I had all of the bills cited, but you deleted that. I can go back in and add those citations, but it's pointless if you're just going to delete them again.
I disagree that this doesn't matter. If no other states had proposed it that would say something about how it is viewed. Likewise if it has been proposed many many times, that says something different. I think it is part of the story.
I've tried to meet you halfway on this. The post has been up, with that list, for years and no one has tried to delete that. You're the only one who has found it onerous. I think you should reconsider.
Volcycle ( talk) 20:06, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Resolution: Bills added to entry. Flyte35 ( talk) 05:51, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Your reverts continue to be nonconstructive to the article Carole Radziwill. You are removing a properly cited reference from a sentence in the article, leaving it unsourced, and changing a link in the article to go a redirect. Neither of these are "Better than before". This edit warring is immature. You have not given any clear, concise reason as to how leaving information unsourced and uncited and changing a link to a redirect are somehow beneficial. -- Willthacheerleader18 ( talk) 17:41, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Resolution: My edits retained. Flyte35 ( talk) 18:27, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
All the changes in the article are explained, and with the proofs.
If you want to polish the English in the page then fine, bat do not erase all the article changes!
Joe silver 1 ( talk) 23:41, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Resolution: Edits under discussion not retained. Flyte35 ( talk) 05:51, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello, even though Columbia school of journalism is not mentioned in Ebenezer Ako-Adjei's article, there are documents that establish that fact and can be provided as references. Will the references be enough premise to add his name to the list of notable alumni or does it still have to be mentioned in his article? Thanks Kinvidia ( talk) 20:26, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Resolution: Ako-Adjei not retained in list. Flyte35 ( talk) 05:52, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
If you think it's so easy to find a reference for her height, then include it. Do not re-add unsourced material. DrKay ( talk) 08:09, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
I find it clear that you have not done so). Please feel free to put forth any points I have made in these many discussions, either attributed to me or, if you concur, as your own. FactStraight ( talk) 19:46, 28 April 2019 (UTC) Resolution: Weirdly ongoing discussion. My edits not retained. Flyte35 ( talk) 05:56, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for supporting ancestry charts against crazed campaigns for their diminution or removal. LE ( talk) 03:06, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Resolution: My edits retained. (Part of same discussion in above.) Flyte35 ( talk) 06:03, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi
Thanks very much for your edits to Industrial property, I agree that there should be less info about WIPO since it has its own article, but I think there should be some information on its role in Industrial Property, what do you think about this cut down version?
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations, WIPO provides a forum for its member states to create and harmonize rules and practices for protecting IP rights, including Industrial Property. Most developed countries have protection systems that are centuries old, while developing countries continue to create legal and administrative frameworks to protect their patents, trademarks, designs and copyright. WIPO assists its member states in developing these new systems through treaty negotiation, legal and technical assistance, and training in various forms, including in the area of enforcement of IP rights.
WIPO provides international registration systems for trademarks, industrial designs and appellations of origin, and an international filing system for patents. Instead of having to file separate national applications, in different languages, in each country in which protection is sought, applicants can file a single application, in one language, with a single application fee. The WIPO-administered systems include four different mechanisms of protection for specific industrial property rights:
Four WIPO treaties have created classification systems that organise information on different branches of industrial property into indexed, manageable structures:
The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center provides services for the resolution of international IP disputes between private parties. Such proceedings can include contractual disputes (such as patent and software licenses, trademark coexistence agreements, and research and development agreements) and non-contractual disputes (such as patent infringement). — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Cummings ( talk • contribs)
Resolution: Information about the World Intellectual Property Organization reduced to two sentences at the beginning of the entry. Flyte35 ( talk) 06:07, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Did you check the hyperlink to the Buffalo Bisons: /info/en/?search=Buffalo_Bisons_(NL) before removing information from the Buffalo entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soperd ( talk • contribs) 00:51, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Resolution: Edits in question not retained. Flyte35 ( talk) 06:11, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
It's really, really weird that you're edit warring to remove one of the unsourced entries in the list of Academic honor societies in Creighton University but you're completely content to leave the other ten entries that are also unsourced. At a minimum it seems extremely unfriendly to the editor who originally added it; worse, it makes it seem like you have a bizarre vendetta against that particular organization. If you want to remove all of the unsourced material from that section, be my guest! But it's incredibly bizarre to only remove one of eleven unsourced items in that section. ElKevbo ( talk) 01:13, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Resolution: Sourcing added. Edits retained. Flyte35 ( talk) 04:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
Just posted my comment. I hope you will read it and see my point, which is very reasonable. Respectufully, M. Armando ( talk) 18:35, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Share your experience in this survey
Hi Flyte35,
There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.
Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.
This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).
Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.
Sincerely,
RMaung (WMF) 20:39, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
There's an entire section of Grand Canyon University that discusses the complex and changing situation of who classifies the university as for-profit (Dept of Education) and who classifies it as non-profit (nearly everyone else). So surely you're going to open a discussion in the article's Talk page about your recent reversion on this topic, right? ElKevbo ( talk) 04:03, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I had all of the bills cited, but you deleted that. I can go back in and add those citations, but it's pointless if you're just going to delete them again.
I disagree that this doesn't matter. If no other states had proposed it that would say something about how it is viewed. Likewise if it has been proposed many many times, that says something different. I think it is part of the story.
I've tried to meet you halfway on this. The post has been up, with that list, for years and no one has tried to delete that. You're the only one who has found it onerous. I think you should reconsider.
Volcycle ( talk) 20:06, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Resolution: Bills added to entry. Flyte35 ( talk) 05:51, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Your reverts continue to be nonconstructive to the article Carole Radziwill. You are removing a properly cited reference from a sentence in the article, leaving it unsourced, and changing a link in the article to go a redirect. Neither of these are "Better than before". This edit warring is immature. You have not given any clear, concise reason as to how leaving information unsourced and uncited and changing a link to a redirect are somehow beneficial. -- Willthacheerleader18 ( talk) 17:41, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Resolution: My edits retained. Flyte35 ( talk) 18:27, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
All the changes in the article are explained, and with the proofs.
If you want to polish the English in the page then fine, bat do not erase all the article changes!
Joe silver 1 ( talk) 23:41, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Resolution: Edits under discussion not retained. Flyte35 ( talk) 05:51, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello, even though Columbia school of journalism is not mentioned in Ebenezer Ako-Adjei's article, there are documents that establish that fact and can be provided as references. Will the references be enough premise to add his name to the list of notable alumni or does it still have to be mentioned in his article? Thanks Kinvidia ( talk) 20:26, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Resolution: Ako-Adjei not retained in list. Flyte35 ( talk) 05:52, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
If you think it's so easy to find a reference for her height, then include it. Do not re-add unsourced material. DrKay ( talk) 08:09, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
I find it clear that you have not done so). Please feel free to put forth any points I have made in these many discussions, either attributed to me or, if you concur, as your own. FactStraight ( talk) 19:46, 28 April 2019 (UTC) Resolution: Weirdly ongoing discussion. My edits not retained. Flyte35 ( talk) 05:56, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for supporting ancestry charts against crazed campaigns for their diminution or removal. LE ( talk) 03:06, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Resolution: My edits retained. (Part of same discussion in above.) Flyte35 ( talk) 06:03, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi
Thanks very much for your edits to Industrial property, I agree that there should be less info about WIPO since it has its own article, but I think there should be some information on its role in Industrial Property, what do you think about this cut down version?
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations, WIPO provides a forum for its member states to create and harmonize rules and practices for protecting IP rights, including Industrial Property. Most developed countries have protection systems that are centuries old, while developing countries continue to create legal and administrative frameworks to protect their patents, trademarks, designs and copyright. WIPO assists its member states in developing these new systems through treaty negotiation, legal and technical assistance, and training in various forms, including in the area of enforcement of IP rights.
WIPO provides international registration systems for trademarks, industrial designs and appellations of origin, and an international filing system for patents. Instead of having to file separate national applications, in different languages, in each country in which protection is sought, applicants can file a single application, in one language, with a single application fee. The WIPO-administered systems include four different mechanisms of protection for specific industrial property rights:
Four WIPO treaties have created classification systems that organise information on different branches of industrial property into indexed, manageable structures:
The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center provides services for the resolution of international IP disputes between private parties. Such proceedings can include contractual disputes (such as patent and software licenses, trademark coexistence agreements, and research and development agreements) and non-contractual disputes (such as patent infringement). — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Cummings ( talk • contribs)
Resolution: Information about the World Intellectual Property Organization reduced to two sentences at the beginning of the entry. Flyte35 ( talk) 06:07, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Did you check the hyperlink to the Buffalo Bisons: /info/en/?search=Buffalo_Bisons_(NL) before removing information from the Buffalo entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soperd ( talk • contribs) 00:51, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Resolution: Edits in question not retained. Flyte35 ( talk) 06:11, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
It's really, really weird that you're edit warring to remove one of the unsourced entries in the list of Academic honor societies in Creighton University but you're completely content to leave the other ten entries that are also unsourced. At a minimum it seems extremely unfriendly to the editor who originally added it; worse, it makes it seem like you have a bizarre vendetta against that particular organization. If you want to remove all of the unsourced material from that section, be my guest! But it's incredibly bizarre to only remove one of eleven unsourced items in that section. ElKevbo ( talk) 01:13, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Resolution: Sourcing added. Edits retained. Flyte35 ( talk) 04:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
Just posted my comment. I hope you will read it and see my point, which is very reasonable. Respectufully, M. Armando ( talk) 18:35, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Share your experience in this survey
Hi Flyte35,
There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.
Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.
This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).
Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.
Sincerely,
RMaung (WMF) 20:39, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
There's an entire section of Grand Canyon University that discusses the complex and changing situation of who classifies the university as for-profit (Dept of Education) and who classifies it as non-profit (nearly everyone else). So surely you're going to open a discussion in the article's Talk page about your recent reversion on this topic, right? ElKevbo ( talk) 04:03, 25 November 2019 (UTC)