User talk:GabeIglesia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GabeIglesia, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi GabeIglesia! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Jtmorgan (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 01:09, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


Hi, GabeIglesia! Just to say I am removing the wikilinks you added to the Dods disambiguation page to conform with the Manual of Style MOS:DABENTRY specifically the bit about: "Include exactly one navigable (blue) link to efficiently guide readers to the most relevant article for that use of the ambiguous term. Do not wikilink any other words in the line." Kerry (talk) 20:38, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I also added DODS as an abbreviation in the Day of Defeat: Source page, as abbreviations aren't supposed to appear in disambiguation pages unless the article itself introduces the abbreviation MOS:DABACRO. But, then I noticed there is a DODS disambiguation page, which might be the better place for the game entry than the Dods disambiguation page. Then I wondered if the abbreviation was DoDS (or some other capitalisation). At which point I thought it better to ask you to decide what the best capitalisation is (I guess the one in common use) and deal with the disambiguation accordingly. What do you reckon? Kerry (talk) 20:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Kerry! Thank you for fixing that on the disambiguation page. As for the abbreviation suggestion, I believe an appropriate abbreviation for Day of Defeat: Source is DoDS or DoD:S. I think DoD:S is in more common use in the community, although Valve has also referred to it as DoD: Source. Similarly, Counter-Strike: Source, which is also a Source upgrade of its respective game, is often abbreviated as CS:S or CSS, so that should be considered. GabeIglesia (talk) 23:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Please fill out our brief Teahouse guest survey[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages sometime in the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

Jonathan and Sarah, Teahouse hosts 02:14, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


Hi! I'm Gabe Mcguire and I thank you for ur Info on my talking page. Also if you would like read about my backround on my page. P.S. talk to you soon! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabe112097 (talkcontribs) 05:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Steam category[edit]

Is there a consensus for adding this category? Steam handles loads of games. This kind of massive editing spree needs some discussion before you waste your time. Try bringing it up at WT:VG. Thanks! Blake (Talk·Edits) 02:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

I think the person you'd want to inquire would be Player017, since it was originally that particular user who launched it. I had assumed the category was already discussed at some particular time and place elsewhere since it was already rolling under way. On that note, a similar situation is with categories that characterize games by platform (Categories for Windows and Xbox Live Arcade, as examples), if we are to consider the same rationale that there are just so many games for that one particular characteristic. Thank you for bringing this to mind though. GabeIglesia (talk) 03:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Okay, I'll talk to him. The thing is, Steam has consistently been a matter of discussion of whether or not it is considered "a platform", and I think the general consensus is that it is a store, not a platform. Thanks, Blake (Talk·Edits) 15:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Turns out I was beaten to it, and the category is up for deletion discussion. Blake (Talk·Edits) 15:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Thanks much for referring me to the right place! GabeIglesia (talk) 16:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikify has been deprecated[edit]

Hi Gabelglesia! Just a friendly note that {{Wikify}} has been deprecated in favor of more specific templates. For example, in Bruce Dinsmore, I replaced {{Wikify section}} with {{Needs table}}.. Happy editing, and happy new year! GoingBatty (talk) 04:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for finding a more appropriate and specific one! It works very well. GabeIglesia (talk) 05:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

March 2013[edit]

Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at Classics, are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage newer editors. Please read Wikipedia:NOTVAND for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:23, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2013[edit]


The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 6, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2013
Fairytale left.png Previous issue | Index | Next issue Fairytale right.png

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2013, the project has:


To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

who are you[edit]

hello, i dont think everyone know who you are.

pls. before writing advices to other people consider introducing yourself.TheXYWriter (talk) 18:21, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheXYWriter (talkcontribs) 18:10, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

December 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to United States presidential line of succession 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • are in line according to the chronological order of the date of the creation of their department (or the department of which their department is the successor (the [[United States Department of
  • llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=362 Presidential Succession Act of 1792], 1 Stat. 239 (from the [[American Memory]] website of the [[Library of Congress]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:12, 10 December 2014 (UTC)