Welcome!
Hello, Setwisohi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Dfrg_
msc 09:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Setwisohi. Welcome to wikipedia. I agree with your recent edit of fishing tackle when you tucked the untidy etymology away at the bottom. However, I do not agree with you removing that image merely because (for some strange reason which I don't understand either!) it was not resizing correctly. That is a hard won image that visually makes the salient point that any gear used for fishing, including tangled nets and rusty gear on a fishing boat, is also "tackle". However don't let that cramp your style, and keep trucking on! -- Geronimo20 ( talk) 11:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it's a shame to have lost it. Sorry. If you can get it back and get it to fit, that would be a lot better! Setwisohi ( talk) 16:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
There is a problem with changing bite detectors on the templates to bite alarms. A bite alarm is an audible device, as in fire alarm, whereas a bite "detector" is a more general term, and could refer to visual or kinaesthetic devices. It is true that the template links to an article called "bite alarms" when strictly it should have linked to an article called bite detectors. But there is, so far, no article called "bite detectors".
To fix this, the templates need to be restored to where they were, and the name of the article called Bite alarm needs to be changed to "Bite detector". Then the article itself needs to be enlarged to reflect its enlarged status.
I have put these templates now on over 800 fishing articles and I am very aware of these issues (which crop up everywhere). Usually there is no simple fix to be made by just renaming items on the templates. The problems are structural, and can only be solved by renaming and expanding existing articles or creating new ones. I am doing just that bit by bit, but I can't do it all at once. Simple renames usually don't fix the problem. If you would like to help by expanding or creating the relevant articles, then you are more than welcome. -- Geronimo20 ( talk) 01:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
see the bottom of the page Redman19 ( talk) 21:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Setwisohi,
I wanted to let you know that I undid the removal of all apiologists who don't have their own wikipedia page. As great as wikipedia is, and as informative as it is, wikipedia is not a complete catalog of all information. I don't think that the existence of a wikipedia entry is the ultimate measure of notability. All of the scientists that you removed are respected published authors with hundreds of peer reviewed scientific papers and several books to their credit. Feel free to discuss this issue in the talk section of the apiology page. Cheers AJseagull1 ( talk) 20:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm afraid it doesn't really work like that. If those people are notable, then they should have articles created. If they are not notable, then they don't - by definiton - belong in a list of notable people. Once they have articles, they can be listed. Setwisohi ( talk) 22:10, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Stop vandalizing Finland article. I don't know what your issue is with Finland, and I don't care, but diluting the article with your own idea of how things should be represented serves no purpose when the fact is that the research places Finland as the 2nd most stable country in the world. If you have an issue with the research, write a critique section to the page where the rankings are listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.112.207.125 ( talk) 17:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Not worth a reply this, is it? If you want to discuss something with someone, don't begin by shouting accusations at them. Setwisohi ( talk) 17:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
It's a good job pruning external links, as they tend to accrue and slip through the net. However, please make sure you don't delete good ones as you did here. [1] Raw Vision is a very well known outsider art magazine and a good resource for readers. Likewise there are useful links on the Intuit page - and Intuit is a long established not-for-profit centre, though I guess a link to the main page or some such might be considered instead. Sites with commercial material aren't banned from EL as such, but we don't want sites that exist primarily for that purpose and where any material is commonplace and just to provide padding for ads. The EL should provide something worthwhile for the reader, which isn't able to be incorporated into the article for whatever reason (maybe length as with an interview). Ty 23:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. It is a good approach to invite comment from a wider field. Ty 01:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
note: Comment placed here by User talk:MarylandArtLover - moved discussion to their talk page.
And to you to, censorship works both ways: You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on United_Kingdom_Independence_Party. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, YOU may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Long live British Democracy. Screw the political class. Eurosceptic Libertarian ( talk) 16:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Thankyou for the barnstar. I will try to keep up the good work! Thanks again and happy editing! America69 ( talk) 01:28, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I rescued this from immediate deletion, but I'd advise you to add more references quickly, before it gets nominated for regular deletion. This is especially important when the material is in a language not that many of us here speak, such as Finnish. DGG ( talk) 00:40, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Sorry DGG, I think you've got the wrong person. Not my article and I don't think I added any references to it. As far as I recall I just tidied it up and removed some dead external links? Setwisohi ( talk) 08:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Good evening to you and regards from Campora San Giovanni. I write you regarding the articles of a note police television series: Kommissar Rex. For better saying some principal actors of the international series. Martin Weinek and Kaspar Capparoni. Weinek is the veteran of the Austrian series, now real member of the series international, as well as excellent agricultural and theatrical entrepreneur and an experienced wine-grower. Capparoni is the new entry of the series, but he has already worked and he works for international productions and with famous directors, I quote among everybody: Dario Argento. I think that the series will arrive within the winter 2008 thanks also to Rai International, that will be transmitted in 150 countries and in more than 60 languages, among which the Irish Gaelic. Naturally if you will help me in this, me ricamberò really the favor translating a biography or a geographical article in Italian and Sicilian. In fact on the Italian edition they are biographer and geographer. In attends him of one certain answer of yours I thank you in advance and I greet you from Campora San Giovanni, my village native. Thanks still for the patience and the understanding.-- Lodewijk Vadacchino ( talk) 09:18, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello,I have removed the Conservatism tag in respect of your request. I only added it on as the UKIP ( United Kingdom Independence Party ) do have Economic and fiscal policies. Thank you and Merry Christmas .
From TheGreenWalker —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheGreenwalker ( talk • contribs) 22:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 22:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC))
How do you get the little pictures like those on your page?
Thank you
( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 23:35, 8 December 2008 (UTC))
Hello, Thank you for your help recently, but I need to know more (I am new). You asked me about if I can provide 'third party reliable sources' for the tag Conservatism. I want to know is what are reliable sources? Is it newspaper articles or other links? If so, how do I attach the link to prove the idealogies of the party? Also Mr Nigel Farage said to the BBC news this after the BNP electoral pact deal for the Euro 2009 elections, He said ' We want a government that will keep out and do less in our lives and the BNP wants to control our lives ' This is proof of Libertarianism in the UKIP, how do I attach the links to it? Thank you again ( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 01:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC))
Hello, me again. I do thank you for helping me recently, but I want to let you know I may have found some articles that may explain that the UKIP may have Conservatism and/or Libertarianism idealogies? ( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 14:07, 11 December 2008 (UTC))
Yes, here are some that may be of good use: 1. http://thepurplescorpion.blogspot.com/2006/05/what-should-next-ukip-leader-do.html 2. http://www.ukipeast.com/localmanifesto.htm 3. http://www.nouse.co.uk/2008/11/12/ukip-%E2%80%93-an-insight-into-one-of-the-fastest-growing-parties-in-the-uk/ I think 3 gives a good insight of Libertarianism for UKIP? Thank you. ( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 00:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC))
Oh well, never mind, at least I tried. Thank you anyway.
( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 23:44, 13 December 2008 (UTC))
Hey, that "double reference"--there was no double reference. What you deleted was, in one edit, the Iron Maiden text, and then the source for that text. But that Iron Maiden thing, of course it wasn't organized by Maiden or some such thing, and the article never claimed it did: it said "coinciding," and that's not a lie or even an exaggeration, as you suggested yourself in your edit summary. Also, I am not quite sure I agree with the edit you called "tidied refs"--it's not tidying up, it's the deletion of a reference to the artist's own explanation of his controversial artwork, which in the circumstances should be allowed, since it's called "obscene" in the paper, and that article does not give the context the work was created in. I'll wait for your response here, but I am very much in the mood to put both of them back, esp. the Iron Maiden thing since that's an interview with him, which provides the most in-depth coverage of all the (scant, I admit) sources. Drmies ( talk) 16:56, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
In answer to the question "Who added all this BS": it was me that originally added the flags. At the time I added them, of course, they were all perfectly valid and applied to the last version by Jay-W. However you then reverted the changes which had occasioned the flags, but neglected to remove the flags that no longer applied, thus creating duplicate flags and what you term "BS". So the real answer to "Who created all this BS", the answer is really "You did!". -- Boson ( talk) 16:41, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Setwisohi, my apologies. I will refrain in the future. I agree the allusion to potential bias is unfounded and added nothing to the discussion at hand re: my comment on another editor's talk page. Carolinequarrier ( talk) 14:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Re. Talk:Robert Mihaly, please see WP:TPG, WP:CIVIL and WP:OUTING. Ty 11:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks but I'm already aware of all of those. Setwisohi ( talk) 15:39, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, the normal way of dealing with edits you disagree with is the discussion page. Would you please explain there and consider using edit summaries in future? Thanks. -- Lo2u ( T • C) 20:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't see the reasoning about your revert. Please discuss it on the Kirkbride talk page. regards [ [2]] ( Off2riorob ( talk) 18:37, 28 May 2009 (UTC))
You have not only reverted my edit without discussion but you have hacked off the cites as well. ( Off2riorob ( talk) 18:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC))
freshacconci talktalk 15:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Regarding your recent edit: please observe that the June Movement's membership of EUDemocrats is valid regardless of whether the movement is in the European Parliament or not. In parliament, the June Movement was in the IND/DEM group. -- Law Lord ( talk) 20:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
User:Setwisohi/Thatcher, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Setwisohi/Thatcher and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Setwisohi/Thatcher during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. GTD 08:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
How does the new version look to you? Jonathan A Jones ( talk) 21:31, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I see you like Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish Independence, but do you like English independence and Cornish independence as well?
( 86.169.125.18 ( talk) 16:13, 6 August 2009 (UTC))
Thank you for replying. So, would you include them on your boxes?
( 86.169.125.18 ( talk) 16:31, 6 August 2009 (UTC))
The links you deleted from Rugby union in Cyprus were references not "link spam". If I don't keep them in, someone will come along and delete all the material (possibly the entire article).-- MacRusgail ( talk) 11:32, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I have copied this discussion to the article's talk page and responded to it there. JamesBWatson ( talk) 10:52, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Ditto for Belgian wine in this edit. Deleting references is WP:Vandalism, as far as I'm concerned. You're of course welcome to find another, better source if you're familiar with the subject, but definitely not to erase references. Regards, Tomas e ( talk) 17:13, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
I am bewildered by anyone who can make a blanket statement that deleting references is vandalism, without regard to circumstances. Deleting references may or may not be vandalism, depending on why it is done. Deleting bad references is obviously not vandalism; otherwise we would have the absurd situation that anyone could insert any rubbishy reference they liked, and it would then have to stay there forever. JamesBWatson ( talk) 14:02, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
What are you talking about? 194.83.131.4 isn't me and I haven't been using my account (TheGreenwalker) recently. Just because I also believe that the Libertarian tag should be added does not mean I did it, because you made it very clear to me that there have to be 'reliable source'. In other words, I did not add that tag in. Also, the IP of 194.83.131.4 is connected to a colllege in Epsom. I live near Wimbledon and have no connections in Epsom. ( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 18:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC))
I don't disagree with this edit, but it hardly counts as a minor edit! — Blue-Haired Lawyer 08:47, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
The WORCESTERSHIRE Project Newsletter - March 2010 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
An article that you have been involved in editing, SpinWatch, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SpinWatch. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jayron 32 19:36, 29 April 2010 (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) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Setwisohi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Dfrg_
msc 09:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Setwisohi. Welcome to wikipedia. I agree with your recent edit of fishing tackle when you tucked the untidy etymology away at the bottom. However, I do not agree with you removing that image merely because (for some strange reason which I don't understand either!) it was not resizing correctly. That is a hard won image that visually makes the salient point that any gear used for fishing, including tangled nets and rusty gear on a fishing boat, is also "tackle". However don't let that cramp your style, and keep trucking on! -- Geronimo20 ( talk) 11:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it's a shame to have lost it. Sorry. If you can get it back and get it to fit, that would be a lot better! Setwisohi ( talk) 16:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
There is a problem with changing bite detectors on the templates to bite alarms. A bite alarm is an audible device, as in fire alarm, whereas a bite "detector" is a more general term, and could refer to visual or kinaesthetic devices. It is true that the template links to an article called "bite alarms" when strictly it should have linked to an article called bite detectors. But there is, so far, no article called "bite detectors".
To fix this, the templates need to be restored to where they were, and the name of the article called Bite alarm needs to be changed to "Bite detector". Then the article itself needs to be enlarged to reflect its enlarged status.
I have put these templates now on over 800 fishing articles and I am very aware of these issues (which crop up everywhere). Usually there is no simple fix to be made by just renaming items on the templates. The problems are structural, and can only be solved by renaming and expanding existing articles or creating new ones. I am doing just that bit by bit, but I can't do it all at once. Simple renames usually don't fix the problem. If you would like to help by expanding or creating the relevant articles, then you are more than welcome. -- Geronimo20 ( talk) 01:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
see the bottom of the page Redman19 ( talk) 21:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Setwisohi,
I wanted to let you know that I undid the removal of all apiologists who don't have their own wikipedia page. As great as wikipedia is, and as informative as it is, wikipedia is not a complete catalog of all information. I don't think that the existence of a wikipedia entry is the ultimate measure of notability. All of the scientists that you removed are respected published authors with hundreds of peer reviewed scientific papers and several books to their credit. Feel free to discuss this issue in the talk section of the apiology page. Cheers AJseagull1 ( talk) 20:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm afraid it doesn't really work like that. If those people are notable, then they should have articles created. If they are not notable, then they don't - by definiton - belong in a list of notable people. Once they have articles, they can be listed. Setwisohi ( talk) 22:10, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Stop vandalizing Finland article. I don't know what your issue is with Finland, and I don't care, but diluting the article with your own idea of how things should be represented serves no purpose when the fact is that the research places Finland as the 2nd most stable country in the world. If you have an issue with the research, write a critique section to the page where the rankings are listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.112.207.125 ( talk) 17:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Not worth a reply this, is it? If you want to discuss something with someone, don't begin by shouting accusations at them. Setwisohi ( talk) 17:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
It's a good job pruning external links, as they tend to accrue and slip through the net. However, please make sure you don't delete good ones as you did here. [1] Raw Vision is a very well known outsider art magazine and a good resource for readers. Likewise there are useful links on the Intuit page - and Intuit is a long established not-for-profit centre, though I guess a link to the main page or some such might be considered instead. Sites with commercial material aren't banned from EL as such, but we don't want sites that exist primarily for that purpose and where any material is commonplace and just to provide padding for ads. The EL should provide something worthwhile for the reader, which isn't able to be incorporated into the article for whatever reason (maybe length as with an interview). Ty 23:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. It is a good approach to invite comment from a wider field. Ty 01:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
note: Comment placed here by User talk:MarylandArtLover - moved discussion to their talk page.
And to you to, censorship works both ways: You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on United_Kingdom_Independence_Party. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, YOU may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Long live British Democracy. Screw the political class. Eurosceptic Libertarian ( talk) 16:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Thankyou for the barnstar. I will try to keep up the good work! Thanks again and happy editing! America69 ( talk) 01:28, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I rescued this from immediate deletion, but I'd advise you to add more references quickly, before it gets nominated for regular deletion. This is especially important when the material is in a language not that many of us here speak, such as Finnish. DGG ( talk) 00:40, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Sorry DGG, I think you've got the wrong person. Not my article and I don't think I added any references to it. As far as I recall I just tidied it up and removed some dead external links? Setwisohi ( talk) 08:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Good evening to you and regards from Campora San Giovanni. I write you regarding the articles of a note police television series: Kommissar Rex. For better saying some principal actors of the international series. Martin Weinek and Kaspar Capparoni. Weinek is the veteran of the Austrian series, now real member of the series international, as well as excellent agricultural and theatrical entrepreneur and an experienced wine-grower. Capparoni is the new entry of the series, but he has already worked and he works for international productions and with famous directors, I quote among everybody: Dario Argento. I think that the series will arrive within the winter 2008 thanks also to Rai International, that will be transmitted in 150 countries and in more than 60 languages, among which the Irish Gaelic. Naturally if you will help me in this, me ricamberò really the favor translating a biography or a geographical article in Italian and Sicilian. In fact on the Italian edition they are biographer and geographer. In attends him of one certain answer of yours I thank you in advance and I greet you from Campora San Giovanni, my village native. Thanks still for the patience and the understanding.-- Lodewijk Vadacchino ( talk) 09:18, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello,I have removed the Conservatism tag in respect of your request. I only added it on as the UKIP ( United Kingdom Independence Party ) do have Economic and fiscal policies. Thank you and Merry Christmas .
From TheGreenWalker —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheGreenwalker ( talk • contribs) 22:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 22:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC))
How do you get the little pictures like those on your page?
Thank you
( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 23:35, 8 December 2008 (UTC))
Hello, Thank you for your help recently, but I need to know more (I am new). You asked me about if I can provide 'third party reliable sources' for the tag Conservatism. I want to know is what are reliable sources? Is it newspaper articles or other links? If so, how do I attach the link to prove the idealogies of the party? Also Mr Nigel Farage said to the BBC news this after the BNP electoral pact deal for the Euro 2009 elections, He said ' We want a government that will keep out and do less in our lives and the BNP wants to control our lives ' This is proof of Libertarianism in the UKIP, how do I attach the links to it? Thank you again ( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 01:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC))
Hello, me again. I do thank you for helping me recently, but I want to let you know I may have found some articles that may explain that the UKIP may have Conservatism and/or Libertarianism idealogies? ( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 14:07, 11 December 2008 (UTC))
Yes, here are some that may be of good use: 1. http://thepurplescorpion.blogspot.com/2006/05/what-should-next-ukip-leader-do.html 2. http://www.ukipeast.com/localmanifesto.htm 3. http://www.nouse.co.uk/2008/11/12/ukip-%E2%80%93-an-insight-into-one-of-the-fastest-growing-parties-in-the-uk/ I think 3 gives a good insight of Libertarianism for UKIP? Thank you. ( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 00:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC))
Oh well, never mind, at least I tried. Thank you anyway.
( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 23:44, 13 December 2008 (UTC))
Hey, that "double reference"--there was no double reference. What you deleted was, in one edit, the Iron Maiden text, and then the source for that text. But that Iron Maiden thing, of course it wasn't organized by Maiden or some such thing, and the article never claimed it did: it said "coinciding," and that's not a lie or even an exaggeration, as you suggested yourself in your edit summary. Also, I am not quite sure I agree with the edit you called "tidied refs"--it's not tidying up, it's the deletion of a reference to the artist's own explanation of his controversial artwork, which in the circumstances should be allowed, since it's called "obscene" in the paper, and that article does not give the context the work was created in. I'll wait for your response here, but I am very much in the mood to put both of them back, esp. the Iron Maiden thing since that's an interview with him, which provides the most in-depth coverage of all the (scant, I admit) sources. Drmies ( talk) 16:56, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
In answer to the question "Who added all this BS": it was me that originally added the flags. At the time I added them, of course, they were all perfectly valid and applied to the last version by Jay-W. However you then reverted the changes which had occasioned the flags, but neglected to remove the flags that no longer applied, thus creating duplicate flags and what you term "BS". So the real answer to "Who created all this BS", the answer is really "You did!". -- Boson ( talk) 16:41, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Setwisohi, my apologies. I will refrain in the future. I agree the allusion to potential bias is unfounded and added nothing to the discussion at hand re: my comment on another editor's talk page. Carolinequarrier ( talk) 14:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Re. Talk:Robert Mihaly, please see WP:TPG, WP:CIVIL and WP:OUTING. Ty 11:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks but I'm already aware of all of those. Setwisohi ( talk) 15:39, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, the normal way of dealing with edits you disagree with is the discussion page. Would you please explain there and consider using edit summaries in future? Thanks. -- Lo2u ( T • C) 20:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't see the reasoning about your revert. Please discuss it on the Kirkbride talk page. regards [ [2]] ( Off2riorob ( talk) 18:37, 28 May 2009 (UTC))
You have not only reverted my edit without discussion but you have hacked off the cites as well. ( Off2riorob ( talk) 18:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC))
freshacconci talktalk 15:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Regarding your recent edit: please observe that the June Movement's membership of EUDemocrats is valid regardless of whether the movement is in the European Parliament or not. In parliament, the June Movement was in the IND/DEM group. -- Law Lord ( talk) 20:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
User:Setwisohi/Thatcher, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Setwisohi/Thatcher and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Setwisohi/Thatcher during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. GTD 08:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
How does the new version look to you? Jonathan A Jones ( talk) 21:31, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I see you like Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish Independence, but do you like English independence and Cornish independence as well?
( 86.169.125.18 ( talk) 16:13, 6 August 2009 (UTC))
Thank you for replying. So, would you include them on your boxes?
( 86.169.125.18 ( talk) 16:31, 6 August 2009 (UTC))
The links you deleted from Rugby union in Cyprus were references not "link spam". If I don't keep them in, someone will come along and delete all the material (possibly the entire article).-- MacRusgail ( talk) 11:32, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I have copied this discussion to the article's talk page and responded to it there. JamesBWatson ( talk) 10:52, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Ditto for Belgian wine in this edit. Deleting references is WP:Vandalism, as far as I'm concerned. You're of course welcome to find another, better source if you're familiar with the subject, but definitely not to erase references. Regards, Tomas e ( talk) 17:13, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
I am bewildered by anyone who can make a blanket statement that deleting references is vandalism, without regard to circumstances. Deleting references may or may not be vandalism, depending on why it is done. Deleting bad references is obviously not vandalism; otherwise we would have the absurd situation that anyone could insert any rubbishy reference they liked, and it would then have to stay there forever. JamesBWatson ( talk) 14:02, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
What are you talking about? 194.83.131.4 isn't me and I haven't been using my account (TheGreenwalker) recently. Just because I also believe that the Libertarian tag should be added does not mean I did it, because you made it very clear to me that there have to be 'reliable source'. In other words, I did not add that tag in. Also, the IP of 194.83.131.4 is connected to a colllege in Epsom. I live near Wimbledon and have no connections in Epsom. ( TheGreenwalker ( talk) 18:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC))
I don't disagree with this edit, but it hardly counts as a minor edit! — Blue-Haired Lawyer 08:47, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
The WORCESTERSHIRE Project Newsletter - March 2010 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
An article that you have been involved in editing, SpinWatch, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SpinWatch. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jayron 32 19:36, 29 April 2010 (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) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)