Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:41, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
I see you recently accepted this pending change to February 2. I looked for a source for this date of birth in the Jackie Burroughs article so I could add it to February 2 and it was unsupported by any source there either.
You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.
Please do not accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 ( talk) 23:47, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello from Wild Bill,
I am the Co-Founder and former CEO of MicroProse Software of Hunt Valley Md.
My linedin profile is here:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jw-wild-bill-stealey-47b25/
You can reach me at jwstealey@ient.com or on SKYPE at ientcustservice.
I was trying to put correct information in the page. It was all rejected and I am not sure why?
It is all true and the facts.
How do I get those edits back?
Thanks, JW Wild Bill Stealey — Preceding unsigned comment added by JWStealey ( talk • contribs) 16:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Why did you revert me? His role in trying to discredit HW's accusers is confirmed by top RS (NYT, the New Yorker) and is not disputed. ANother thing: Why are the dozen or so accusations of sexual harassment against Howard being removed from the article? 128.135.96.210 ( talk) 20:54, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I was inspired by your user page styling. I created the template User:Bellezzasolo/UserPage based off it. In particular, it is quite easy to maintain - for example, try
{{User:Bellezzasolo/UserPage|border=navy|background_normal=lightgreen| text_normal=navy|text_highlight=lightgreen|background_select=navy|user_title_color=green}}
I thought that might be of interest. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 02:03, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi! I'm pretty sure I undid your revision to my edit on the El Salvador page and wanted to clarify that it was not my intention. I meant to use the citation for a fact stated in another paragraph and got super confused when trying to fix my mistake. I am super new to editing on Wiki so my apologies if that came across as anything other than a mistake. Russovidal ( talk) 04:46, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
You s Theweathercat2002 ( talk) 03:14, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Just a heads up, I mentioned you in this ANI thread. You are not the subject of the thread, you were just mentioned because you warned the user who is the subject of the thread. Just wanted to make you aware. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 15:59 on February 3, 2018 (UTC)
I realize you're probably joking, but just in case =) I can't undo those edits automatically, and I'm too lazy to do it manually. BytEfLUSh Talk 03:27, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Per the Manual of Style, Wikipedia gives precedence to gender self-identification as reported by reliable sources. This includes the use of appropriate pronouns corresponding to the identity (e.g., trans women typically use she/her and trans men typically use he/him). Further, per this part of the Manual of Style, birth names should be included in the lead sentence only when the person was notable prior to coming out. Your edits were counter to the one or both of these aspects of the Manual of Style and have been reverted or removed. Repeated vandalism like this can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:17, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, L293D!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
Robert McClenon (
talk) 04:44, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
|
Hi, the blue division bent under pressure from the 55th army in the battle of krasny bor, but the division did not break, which is why I made the change. -- 2001:8003:548A:5600:BD2F:662B:69B1:9637 ( talk) 02:20, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
I think you are incorrect saying my changes on that page were vandalism and reverting it. I did fail to update the date accessed for the source at the bottom of the page but if you had chosen to do so you might have learned that the changes made reflected that the team changed its name and changed its roster which were the same changes I made. I feel that when you take the step to accuse someone of vandalism you should try and get that right. I apologize for not updating the source access date to reflect that but you might have gone a tad too far. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shermanm365 ( talk • contribs) 00:07, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
thank you L293D, I've added the source of citation now. Pleayo ( talk) 00:19, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
I disagree that my edit to the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center page was disruptive. I added examples of the aversive used and had a citation. It is not vandalization when sourced and posted in good faith. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cpotisch ( talk • contribs) 16:10, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for thanking :D Haha Shamvilraza ( talk) 16:55, 7 February 2018 (UTC) |
If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Well, I think you did make a mistake, concerning your revert of my edits in Murder (German law), which were quite constructive. For one, the article had previously left out the systematically rather important battery-with-deadly-outcome. For another, it had said that it's not a with-deadly-outcome crime if there was murderous intent, which simply is not true (and which would mean that a pirate [for non-greedy reasons] who unintentionally kills would get at least ten years, while a pirate who intentionally kills without fulfilling one of the aggravating circumstances of Mord could theoretically get off with five.-- 131.159.76.38 ( talk) 18:06, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
The two additions were constructive. The first was about very effective TV ads by Roemer. The second gave context as to another reason why Edwards left the race. At the time, it was discussed more than the point already made in the article, that Edwards dropped out to deny Roemer the chance to build a coalition. Howardekatz ( talk) 19:43, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Thank you very much for looking on Autophagy page. My purpose was to establish a link between "Autophagy" and "Negative regulator" pages. If you can do it on behalf of me, I will be thankful. Regards,-- German creek ( talk) 07:24, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for your anti-vandalism efforts. Just letting you know that on the HTTPS Everywhere page, you reverted just one of two vandalism edits. This is dangerous because it leaves other watchers with the impression that the vandalism has been dealt with and thus evades detection. I've seen such lingering vandalism persist for years. In this case thankfully it was caught by an IP editor. -- intgr [talk] 22:31, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and people associated with the same, all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.EvergreenFir (talk) 19:21, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
I think it's very relevant to point out this test failed to enter the intended orbit. Had there been an actual person in that space suite, they would now be condemned to death. That's kind of a big deal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.250.175.26 ( talk) 18:05, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi dear friend Please help some not registered user tried to remove information from page links etc. If possible can you make this page semi-protected. This page Majid Karimov. /info/en/?search=Majid_Karimov Thank you very much. Acer Comp ( talk) 08:59, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Acer Comp ( talk • contribs) 08:48, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Acer Comp ( talk) 08:59, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
I did add some specific information about comandos for example, and you've deleted all . I would like to know why , beacause it was correct information . I had some pictures to show more detailed content and you've deleted . I'm expecting your answer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filósofo Lusófono ( talk • contribs) 12:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 09:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi,
I haven't made any WIKI Changes(Never), I'm concerned someone is using my IP, is there anything I can do? 2600:387:A:9:0:0:0:A2 ( talk) 19:43, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, your undoing my change was erroneous as I did include a reference link at the same time I added the information (I assume it was a mistake rather than an intentional "disappearance" of the added information). 2A02:1811:B214:CA00:351:2ED1:7109:201B ( talk) 14:50, 19 February 2018 (UTC) 2A02:1811:B214:CA00:351:2ED1:7109:201B ( talk) 14:53, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
In this edit you moved my comment to the talk page. My fundamental point was one of a very relevant fact to the RfA; in all the examples cited the view of the community lined up with the view of the applicant. It was not a continuation of an argument with the OP. This fact should be on the page for others to review, not buried in the talk page or require them to follow all the links themselves. Please reinstate it or otherwise put that information on the page.
On what basis are you deciding which posts should be removed to the talk page? Are you following some guideline, or is this jsut based on your own personal feelings on the matter? Spinning Spark 18:37, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for finding that existing article. I had searched but found another article with the same name about an older defunct group. I took your advice and updated the article you gave me the link for. Vahvistus ( talk) 00:28, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for sharing your precious time to review the Draft, Naver_Academic.
As the next step, I am trying to add more reliable sources as references by following your guide.
The previous draft has three different sources, newspapers in Korean, a journal article in English, and a blog post published by Naver Academic in English.
If you tell me which part of the references are not adequate as the reliable references, it will be greatly helpful for me to enhance this article.
Goldentp ( talk) 08:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
add section to article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nhlman99 ( talk • contribs) 15:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Hey could you explain why QASource was accepted? None of those sources cover this company in-depth and definitely don't have editorial oversight. The article is quite literally blatant spam. I'm also concerned about the acceptance of America Suresh as well. The sources were almost entirely unreliable, cruft, blatant spam or youtube. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:31, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:34, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
I fixed a misspelling to make the article self-consistent, at least read things before you revert them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.96.38.102 ( talk) 01:53, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
You seem to be a bit down. You've gotten really involved over the past few months which is good, but you seem to be rushing into the maintenance side of things. Focus on content work for a bit after you get back from your break. It is often easier to edit existing content than create new content, and you learn more of the way we do things around here that way anyway. If you are at all interested in historical Catholicism articles, we have a bunch of articles from the early years of Wikipedia that need cleanup (and I'm finishing a good topic series on the 17th century conclaves that I could use some help on (I also have other articles in that field I can point out). If you prefer military history, try your hand at WP:MILHIST. They have great resources there to help you learn about how Wikipedia works. Also, always feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions. We all make mistakes (and I've made legion, and when you are an admin, people point them out to you in amazingly clear detail. Anyway, enjoy your break, and I do hope to see you before February 30... TonyBallioni ( talk) 02:10, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
There were two pages by similar names with the same content. I tried to redirect it and something went wrong. The page that has been linked to the previous ministries is /info/en/?search=First_K._Karunakaran_Ministry. Therefore this page ( /info/en/?search=First_K.Karunakaran_Ministry) is unnecessary. Sorry about the inconvenience. Please sort this out if possible. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheInnocentBystander ( talk • contribs) 21:18, 27 February 2018 (UTC)