|
/Archive 1—September 2010 |
I myself was going to delete the offending passage ~ but it is not even in Pali. It looks like Bahasa Indonesia to me !-- अनाम गुमनाम 02:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
In fact the vowel in the first syllable in Lhasa dialect is not 'e' it is 'ä'. You can confirm this in Tournadre's manuel. Tibetologist ( talk) 07:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
That's true, but this is the english language page in Wikipedia, not, e.g., the German or Swedish page. There is no ä in English, hence english speakers tend not to know how the vowel would be pronounced. So if you are not writing a wylie transliteration, and you are not writing the ä (which you should not do, because it's not a valid transliteration), the spelling that most closely resembles the sound as it would be pronounced in Tibetan is ten. Furthermore, if you say "tengyur" to a Tibetan scholar, they will probably know what you are talking about without any explanation. If you say "tangyur," you will probably have to explain yourself. Abhayakara ( talk) 04:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Abhayakara. We
welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things
you have written about in the article
Michael Roach, you may have a
conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.
All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
- Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
- Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
- Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
- Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 16:12, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry case
|
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Abhayakara for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 21:56, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Michael Roach shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 05:28, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps you could list the three reverts that you claim I did? Abhayakara ( talk) 05:44, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- Since you are no doubt able to perceive that you have edited the article three times in the last 24 hours, I assume your question means you're not familiar with WP:REVERT, "reverting may also refer to any action that in whole or in part reverses the actions of any editors". Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 05:47, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I am familiar with that text. So can you point me to the three reverts you claim I have done? You have a history of not actually looking at the changes I've made, so I'd ask you to actually look at the diffs and not just assume that because I've edited the article, I must have reverted a change you made. Abhayakara ( talk) 06:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- It doesn't have to be 3 reverts to changes that only I have made. All three of your edits in the last 24 hours are reverts. You can look at the diffs yourself.
Nomoskedasticity (
talk) 06:14, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- Huh. The sequence of events is that I corrected the last sentence in the marriage section to be consistent with sources. You reverted my change. A user you claim is my sockpuppet (but who, I hasten to add, is not) took out some of the text you added in your revert, but left some intact. I corrected his edit to be more consistent with the source. You added back in the original text. I reverted that. So I've done two reverts, and you've done two reverts, unless you're counting the sockpuppet. This is a really stupid discussion, though. It would be much better if you could just, once, actually explain why you want to make the change you want, and explain how the sources support the wording you have used. You haven't explained why my edit of your text was wrong. You just keep reverting it. I have explained why my edit is more accurate, so you should have no trouble explaining why I'm wrong, if you have any explanation at all. Abhayakara ( talk) 06:22, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
You are again at the limit of 3RR on Michael Roach. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 07:19, 16 June 2012 (UTC) The three revert rule applies to edit wars. There's no edit war going on here (unless you've started one—I haven't looked yet). I've been removing text that was added that's not justified by the cited references and that's potentially defamatory, and then moving on and removing different text with the same problem. I've been doing the edits a piece at a time because it requires a lot of work go to through all the articles cited and determine whether they actually say what they've been quoted as saying. You have in fact made two inaccurate edits, and I've reverted both of them, but they were different edits addressing different topics. Abhayakara ( talk) 14:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 06:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Merge discussion for Incidents of zombie-like behavior in 2012
An article that you have been involved in editing,
Incidents of zombie-like behavior in 2012, has been proposed for a
merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going
here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.
Schmidt,
MICHAEL Q. 17:15, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Simple and textbook professional addition there, well done. 76.239.24.140 ( talk) 00:44, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Abhayakara, I have made a few new comments in the talk page of Mata Amritanandamayi. I am hoping you can look at them and comment. As you probably remember you responded to a request for a third-party editor there. I am very new to Wiki and, with the lock on the page being removed on 24 August, dont really know how to proceed. Can you explain/suggest on the talk page there? Thanks.-- LanceMurdock999 ( talk) 17:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Paul Williams is a well-known scholar on Mahayana-Buddhism. See his Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations Joshua Jonathan ( talk) 15:39, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello Abhayakara; this message is to inform you that there is currently a public poll to determine whether to capitalize the definite article ("the") when mentioning the band "THE BEATLES" mid-sentence. As you've previously participated either here, here, or here, your input would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. For the mediators. ~ GabeMc ( talk| contribs) 22:37, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. The link to the poll is under "public poll" ~ GabeMc ( talk| contribs) 03:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Ante Pavelić
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ante Pavelić. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 16:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Abhayakara. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Al-Ahbash. Thank you. -- McKhan ( talk)
- And I think you'd better explain your attack on me as well, which is completely unfounded. If you have evidence of me being "non-neutral" here, produce it or redact your attack. Black Kite ( talk) 20:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- I already explained what you did that wasn't neutral on
WP:NPOVN. Please review the conversation, assuming good faith rather than attacking. There's no shame in a mistake; furthering it by attacking the person who points it out to you is, however, shameful.
Abhayakara (
talk) 21:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, you already "explained" it, except that I believe you are wrong. First of all, my watchlist of Darkness Shines' talkpage is not "protective" of them - it is simply an easy way of finding sockpuppets of a certain banned editor, because they often post abuse on that particular talkpage. I also have a number of other talkpages and articles watchlisted which that editor favours (we are talking here about an editor with at least 150 identified sockpuppets). Secondly, I have no interest in this article or indeed any other in this area; you can check my contributions on that front and you will find nothing. Thirdly, the timeline is this; I saw McKhan's edits on DS's talkpage due to the watchlist; I then looked at his edits to see that they were (a) practically all reverts and/or edit-warring, and (b) there is clear evidence of sockpuppetry by him. I could have blocked him at this point for persistent disruptive editing, but I didn't - I instead protected the article on which he (and multiple other editors) were edit-warring. Then, instead of discussing at the talkpage, he then immediately brought his complaint to NPOVN, which should not be a first recourse. I added my comments below his claims so that other editors had full knowledge of the situation (and actually, I even left out the sockpuppetry case, and pointed out that other editors were not acting neutrally as well). So given all that, how exactly have I acted non-neutrally? I am genuinely puzzled as to how you've drawn that conclusion.
Black Kite (
talk) 22:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- The abuse on the Al-Ahbash page has been going on for months. It is not one-sided. It's easy to see this from looking at the edit history and the talk page. Yet you took the side of someone you know. I do not have the ability to read your mind—I don't know what your motivation is. All I know is that your behavior looks biased. As an administrator, your behavior shouldn't look biased. You should think carefully before acting, not shoot from the hip. And if someone accuses you of bias, you should review your actions to see if there is an appearance of bias. If there is, it's pointless to debate the matter, because nobody but you knows the contents of your own mind. So you should recuse yourself and ask someone else to take over. I'm sure this sucks, and I'm sympathetic, but admin privs on Wikipedia are abused pretty frequently, and it is precisely why Wikipedia has gained such a negative reputation. I don't have any power here—you can feel free to ignore me. But if you really care about Wikipedia, you might want to stop reacting so harshly to criticism. Being an admin is a sacred trust, not a merit badge.
Abhayakara (
talk) 02:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I give up. I'm not bothered particularly about being accused of something (as an admin I'm used to it), it's just particularly irritating when an editor's rationale for it is effectively "well, it looks biased to me, so it must be" without any actual explananation.
Black Kite (
talk) 06:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- How else would bias be evident? All we have is what we see. I can't prove that you were biased, nor decide that you weren't after all. All I can say is what I saw. Even if you aren't biased, your response to the edit war wasn't constructive, in the sense that it isn't likely to lead either to compromise, or even to some clear idea of which editor, if any, is editing with POV. Abhayakara ( talk) 06:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I give up. I'm not bothered particularly about being accused of something (as an admin I'm used to it), it's just particularly irritating when an editor's rationale for it is effectively "well, it looks biased to me, so it must be" without any actual explananation.
Black Kite (
talk) 06:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- The abuse on the Al-Ahbash page has been going on for months. It is not one-sided. It's easy to see this from looking at the edit history and the talk page. Yet you took the side of someone you know. I do not have the ability to read your mind—I don't know what your motivation is. All I know is that your behavior looks biased. As an administrator, your behavior shouldn't look biased. You should think carefully before acting, not shoot from the hip. And if someone accuses you of bias, you should review your actions to see if there is an appearance of bias. If there is, it's pointless to debate the matter, because nobody but you knows the contents of your own mind. So you should recuse yourself and ask someone else to take over. I'm sure this sucks, and I'm sympathetic, but admin privs on Wikipedia are abused pretty frequently, and it is precisely why Wikipedia has gained such a negative reputation. I don't have any power here—you can feel free to ignore me. But if you really care about Wikipedia, you might want to stop reacting so harshly to criticism. Being an admin is a sacred trust, not a merit badge.
Abhayakara (
talk) 02:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, you already "explained" it, except that I believe you are wrong. First of all, my watchlist of Darkness Shines' talkpage is not "protective" of them - it is simply an easy way of finding sockpuppets of a certain banned editor, because they often post abuse on that particular talkpage. I also have a number of other talkpages and articles watchlisted which that editor favours (we are talking here about an editor with at least 150 identified sockpuppets). Secondly, I have no interest in this article or indeed any other in this area; you can check my contributions on that front and you will find nothing. Thirdly, the timeline is this; I saw McKhan's edits on DS's talkpage due to the watchlist; I then looked at his edits to see that they were (a) practically all reverts and/or edit-warring, and (b) there is clear evidence of sockpuppetry by him. I could have blocked him at this point for persistent disruptive editing, but I didn't - I instead protected the article on which he (and multiple other editors) were edit-warring. Then, instead of discussing at the talkpage, he then immediately brought his complaint to NPOVN, which should not be a first recourse. I added my comments below his claims so that other editors had full knowledge of the situation (and actually, I even left out the sockpuppetry case, and pointed out that other editors were not acting neutrally as well). So given all that, how exactly have I acted non-neutrally? I am genuinely puzzled as to how you've drawn that conclusion.
Black Kite (
talk) 22:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- I already explained what you did that wasn't neutral on
WP:NPOVN. Please review the conversation, assuming good faith rather than attacking. There's no shame in a mistake; furthering it by attacking the person who points it out to you is, however, shameful.
Abhayakara (
talk) 21:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 15:15, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Sockpuppet (Internet)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sockpuppet (Internet). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 20:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Eugene Plotkin
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Eugene Plotkin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 21:15, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hans-Hermann Hoppe. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 21:16, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 22:15, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Alger Hiss
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Alger Hiss. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 22:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Elizabeth II
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Elizabeth II. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 23:15, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Laura Robson
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Laura Robson. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 23:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Murray Rothbard
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Murray Rothbard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 23:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Serbia at the 2012 Summer Olympics
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Serbia at the 2012 Summer Olympics. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 00:15, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Michael Knighton
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Michael Knighton. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 00:15, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Emily VanCamp
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Emily VanCamp. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 01:15, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Pricasso
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pricasso. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 02:15, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 02:16, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 03:15, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Gary North (economist)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gary North (economist). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 04:15, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Prince George of Cambridge
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Prince George of Cambridge. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 04:15, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Roger Waters
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Roger Waters. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 04:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 04:15, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on an RfC about Living members of deposed royal families and the titles attributed to them on WP
Hello - I have opened an RfC about suggested guidelines in the Manual of Style for articles about living members of families whose ancestors were deposed as monarchs of various countries and the titles and "styles" attributed to these living people, at the moment often in a misleading and inaccurate way in my opinion. Please join in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies "Use of royal "Titles and styles" and honorific prefixes in articles and templates referring to pretenders to abolished royal titles and their families" [1]Regards, Smeat75 ( talk) 05:57, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
I just re-read your post on the talk page for Mata Amritanandamayi. Despite your comments from 2012, there is still undue weight in the "controversies" section of her page. Furthermore there seems to be an effort to use a self-published book as a source for unsubstantiated accusations. Could you please take a look at the page to help resolve the content dispute? JamesRoberts ( talk) 01:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
The allegedly self published book was not used as a source in the deleted section. Only reliable third party sources were used as inline citations. I have left you a message in Talk:Mata Amritanandamayi#Disputed text removed pending outcome of arbitration. I have also included you in the mediation page since you seems to have taken a position which was not argued by anyone else in the talk page before. -- Drajay1976 ( talk) 17:02, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Justin Bieber
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Justin Bieber. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:01, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hello Abhayakara. I see that you have responded to Bieber's RfC in the General Survey section. Some users have posted that the RfC is currently a mess, and that we need to be very explicit in what we agree to include and what we don't. As such, a second survey was created which cut the content into points. Could you take the time to post your opinion on each point, whether you think it should be included or not, or summarized, or changed in the responses to above points subsection to move the RfC forward? Thank you very much. starship.paint ( talk | ctrb) 11:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited DNS Long Lived Queries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TCP ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Suicide of Phoebe Prince
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Suicide of Phoebe Prince. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Pablo Casals
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pablo Casals. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 18:46, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:List of Bohemian Club members
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Bohemian Club members. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:John Schlossberg
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:John Schlossberg. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Please comment on Talk:Jason Russell
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jason Russell. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Please comment on Talk:Governorship of Chris Christie
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Governorship of Chris Christie. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Mary Kay Letourneau
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mary Kay Letourneau. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:List of Bohemian Club members
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Bohemian Club members. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Jodie Foster
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jodie Foster. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:01, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Request board
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Request board. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:List of best-selling music artists
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of best-selling music artists. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Fields Medal
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Fields Medal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:James Randi Educational Foundation
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:James Randi Educational Foundation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Sigmund Freud
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sigmund Freud. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 17 September 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) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:White House Press Secretary
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:White House Press Secretary. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Jared Taylor
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jared Taylor. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Debbie Wasserman Schultz
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Google's Ideological Echo Chamber
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Google's Ideological Echo Chamber. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Abhayakara. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
| Your feedback is requested
at Talk:Killing of George Floyd on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. |
 |
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:45, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Please see: Talk:Santa Claus#RfC about the wording lead section of the article. Félix An ( talk) 15:59, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Lana Del Rey on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Naomi Scott on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:31, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:House of Windsor on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi Abhayakara! You're receiving this notification because you were previously subscribed to the Feedback Request Service, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over three years.
In order to declutter the Feedback Request Service list, and to produce a greater chance of active users being randomly selected to receive invitations to contribute, you've been unsubscribed, along with all other users who have made no edits in three years or more.
You do not need to do anything about this - if you are happy to not receive Feedback Request Service messages, thank you very much for your contributions in the past, and this will be the last you hear from the service. If, however, you would like to resubscribe yourself, you can follow the below instructions to do so:
- Go to the Feedback Request Service page.
- Decide which categories are of interest to you, under the RfC and/or GA headings.
- Paste
{{ Frs user|Abhayakara|limit}}underneath the relevant heading(s), where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month. - Publish the page.
If you've just come back after a wikibreak and are seeing this message, welcome back! You can follow the above instructions to re-activate your subscription. Likewise, if this is an alternate account, please consider subscribing your main account in much the same way.
Note that if you had a rename and left your old name subscribed to the FRS, you may be receiving this message on your new username's talk page still. If so, make sure your new account name is subscribed to the FRS, using the same procedure mentioned above.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the Feedback Request Service talk page, or on the Feedback Request Service bot's operator's talk page. Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:01, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
|
/Archive 1—September 2010 |
I myself was going to delete the offending passage ~ but it is not even in Pali. It looks like Bahasa Indonesia to me !-- अनाम गुमनाम 02:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
In fact the vowel in the first syllable in Lhasa dialect is not 'e' it is 'ä'. You can confirm this in Tournadre's manuel. Tibetologist ( talk) 07:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
That's true, but this is the english language page in Wikipedia, not, e.g., the German or Swedish page. There is no ä in English, hence english speakers tend not to know how the vowel would be pronounced. So if you are not writing a wylie transliteration, and you are not writing the ä (which you should not do, because it's not a valid transliteration), the spelling that most closely resembles the sound as it would be pronounced in Tibetan is ten. Furthermore, if you say "tengyur" to a Tibetan scholar, they will probably know what you are talking about without any explanation. If you say "tangyur," you will probably have to explain yourself. Abhayakara ( talk) 04:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Abhayakara. We
welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things
you have written about in the article
Michael Roach, you may have a
conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.
All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
- Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
- Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
- Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
- Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 16:12, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry case
|
|
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Abhayakara for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 21:56, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Michael Roach shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 05:28, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps you could list the three reverts that you claim I did? Abhayakara ( talk) 05:44, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- Since you are no doubt able to perceive that you have edited the article three times in the last 24 hours, I assume your question means you're not familiar with WP:REVERT, "reverting may also refer to any action that in whole or in part reverses the actions of any editors". Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 05:47, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I am familiar with that text. So can you point me to the three reverts you claim I have done? You have a history of not actually looking at the changes I've made, so I'd ask you to actually look at the diffs and not just assume that because I've edited the article, I must have reverted a change you made. Abhayakara ( talk) 06:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- It doesn't have to be 3 reverts to changes that only I have made. All three of your edits in the last 24 hours are reverts. You can look at the diffs yourself.
Nomoskedasticity (
talk) 06:14, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- Huh. The sequence of events is that I corrected the last sentence in the marriage section to be consistent with sources. You reverted my change. A user you claim is my sockpuppet (but who, I hasten to add, is not) took out some of the text you added in your revert, but left some intact. I corrected his edit to be more consistent with the source. You added back in the original text. I reverted that. So I've done two reverts, and you've done two reverts, unless you're counting the sockpuppet. This is a really stupid discussion, though. It would be much better if you could just, once, actually explain why you want to make the change you want, and explain how the sources support the wording you have used. You haven't explained why my edit of your text was wrong. You just keep reverting it. I have explained why my edit is more accurate, so you should have no trouble explaining why I'm wrong, if you have any explanation at all. Abhayakara ( talk) 06:22, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
You are again at the limit of 3RR on Michael Roach. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 07:19, 16 June 2012 (UTC) The three revert rule applies to edit wars. There's no edit war going on here (unless you've started one—I haven't looked yet). I've been removing text that was added that's not justified by the cited references and that's potentially defamatory, and then moving on and removing different text with the same problem. I've been doing the edits a piece at a time because it requires a lot of work go to through all the articles cited and determine whether they actually say what they've been quoted as saying. You have in fact made two inaccurate edits, and I've reverted both of them, but they were different edits addressing different topics. Abhayakara ( talk) 14:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 06:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Merge discussion for Incidents of zombie-like behavior in 2012
An article that you have been involved in editing,
Incidents of zombie-like behavior in 2012, has been proposed for a
merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going
here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.
Schmidt,
MICHAEL Q. 17:15, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Simple and textbook professional addition there, well done. 76.239.24.140 ( talk) 00:44, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Abhayakara, I have made a few new comments in the talk page of Mata Amritanandamayi. I am hoping you can look at them and comment. As you probably remember you responded to a request for a third-party editor there. I am very new to Wiki and, with the lock on the page being removed on 24 August, dont really know how to proceed. Can you explain/suggest on the talk page there? Thanks.-- LanceMurdock999 ( talk) 17:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Paul Williams is a well-known scholar on Mahayana-Buddhism. See his Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations Joshua Jonathan ( talk) 15:39, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello Abhayakara; this message is to inform you that there is currently a public poll to determine whether to capitalize the definite article ("the") when mentioning the band "THE BEATLES" mid-sentence. As you've previously participated either here, here, or here, your input would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. For the mediators. ~ GabeMc ( talk| contribs) 22:37, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. The link to the poll is under "public poll" ~ GabeMc ( talk| contribs) 03:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Ante Pavelić
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ante Pavelić. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 16:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Abhayakara. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Al-Ahbash. Thank you. -- McKhan ( talk)
- And I think you'd better explain your attack on me as well, which is completely unfounded. If you have evidence of me being "non-neutral" here, produce it or redact your attack. Black Kite ( talk) 20:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- I already explained what you did that wasn't neutral on
WP:NPOVN. Please review the conversation, assuming good faith rather than attacking. There's no shame in a mistake; furthering it by attacking the person who points it out to you is, however, shameful.
Abhayakara (
talk) 21:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, you already "explained" it, except that I believe you are wrong. First of all, my watchlist of Darkness Shines' talkpage is not "protective" of them - it is simply an easy way of finding sockpuppets of a certain banned editor, because they often post abuse on that particular talkpage. I also have a number of other talkpages and articles watchlisted which that editor favours (we are talking here about an editor with at least 150 identified sockpuppets). Secondly, I have no interest in this article or indeed any other in this area; you can check my contributions on that front and you will find nothing. Thirdly, the timeline is this; I saw McKhan's edits on DS's talkpage due to the watchlist; I then looked at his edits to see that they were (a) practically all reverts and/or edit-warring, and (b) there is clear evidence of sockpuppetry by him. I could have blocked him at this point for persistent disruptive editing, but I didn't - I instead protected the article on which he (and multiple other editors) were edit-warring. Then, instead of discussing at the talkpage, he then immediately brought his complaint to NPOVN, which should not be a first recourse. I added my comments below his claims so that other editors had full knowledge of the situation (and actually, I even left out the sockpuppetry case, and pointed out that other editors were not acting neutrally as well). So given all that, how exactly have I acted non-neutrally? I am genuinely puzzled as to how you've drawn that conclusion.
Black Kite (
talk) 22:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- The abuse on the Al-Ahbash page has been going on for months. It is not one-sided. It's easy to see this from looking at the edit history and the talk page. Yet you took the side of someone you know. I do not have the ability to read your mind—I don't know what your motivation is. All I know is that your behavior looks biased. As an administrator, your behavior shouldn't look biased. You should think carefully before acting, not shoot from the hip. And if someone accuses you of bias, you should review your actions to see if there is an appearance of bias. If there is, it's pointless to debate the matter, because nobody but you knows the contents of your own mind. So you should recuse yourself and ask someone else to take over. I'm sure this sucks, and I'm sympathetic, but admin privs on Wikipedia are abused pretty frequently, and it is precisely why Wikipedia has gained such a negative reputation. I don't have any power here—you can feel free to ignore me. But if you really care about Wikipedia, you might want to stop reacting so harshly to criticism. Being an admin is a sacred trust, not a merit badge.
Abhayakara (
talk) 02:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I give up. I'm not bothered particularly about being accused of something (as an admin I'm used to it), it's just particularly irritating when an editor's rationale for it is effectively "well, it looks biased to me, so it must be" without any actual explananation.
Black Kite (
talk) 06:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- How else would bias be evident? All we have is what we see. I can't prove that you were biased, nor decide that you weren't after all. All I can say is what I saw. Even if you aren't biased, your response to the edit war wasn't constructive, in the sense that it isn't likely to lead either to compromise, or even to some clear idea of which editor, if any, is editing with POV. Abhayakara ( talk) 06:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I give up. I'm not bothered particularly about being accused of something (as an admin I'm used to it), it's just particularly irritating when an editor's rationale for it is effectively "well, it looks biased to me, so it must be" without any actual explananation.
Black Kite (
talk) 06:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- The abuse on the Al-Ahbash page has been going on for months. It is not one-sided. It's easy to see this from looking at the edit history and the talk page. Yet you took the side of someone you know. I do not have the ability to read your mind—I don't know what your motivation is. All I know is that your behavior looks biased. As an administrator, your behavior shouldn't look biased. You should think carefully before acting, not shoot from the hip. And if someone accuses you of bias, you should review your actions to see if there is an appearance of bias. If there is, it's pointless to debate the matter, because nobody but you knows the contents of your own mind. So you should recuse yourself and ask someone else to take over. I'm sure this sucks, and I'm sympathetic, but admin privs on Wikipedia are abused pretty frequently, and it is precisely why Wikipedia has gained such a negative reputation. I don't have any power here—you can feel free to ignore me. But if you really care about Wikipedia, you might want to stop reacting so harshly to criticism. Being an admin is a sacred trust, not a merit badge.
Abhayakara (
talk) 02:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, you already "explained" it, except that I believe you are wrong. First of all, my watchlist of Darkness Shines' talkpage is not "protective" of them - it is simply an easy way of finding sockpuppets of a certain banned editor, because they often post abuse on that particular talkpage. I also have a number of other talkpages and articles watchlisted which that editor favours (we are talking here about an editor with at least 150 identified sockpuppets). Secondly, I have no interest in this article or indeed any other in this area; you can check my contributions on that front and you will find nothing. Thirdly, the timeline is this; I saw McKhan's edits on DS's talkpage due to the watchlist; I then looked at his edits to see that they were (a) practically all reverts and/or edit-warring, and (b) there is clear evidence of sockpuppetry by him. I could have blocked him at this point for persistent disruptive editing, but I didn't - I instead protected the article on which he (and multiple other editors) were edit-warring. Then, instead of discussing at the talkpage, he then immediately brought his complaint to NPOVN, which should not be a first recourse. I added my comments below his claims so that other editors had full knowledge of the situation (and actually, I even left out the sockpuppetry case, and pointed out that other editors were not acting neutrally as well). So given all that, how exactly have I acted non-neutrally? I am genuinely puzzled as to how you've drawn that conclusion.
Black Kite (
talk) 22:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- I already explained what you did that wasn't neutral on
WP:NPOVN. Please review the conversation, assuming good faith rather than attacking. There's no shame in a mistake; furthering it by attacking the person who points it out to you is, however, shameful.
Abhayakara (
talk) 21:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 15:15, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Sockpuppet (Internet)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sockpuppet (Internet). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 20:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Eugene Plotkin
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Eugene Plotkin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 21:15, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hans-Hermann Hoppe. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 21:16, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 22:15, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Alger Hiss
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Alger Hiss. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 22:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Elizabeth II
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Elizabeth II. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 23:15, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Laura Robson
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Laura Robson. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 23:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Murray Rothbard
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Murray Rothbard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 23:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Serbia at the 2012 Summer Olympics
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Serbia at the 2012 Summer Olympics. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 00:15, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Michael Knighton
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Michael Knighton. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 00:15, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Emily VanCamp
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Emily VanCamp. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 01:15, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Pricasso
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pricasso. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 02:15, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 02:16, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 03:15, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Gary North (economist)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gary North (economist). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 04:15, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Prince George of Cambridge
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Prince George of Cambridge. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 04:15, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Roger Waters
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Roger Waters. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 04:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 04:15, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on an RfC about Living members of deposed royal families and the titles attributed to them on WP
Hello - I have opened an RfC about suggested guidelines in the Manual of Style for articles about living members of families whose ancestors were deposed as monarchs of various countries and the titles and "styles" attributed to these living people, at the moment often in a misleading and inaccurate way in my opinion. Please join in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies "Use of royal "Titles and styles" and honorific prefixes in articles and templates referring to pretenders to abolished royal titles and their families" [1]Regards, Smeat75 ( talk) 05:57, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
I just re-read your post on the talk page for Mata Amritanandamayi. Despite your comments from 2012, there is still undue weight in the "controversies" section of her page. Furthermore there seems to be an effort to use a self-published book as a source for unsubstantiated accusations. Could you please take a look at the page to help resolve the content dispute? JamesRoberts ( talk) 01:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
The allegedly self published book was not used as a source in the deleted section. Only reliable third party sources were used as inline citations. I have left you a message in Talk:Mata Amritanandamayi#Disputed text removed pending outcome of arbitration. I have also included you in the mediation page since you seems to have taken a position which was not argued by anyone else in the talk page before. -- Drajay1976 ( talk) 17:02, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Justin Bieber
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Justin Bieber. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:01, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hello Abhayakara. I see that you have responded to Bieber's RfC in the General Survey section. Some users have posted that the RfC is currently a mess, and that we need to be very explicit in what we agree to include and what we don't. As such, a second survey was created which cut the content into points. Could you take the time to post your opinion on each point, whether you think it should be included or not, or summarized, or changed in the responses to above points subsection to move the RfC forward? Thank you very much. starship.paint ( talk | ctrb) 11:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited DNS Long Lived Queries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TCP ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Suicide of Phoebe Prince
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Suicide of Phoebe Prince. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Pablo Casals
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pablo Casals. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 18:46, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:List of Bohemian Club members
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Bohemian Club members. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:John Schlossberg
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:John Schlossberg. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Please comment on Talk:Jason Russell
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jason Russell. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Please comment on Talk:Governorship of Chris Christie
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Governorship of Chris Christie. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Mary Kay Letourneau
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mary Kay Letourneau. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:List of Bohemian Club members
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Bohemian Club members. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Jodie Foster
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jodie Foster. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:01, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Request board
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Request board. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:List of best-selling music artists
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of best-selling music artists. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Fields Medal
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Fields Medal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:James Randi Educational Foundation
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:James Randi Educational Foundation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Sigmund Freud
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sigmund Freud. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:00, 17 September 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) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:White House Press Secretary
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:White House Press Secretary. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Jared Taylor
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jared Taylor. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Debbie Wasserman Schultz
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Google's Ideological Echo Chamber
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Google's Ideological Echo Chamber. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Abhayakara. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
| Your feedback is requested
at Talk:Killing of George Floyd on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. |
|
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:45, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Please see: Talk:Santa Claus#RfC about the wording lead section of the article. Félix An ( talk) 15:59, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Lana Del Rey on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Naomi Scott on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:31, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:House of Windsor on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi Abhayakara! You're receiving this notification because you were previously subscribed to the Feedback Request Service, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over three years.
In order to declutter the Feedback Request Service list, and to produce a greater chance of active users being randomly selected to receive invitations to contribute, you've been unsubscribed, along with all other users who have made no edits in three years or more.
You do not need to do anything about this - if you are happy to not receive Feedback Request Service messages, thank you very much for your contributions in the past, and this will be the last you hear from the service. If, however, you would like to resubscribe yourself, you can follow the below instructions to do so:
- Go to the Feedback Request Service page.
- Decide which categories are of interest to you, under the RfC and/or GA headings.
- Paste
{{ Frs user|Abhayakara|limit}}underneath the relevant heading(s), where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month. - Publish the page.
If you've just come back after a wikibreak and are seeing this message, welcome back! You can follow the above instructions to re-activate your subscription. Likewise, if this is an alternate account, please consider subscribing your main account in much the same way.
Note that if you had a rename and left your old name subscribed to the FRS, you may be receiving this message on your new username's talk page still. If so, make sure your new account name is subscribed to the FRS, using the same procedure mentioned above.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the Feedback Request Service talk page, or on the Feedback Request Service bot's operator's talk page. Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:01, 17 August 2020 (UTC)