The Civility Barnstar | |
Thank you for being the model of civility in the middle of chaos. Viriditas ( talk) 07:24, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar
The Original Barnstar | ||
For improvements to the Death Penalty (NCAA) article Obamafan70 ( talk) 13:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC) |
Hi Jim. I've been keeping up and watching your edits on the KT page. Really getting fine-tuned! I've been spending my time on the John Fahey discography, starting with Blind Joe Death (which needs more work) and moving on up - using the new review format. I'll try get to updating and expanding the KT albums in due time. Best regards. Airproofing ( talk) 04:38, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the suggestions about how to improve my contribution. I was wondering if you could elaborate on how to improve my potential contribution. I am TDKFC2.
I recieved your message. It was informitive and helpful. I really appreciate it! I understand all of the flaws you have pointed out except for one. You said that I needed citations at certain places throughout the paragraph. However, my paragraph came from one article. Does that mean that I should put it multiple times or just once? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDKFC2 ( talk • contribs) 22:14, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your message clarifying that. Actually, though, I don't think you need 'first' and 'second' - the second 'on' you added does it nicely! - Rothorpe ( talk) 12:54, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry about the picture name conflict. With millions of pictures on the wiki, there must be many. When this has happened before, a warning has come up. I think I'm going to have to give future picture better names so less chance of another conflict. ( Cyberia3 ( talk) 11:25, 25 May 2010 (UTC))
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles ( talk) 18:31, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
Thank you for the information regarding the "ancillary material" I posted on the John Denver page. However, I am confused about the reason given, "relevant only if JD himself published or arranged them." It seems then as if a discography would be out of place on any recording artist's page too; after all, the record label publishes the albums, not necessarily the artist himself. I can understand elimination of arrangements of Denver's work, but would the sheet music warrant inclusion if it were limited to direct songbooks and transcriptions of albums? Mikeclm ( talk) 19:55, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey, good find on the cn book cites. -- Lexein ( talk) 19:58, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Sensei, your request is kindly requested. There was a really egregious case of vandalism whereby the editor claimed USC had received the death penalty. The user should get a warning. Obamafan70 ( talk) 00:07, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
It seems to be widely accepted to use cite book for Google Books, presumably because it supports fields such as ISBN. I would agree that in this case Cite journal might be better, however the difference between
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)is purely one of italicisation.
{{
cite journal}}
: |page=
has extra text (
help)Might actually by providing the page number and other information enable someone to find a paper copy of The Billboard (as it was then), I am a little puzzled that you say the article does this now.
As to the AMG question I can't see the cite you refer to.
Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 21:56, 29 August 2010 (UTC).
Thanks for your continued help on the RB/USC articles. It's getting pretty frequent now, unfortunately. Obamafan70 ( talk) 05:38, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. What I would say though is that Kimberly Heinrichs view is no less valid than any other critic. The point being made in the article is that there are hugely contrasting views about King of Kings and Bazlen's work. Whereas contemporary critics tend to denigrate them, modern day critics are much more positive. Heinrichs view is an example of the latter. Who is right? Who knows and it is not the intention of the article to take sides. Everybody will have a different view. The article merely states that King of King's and Bazlen's work have been re-evaluated down the years with modern day critics taking a more positive view than contemporary critics. I have a lot more content to add in the coming months to this and will add further critical comment and references when I get around to it. I have no objections to amendments per se. However, it is my view having created this article and having done considerable research that reference to the re-evaluation of King of Kings and Bazlens work and the contrasting views of contemporary and modern day critics should be retained. As stated, it is not the job of the article to take sides and decide who is right. All that is being said is that modern day critics tend to be more positive than Bazlen's contemporaries. I would also point out that blogs are now a recognised modern day forum for film reviews. So long as its a serious and established blog, then just because somebody writes for it, it doesn't make their views any less valid than those of somebody who writes for a large newspaper or television show. I am aware of the need to source on Wikipedia and this article has plenty of them. Nevertheless, I respect your view on the need to add further references (which I already have, but which are buried under a whole load of other paperwork) and as and when I find further time, I shall certainly do so. I would also add that they not from the "Christian Press" which I never read wheresthatpenguin (talk) 09:04, 2 October 2010 (GMT). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wheresthatpenguin ( talk • contribs)
I thought you'd like to know that content you previously deleted as original research has been recently restored to this article. Oore ( talk) 14:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey Sensei, I was thinking--there's enough out there at the very least to say that the NCAA uses the SMU affair as its standard for whether or not to impose a death penalty. I just had a look at the Baylor infractions report ( here) and as I said a few months ago, the NCAA found that Baylor had engaged in violations as egregious as SMU's. I was thinking I could say something like this in the article: "Despite the NCAA's apparent wariness about imposing a death penalty, it has indicated that the SMU case is its standard for imposing such an extreme sanction. In its 2005 investigation of Baylor basketball, the NCAA determined that the Bears had committed violations as serious as those found at SMU 18 years earlier. However, it praised Baylor for taking swift corrective action once the violations came to light, including forcing out head coach Dave Bliss. According to the NCAA, this stood in marked contrast to SMU, where school officials knew violations had occurred and did nothing." Blueboy 96 18:35, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
IS is necessary for one to play a certain instrument on their own recording. Is it not significant that they studied the instruments (Lightfoot - drums and percussion) and this is worth listing as it affected the art to some degree? The drums and percussion arrangments that appear on Lightfoots recordings are notable and it seemed logical to note that he was a student of those instruments. (Sorry I ddnt notice your edit summary before, and thanks for your attention and consideration.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.110.242.80 ( talk) 20:34, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
I have redone the edit that you attempted to make to
Wikipedia:WikiProject Roots music. In
this case, you removed the |}
which closed the table started six lines above the "
Good Articles" section heading (ie the {| class="collapsible collapsed" width="100%" style="background:#ecf1f1;"
). As for
this case, it was the same problem; but your removal of a </div>
was probably valid, because it seems to be redundant: I don't see any opening <div>
that it would be closing. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 13:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
I added several kinda-cool screen shots to our article, and literally within minutes a WikiNazi (no kidding, he's German) was threatening to delete them. I'd like you to see 'em, but you gotta "act now"! — HarringtonSmith ( talk) 22:47, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Please pardon the intrusion; I don't normally comment on other folks' edits.
But, WOW, what you did when you cleaned up the recent edits to Burgess Meredith were superb! (Much better than I could/would have done, I must admit.) Excellent style, research, references, etc. Bravo!
And, I believe in giving credit where credit is due. Thanks for the good work! — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 04:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Courcelles has a crush on me, as you can see!
But none of your nonSense, sir.
You have some answering to do on the BLBH talk page. Mysweetoldetc. ( talk) 00:32, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
My Dear Courcelles – You might take a moment and let Mr. Sensei48 know that you monitor all my postings; needless to say, it’s superfluous for him to forward them to you.
I’m sorry to see you’ve misled this graduate of Notre Dame on the matter of my conduct – or misconduct. I’ve never denied that my record at Wiki is rich with demerits; both Custer and Reno (especially Reno) were masters of the demerit at West Point. No dishonor in that.
My advice to Sensei48 is to form a skirmish line, and hold that position. Do not retreat to the timber. Neither should he order a “charge to the rear”: that way disaster lies.
I include the rousing “Notre Dame Victory March” to help inspire you to defend your remarks of May 5, 2011:
Rally sons of Notre Dame
Sing her glory, and sound her fame
Raise her Gold and Blue,
And cheer with voices true,
Rah! Rah! For Notre Dame.
We will fight in every game
Strong of heart and true to her name.
We will ne'er forget her
And we'll cheer her ever,
Loyal to Notre Dame.
Chorus:
Cheer, cheer for Old Notre Dame
Wake up the echoes cheering her name,
Send the volley cheer on high,
Shake down the thunder from the sky,
What though the odds be great or small
Old Notre Dame will win over all,
While her loyal sons are marching
Onward to Victory.
Bon Courage! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mysweetoldetc. ( talk • contribs) 19:10, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► (
(⊕)) 14:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Werner Erhard (book). Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
In particular, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. - FASTILY (TALK) 06:25, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
I have nominated The Kingston Trio article for Featured Article status. I think it is time. The article meets all the criteria and is a well known subject. Airproofing ( talk) 00:40, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
I can only have a full review of it on Sunday. Maybe I can edit / comment intermittently during weekdays. Thanks. -- Efe ( talk) 11:51, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Sensei. I am still wondering why Kingston Trio was archived. Anyway, I see that you're very good in English. Can you possibly visit the PR page, or do some prose tightening on the article directly? Appreciate feedback. Thanks. -- Efe ( talk) 14:24, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
My formulation of the Territorial changes resulting from Red Cloud’s War was “Lakota and Cheyenne ownership of a large territory confimed by peace treaty.” You made the addition “other claimed lands ceded to Federal government.” And you commented “Let’s not rewrite history.”
Looking at the Treaty of Laramie I don’t believe your formulation is accurate. I don’t see anything in the treaty about the Indians ceding any land to the Federal government. What I see in article 11 is the following: "ARTICLE 11. In consideration of the advantages and benefits conferred by this treaty, and the many pledges of friendship by the United States, the tribes who are parties to this agreement hereby stipulate that they will relinquish all right to occupy permanently the territory outside their reservation as herein defined, but yet reserve the right to hunt on any lands north of North Platte, and on the Republican Fork of the Smoky Hill River, so long as the buffalo may range thereon in such numbers as to justify the chase...."
Nomadic hunters giving up the right to “occupy permanently” but retaining hunting rights doesn’t seem the same to me as ceding land -- especially in the minds of the Lakota/Cheyenne who probably saw this clause as affirming, rather than limiting, their hunting rights.
Would you consider an alternate formulation? “Lakota and Cheyenne ownership of a large territory and hunting rights on other lands confirmed by treaty.”
I fully agree that we shouldn’t “rewrite history.” Smallchief ( talk) 12:55, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Your recent edits to Notre Dame Fighting Irish Football confused dates with doi's. I fixed that. AManWithNoPlan ( talk) 00:49, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Although YouTube in itself isn't a reliable source all the time, there are videos of the orginial broadcasts; Joe Montana's sack, Roger Craig's fumble, Steve Young's troubles. Almost everything I wrote was essentially rewritten from the
San Francisco 49ers article and the
Steve Young article, not
WP:OR. Take a look at those. The only thing I can do next is try to find a news article from the era, but neither article really has much of a source. Even so if you want them reverted, those two sections don't nearly have as much detail as they should. The 1990 NFC Championship Game was a not only a turning point in Montana's career, it was a turning point in 49er history, and a couple sentences wouldn't do that justice. --
67.180.161.183
(talk)
15:38, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
67.180.161.183
(talk)
15:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC)67.180.161.183
(talk)
19:31, 2 July 2012 (UTC)Thanks for the friendly discussion on the talk page. I hope we get a few more participants, because it looks like you and I disagree on the principle involved - but we'd have to find some acceptable solution as far as the wording of the article goes. St Anselm ( talk) 23:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Sensei48, thanks for friendly comment. I find these arguments about authenticity of folk and blues performers fascinating. Perhaps it was only in 2004 that Dylan could express admiration for the Kingston Trio, he couldn't have done it in 1964. Similar issues rage around the contributions of John & Alan Lomax to the history of the blues. There is good discussion of success of KT's "Tom Dooley" in Robert Cantwell's book on The Folk Revival, When We Were Good. Best, Mick gold ( talk) 08:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Good points, Sensei. Looks like those videos you mentioned got uploaded after I made my last edits yesterday. I tightened up your wording some, since a lot of refs ended up getting duplicated. Looks like between us, we might make the death penalty article featured yet. HangingCurve Swing for the fence 14:51, 26 July 2012 (UTC) (the artist formerly known as Blueboy96)
I am new to this and do not appreciate the condescending and authoritarian tone taken to edits/suggestions that I have made. Perhaps I am not doing this correctly...I may even be posting this in the wrong area. A kind correction or response would be welcome. As stated earlier, the current page regarding the Jerry Sandusky/Second Mile Child Abuse scandal is incorrectly named for sensationalism. If we cannot have a dialogue about this, is there an arbitrator who will work with us to resolve? Many thanks in advance for civility. -- PHD77 ( talk) 18:03, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
In addition, I see that you removed the following information regarding the Accreditation restorationn: On November 15th, Penn State's accreditation was reaffirmed, as "Penn State is in full compliance with all accreditation requirements, according to the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), which has lifted its 'warning' and Thursday (Nov. 15) reaffirmed the University's accreditation." --- This information was more specific than the information that was there (provided the date and organization restoring accreditation) - was fully referenced and added value. I left the other information there as it provided another source. Sounds like you are guarding the gates and don't want anyone else to contribute to this article. Please let me know what your rational was without being curt or rude. -- PHD77 ( talk) 18:11, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Sensei, what is the rationale for deleting my edit this morning, on the penn state scandal page. What I added was a note that Dowd's column about the "open joke" has no basis in the trial transcript. How is that a personal POV? And since I in fact read the entire trial transcript, and referenced it, what's the rationale for the no original research marking? I could understand you removing the hyberbole statement. But the whole edit? Is the factuality of this wikipedia page somehow damaged by including references that draw into question to media coverage? DiffuseGoose ( talk) 15:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Not this again. This was discussed on the talk page. [9] Apparently, the correct source [10] was replaced with the wrong one. The correct source was accidentally removed here. Here's some more:
Please note, these are all news sources, not op/ed's. Please restore the subheading and the material. Thanks. Viriditas ( talk) 23:23, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Someone had put the material in the wrong article talk page with the links elsewhere on the page. That section was huge with many links and I didn't know which to use. I moved it to the correct article expecting them to add sources.-- Canoe1967 ( talk) 02:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
As I said above. If you say you have no interest then drop the stick, walk away from the article, take it off your watch list, etc, etc. There are probably far more articles you could be working on and this one will do fine without you. I mean you are not to only editor in en:wp and this is not the only article.-- Canoe1967 ( talk) 07:08, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Then please WP:STICK on this one, work on the ones at my NPOV gun article and feel free to add more if you wish. I was thinking of sorting them into good, bad, and in between. If you are as good as you think you are then that should not be a difficult task for you. If you continue with this article it will just hamper the efforts of editors trying to improve it. They find that very difficult, as I do, when you keep bothering us on other pages such as this one. I would ask you to WP:STICK here as well but I doubt that will do any good. I am still trying to figure out how you ended up in this section about a different lame article that I was actually trying to help you improve.-- Canoe1967 ( talk) 07:29, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Note to Sensei48: Thanks for your honesty. Viriditas ( talk) 07:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
It seems to me that you all are disputing both content and methodology, and that suggests that some sort of compromise or accommodation in both regards might be a good idea. I have to admit to being a bit confused about the exact nature of these because I have to skip back and forth from the Aurora article to here, but let me take a stab at proposal.
First - seems to me that a) Viriditas feels that there should be more in the article regarding the gun control issues and Canoe thinks that such material is tangential to the thrust of the article, and b) Canoe wants to establish or recognize a consensus of editors to limit gun control discussion in the article, which Viriditas maintains does not currently exist. If I have misstated, please feel free to correct, amend, excoriate (insert smiley) me on these points.
My own sense is that the material I added looks pretty lame and limp - I agree with Viriditas that a slightly expanded version similar to what appears in the Columbine article would not be ragingly off-topic at all. There are plenty of RS news articles that deal with the topic. I think there are three related issues covered in the sources in addition to the Pew material already added. 1) Legality of weapons purchases by the shooter; 2) enhanced capability of magazines and weapons; 3) the rise in background checks as an unusual/atypical response to a mass shooting (someone tried to add a section regarding that but it was OR and there are several news analysis stories that suggest this). Two or three additional sourced sentences - sourced directly to this incident and as a consequence of it - could be added and would improve the article. regards, Sensei48 ( talk) 13:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Its about time someone recognized this. Countless books have been written and copied rehashing all that is known. Perhaps a more suitable subject would be the lives and times of the thirteen victims. The lives and times of the officers who did the job would be interesting as well. Busceda ( talk) 22:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Sensei48, Following our discussions last March, I've finally got round to putting up a suggested re-write of the contents section of the above article on its Talk page. I'd welcome any comments or suggestions you may have. Thanks DaveApter ( talk) 13:11, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
I support your reverts of the LBH page, regarding the sourced material of Elizabeth Custer. There seems to be a lot of movement on that page recently, and I am not sure I agree with all of it, including the pruning of the illustration captions that mention the incorrect portrayals. Standing by for now 'till the dust settles. Thanks as always for your work. Jus da fax 05:15, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello
I notice you re-edited a change I made here; I’ve raised the matter on the talk page (
here) if you wish to comment.
Regards,
Xyl 54 (
talk) 23:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
I noticed you reverted my change for the sub-section Sexual Assault Scandal for citing an op-ed piece. While the piece is under the blogs section of the Washington Post, the facts cited from the source are not opinions and the piece cites its sources under links. As such, this piece is a secondary source. You claim this is a shallow, pejorative edit that includes innuendo, but there is nothing here that is not presented in the article and its sources as something that actually happened. I challenge you to name what is pejorative in my edits. I have not used any terms or phrases that are outrageous or in common use to describe the subject matter at hand. I also note that you are an alumni of this university and hence may be biased. While this subject matter paints your alma mater in a bad light, there is nothing here that is subjective. All the edits are events that have happened and are from the citation. You also claim that this citation is of a tabloid nature. I don't think many editors will agree with you that the Washington Post is a tabloid.
Before you go reverting me again, please consider whether or not your biases are affecting your decision here. Transcendence ( talk) 00:53, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
You undid a revision on the Notre Dame page on the basis that "The NCAA only recognizes Alabama with 13 titles". This is a complete falsehood. In fact, Alabama is credited by the NCAA with more titles than they actually claim, as many schools do.
Officially, last season's title is their 19th per NCAA recognition standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.31.100 ( talk) 02:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Transcendence ( talk) 19:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tom Dooley (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greg Brown ( 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) 00:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
You claim History Channel is not an acceptable source. I'd like to see you back0-up that claim with a list of what sources are acceptable. (Or explain why History is forbidden from wikipedia.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C4D4:82A0:AC62:50A1:B226:E1D ( talk) 22:16, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Battle of Washita River may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 06:54, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm afraid I have no idea what "consensual edit" is supposed to mean. All edits are made by individuals; consensus is a hypothetical construct, or a pragmatic state of editing quiescence.
Edit summaries are not the proper forum for discussing an edit. Undoing an edit is not the proper procedure for responding to good-faith editing of WP articles (please see WP:BRD). Please do not revert my edit again without proper discussion on the article's talk page. Thanks in advance. Eaglizard ( talk) 22:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Hey - as one of the aforementioned article's main contributors, I just wanted to send a heads-up that I've made a variety of (I hope) improvements and added refs. Give it a look if you have a few minutes; I'm considering submitting it as a GA, but I suspect there are places where I've slipped up or crucial things that are still missing. I've got a few books I can mine sourcing from, if need be. -- Batard0 ( talk) 12:00, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
I added citations regarding change to traditions should have found sources the team walk changed in 2011 and they changed mass this year -- Jamesbondfan ( talk) 19:07, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Joe Gannon may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 19:09, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
This user has contributed to Ara Parseghian good articles on Wikipedia. |
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I thank you for your editorial contributions to Ara Parseghian, which recently was promoted to WP:GA.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:11, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Your ranking for total "national championships recognized by the NCAA" is second, according to your own reference. You've just chosen to use a date prior to Alabama winning their latest NC in January 2013. Scrodz ( talk) 08:56, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
But the song Mezei Mária sang first hungarian and better known as sung by Gerendás Péter versions (numbers of the Facebook-versions are influenced). I have not written explanation because, I should have written it probably bad English.
De a dalt Mezei Mária énekelte először magyarul és jóval ismertebb, mint a Gerendás Péteré (a Facebook-verziók száma befolyásolható). Azért nem írtam magyarázatot, mivel valószínűleg rossz angolsággal írtam meg volna ezeket.
Ám nem változtatok rajta, megértettem, hogy ezen a részen momentán nem szabad. Hadd higyék a nyugati országokban, hogy Magyarországon Gerendás Péter énekelte először a "Hol vannak katonák" című dalt és nem Mezei Mária (mivel az se derül ki a szövegkörnyezetből, nem a laptörtenetből, hogy miért Gerendás Péter verziója szerepel rajta és miért nem Mezei Máriáé vagy Kovács Erzsié, márpedig az ember elsődlegesen a történetiségből indul ki és nem egy-egy Facebook-verzió látogatottságából, amikor énekesneveket lát felsorolva a különböző országok nyelvi változatai mellett). Apród ( talk) 18:02, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I am new to the "wiki" style of editing an encyclopedia. I was curious as to why my change to "Joe Montana" (article) disappeared. I happen to have insider info (I grew up with his son). I'm just here to learn, and I want to help others learn, with the knowledge.
Do I need to source this to an almanac?
Thanks, 71.178.48.17 ( talk) 08:05, 5 April 2014 (UTC) (signed)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited American folk music revival, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Cohen ( 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) 08:55, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
On page 74 of the annual record book I showed you, there IS a list of selectors that the NCAA recognizes. A couple pages down from that, it has a list of every year, along with teams that were chosen by these selectors. I go by this when editing pages on Wikipedia, though obviously, many people don't. It includes all the national titles on Oklahoma Sooners football. I'm not sure how you could go wrong using the NCAA's official record book, so I suggest this be used all throughout Wikipedia, including for Notre Dame Fighting Irish football. Kobra98 ( talk) 00:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jerry Orbach, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Law and Order. 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) 08:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to There Will Be Blood may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 06:01, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
See revisions. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 05:42, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
In editing Death Hunt, I noted that two other films based on a similar topic were out there, but had some errors that seem to have creeped into almost all the reference sources. The biggest mistake is the confusion over the titles, Mad Trapper, an alternate title for Challenge to Be Free (1975 US production) and The Mad Trapper (1972 British made-for-television docudrama). Take a look. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 14:12, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
All due respect, the NY Times obit isn't the end-all, be all for what the lead should be. Penguin and Mickey are the 2 roles most associated with Meredith, as they are the roles he portrayed most often. Here's his TCM biography, which places emphasis on his turns as Penguin and Mickey, thus showing that those are his 2 most notable roles.
Vjmlhds (talk) 00:34, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!! | |
Hello Sensei48, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to user talk pages with a friendly message. |
To you and yours
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 22:51, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you so much for your edits in Beeton School but I have a question about it. You write "the Japanese puppetry pastiche of Sherlock Holmes" in it, but the series is based on the Canon of Sherlock Holmes. Though being adapted to the drama set in school, the elements of original stories can be seen in each episode. I don't think it's pastiche. And the title of the puppetry is "error: {{nihongo}}: Japanese or romaji text required ( help)" (Sherlock Holmes) so I used it in the article. Official website-- Ishinoak ( talk) 16:00, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Dear Sensei48,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--
FWiW Bzuk (
talk)
This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").
Hey Sensei48, can you take a look at the changes I made to College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS related to the new playoff system and the final 2014 results. Also there a few issues that need to be address on the bottom of the talk page, as well. Thanks, Dolenath ( talk) 21:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
I have corrected one source: Joel Whitburn. You might know how to group a source into one when two different citations are on two separate pages (just like here: reference 8: page 556, and reference 9: page: 560) Radosław Wiśniewski ( talk) 09:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Radosław Wiśniewski
Hi Sensei, if you have time, I would appreciate your comments and suggestions LBH TALK here.Cheers. Grahamboat ( talk) 23:30, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Nice catch on the premature archive. It looks like an IPv6 editor changed the archiving settings recently. I have changed them back. Cheers! -- Tgeairn ( talk) 06:23, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sensei48, we got a new reviewer for a GA review. He had a question about the use of tables. Could you take a look and respond?: [ [18]] Dolenath ( talk) 18:45, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey!
I noticed you removed "large" from the description of Notre Dame. it wasn't a subjective assessment, I was just using the desciprion given by the carnegie Mellon foundation, the same that defines Notre Dame as "very high research" [19]
As an alumnus, I also would disagree that ND is large, but they have official standards. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eccekevin ( talk • contribs) 01:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Honestly, I agree on going mid-sized, Notre Dame is mid-size for a private school, and even small for public school standards. Alos, I'm revaping the Wikipedia:WikiProject Notre Dame. Come check it out, and maybe you can help us out. I you look at my contibutions, you'll see I'm working a lot on improving so many different ND-related articles. I could definitely use some help. That whole Lead section was a mess, talking only about Fr. Sorin and the Architecture school, and not even mentioning important stuff like the Fight song, our schools and colleges, or the golden dome. Eccekevin ( talk) 17:25, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Hey, as I said before, you're invited! Here's the official invitation with all the links you might need.
Hello, Sensei48! We are looking for editors to join WikiProject Notre Dame, an outreach effort which aims to support development of Notre Dame related articles in Wikipedia. We thought you might be interested, and hope that you will join us. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of participants, check out our To Do list, and join the discussion on our talk page. Thanks!!! |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 16:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Respectfully, the text to which you reverted, as below:
With all respect, I genuinely don't see how there was a grammar error, and I'm pretty confident that most people would agree with me that my minor rewording made far more grammatical sense than the previous form. Mabalu ( talk) 22:51, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | ||
message Eccekevin ( talk) 00:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC) |
Dear Sensei48, I want to conrgatulate you for your awesome work as an editor, an in particular for your work with the Notre Dame Fighting Irish football and the WikiProject Notre Dame.
I hope you continue contributing to Wikipedia and our project. All help is appreciated, especially with our Wikipedia:WikiProject Notre Dame/To Do List.
The Schools Barnstar | ||
message Eccekevin ( talk) 00:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC) |
Thanks again!
Eccekevin ( talk) 00:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Little Mermaid may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 18:31, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Provide a citation for this claim that [he] wrote "hundreds" of songs. Wjhonson ( talk) 19:00, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shame & Scandal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Back In Town. 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) 09:55, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
You may want to comment on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#American_Film_Institute_recognition. -- Softlavender ( talk) 22:47, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Just wanted to let you know I undid a couple of your reverts in order to revert via restoration, prior edits by the vandal you were reverting. Same destination different road. TimothyJosephWood 17:36, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Sensei48. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Talk:College_football_national_championships_in_NCAA_Division_I_FBS#Remove_College_Football_Data_Warehouse_section Dolenath ( talk) 21:59, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
I ask you to undertake a considered review of the edits you reverted here and let me know if you still stand by them. If so, I will take the matter to the article's Talk page before re-reverting. Bjenks ( talk) 07:31, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi there! As a member of the Notre Dame project, I'd invite you over to take a look at a current disagreement taking place over the ND seal. Traditionally, and all over campus, the seal is colored, but another user has brought up that he would like to see it in black and white. Please take a look at the discussion here and chime in if you would like. /info/en/?search=Talk:University_of_Notre_Dame#The_Seal
Best, Eccekevin ( talk) 23:04, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm not understanding what the logic is behind the "major performers". There are a lot of people with bigger hits then the people you are putting in the major figures, that are for some reason in the other performers tab. The smothers brothers have had one single barely chart. Yet they're on the major performers tab. The only thing I can come up with is that these are only the 1960s. And Chapin and the people I've seen are 70s. --15:18, 18 October 2017 (UTC) Citybuild122 ( talk) Brandon
Citybuild122 ( talk) 17:46, 18 October 2017 (UTC)Brandon
Hello, Sensei48. 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)
It has long been established that Plot sections of film articles should focus on what is shown in the film and should generally not break the fourth wall. Whether or not Lawrence is raped isn't, to the best of my recollections, pertinent to the rest of the film, and in any event the film itself doesn't depict Lawrence being raped.
It may be worth discussing the subject elsewhere in the article, but I don't believe the Plot section is the place for it. You are welcome to raise the subject at the article's Talk page if you feel otherwise. DonIago ( talk)1 4:36, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
If you're going to restore personal info about a living person, like this you better bring a source. Toddst1 ( talk) 06:46, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Sensei48. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019! | |
Hello Sensei48, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Good catch. SOMEONE must have changed it back. I am a fanatic about "which" and "that" and am always making corrections. I can't believe that in all the times I've visited the K-Trio article that I didn't either see it or correct it or both. Yrs. for correct grammar -- a losing fight at WP! And a Happy New Year! Hayford Peirce ( talk) 03:54, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Just changed it on the Cisco Houston page.... Hayford Peirce ( talk) 04:09, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Check the latest update to The Kingston Trio. Apparently the concerns we had about squabbling over ownership of the brand are happening. - DavidWBrooks ( talk) 22:24, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello Sensei48, I just wanted to thank you for your work for the WikiProject Notre Dame. I am currently making an effort to revamp it and improve all articles. I was wondering if you could help out, since any and all help is needed. If you want, you can check out the To Do list for the top priority, or take your own initiative and work on what's needed the most. The top priority articles in bad condition, like the colleges or the grotto, need a lot of help too. Additionally, photos or translation in other languages are also great.
Best and thank once more for your work on Wikipedia, Eccekevin ( talk) 02:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
I did not saw that her death was posted on his page below.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stephen Stills, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CSN ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 10:54, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the explanation. That makes perfect sense. Is there a way I can include that in the page with a more accurate description? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WolverineNation ( talk • contribs) 20:08, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out the possible reasoning for using Sherif instead of Sharif. I have self-reverted to keep consistency between the script and real life. However, one of the interesting anecdotes about Lawrence is that his publisher complained of him changing the spelling of Arab words from page to page. Lawrence replied that the publisher could spell it however he wished because it was Arabic and did not use the Roman alphabet. Humphrey Tribble ( talk) 16:23, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi! Just dropping in to say thanks for all your good work on Notre Dame pages. Regarding your recent edit on the Notre Dame football page, I agree with your position, with one possible exception. I'd say that based on the recent history, sources, and media attention it gets, Stanford would deserve to be in the infobox, at the very least above Michigan State. Thoughts? As you might know, I do a lot of work on ND pages, but generally avid the football ones since I'm no expert, but wanted to share my 2 cents with you. Additionally, this website is an interesting resource and collects info about rivalries. It does show how Stanford is among the most heart-felt rivalries (unlike Purdue or Boston College, as you point out). Cheers. Eccekevin ( talk) 01:41, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
... Nu? Loew Galitz ( talk) 00:32, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Upcoming Indianapolis event - July 28: Food Deserts & Food Policy | ||
---|---|---|
You are invited to join us at Ruth Lilly Law Library for an edit-a-thon on Food Deserts & Food Policy hosted by Ruth Lilly Law Library and United States National Agricultural Library. Together, both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on food deserts, nutrition, and related local and federal food policy.
Visit the Wikipedia/Meetup page or Eventbrite to sign up and learn more. |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 08:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC).)
|
Upcoming events around Indiana - Nov. 1:
Environmental Justice editathons 2 locations: Indianapolis & Bloomington (and virtual option) |
|
---|---|---|
You are invited to join us for a multi-site editathon organized by Indiana Wikimedians at IUPUI University Library in downtown Indianapolis and the Herman B Wells Library at IU Bloomington (with virtual option). Together, both experienced and new Wikipedia editors, with faculty subject matter experts, will collaboratively improve articles on environmental justice in Indiana and globally. Join us at either location or virtually!
Visit the meetup page or Eventbrite to sign up and learn more. |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 01:52, 10 October 2022 (UTC).)
|
Nov. 11-13:
WikiConference North American Meetup! IUPUI University Library (and around Indianapolis) |
|
---|---|---|
Registration is now open for WikiConference North America 2022 (Nov. 11–13) held jointly with Mapping USA! If you would like to experience this virtual event in-person, you are welcome to join our meetup in Indianapolis! We will be meeting at IUPUI University Library for the weekend, with AV set up for conference streaming and presenting (for those who've submitted proposals). Anyone is welcome to join, we will have some light refreshments and are planning evening activities. Feel free to join us for an activity, a day, or the whole weekend. Please let us know you are coming via the meetup page and please register for the conference. We will share more about in-person activities on the meetup page as they are finalized. Visit the WikiConference North America site for the schedule and visit our meetup page to sign up and learn more. And don't forget to register for the conference! |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 17:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC).)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Upcoming Indianapolis event March 17: Indiana Women in the Arts |
||
---|---|---|
You are invited to join us at Newfields for an edit-a-thon on Indiana women in the arts, co-hosted by Wikimedians of Indiana and IUPUI University Library. Together, both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on women artists and artworks of Indiana.
Visit the Wikipedia Meetup page or Eventbrite to sign up and learn more. |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 21:02, 8 March 2023 (UTC).)
Upcoming Indianapolis event - May 13: Indiana Politics & Government 2023 | ||
---|---|---|
It's been an eventful state legislative session in Indiana, and local elections took place this week, so we have lots to cover! You are invited to The AMP at 16 Tech in Indianapolis for a Politics & Government editathon to improve write articles about local political and government topics of interest and improve information about local officials, candidates, elections, and legislation. Come join us at this fun venue, with free parking and refreshments provided!
We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians in Indiana User Group |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 01:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC).)
@ Sensei48: There is a discussion occurring here regarding whether to continue to use the data from College Football Data Warehouse in that list's inclusion criterion for college football national championships, as it has been from the list's inception. Any comments or suggestions you may have would be appreciated. Jeff in CA ( talk) 22:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Upcoming Indianapolis event - June 24, 2023: Wiki Loves Pride Indy | ||
---|---|---|
You are invited to join us at Spades Park Branch Library for a Wiki Loves Pride editathon—hosted by the Wikimedians of Indiana User Group with support from the Central Indiana Community Foundation. Together, new and experienced Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on LGBTQ+ topics, individuals, organizations, and legislation in Indiana.
We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians of Indiana User Group |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 16:30, 19 June 2023 (UTC).)
Upcoming Indianapolis event - July 30, 2023: Indiana State Fair Wiknic | ||
---|---|---|
We are partnering with the Indiana State Fair to offer FREE tickets to the fair for Wikipedians! We will be meeting on July 30th at 10am to pass out tickets and have a quick info session before we attend the fair (feel free to branch off and share your accomplishments on the Meetup page later!) Detailed instructions on how the day will go is available on the Meetup page! We hope you'll join us to edit about things related to fair (historic buildings, foods, animals, activities, and the fair itself). All levels of experience are welcome! Please RSVP so we know who is coming. We hope you'll join us!
We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians of Indiana User Group |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 13:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC).)
Upcoming Indianapolis event - October 11, 2023: Indiana Under-represented Artists Edit-a-thon | ||
---|---|---|
You are invited to Herron Art Library in Herron School of Art & Design for an Under-represented Artists of Indiana Edit-a-thon—hosted by the Wikimedians of Indiana User Group with support from the Central Indiana Community Foundation. Together, new and experienced Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on under-represented Indiana based artists and art/artist organizations and groups in Indiana today, and historically.
All levels of experience are welcome! Please RSVP so we know who is coming. We hope you'll join us!
|
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 00:49, 5 October 2023 (UTC).)"
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Anderson (actor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rawhide.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello — you reverted my addition of a paragraph break with the comment “unsourced trivia”. I was not the person who added the trivial sentence that you returned to the preceding paaragraph. I agree that the sentence should probably be removed — it definitely does not belong in the paragraph where it was placed (and now restored to by your reversion of my edit). Feel free to remove the sentence as I believe this was probably the actual intent of your edit. Thanks! Manushand ( talk) 10:19, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
The Civility Barnstar | |
Thank you for being the model of civility in the middle of chaos. Viriditas ( talk) 07:24, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar
The Original Barnstar | ||
For improvements to the Death Penalty (NCAA) article Obamafan70 ( talk) 13:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC) |
Hi Jim. I've been keeping up and watching your edits on the KT page. Really getting fine-tuned! I've been spending my time on the John Fahey discography, starting with Blind Joe Death (which needs more work) and moving on up - using the new review format. I'll try get to updating and expanding the KT albums in due time. Best regards. Airproofing ( talk) 04:38, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the suggestions about how to improve my contribution. I was wondering if you could elaborate on how to improve my potential contribution. I am TDKFC2.
I recieved your message. It was informitive and helpful. I really appreciate it! I understand all of the flaws you have pointed out except for one. You said that I needed citations at certain places throughout the paragraph. However, my paragraph came from one article. Does that mean that I should put it multiple times or just once? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDKFC2 ( talk • contribs) 22:14, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your message clarifying that. Actually, though, I don't think you need 'first' and 'second' - the second 'on' you added does it nicely! - Rothorpe ( talk) 12:54, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry about the picture name conflict. With millions of pictures on the wiki, there must be many. When this has happened before, a warning has come up. I think I'm going to have to give future picture better names so less chance of another conflict. ( Cyberia3 ( talk) 11:25, 25 May 2010 (UTC))
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles ( talk) 18:31, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
Thank you for the information regarding the "ancillary material" I posted on the John Denver page. However, I am confused about the reason given, "relevant only if JD himself published or arranged them." It seems then as if a discography would be out of place on any recording artist's page too; after all, the record label publishes the albums, not necessarily the artist himself. I can understand elimination of arrangements of Denver's work, but would the sheet music warrant inclusion if it were limited to direct songbooks and transcriptions of albums? Mikeclm ( talk) 19:55, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey, good find on the cn book cites. -- Lexein ( talk) 19:58, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Sensei, your request is kindly requested. There was a really egregious case of vandalism whereby the editor claimed USC had received the death penalty. The user should get a warning. Obamafan70 ( talk) 00:07, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
It seems to be widely accepted to use cite book for Google Books, presumably because it supports fields such as ISBN. I would agree that in this case Cite journal might be better, however the difference between
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)is purely one of italicisation.
{{
cite journal}}
: |page=
has extra text (
help)Might actually by providing the page number and other information enable someone to find a paper copy of The Billboard (as it was then), I am a little puzzled that you say the article does this now.
As to the AMG question I can't see the cite you refer to.
Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 21:56, 29 August 2010 (UTC).
Thanks for your continued help on the RB/USC articles. It's getting pretty frequent now, unfortunately. Obamafan70 ( talk) 05:38, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. What I would say though is that Kimberly Heinrichs view is no less valid than any other critic. The point being made in the article is that there are hugely contrasting views about King of Kings and Bazlen's work. Whereas contemporary critics tend to denigrate them, modern day critics are much more positive. Heinrichs view is an example of the latter. Who is right? Who knows and it is not the intention of the article to take sides. Everybody will have a different view. The article merely states that King of King's and Bazlen's work have been re-evaluated down the years with modern day critics taking a more positive view than contemporary critics. I have a lot more content to add in the coming months to this and will add further critical comment and references when I get around to it. I have no objections to amendments per se. However, it is my view having created this article and having done considerable research that reference to the re-evaluation of King of Kings and Bazlens work and the contrasting views of contemporary and modern day critics should be retained. As stated, it is not the job of the article to take sides and decide who is right. All that is being said is that modern day critics tend to be more positive than Bazlen's contemporaries. I would also point out that blogs are now a recognised modern day forum for film reviews. So long as its a serious and established blog, then just because somebody writes for it, it doesn't make their views any less valid than those of somebody who writes for a large newspaper or television show. I am aware of the need to source on Wikipedia and this article has plenty of them. Nevertheless, I respect your view on the need to add further references (which I already have, but which are buried under a whole load of other paperwork) and as and when I find further time, I shall certainly do so. I would also add that they not from the "Christian Press" which I never read wheresthatpenguin (talk) 09:04, 2 October 2010 (GMT). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wheresthatpenguin ( talk • contribs)
I thought you'd like to know that content you previously deleted as original research has been recently restored to this article. Oore ( talk) 14:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey Sensei, I was thinking--there's enough out there at the very least to say that the NCAA uses the SMU affair as its standard for whether or not to impose a death penalty. I just had a look at the Baylor infractions report ( here) and as I said a few months ago, the NCAA found that Baylor had engaged in violations as egregious as SMU's. I was thinking I could say something like this in the article: "Despite the NCAA's apparent wariness about imposing a death penalty, it has indicated that the SMU case is its standard for imposing such an extreme sanction. In its 2005 investigation of Baylor basketball, the NCAA determined that the Bears had committed violations as serious as those found at SMU 18 years earlier. However, it praised Baylor for taking swift corrective action once the violations came to light, including forcing out head coach Dave Bliss. According to the NCAA, this stood in marked contrast to SMU, where school officials knew violations had occurred and did nothing." Blueboy 96 18:35, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
IS is necessary for one to play a certain instrument on their own recording. Is it not significant that they studied the instruments (Lightfoot - drums and percussion) and this is worth listing as it affected the art to some degree? The drums and percussion arrangments that appear on Lightfoots recordings are notable and it seemed logical to note that he was a student of those instruments. (Sorry I ddnt notice your edit summary before, and thanks for your attention and consideration.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.110.242.80 ( talk) 20:34, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
I have redone the edit that you attempted to make to
Wikipedia:WikiProject Roots music. In
this case, you removed the |}
which closed the table started six lines above the "
Good Articles" section heading (ie the {| class="collapsible collapsed" width="100%" style="background:#ecf1f1;"
). As for
this case, it was the same problem; but your removal of a </div>
was probably valid, because it seems to be redundant: I don't see any opening <div>
that it would be closing. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 13:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
I added several kinda-cool screen shots to our article, and literally within minutes a WikiNazi (no kidding, he's German) was threatening to delete them. I'd like you to see 'em, but you gotta "act now"! — HarringtonSmith ( talk) 22:47, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Please pardon the intrusion; I don't normally comment on other folks' edits.
But, WOW, what you did when you cleaned up the recent edits to Burgess Meredith were superb! (Much better than I could/would have done, I must admit.) Excellent style, research, references, etc. Bravo!
And, I believe in giving credit where credit is due. Thanks for the good work! — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 04:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Courcelles has a crush on me, as you can see!
But none of your nonSense, sir.
You have some answering to do on the BLBH talk page. Mysweetoldetc. ( talk) 00:32, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
My Dear Courcelles – You might take a moment and let Mr. Sensei48 know that you monitor all my postings; needless to say, it’s superfluous for him to forward them to you.
I’m sorry to see you’ve misled this graduate of Notre Dame on the matter of my conduct – or misconduct. I’ve never denied that my record at Wiki is rich with demerits; both Custer and Reno (especially Reno) were masters of the demerit at West Point. No dishonor in that.
My advice to Sensei48 is to form a skirmish line, and hold that position. Do not retreat to the timber. Neither should he order a “charge to the rear”: that way disaster lies.
I include the rousing “Notre Dame Victory March” to help inspire you to defend your remarks of May 5, 2011:
Rally sons of Notre Dame
Sing her glory, and sound her fame
Raise her Gold and Blue,
And cheer with voices true,
Rah! Rah! For Notre Dame.
We will fight in every game
Strong of heart and true to her name.
We will ne'er forget her
And we'll cheer her ever,
Loyal to Notre Dame.
Chorus:
Cheer, cheer for Old Notre Dame
Wake up the echoes cheering her name,
Send the volley cheer on high,
Shake down the thunder from the sky,
What though the odds be great or small
Old Notre Dame will win over all,
While her loyal sons are marching
Onward to Victory.
Bon Courage! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mysweetoldetc. ( talk • contribs) 19:10, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► (
(⊕)) 14:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Werner Erhard (book). Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
In particular, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. - FASTILY (TALK) 06:25, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
I have nominated The Kingston Trio article for Featured Article status. I think it is time. The article meets all the criteria and is a well known subject. Airproofing ( talk) 00:40, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
I can only have a full review of it on Sunday. Maybe I can edit / comment intermittently during weekdays. Thanks. -- Efe ( talk) 11:51, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Sensei. I am still wondering why Kingston Trio was archived. Anyway, I see that you're very good in English. Can you possibly visit the PR page, or do some prose tightening on the article directly? Appreciate feedback. Thanks. -- Efe ( talk) 14:24, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
My formulation of the Territorial changes resulting from Red Cloud’s War was “Lakota and Cheyenne ownership of a large territory confimed by peace treaty.” You made the addition “other claimed lands ceded to Federal government.” And you commented “Let’s not rewrite history.”
Looking at the Treaty of Laramie I don’t believe your formulation is accurate. I don’t see anything in the treaty about the Indians ceding any land to the Federal government. What I see in article 11 is the following: "ARTICLE 11. In consideration of the advantages and benefits conferred by this treaty, and the many pledges of friendship by the United States, the tribes who are parties to this agreement hereby stipulate that they will relinquish all right to occupy permanently the territory outside their reservation as herein defined, but yet reserve the right to hunt on any lands north of North Platte, and on the Republican Fork of the Smoky Hill River, so long as the buffalo may range thereon in such numbers as to justify the chase...."
Nomadic hunters giving up the right to “occupy permanently” but retaining hunting rights doesn’t seem the same to me as ceding land -- especially in the minds of the Lakota/Cheyenne who probably saw this clause as affirming, rather than limiting, their hunting rights.
Would you consider an alternate formulation? “Lakota and Cheyenne ownership of a large territory and hunting rights on other lands confirmed by treaty.”
I fully agree that we shouldn’t “rewrite history.” Smallchief ( talk) 12:55, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Your recent edits to Notre Dame Fighting Irish Football confused dates with doi's. I fixed that. AManWithNoPlan ( talk) 00:49, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Although YouTube in itself isn't a reliable source all the time, there are videos of the orginial broadcasts; Joe Montana's sack, Roger Craig's fumble, Steve Young's troubles. Almost everything I wrote was essentially rewritten from the
San Francisco 49ers article and the
Steve Young article, not
WP:OR. Take a look at those. The only thing I can do next is try to find a news article from the era, but neither article really has much of a source. Even so if you want them reverted, those two sections don't nearly have as much detail as they should. The 1990 NFC Championship Game was a not only a turning point in Montana's career, it was a turning point in 49er history, and a couple sentences wouldn't do that justice. --
67.180.161.183
(talk)
15:38, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
67.180.161.183
(talk)
15:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC)67.180.161.183
(talk)
19:31, 2 July 2012 (UTC)Thanks for the friendly discussion on the talk page. I hope we get a few more participants, because it looks like you and I disagree on the principle involved - but we'd have to find some acceptable solution as far as the wording of the article goes. St Anselm ( talk) 23:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Sensei48, thanks for friendly comment. I find these arguments about authenticity of folk and blues performers fascinating. Perhaps it was only in 2004 that Dylan could express admiration for the Kingston Trio, he couldn't have done it in 1964. Similar issues rage around the contributions of John & Alan Lomax to the history of the blues. There is good discussion of success of KT's "Tom Dooley" in Robert Cantwell's book on The Folk Revival, When We Were Good. Best, Mick gold ( talk) 08:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Good points, Sensei. Looks like those videos you mentioned got uploaded after I made my last edits yesterday. I tightened up your wording some, since a lot of refs ended up getting duplicated. Looks like between us, we might make the death penalty article featured yet. HangingCurve Swing for the fence 14:51, 26 July 2012 (UTC) (the artist formerly known as Blueboy96)
I am new to this and do not appreciate the condescending and authoritarian tone taken to edits/suggestions that I have made. Perhaps I am not doing this correctly...I may even be posting this in the wrong area. A kind correction or response would be welcome. As stated earlier, the current page regarding the Jerry Sandusky/Second Mile Child Abuse scandal is incorrectly named for sensationalism. If we cannot have a dialogue about this, is there an arbitrator who will work with us to resolve? Many thanks in advance for civility. -- PHD77 ( talk) 18:03, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
In addition, I see that you removed the following information regarding the Accreditation restorationn: On November 15th, Penn State's accreditation was reaffirmed, as "Penn State is in full compliance with all accreditation requirements, according to the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), which has lifted its 'warning' and Thursday (Nov. 15) reaffirmed the University's accreditation." --- This information was more specific than the information that was there (provided the date and organization restoring accreditation) - was fully referenced and added value. I left the other information there as it provided another source. Sounds like you are guarding the gates and don't want anyone else to contribute to this article. Please let me know what your rational was without being curt or rude. -- PHD77 ( talk) 18:11, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Sensei, what is the rationale for deleting my edit this morning, on the penn state scandal page. What I added was a note that Dowd's column about the "open joke" has no basis in the trial transcript. How is that a personal POV? And since I in fact read the entire trial transcript, and referenced it, what's the rationale for the no original research marking? I could understand you removing the hyberbole statement. But the whole edit? Is the factuality of this wikipedia page somehow damaged by including references that draw into question to media coverage? DiffuseGoose ( talk) 15:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Not this again. This was discussed on the talk page. [9] Apparently, the correct source [10] was replaced with the wrong one. The correct source was accidentally removed here. Here's some more:
Please note, these are all news sources, not op/ed's. Please restore the subheading and the material. Thanks. Viriditas ( talk) 23:23, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Someone had put the material in the wrong article talk page with the links elsewhere on the page. That section was huge with many links and I didn't know which to use. I moved it to the correct article expecting them to add sources.-- Canoe1967 ( talk) 02:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
As I said above. If you say you have no interest then drop the stick, walk away from the article, take it off your watch list, etc, etc. There are probably far more articles you could be working on and this one will do fine without you. I mean you are not to only editor in en:wp and this is not the only article.-- Canoe1967 ( talk) 07:08, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Then please WP:STICK on this one, work on the ones at my NPOV gun article and feel free to add more if you wish. I was thinking of sorting them into good, bad, and in between. If you are as good as you think you are then that should not be a difficult task for you. If you continue with this article it will just hamper the efforts of editors trying to improve it. They find that very difficult, as I do, when you keep bothering us on other pages such as this one. I would ask you to WP:STICK here as well but I doubt that will do any good. I am still trying to figure out how you ended up in this section about a different lame article that I was actually trying to help you improve.-- Canoe1967 ( talk) 07:29, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Note to Sensei48: Thanks for your honesty. Viriditas ( talk) 07:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
It seems to me that you all are disputing both content and methodology, and that suggests that some sort of compromise or accommodation in both regards might be a good idea. I have to admit to being a bit confused about the exact nature of these because I have to skip back and forth from the Aurora article to here, but let me take a stab at proposal.
First - seems to me that a) Viriditas feels that there should be more in the article regarding the gun control issues and Canoe thinks that such material is tangential to the thrust of the article, and b) Canoe wants to establish or recognize a consensus of editors to limit gun control discussion in the article, which Viriditas maintains does not currently exist. If I have misstated, please feel free to correct, amend, excoriate (insert smiley) me on these points.
My own sense is that the material I added looks pretty lame and limp - I agree with Viriditas that a slightly expanded version similar to what appears in the Columbine article would not be ragingly off-topic at all. There are plenty of RS news articles that deal with the topic. I think there are three related issues covered in the sources in addition to the Pew material already added. 1) Legality of weapons purchases by the shooter; 2) enhanced capability of magazines and weapons; 3) the rise in background checks as an unusual/atypical response to a mass shooting (someone tried to add a section regarding that but it was OR and there are several news analysis stories that suggest this). Two or three additional sourced sentences - sourced directly to this incident and as a consequence of it - could be added and would improve the article. regards, Sensei48 ( talk) 13:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Its about time someone recognized this. Countless books have been written and copied rehashing all that is known. Perhaps a more suitable subject would be the lives and times of the thirteen victims. The lives and times of the officers who did the job would be interesting as well. Busceda ( talk) 22:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Sensei48, Following our discussions last March, I've finally got round to putting up a suggested re-write of the contents section of the above article on its Talk page. I'd welcome any comments or suggestions you may have. Thanks DaveApter ( talk) 13:11, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
I support your reverts of the LBH page, regarding the sourced material of Elizabeth Custer. There seems to be a lot of movement on that page recently, and I am not sure I agree with all of it, including the pruning of the illustration captions that mention the incorrect portrayals. Standing by for now 'till the dust settles. Thanks as always for your work. Jus da fax 05:15, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello
I notice you re-edited a change I made here; I’ve raised the matter on the talk page (
here) if you wish to comment.
Regards,
Xyl 54 (
talk) 23:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
I noticed you reverted my change for the sub-section Sexual Assault Scandal for citing an op-ed piece. While the piece is under the blogs section of the Washington Post, the facts cited from the source are not opinions and the piece cites its sources under links. As such, this piece is a secondary source. You claim this is a shallow, pejorative edit that includes innuendo, but there is nothing here that is not presented in the article and its sources as something that actually happened. I challenge you to name what is pejorative in my edits. I have not used any terms or phrases that are outrageous or in common use to describe the subject matter at hand. I also note that you are an alumni of this university and hence may be biased. While this subject matter paints your alma mater in a bad light, there is nothing here that is subjective. All the edits are events that have happened and are from the citation. You also claim that this citation is of a tabloid nature. I don't think many editors will agree with you that the Washington Post is a tabloid.
Before you go reverting me again, please consider whether or not your biases are affecting your decision here. Transcendence ( talk) 00:53, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
You undid a revision on the Notre Dame page on the basis that "The NCAA only recognizes Alabama with 13 titles". This is a complete falsehood. In fact, Alabama is credited by the NCAA with more titles than they actually claim, as many schools do.
Officially, last season's title is their 19th per NCAA recognition standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.31.100 ( talk) 02:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Transcendence ( talk) 19:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tom Dooley (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greg Brown ( 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) 00:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
You claim History Channel is not an acceptable source. I'd like to see you back0-up that claim with a list of what sources are acceptable. (Or explain why History is forbidden from wikipedia.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C4D4:82A0:AC62:50A1:B226:E1D ( talk) 22:16, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Battle of Washita River may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 06:54, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm afraid I have no idea what "consensual edit" is supposed to mean. All edits are made by individuals; consensus is a hypothetical construct, or a pragmatic state of editing quiescence.
Edit summaries are not the proper forum for discussing an edit. Undoing an edit is not the proper procedure for responding to good-faith editing of WP articles (please see WP:BRD). Please do not revert my edit again without proper discussion on the article's talk page. Thanks in advance. Eaglizard ( talk) 22:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Hey - as one of the aforementioned article's main contributors, I just wanted to send a heads-up that I've made a variety of (I hope) improvements and added refs. Give it a look if you have a few minutes; I'm considering submitting it as a GA, but I suspect there are places where I've slipped up or crucial things that are still missing. I've got a few books I can mine sourcing from, if need be. -- Batard0 ( talk) 12:00, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
I added citations regarding change to traditions should have found sources the team walk changed in 2011 and they changed mass this year -- Jamesbondfan ( talk) 19:07, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Joe Gannon may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 19:09, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
This user has contributed to Ara Parseghian good articles on Wikipedia. |
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I thank you for your editorial contributions to Ara Parseghian, which recently was promoted to WP:GA.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:11, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Your ranking for total "national championships recognized by the NCAA" is second, according to your own reference. You've just chosen to use a date prior to Alabama winning their latest NC in January 2013. Scrodz ( talk) 08:56, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
But the song Mezei Mária sang first hungarian and better known as sung by Gerendás Péter versions (numbers of the Facebook-versions are influenced). I have not written explanation because, I should have written it probably bad English.
De a dalt Mezei Mária énekelte először magyarul és jóval ismertebb, mint a Gerendás Péteré (a Facebook-verziók száma befolyásolható). Azért nem írtam magyarázatot, mivel valószínűleg rossz angolsággal írtam meg volna ezeket.
Ám nem változtatok rajta, megértettem, hogy ezen a részen momentán nem szabad. Hadd higyék a nyugati országokban, hogy Magyarországon Gerendás Péter énekelte először a "Hol vannak katonák" című dalt és nem Mezei Mária (mivel az se derül ki a szövegkörnyezetből, nem a laptörtenetből, hogy miért Gerendás Péter verziója szerepel rajta és miért nem Mezei Máriáé vagy Kovács Erzsié, márpedig az ember elsődlegesen a történetiségből indul ki és nem egy-egy Facebook-verzió látogatottságából, amikor énekesneveket lát felsorolva a különböző országok nyelvi változatai mellett). Apród ( talk) 18:02, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I am new to the "wiki" style of editing an encyclopedia. I was curious as to why my change to "Joe Montana" (article) disappeared. I happen to have insider info (I grew up with his son). I'm just here to learn, and I want to help others learn, with the knowledge.
Do I need to source this to an almanac?
Thanks, 71.178.48.17 ( talk) 08:05, 5 April 2014 (UTC) (signed)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited American folk music revival, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Cohen ( 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) 08:55, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
On page 74 of the annual record book I showed you, there IS a list of selectors that the NCAA recognizes. A couple pages down from that, it has a list of every year, along with teams that were chosen by these selectors. I go by this when editing pages on Wikipedia, though obviously, many people don't. It includes all the national titles on Oklahoma Sooners football. I'm not sure how you could go wrong using the NCAA's official record book, so I suggest this be used all throughout Wikipedia, including for Notre Dame Fighting Irish football. Kobra98 ( talk) 00:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jerry Orbach, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Law and Order. 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) 08:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to There Will Be Blood may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 06:01, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
See revisions. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 05:42, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
In editing Death Hunt, I noted that two other films based on a similar topic were out there, but had some errors that seem to have creeped into almost all the reference sources. The biggest mistake is the confusion over the titles, Mad Trapper, an alternate title for Challenge to Be Free (1975 US production) and The Mad Trapper (1972 British made-for-television docudrama). Take a look. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 14:12, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
All due respect, the NY Times obit isn't the end-all, be all for what the lead should be. Penguin and Mickey are the 2 roles most associated with Meredith, as they are the roles he portrayed most often. Here's his TCM biography, which places emphasis on his turns as Penguin and Mickey, thus showing that those are his 2 most notable roles.
Vjmlhds (talk) 00:34, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!! | |
Hello Sensei48, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to user talk pages with a friendly message. |
To you and yours
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 22:51, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you so much for your edits in Beeton School but I have a question about it. You write "the Japanese puppetry pastiche of Sherlock Holmes" in it, but the series is based on the Canon of Sherlock Holmes. Though being adapted to the drama set in school, the elements of original stories can be seen in each episode. I don't think it's pastiche. And the title of the puppetry is "error: {{nihongo}}: Japanese or romaji text required ( help)" (Sherlock Holmes) so I used it in the article. Official website-- Ishinoak ( talk) 16:00, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Dear Sensei48,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--
FWiW Bzuk (
talk)
This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").
Hey Sensei48, can you take a look at the changes I made to College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS related to the new playoff system and the final 2014 results. Also there a few issues that need to be address on the bottom of the talk page, as well. Thanks, Dolenath ( talk) 21:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
I have corrected one source: Joel Whitburn. You might know how to group a source into one when two different citations are on two separate pages (just like here: reference 8: page 556, and reference 9: page: 560) Radosław Wiśniewski ( talk) 09:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Radosław Wiśniewski
Hi Sensei, if you have time, I would appreciate your comments and suggestions LBH TALK here.Cheers. Grahamboat ( talk) 23:30, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Nice catch on the premature archive. It looks like an IPv6 editor changed the archiving settings recently. I have changed them back. Cheers! -- Tgeairn ( talk) 06:23, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sensei48, we got a new reviewer for a GA review. He had a question about the use of tables. Could you take a look and respond?: [ [18]] Dolenath ( talk) 18:45, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey!
I noticed you removed "large" from the description of Notre Dame. it wasn't a subjective assessment, I was just using the desciprion given by the carnegie Mellon foundation, the same that defines Notre Dame as "very high research" [19]
As an alumnus, I also would disagree that ND is large, but they have official standards. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eccekevin ( talk • contribs) 01:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Honestly, I agree on going mid-sized, Notre Dame is mid-size for a private school, and even small for public school standards. Alos, I'm revaping the Wikipedia:WikiProject Notre Dame. Come check it out, and maybe you can help us out. I you look at my contibutions, you'll see I'm working a lot on improving so many different ND-related articles. I could definitely use some help. That whole Lead section was a mess, talking only about Fr. Sorin and the Architecture school, and not even mentioning important stuff like the Fight song, our schools and colleges, or the golden dome. Eccekevin ( talk) 17:25, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Hey, as I said before, you're invited! Here's the official invitation with all the links you might need.
Hello, Sensei48! We are looking for editors to join WikiProject Notre Dame, an outreach effort which aims to support development of Notre Dame related articles in Wikipedia. We thought you might be interested, and hope that you will join us. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of participants, check out our To Do list, and join the discussion on our talk page. Thanks!!! |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 16:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Respectfully, the text to which you reverted, as below:
With all respect, I genuinely don't see how there was a grammar error, and I'm pretty confident that most people would agree with me that my minor rewording made far more grammatical sense than the previous form. Mabalu ( talk) 22:51, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | ||
message Eccekevin ( talk) 00:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC) |
Dear Sensei48, I want to conrgatulate you for your awesome work as an editor, an in particular for your work with the Notre Dame Fighting Irish football and the WikiProject Notre Dame.
I hope you continue contributing to Wikipedia and our project. All help is appreciated, especially with our Wikipedia:WikiProject Notre Dame/To Do List.
The Schools Barnstar | ||
message Eccekevin ( talk) 00:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC) |
Thanks again!
Eccekevin ( talk) 00:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Little Mermaid may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 18:31, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Provide a citation for this claim that [he] wrote "hundreds" of songs. Wjhonson ( talk) 19:00, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shame & Scandal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Back In Town. 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) 09:55, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
You may want to comment on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#American_Film_Institute_recognition. -- Softlavender ( talk) 22:47, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Just wanted to let you know I undid a couple of your reverts in order to revert via restoration, prior edits by the vandal you were reverting. Same destination different road. TimothyJosephWood 17:36, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Sensei48. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Talk:College_football_national_championships_in_NCAA_Division_I_FBS#Remove_College_Football_Data_Warehouse_section Dolenath ( talk) 21:59, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
I ask you to undertake a considered review of the edits you reverted here and let me know if you still stand by them. If so, I will take the matter to the article's Talk page before re-reverting. Bjenks ( talk) 07:31, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi there! As a member of the Notre Dame project, I'd invite you over to take a look at a current disagreement taking place over the ND seal. Traditionally, and all over campus, the seal is colored, but another user has brought up that he would like to see it in black and white. Please take a look at the discussion here and chime in if you would like. /info/en/?search=Talk:University_of_Notre_Dame#The_Seal
Best, Eccekevin ( talk) 23:04, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm not understanding what the logic is behind the "major performers". There are a lot of people with bigger hits then the people you are putting in the major figures, that are for some reason in the other performers tab. The smothers brothers have had one single barely chart. Yet they're on the major performers tab. The only thing I can come up with is that these are only the 1960s. And Chapin and the people I've seen are 70s. --15:18, 18 October 2017 (UTC) Citybuild122 ( talk) Brandon
Citybuild122 ( talk) 17:46, 18 October 2017 (UTC)Brandon
Hello, Sensei48. 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)
It has long been established that Plot sections of film articles should focus on what is shown in the film and should generally not break the fourth wall. Whether or not Lawrence is raped isn't, to the best of my recollections, pertinent to the rest of the film, and in any event the film itself doesn't depict Lawrence being raped.
It may be worth discussing the subject elsewhere in the article, but I don't believe the Plot section is the place for it. You are welcome to raise the subject at the article's Talk page if you feel otherwise. DonIago ( talk)1 4:36, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
If you're going to restore personal info about a living person, like this you better bring a source. Toddst1 ( talk) 06:46, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Sensei48. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019! | |
Hello Sensei48, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Good catch. SOMEONE must have changed it back. I am a fanatic about "which" and "that" and am always making corrections. I can't believe that in all the times I've visited the K-Trio article that I didn't either see it or correct it or both. Yrs. for correct grammar -- a losing fight at WP! And a Happy New Year! Hayford Peirce ( talk) 03:54, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Just changed it on the Cisco Houston page.... Hayford Peirce ( talk) 04:09, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Check the latest update to The Kingston Trio. Apparently the concerns we had about squabbling over ownership of the brand are happening. - DavidWBrooks ( talk) 22:24, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello Sensei48, I just wanted to thank you for your work for the WikiProject Notre Dame. I am currently making an effort to revamp it and improve all articles. I was wondering if you could help out, since any and all help is needed. If you want, you can check out the To Do list for the top priority, or take your own initiative and work on what's needed the most. The top priority articles in bad condition, like the colleges or the grotto, need a lot of help too. Additionally, photos or translation in other languages are also great.
Best and thank once more for your work on Wikipedia, Eccekevin ( talk) 02:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
I did not saw that her death was posted on his page below.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stephen Stills, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CSN ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 10:54, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the explanation. That makes perfect sense. Is there a way I can include that in the page with a more accurate description? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WolverineNation ( talk • contribs) 20:08, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out the possible reasoning for using Sherif instead of Sharif. I have self-reverted to keep consistency between the script and real life. However, one of the interesting anecdotes about Lawrence is that his publisher complained of him changing the spelling of Arab words from page to page. Lawrence replied that the publisher could spell it however he wished because it was Arabic and did not use the Roman alphabet. Humphrey Tribble ( talk) 16:23, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi! Just dropping in to say thanks for all your good work on Notre Dame pages. Regarding your recent edit on the Notre Dame football page, I agree with your position, with one possible exception. I'd say that based on the recent history, sources, and media attention it gets, Stanford would deserve to be in the infobox, at the very least above Michigan State. Thoughts? As you might know, I do a lot of work on ND pages, but generally avid the football ones since I'm no expert, but wanted to share my 2 cents with you. Additionally, this website is an interesting resource and collects info about rivalries. It does show how Stanford is among the most heart-felt rivalries (unlike Purdue or Boston College, as you point out). Cheers. Eccekevin ( talk) 01:41, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
... Nu? Loew Galitz ( talk) 00:32, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Upcoming Indianapolis event - July 28: Food Deserts & Food Policy | ||
---|---|---|
You are invited to join us at Ruth Lilly Law Library for an edit-a-thon on Food Deserts & Food Policy hosted by Ruth Lilly Law Library and United States National Agricultural Library. Together, both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on food deserts, nutrition, and related local and federal food policy.
Visit the Wikipedia/Meetup page or Eventbrite to sign up and learn more. |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 08:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC).)
|
Upcoming events around Indiana - Nov. 1:
Environmental Justice editathons 2 locations: Indianapolis & Bloomington (and virtual option) |
|
---|---|---|
You are invited to join us for a multi-site editathon organized by Indiana Wikimedians at IUPUI University Library in downtown Indianapolis and the Herman B Wells Library at IU Bloomington (with virtual option). Together, both experienced and new Wikipedia editors, with faculty subject matter experts, will collaboratively improve articles on environmental justice in Indiana and globally. Join us at either location or virtually!
Visit the meetup page or Eventbrite to sign up and learn more. |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 01:52, 10 October 2022 (UTC).)
|
Nov. 11-13:
WikiConference North American Meetup! IUPUI University Library (and around Indianapolis) |
|
---|---|---|
Registration is now open for WikiConference North America 2022 (Nov. 11–13) held jointly with Mapping USA! If you would like to experience this virtual event in-person, you are welcome to join our meetup in Indianapolis! We will be meeting at IUPUI University Library for the weekend, with AV set up for conference streaming and presenting (for those who've submitted proposals). Anyone is welcome to join, we will have some light refreshments and are planning evening activities. Feel free to join us for an activity, a day, or the whole weekend. Please let us know you are coming via the meetup page and please register for the conference. We will share more about in-person activities on the meetup page as they are finalized. Visit the WikiConference North America site for the schedule and visit our meetup page to sign up and learn more. And don't forget to register for the conference! |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 17:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC).)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Upcoming Indianapolis event March 17: Indiana Women in the Arts |
||
---|---|---|
You are invited to join us at Newfields for an edit-a-thon on Indiana women in the arts, co-hosted by Wikimedians of Indiana and IUPUI University Library. Together, both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on women artists and artworks of Indiana.
Visit the Wikipedia Meetup page or Eventbrite to sign up and learn more. |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 21:02, 8 March 2023 (UTC).)
Upcoming Indianapolis event - May 13: Indiana Politics & Government 2023 | ||
---|---|---|
It's been an eventful state legislative session in Indiana, and local elections took place this week, so we have lots to cover! You are invited to The AMP at 16 Tech in Indianapolis for a Politics & Government editathon to improve write articles about local political and government topics of interest and improve information about local officials, candidates, elections, and legislation. Come join us at this fun venue, with free parking and refreshments provided!
We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians in Indiana User Group |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 01:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC).)
@ Sensei48: There is a discussion occurring here regarding whether to continue to use the data from College Football Data Warehouse in that list's inclusion criterion for college football national championships, as it has been from the list's inception. Any comments or suggestions you may have would be appreciated. Jeff in CA ( talk) 22:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Upcoming Indianapolis event - June 24, 2023: Wiki Loves Pride Indy | ||
---|---|---|
You are invited to join us at Spades Park Branch Library for a Wiki Loves Pride editathon—hosted by the Wikimedians of Indiana User Group with support from the Central Indiana Community Foundation. Together, new and experienced Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on LGBTQ+ topics, individuals, organizations, and legislation in Indiana.
We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians of Indiana User Group |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 16:30, 19 June 2023 (UTC).)
Upcoming Indianapolis event - July 30, 2023: Indiana State Fair Wiknic | ||
---|---|---|
We are partnering with the Indiana State Fair to offer FREE tickets to the fair for Wikipedians! We will be meeting on July 30th at 10am to pass out tickets and have a quick info session before we attend the fair (feel free to branch off and share your accomplishments on the Meetup page later!) Detailed instructions on how the day will go is available on the Meetup page! We hope you'll join us to edit about things related to fair (historic buildings, foods, animals, activities, and the fair itself). All levels of experience are welcome! Please RSVP so we know who is coming. We hope you'll join us!
We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians of Indiana User Group |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 13:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC).)
Upcoming Indianapolis event - October 11, 2023: Indiana Under-represented Artists Edit-a-thon | ||
---|---|---|
You are invited to Herron Art Library in Herron School of Art & Design for an Under-represented Artists of Indiana Edit-a-thon—hosted by the Wikimedians of Indiana User Group with support from the Central Indiana Community Foundation. Together, new and experienced Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on under-represented Indiana based artists and art/artist organizations and groups in Indiana today, and historically.
All levels of experience are welcome! Please RSVP so we know who is coming. We hope you'll join us!
|
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 00:49, 5 October 2023 (UTC).)"
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Anderson (actor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rawhide.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello — you reverted my addition of a paragraph break with the comment “unsourced trivia”. I was not the person who added the trivial sentence that you returned to the preceding paaragraph. I agree that the sentence should probably be removed — it definitely does not belong in the paragraph where it was placed (and now restored to by your reversion of my edit). Feel free to remove the sentence as I believe this was probably the actual intent of your edit. Thanks! Manushand ( talk) 10:19, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)