad men?haha,it is really mistake.I am happy,Because the thing is over.I have depression you know.I was very friendly, just afraid of injury,and afraid of injury anybody you and me......I am happy very happy everyone is ok!I think you are the same to me,right? thanks to God. Adsafe ( talk) 15:57, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Qed237 is very very very afraid to delete your edit,alas...
I am very happy to get your help but.......they are free,right?I think you can know what I say.you will be the best wiki men always(come on!). Adsafe ( talk) 16:30, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
and I am sorry to modify it always.I am a depressed patient.I am afraid of injury you, so I must do my best and perfect letter to you.and because this my edit always again and again.so sorry please fogive me. Adsafe ( talk) 16:46, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
UPDATE: Sock now [9] Blocked by User:Huon Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:14, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello (2). I have now found some material on my talk page that I think is some references that you were referring to, which I can see you have provided in good faith, but what you have sent relates to Old Buckenham which is a neighbouring parish, and aspects of the history of New Buckenham that are unrelated to the material I am trying to post. please don't be offended but could I ask if you have read the material I tried to post, in the revised and sourced/ referenced version?... are you an official editor - how does this work ? thanks Observer900 ( talk) 15:07, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for your message, if it is from you, you have said you have provided a wealth of information, can you please let me know where you have put it, how will I receive what you have sent ? I am trying to be collegiate by trying to 'talk' with the person who keeps deleting my input but they do not reply ? Observer900 ( talk) 14:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello, can you please explain why you have deleted my edit on this page, the material I have shown has sources and referencing displayed. are you an official editor, could you please explain ??, thanks....
Observer900 (
talk)
14:40, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
you have deleted an edit, please explain what you mean in your comment ?, I suspect you don't know this place, my sources are accurate, the wording is factually correct, could you please explain why you completely deleted what I carefully entered ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Observer900 ( talk • contribs) 12:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
So you deleted the full edit without a second thought. Cool, you might be a real idiot.
I'll make changes more appropriately this time.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivam8540 ( talk • contribs)
WP:DENY |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
To back Dcasey98 up, this is an editing notice posted at the top of the page, therefore I'm deleting Harry Potter from the page too: PLEASE NOTE BEFORE ADDING ITEMS TO THIS LIST: Do not add films which carry teen/adult ratings or are marketed to teens/adults. In the case of films which carry a pre-teen rating, such as the MPAA's G rating or the BBFC's PG rating, please note these are only content guidance ratings that indicate suitability for children and in most cases do not indicate whether children are the primary audience Other films with a PG-13, like The Golden Compass, should therefore be removed as well. Bellatrix2017 ( talk) 12:53, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
To back Dcasey98 up, this is an editing notice posted at the top of the page, therefore I'm deleting Harry Potter from the page too: "PLEASE NOTE BEFORE ADDING ITEMS TO THIS LIST: Do not add films which carry teen/adult ratings or are marketed to teens/adults. In the case of films which carry a pre-teen rating, such as the MPAA's G rating or the BBFC's PG rating, please note these are only content guidance ratings that indicate suitability for children and in most cases do not indicate whether children are the primary audience" Other films with a PG-13, like The Golden Compass, should therefore be removed as well. Bellatrix2017 ( talk) 12:58, 16 March 2016 (UTC) Please explain to me what you are doing right by posting films that violet the criteria of being a children's film to this list. They don't qualify. I'm following the rules. You're not. Bellatrix2017 ( talk) 12:59, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
"PLEASE NOTE BEFORE ADDING ITEMS TO THIS LIST: Do not add films which carry teen/adult ratings In the case of films which carry a pre-teen rating, such as the MPAA's G rating or the BBFC's PG rating, please note these are only content guidance ratings that indicate suitability for children and in most cases do not indicate whether children are the primary audience" Other films with a PG-13, like The Golden Compass, should therefore be removed as well. Bellatrix2017 ( talk) 14:44, 16 March 2016 (UTC) |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
What are you doing and why? I am adding good content and you guys are just deleting it as if you don't want new info in the article!! Please stop deleting info. Instead contribute information or give proper structure to the page but please stop just deleting. Just deleting is not any kind of contribution! — Preceding unsigned comment added by K Sikdar ( talk • contribs) 15:24, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
You are behaving like some wiki mafia!! You guys are just deleting new info! Please stop imposing your opinion and check the correctness of info we are adding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K Sikdar ( talk • contribs) 15:51, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Please mind your own business. You are not an administrator. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K Sikdar ( talk • contribs) 10:58, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
No???
Fortuna
Imperatrix Mundi
11:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
That rather seems to have settled that. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I don't know what your game is, but one minute you're bulk reverting real editors as "socks" and the next you're adding nonsense about London running trolleybuses in 1972. Andy Dingley ( talk) 18:22, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
|
Bocked edit-warrior. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
RevertI have given reference and explained in talk page Truth should trump ( talk) 19:27, 23 March 2016 (UTC) |
Hi Truth should trump ( talk) 19:25, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Editor was blocked at exactly the same time as your AN3 filing. Thanks for filing the report anyway - much appreciated. -- Ches (talk) (contribs) 20:01, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi,
You have recently reverted an edit on Pro-life feminism claiming that the information was unsourced. There were 4 sources in the article alone, and several more on the talk page. Please undo your reversion as there were many sources afterall. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd ( talk) 19:07, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
I am terribly sorry if I caused any trouble I was just joking with a friend and thought there would be no harm. It will not happen again. REDTMR1 ( talk) 18:48, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Just making you aware of this - when you left a comment regarding Wikicology's indef block proposal, your signature did not display correctly (precisely the "Fortuna" bit; the coding for the green writing must've been broken). I'm not sure how to fix it, otherwise I would've done it for you. Link to diff: Here. Best, -- Ches (talk) (contribs) 13:49, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi I don't want to remove my comments from the talk pages. But can you please correct my English a bit? These are the articles I have commented on: Achaemenid empire, Parthian empire, Sasanian Empire. Arman ad60 ( talk) 15:32, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Your comments at AIV are appreciated. I knew we'd crossed paths recently, at Alice Lai Nga Yu. To my minor chagrin, my usual IP was jogged to this one, at least for the moment. Cheers, 2601:188:0:ABE6:60FC:44F0:F227:C4AF ( talk) 14:09, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Can you please add a photo of Abhishek Verma to his wikipedia profile that you have been updating / editing? The photo from Abhishek Verma's Google+ profile is below. It does not have copyright issues as it is on the net.
AV photo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Authorincharge ( talk • contribs) 11:27, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, I removed passages of unacceptable content from the article again, but didn't stop to check whether that removed copyright violations, your rationale for a speedy deletion nomination. My apologies if I mucked things up. Just so tired of the crap they keep off-loading there. Thank you for your good work, 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 18:07, 11 April 2016 (UTC)