This is Swaq's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Good Job finding my Secret Page. Please sign my Guest Book. Click on Guest Book to sign. -- RyRy5 (talk) 00:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand why you're saying I cannot add a verified Wikipedia reference to the external links section. It specifically links to the character database on MyAnimeList. Please explain why you think this is 'advertising' or 'spam' as you put it. Thanks. Ggyssler ( talk) 16:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the comment belowabove why you're saying I cannot add a verified Wikipedia reference to the external links section. It specifically links to relevant content. Please ecplain why you see this as spamming or in fact advertising? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
CAR Online (
talk •
contribs)
16:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about clogging up the page history, I manage a wikispace and know it makes a huge difference if you use the preview button, rather than just clicking save and seeing what happens. NB. You know the concept car markup? How do I change the text/images in it? Hce95 ( talk) 17:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity... Hce95 ( talk) 12:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I understand your point about not adding promotional material to Wikipedia and my article, ( VistaJet Holding), which was not meant to be promotional. I guess I used too much of the company's website text. VistaJet is a company similar to NetJets and I was trying to create an article similar to theirs. Please give me a copy of the source text so that I can rewrite it with content acceptable to Wikipedia. Also, I am the creator of the logo I uploaded, as well as the website text. If you look on the company's website under their press releases you will see I was appointed COO as of April 1st.
Thanks for your help,
2McDonnell ( talk) 00:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there
You recently removed links to Facebook group links I had made to certain articles. can i ask, does myspace fall under the same removal rules? because i have found others adding myspace links and would like to know if i should revert these for the same reasons? Many thanks δ²( Talk) 21:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Um, thanks? (I read the explanation on another talk page you posted this on but I still don't get why...) swa q 14:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
I added a legitimate external link to a company and that link was removed by a user, which I found wrong. We conducted an interview with the company about it's products and employees and this article added useful and deeper information that was missing from the company profile. The company I'm referring to is called Koenigsegg and my magazine spent a day interviewing the owners of the company. Can anyone please explain how I may have violated the guidelines if I'm adding more information - legitimate information - abou the company? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bihac008 ( talk • contribs) 12:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Audi R8 TDI Le Mans, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Audi R8 TDI Le Mans. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? -- Teutonic_Tamer ( talk to Teutonic_Tamer) 11:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
just so you know - Xdelta as referenced in Revision Control System is a different thing than the XDELTA debugger Tedickey ( talk) 16:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, yeah, A7 never applies to software. My only thinking is that the deleting admin thought it was web content, as in a website, rather than a software program. Or they didn't understand the policy at all, which unfortunately applies to a few admins. For future reference, always AfD a software program. I'm not going to undelete the other one because it would've been deleted anyway, but the admin should have followed the rules there; otherwise what's the point in having them? You were right to query it. :) Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the nice link cleanup work on the Asimo article. :) RainbowOfLight Talk 05:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
You removed a point added to Lotus Cars' article about their new advertising campaign involving "faceless aliens" in prominent venues across London. You're not was that the point constituted vandalism. Exactly why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.193.39 ( talk) 10:32, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Please explain the rationale for your removal of my edit adding the Special Agents Mutual Benefit Association. You failed to leave an edit summary. Thanks. REL1870 ( talk) 21:31, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
I added some references to Vbuzzer. You may want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vbuzzer. -- Eastmain ( talk) 19:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Please do not delete links to valid future articles. Almost every airline is notable. The fact that an article may have been deleted does not mean that the airline is not notable and that a proper article will not be written. Vegaswikian ( talk) 21:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, just wanted to ask one thing : the info I've added to the Lamborghini pages are perfectly correct, apparently there were some issues with a lambocars account that leads you to believe I'm not legit ?? I've been collecting all things about Lamborghini since childhood, browsed thousands of pages of the years and found lambocars.com to be a valuable source, I'm sure his info is verified with the factory. As for the production numbers on the GT, Valentino himself told me there were 83 cars built, the factory museum car is not numbered by the way as nr 80/80 was already sold when they built it.
I have responded to your accusations on the page, please read that reply too, I'm not referencing lambocars.com only, added several articles from other sites too. I'm feeling really bad about this personal attack on me, I wanted to contribute something useful to these pages, but get punished because of some issues with another member. Johan - WikiBull ( talk) 18:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello Swaq. I've just resubmitted this report, which had a formatting problem. It is now at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Kumarrao. Please add your own comment about how this matter came to your attention. I thought I would try to close this, because it is the report which has been open the longest at WP:SSP. But it is hard to see what the problem is. Maybe there is more evidence that has not yet been included. Please see my comment, and explain any remaining problem that you think needs to be addressed. If you are satisfied, perhaps the report can be closed with no further ado. The two editors named in the report had not been notified, and I've just done that. EdJohnston ( talk) 01:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand what is meant by "'brakes' is an invalid infobox field" as the edit summary re. deletion of "Dunlop" from "Dunlop disc brakes"; would be grateful for enlightenment! Thanks — Writegeist ( talk) 23:32, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes it was a mistake on my part. I was tired and not really paying attention, sorry about that. The world can still win! Ollie Fury Contribs 18:39, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
On Rossion Q1 Why? It takes up alot less space one line down. Sir Stig ( talk) 20:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
You removed the entry " Bundesagentur für Arbeit, The German Federal Employment Office" on the disambiguation page BA with the comment "Removing entries without articles per manual of style". This is wrong, the manual says: "A link to a non-existent article (a "red link") should only be included on a disambiguation page when another article also includes that red link." Other pages do link to that non existent page. Kricke ( talk) 09:54, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the supercar/archiving/peacock/etiquette advice etc -- Redashhope< 18:12 CET 21st Nov 2008
The only consensus here is there is no consensus. Thats my only point (and its not a negative one). But I can forgive your reference to the Fiat 500 supercar article as being an example of the poor/common or over use of the term. In fact you are probably far too young to know anyway (that is not intended to be condescending but factual by the way), but having now read the Abarth article you link back to I can tell you a French friend of mine who was a racing instructor in the mid 1960's in France (He eventually became the President of Le Mans race circuit) was racing a very early version of the same Abarth on a daily basis. The Abarth is very well qualified to be called a supercar based on its racing heritage and I for one would not have a problem with that....if only we knew what those qualifications where! Of course there are many words for which there is no universally accepted definition but we still choose to use them, like love and beautiful to name but two. My wife believes her dog is beautiful and she loves her...glad someone does.
On a practical point I have noted in your editing of my and other previous authors work in supercars (NSX in particular) you justify your actions (which I take really as splitting hairs and largely pedantic if not a straightforward waste of time) in removing text as editing peacock language. Please do remember that like supermodels, supercar buyers/enthusiasts/watchers/authors/readers do have their own dialect if not language and often the very reason behind owning a supercar (or expensive/sports car if that is a term you are more comfortable with) is not practical but willingly and openly narcissitic. Please do not convert every Wiki article you edit into your own form of dull window dressing without solid justification especially a catergory many peacocks happily frequent and understand. Have a good day and I took your advice and added an entry at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles . Redashhope 13:55, 22 November 2008 (CET)
The info added is now sourced Bagbesh ( talk) 07:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
We were surprised you saw fit to remove it - this is a bone fide non commercial project. Some people may be interested in getting hold of it and using it hence the additions. Also use of coLinux to leverage PC hardware (e.g. creating virtual clusters) is in our opinion valid content here: it seems idiotic to go create another page duplicating most of the (excellent) stuff on that page. cocytius 19:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Try making a valuable contribution beyond removing and reverting edits. This form of editing focuses more on destruction of the work of other editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. jones999 ( talk • contribs) 22:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
links are easily found using google. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. jones999 ( talk • contribs) 23:01, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi - I've added a comment here after I removed some external links. I'd welcome your thoughts - not least because I've removed two apparently legitimate external links!
Cheers, This flag once was red propaganda deeds 09:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I made a correct edit to RX7 page, with valid links, and you threaten to block me from Wikipedia. So who do I have to pay to join this "club" of people allowed to edit Wikipedia. This is from Wikipedia's 'About' page: "Wikipedia is written collaboratively by volunteers from all around the world; anyone can edit it." So when you did you decide who can and who cannot make a contribution to Wiki? Hmm? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theadrock13 ( talk • contribs) 21:14, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
I see you have repeatedly warned User:GTO123 about vandalism. He's been at it again, repeatedly adding the same few lines to the Ford Mondeo page - unreferenced, inaccurate, and with poor spelling and grammar. Claidheamhmor ( talk) 07:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I may copy this... decltype ( talk) 16:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey, please add the "+" to my move when you are updating. I'd do it myself, but I don't want to clutter the edit history. Regards, decltype ( talk) 23:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello- I need your vote, please Support. Regards. Vegavairbob ( talk) 19:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
It might be best to take that to WP:ANI; while the editor seems to have some difficulties with English, the content changes being made don't appear to be obvious vandalism, and I think it might need more in-depth examination than we typically have time for at AIV. EyeSerene talk 15:37, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Swaq! I just wanted to drop you a kind note and let you know that you forgot to inform Nagara373 that you opened an WP:ANI thread about him. Don't worry! I've has take care of it. Just wanted to gently remind you to make sure to do so when and if you open a new ANI thread in the future. Thanks! Basket of Puppies 16:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Did this get resolved at ANI? EyeSerene talk 11:41, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm hoping for further contributions to the discussion about the proposed deletion of the above template here [1] any constructive comments would be very welcome. Mighty Antar ( talk) 00:42, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles ( talk) 17:35, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
A TFD has been opened on Template:Religious text primary. The TfD was opened on 2 December; so is due to close in two days time. Notification being sent to all participants in the previous discussion Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_July_30#Template:BibleAsFact. Jheald ( talk) 23:35, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I wonder if you are interested in the discussion regarding whether the Subaru Outback deserves a standalone article or if it ought to be merged into the relevant generational articles of Subaru Legacy (and Impreza)? Thank you.--- North wiki ( talk) 18:35, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
A Tesla Roadster for you! | |
Thank you for contributing for Wikipedia! Gg53000 ( talk) 13:57, 7 January 2014 (UTC) |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Swaq. 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)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Zok death sloop. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 20#Zok death sloop until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm Bacon 03:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
This is Swaq's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Good Job finding my Secret Page. Please sign my Guest Book. Click on Guest Book to sign. -- RyRy5 (talk) 00:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand why you're saying I cannot add a verified Wikipedia reference to the external links section. It specifically links to the character database on MyAnimeList. Please explain why you think this is 'advertising' or 'spam' as you put it. Thanks. Ggyssler ( talk) 16:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the comment belowabove why you're saying I cannot add a verified Wikipedia reference to the external links section. It specifically links to relevant content. Please ecplain why you see this as spamming or in fact advertising? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
CAR Online (
talk •
contribs)
16:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about clogging up the page history, I manage a wikispace and know it makes a huge difference if you use the preview button, rather than just clicking save and seeing what happens. NB. You know the concept car markup? How do I change the text/images in it? Hce95 ( talk) 17:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity... Hce95 ( talk) 12:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I understand your point about not adding promotional material to Wikipedia and my article, ( VistaJet Holding), which was not meant to be promotional. I guess I used too much of the company's website text. VistaJet is a company similar to NetJets and I was trying to create an article similar to theirs. Please give me a copy of the source text so that I can rewrite it with content acceptable to Wikipedia. Also, I am the creator of the logo I uploaded, as well as the website text. If you look on the company's website under their press releases you will see I was appointed COO as of April 1st.
Thanks for your help,
2McDonnell ( talk) 00:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there
You recently removed links to Facebook group links I had made to certain articles. can i ask, does myspace fall under the same removal rules? because i have found others adding myspace links and would like to know if i should revert these for the same reasons? Many thanks δ²( Talk) 21:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Um, thanks? (I read the explanation on another talk page you posted this on but I still don't get why...) swa q 14:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
I added a legitimate external link to a company and that link was removed by a user, which I found wrong. We conducted an interview with the company about it's products and employees and this article added useful and deeper information that was missing from the company profile. The company I'm referring to is called Koenigsegg and my magazine spent a day interviewing the owners of the company. Can anyone please explain how I may have violated the guidelines if I'm adding more information - legitimate information - abou the company? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bihac008 ( talk • contribs) 12:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Audi R8 TDI Le Mans, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Audi R8 TDI Le Mans. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? -- Teutonic_Tamer ( talk to Teutonic_Tamer) 11:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
just so you know - Xdelta as referenced in Revision Control System is a different thing than the XDELTA debugger Tedickey ( talk) 16:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, yeah, A7 never applies to software. My only thinking is that the deleting admin thought it was web content, as in a website, rather than a software program. Or they didn't understand the policy at all, which unfortunately applies to a few admins. For future reference, always AfD a software program. I'm not going to undelete the other one because it would've been deleted anyway, but the admin should have followed the rules there; otherwise what's the point in having them? You were right to query it. :) Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the nice link cleanup work on the Asimo article. :) RainbowOfLight Talk 05:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
You removed a point added to Lotus Cars' article about their new advertising campaign involving "faceless aliens" in prominent venues across London. You're not was that the point constituted vandalism. Exactly why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.193.39 ( talk) 10:32, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Please explain the rationale for your removal of my edit adding the Special Agents Mutual Benefit Association. You failed to leave an edit summary. Thanks. REL1870 ( talk) 21:31, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
I added some references to Vbuzzer. You may want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vbuzzer. -- Eastmain ( talk) 19:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Please do not delete links to valid future articles. Almost every airline is notable. The fact that an article may have been deleted does not mean that the airline is not notable and that a proper article will not be written. Vegaswikian ( talk) 21:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, just wanted to ask one thing : the info I've added to the Lamborghini pages are perfectly correct, apparently there were some issues with a lambocars account that leads you to believe I'm not legit ?? I've been collecting all things about Lamborghini since childhood, browsed thousands of pages of the years and found lambocars.com to be a valuable source, I'm sure his info is verified with the factory. As for the production numbers on the GT, Valentino himself told me there were 83 cars built, the factory museum car is not numbered by the way as nr 80/80 was already sold when they built it.
I have responded to your accusations on the page, please read that reply too, I'm not referencing lambocars.com only, added several articles from other sites too. I'm feeling really bad about this personal attack on me, I wanted to contribute something useful to these pages, but get punished because of some issues with another member. Johan - WikiBull ( talk) 18:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello Swaq. I've just resubmitted this report, which had a formatting problem. It is now at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Kumarrao. Please add your own comment about how this matter came to your attention. I thought I would try to close this, because it is the report which has been open the longest at WP:SSP. But it is hard to see what the problem is. Maybe there is more evidence that has not yet been included. Please see my comment, and explain any remaining problem that you think needs to be addressed. If you are satisfied, perhaps the report can be closed with no further ado. The two editors named in the report had not been notified, and I've just done that. EdJohnston ( talk) 01:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand what is meant by "'brakes' is an invalid infobox field" as the edit summary re. deletion of "Dunlop" from "Dunlop disc brakes"; would be grateful for enlightenment! Thanks — Writegeist ( talk) 23:32, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes it was a mistake on my part. I was tired and not really paying attention, sorry about that. The world can still win! Ollie Fury Contribs 18:39, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
On Rossion Q1 Why? It takes up alot less space one line down. Sir Stig ( talk) 20:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
You removed the entry " Bundesagentur für Arbeit, The German Federal Employment Office" on the disambiguation page BA with the comment "Removing entries without articles per manual of style". This is wrong, the manual says: "A link to a non-existent article (a "red link") should only be included on a disambiguation page when another article also includes that red link." Other pages do link to that non existent page. Kricke ( talk) 09:54, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the supercar/archiving/peacock/etiquette advice etc -- Redashhope< 18:12 CET 21st Nov 2008
The only consensus here is there is no consensus. Thats my only point (and its not a negative one). But I can forgive your reference to the Fiat 500 supercar article as being an example of the poor/common or over use of the term. In fact you are probably far too young to know anyway (that is not intended to be condescending but factual by the way), but having now read the Abarth article you link back to I can tell you a French friend of mine who was a racing instructor in the mid 1960's in France (He eventually became the President of Le Mans race circuit) was racing a very early version of the same Abarth on a daily basis. The Abarth is very well qualified to be called a supercar based on its racing heritage and I for one would not have a problem with that....if only we knew what those qualifications where! Of course there are many words for which there is no universally accepted definition but we still choose to use them, like love and beautiful to name but two. My wife believes her dog is beautiful and she loves her...glad someone does.
On a practical point I have noted in your editing of my and other previous authors work in supercars (NSX in particular) you justify your actions (which I take really as splitting hairs and largely pedantic if not a straightforward waste of time) in removing text as editing peacock language. Please do remember that like supermodels, supercar buyers/enthusiasts/watchers/authors/readers do have their own dialect if not language and often the very reason behind owning a supercar (or expensive/sports car if that is a term you are more comfortable with) is not practical but willingly and openly narcissitic. Please do not convert every Wiki article you edit into your own form of dull window dressing without solid justification especially a catergory many peacocks happily frequent and understand. Have a good day and I took your advice and added an entry at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles . Redashhope 13:55, 22 November 2008 (CET)
The info added is now sourced Bagbesh ( talk) 07:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
We were surprised you saw fit to remove it - this is a bone fide non commercial project. Some people may be interested in getting hold of it and using it hence the additions. Also use of coLinux to leverage PC hardware (e.g. creating virtual clusters) is in our opinion valid content here: it seems idiotic to go create another page duplicating most of the (excellent) stuff on that page. cocytius 19:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Try making a valuable contribution beyond removing and reverting edits. This form of editing focuses more on destruction of the work of other editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. jones999 ( talk • contribs) 22:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
links are easily found using google. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. jones999 ( talk • contribs) 23:01, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi - I've added a comment here after I removed some external links. I'd welcome your thoughts - not least because I've removed two apparently legitimate external links!
Cheers, This flag once was red propaganda deeds 09:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I made a correct edit to RX7 page, with valid links, and you threaten to block me from Wikipedia. So who do I have to pay to join this "club" of people allowed to edit Wikipedia. This is from Wikipedia's 'About' page: "Wikipedia is written collaboratively by volunteers from all around the world; anyone can edit it." So when you did you decide who can and who cannot make a contribution to Wiki? Hmm? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theadrock13 ( talk • contribs) 21:14, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
I see you have repeatedly warned User:GTO123 about vandalism. He's been at it again, repeatedly adding the same few lines to the Ford Mondeo page - unreferenced, inaccurate, and with poor spelling and grammar. Claidheamhmor ( talk) 07:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I may copy this... decltype ( talk) 16:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey, please add the "+" to my move when you are updating. I'd do it myself, but I don't want to clutter the edit history. Regards, decltype ( talk) 23:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello- I need your vote, please Support. Regards. Vegavairbob ( talk) 19:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
It might be best to take that to WP:ANI; while the editor seems to have some difficulties with English, the content changes being made don't appear to be obvious vandalism, and I think it might need more in-depth examination than we typically have time for at AIV. EyeSerene talk 15:37, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Swaq! I just wanted to drop you a kind note and let you know that you forgot to inform Nagara373 that you opened an WP:ANI thread about him. Don't worry! I've has take care of it. Just wanted to gently remind you to make sure to do so when and if you open a new ANI thread in the future. Thanks! Basket of Puppies 16:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Did this get resolved at ANI? EyeSerene talk 11:41, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm hoping for further contributions to the discussion about the proposed deletion of the above template here [1] any constructive comments would be very welcome. Mighty Antar ( talk) 00:42, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles ( talk) 17:35, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
A TFD has been opened on Template:Religious text primary. The TfD was opened on 2 December; so is due to close in two days time. Notification being sent to all participants in the previous discussion Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_July_30#Template:BibleAsFact. Jheald ( talk) 23:35, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I wonder if you are interested in the discussion regarding whether the Subaru Outback deserves a standalone article or if it ought to be merged into the relevant generational articles of Subaru Legacy (and Impreza)? Thank you.--- North wiki ( talk) 18:35, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
A Tesla Roadster for you! | |
Thank you for contributing for Wikipedia! Gg53000 ( talk) 13:57, 7 January 2014 (UTC) |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Swaq. 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)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Zok death sloop. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 20#Zok death sloop until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm Bacon 03:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC)