User talk:Ibadibam

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

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Ibadibam, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Newcomers help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Kukini 04:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

WP:CHICAGO survey[edit]

WP:CHICAGO[edit]

You have been marked as an inactive member of WP:CHICAGO since you have not updated your status at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/members. If you consider yourself either an active or semi-active member of the project please correct your status. If you consider yourself a member you may want to get involved in the Wikipedia:Meetup/Chicago 3. Also, if you are a member, be advised that the project is now trying to keep all the project's WP:PR, WP:FAC, WP:FAR, WP:GAR, WP:GAC WP:FLC, WP:FLRC, WP:FTC, WP:FPOC, WP:FPC, and WP:AFD discussion pages in one location at the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Review page. Please help add any discussion you are aware of at this location.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area roll call[edit]

BayareaUSGS.jpg

Hello from WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area!

As part of a recent update to our project main page we are conducting a roll call to check which members are still active and interested in working on bay area related content. If you are still interested in participating, simply move your username from the inactive section of the participant list to the active section. I hope you will find the redesigned project pages helpful, and I wanted to welcome you back to the project. If you want you can take a look at the newly redesigned:

As well as the existing pages:

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page, and add it to your watchlist, if it isn't already.

Again, hi!  -Optigan13 (talk) 07:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


Barbershop[edit]

Thanks for the positive remarks - I sing with West Towns! --DAW0001 (talk) 04:59, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

for reverting "History of the world" from "BC" and "AD" back to "BCE" and "CE." I think the latter are more appropriate to our times and to the subject.

I did not feel, however, that I could afford to undertake the effort that you have invested. I'm deeply grateful. Nihil novi (talk) 08:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Nie ma za co, Nn :) I also messaged the user who made the edits, but since he hasn't set up his page, it remains to be seen whether he notices. Ibadibam (talk) 17:10, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sandwich, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grilled cheese (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) 11:39, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

This appears to be a false positive. Checking it out. Ibadibam (talk) 21:48, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Re: Pepsi edit war[edit]

I hate to be a complete jerk, but people going on about little things like this long after they've happened is a much bigger problem than the actual thing could ever be. There is no principle there.

The only thing I am or was angry about is that, and multiple editors treating me like a vandal because one did. I don't particularly care about the block, even though that's the one thing anyone would care about me caring about. See how stupid even that sounds?

Thanks for the input, by the way. Wish those other guys would approach the subject in a similar way, but it doesn't look like that's going to happen. Despatche (talk) 06:09, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOOD Needs You![edit]

Hi there Ibadibam! I've noticed you have yourself listed as a member of the Food and Drink Wikiproject. Unfortunately it looks like the project has been slowly sliding into inactivity except for a couple of people. That makes me a sad potato, and nobody likes a sad potato amirite?

If you'd like to turn my frown upside down, can you do two small things?

First off, go here and add {{Tick}} (YesY) next to your name if you're still part of the project.

Second, go to the project talkpage and participate in a discussion about how to make the project more active, and how to go about making articles in our area of interest a lot better.

You don't want to make me cry, do you? Potatoes have a lot of eyes you know. So come on, join in! :)

— The Potato Hose 18:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Romanizations[edit]

Thanks for the link at Despatche's talk page! I always forget where that guideline is. :)--Atlan (talk) 20:22, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Glad it helped Face-smile.svg Ibadibam (talk) 20:25, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the information about The Country Bears mistake. I see that although the edit was wrong, it was not meant to be vandalism. I admit that after doing vandalism reversion for several months with only a few very minor problems that were promptly taken care of, I have been mistaken, more like being fooled actually, three times recently. It is good to be reminded that something that may look like vandalism at first glance, and in fact may have been vandalism in another case, may just be wrong or unintentionally disruptive. I have seen a few such instances recently and adjusted my notice accordingly. In this case, I missed it. Donner60 (talk) 03:39, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013[edit]

Refrain from using automated warnings on good faith editors and their edits. It is extremely poor form. Thank you. OmniArticleEditor (talk) 16:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Okay, okay, I'm sorry for WP:DTRing you. Please also assume that the warning was in good faith (I will point out that I used a GF-level template). I also noted that your account has been active for less than two weeks, and I assumed you're still finding your way around wiki policy. I'm just trying to help you be a better editor. Ibadibam (talk) 17:12, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
In that case then kindly remove your disrespectful template warning from my talk page. OmniArticleEditor (talk) 17:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
You're welcome to maintain your user talk page per the relevant guidelines. But please see the essay I linked to above, which encourages you to "take the template as a reminder and/or constructive criticism and move on." Ibadibam (talk) 17:59, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Despite WP:AGF your warning comes across as unnecessarily robotically negative. Do avoid usage of templates in the future with registered users. Particularly ones that have even relatively minor histories of good faith editing. The project is losing editors left and right and such idiotic usage of templates is not going to help with that issue. OmniArticleEditor (talk) 18:07, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, again[edit]

Thanks for watching out for my user page. I have had enough experience to expect some vandalism occasionally but it is always appreciated when a fellow editor promptly takes care of it. I have never seen someone (a vandal) put a bogus commendation on their talk page. It is even stranger since the previous vandalism was over a month ago. Too bad the person does not use his or her time and talent more productively. Thanks again. Donner60 (talk) 23:14, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

That's an awesome attitude to take! I've got to remember that: instead of "I wish this person weren't on Wikipedia," say, "I wish this person were doing something better with their life and fulfilling their great potential as a human being." Anyway, yeah, I was still watching your page from our last conversation. This definitely is a more creative vandal than I've seen before. So how was your monkey hunt? smile Ibadibam (talk) 23:28, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
I did not catch any but they are rather fast. Donner60 (talk) 23:31, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Grammar[edit]

You are incorrect with regard to immigrate and emigrate. The "point of view from which they are used" is entirely subjective. The fact remains that one immigrates to a country in which they have emigrated from. Immigrate to; emigrate from. Always.

I will not attempt to revert your reversions, as a quick Google search shows hundreds of mistakes on this site. It seems the vast majority, you included, are misinformed. My effort would be in vain if I had to deal with people like you for every correction I make.

Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImmigrateEmigrate (talkcontribs) 20:53, 8 August 2013‎

Thanks for your message. Did you get a chance to read the articles I posted on your talk page? That should provide some clarification. (If you have some authoritative sources for the rule you're using, I'd be interested to read them. I've really never heard of it until now.)
Immigration is the act of arriving, while emigration is the act of leaving. In general, "immigrate" is analogous to "come" and "emigrate" is analogous to "go," in the sense that one may "come from" or "come to" and "go from" or "go to." The construction used depends on the speaker's perspective. I'm in the United States, so if I'm talking about an American originally from Mongolia I would say they immigrated from Mongolia to the U.S. Someone in Mongolia would say that person emigrated to the U.S. from Mongolia. Both verbs have sufficient valency to allow both prepositional phrases specifying destination and origin.
It also makes more sense in cases like "Most Soviets allowed to leave during this time period were ethnic Jews permitted to emigrate to Israel [...]". The Soviet Union had no influence on immigration to Israel — they couldn't control who entered another country — but they did control emigration from the USSR, including emigration from the USSR to Israel. Ibadibam (talk) 21:19, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
"The Accidents of Style: Good Advice on How Not to Write Badly"
By Charles Harrington Elster
http://books.google.com/books?id=FgKFrucChzMC&lpg=PA175&ots=hGT3Y-weD0&pg=PA175#v=onepage&q&f=false ImmigrateEmigrate (talk) 22:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Interesting. That seems like a good rule of thumb, but if you look at the first link I sent you it presents an exception to the rule: "The Polenskis do not live here any more. They emigrated to Canada in 1943." From the speaker's perspective, the Polenskis are emigrants. In Canada, they would be called immigrants. It works like "here" and "there" or "come" and "go." Ibadibam (talk) 22:57, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
All that to say, it seems like there are multiple valid conventions as to the usage of these words, and it might be worth getting a new Manual of Style guideline in place for consistency's sake. Incidentally, the question was raised some time ago at the Wikipedia reference desk without much consensus. The end suggestion was to simply change "immigrated" or "emigrated" to "moved" when the choice is not clear. Ibadibam (talk) 23:07, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Your first link is editable content though. You wouldn't cite Wikipedia for anything would you? If there is to be any consistency, then the convention used should be based on the article's neutral perspective of the event(s). If it's a quote, then fine, but for everything else, it should be as I've described. ImmigrateEmigrate (talk) 00:35, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
I guess you're right that that first link isn't particularly reliable. It is a good indication that the usage of these verbs is not universal, though, and that a hard and fast rule based on prepositions isn't applicable in all cases. Different readers are going to understand the terms differently, and we want to be sensitive to that. Even Elster, in the book you linked to, uses "emigrate ... to" in the sentence, "An emigrant is a person who emigrates from his native country to another country [...]." What are your impressions of the reference desk thread I linked to? Ibadibam (talk) 00:46, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
You've misinterpreted Elster's quote. He has it, "emigrates from X ... to Y". X = "his native country", Y = "another country". What I've been claiming has been consistent with what he's written.
As far as the discussion you linked, they seem to be squabbling over the point of view. All of that can easily be resolved by using the (hopefully) neutral point of view of the article. In that case it should consistently be emigrate from; immigrate to. ImmigrateEmigrate (talk) 01:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Of course X is the place of origin and Y is the destination. That's what "from" and "to" mean, naturally! The point is that you can see him using the verb "emigrate" with the preposition "to," indicating that "emigrate to" is a perfectly acceptable construction, even for him. You could rearrange the sentence and the meaning wouldn't change. Tell me you don't think the following four phrases aren't identical in meaning:

  • "A person who emigrates from his native country to another country."
  • "A person who emigrates to another country from his native country."
  • "A person who immigrates from his native country to another country."
  • "A person who immigrates to another country from his native country."

I misspoke when I used the term "point of view" as I didn't mean to suggest an article shouldn't be neutral. I really meant the grammatical point of view — the context of the sentence. The same thing that tells you when to use "this" or "that," "here" or "there," and so forth. Ibadibam (talk) 01:32, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

There's not one instance in that book in which "emigrate" is immediately followed by the preposition "to". This is the crux of the issue. It explicitly states that "[e]migrate is followed by the preposition 'from'." And that's exactly how you've quoted it. The "to" comes after the "emigrate from" pair. It's not the associative preposition for emigrate. Conversely, the same applies to an "immigrate to" pair being followed by "from."
The only acceptable sentences you've quoted are the first and fourth. Although the other two may sound fine, they are semantically incorrect. ImmigrateEmigrate (talk) 02:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
What is the meaning of the second and third, if different from the first and fourth? And since when does the order of prepositional phrases alter the meaning of a clause? Ibadibam (talk) 02:43, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
The meaning is irrelevant. I can interpret what you mean because of the context of our discussion, and I can interpret it into something entirely different, but that's not the point. The point is that it is not grammatically correct for "to" to follow "emigrate" or "from" to follow "immigrate".
I don't want to flood you with book citations, so I'm going to flood you with book citations.
The Careful Writer By Theodore M. Bernstein
[1]
[2]
Kaplan SAT Strategies for Super Busy Students 2009 Edition: 10 Simple Steps ... By Kaplan
[3]
Garner's Modern American Usage By Bryan A. Garner
[4]
Robert Hartwell Fiske's Dictionary of Unendurable English: A Compendium of ... By Robert Hartwell Fiske
[5]
Got Grammar Ready-to-Use Lessons and Activities That Make Grammar Fun! By Jack Umstatter
[6]
I'm not discussing this anymore. You're free to believe what you want. Have a good day. ImmigrateEmigrate (talk) 03:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Oh no! Please don't get discouraged. I really don't mean to put you off! I'm finding the discussion quite stimulating. Remember that our goal here isn't to establish some universal linguistic truth, nor is it to win an argument, but to arrive at a mutual understanding and consensus about the most effective way of conveying information to Wikipedia's readers. My hope is that our conversation can be synthesized into a proposal for a new usage guideline that will help other Wikipedia editors make smart choices.
If you feel that the discussion is getting a bit heated, then I understand if you'd like to take a break, but I hope you'll find it in you to continue this productive inquiry into what seems to be a pretty important style point.
Thanks for this excellent survey of style guides. They present a useful array of opinions on the question. Bernstein is clearly in the same camp as Elster: the verbs are each meant to subcategorize for a particular preposition. The Kaplan guide is more moderate but vaguely so, indicating that the subcategorization is not universal, but "usual." Garner is at the other end, saying that the verbs are interchangeable in certain circumstances, when the preposition used is sufficiently precise. Fiske and Umstatter appear to agree with Bernstein, though they don't explicitly state whether the subcategorization is universal or case-specific.
I still don't understand the basis for your point about Elster's example. I'm unaware of a constraint on the order of prepositional phrases in the English language. In Elster's sentence, both prepositional phrases are adjuncts of the verb, each fulfilling a complementary semantic role: one is the origin, the other the destination. From a syntactic and semantic perspective, both phrases have equivalent weight.
When you wrote, "I can interpret what you mean because of the context of our discussion, and I can interpret it into something entirely different," what would be the "entirely different" interpretation?
Associative prepositions are things like "in" in the sentence "I believe in Santa Claus." The presence or absence of the preposition alters the meaning of the verb. I see no indication that "emigrate" and "immigrate" are prepositional verbs. Indeed, they can be used with no preposition at all, as in, "There were few jobs available, so the family decided to emigrate."
I'm inclined to see the rules advanced by Elster, Bernstein, Fiske and Umstatter as general guidelines, rather than universally applied rules. That is to say, if one is unsure which verb to use, chances are good that, if one is using the preposition "to," then the focus is on the act of arrival, thus "immigrate" is more likely to be correct. Conversely, if one is using the preposition "from" then it's likely the sentence is focused on the act of departure and "emigrate" is likely to be correct. This is a simpler rule to understand than explaining the full semantics of the verbs, and thus more concise in a style guide that's meant to be a quick reference. In the same vein, "I before E, except after C" is still taught in schools because it's correct most of the time, despite there being numerous exceptions.
This interpretation seems to fit better with the historical usage of the terms, which doesn't appear to follow the rule just so. To interpret the rule at face value is artificially prescriptive, and has little basis in the English language as it actually exists. Ibadibam (talk) 20:02, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

"Be nice"[edit]

Just a comment, I believe my comments were far more civil and useful than anything he's ever said. Either way, I'm not assuming good faith for someone who says "I don't care about Wikipedia's silly policy" and is deliberately petulant. Believe me, I've tried to AGF but the guy is a child, whether or not he's an IP, and should not be taken lightly. Note taken, either way. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 22:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Sounds really unpleasant! I had to revert one of his edits myself. Some people just think they know everything and can't accept that Wikipedia is as much as social exercise as it is an encyclopedia, if not more. Hope the future is brighter smile Ibadibam (talk) 00:02, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you![edit]

Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg Thank you for the diplomatically put reminder. 7&6=thirteen () 15:44, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:Food[edit]

It would be appreciated if you joined in the conversation occurring at WT:Food regarding the layout and presentation of the project's main page. Northamerica1000(talk) 03:20, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Egyptian Turks[edit]

this article has information about Egyptian Turks history and demographics but Turks in Egypt has a no formation about history nor demographics and this sentence (Turks in Egypt) talked about the Egyptian Turks as ethnic group in Egyptian society so I refused to merge my article with (Turks in Egypt) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Turkmen oglu (talkcontribs) 23:57, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

It's far, far better to improve the existing article than create a new one about the same subject. Please leave the pages as they are, with templates in place, and participate in the discussion at Turks in Egypt#Proposed merge with Egyptian Turks. Ibadibam (talk) 18:07, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Performance[edit]

I am well aware of the express scope of WP:OC#PERF. HOwever, the principle needs to be applied also byu analogy to other situations. Two that are currently coming up regularly on WP:CFD are:

  • Places located on named long-distance paths
  • Chemical compounds that occur in particular species, some being extremely ubiquitous.

These category types raise exactly the same problems as the classic application of PERF. I will thereofre continue to cite it beyond its express scope. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:14, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikiproject Food and Drink Newsletter - October 2013[edit]

|- | style="border: 1px gray solid; position: relative; vertical-align: top; padding: .5em; width: 55%; " |

FA evaluation.svg

Food and drink articles by quality and importance

Article statistics

|}

NPOV and sandwiches[edit]

Actually a lot of the UK sandwiches are almost by inclusion NPOV: baked bean sanwiches (neither notable nor edible), crisp sandwich (forsooth) &c. Its understandable I'm a London-born European of UK descent (I'll go a long way to deny being British) and know that the country has a deeply dysfunctional attitude towards food. We used to eat anything, provided it was disgusting in some way, & have now swung to the opposite extreme. I.e we'll eat anything provided its garnished with the right adjectives. Still have not got the idea.TheLongTone (talk) 05:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you![edit]

Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg To relax with after adding citation templates to Fiasco (role-playing game) Neonchameleon (talk) 11:54, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Ibadibam. You have new messages at CraneInHand's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Posted some suggestions for edits on "Sherd" in the sherd talk section.[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Ibadibam. You have new messages at CraneInHand's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I posted some suggestions in the "sherd" talk section. Can't figure out if there is a way to have this message direct you there rather than to my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.135.211.246 (talk) 17:43, 26 February 2014‎

A Dobos torte for you![edit]

Dobos cake (Gerbeaud Confectionery Budapest Hungary).jpg 7&6=thirteen () has given you a Dobos Torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.


To give a Dobos Torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen () 13:29, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Move discussion[edit]

See Talk:Livery Company#Requested move to Livery company. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 23:38, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks. I wasn't 100% sure it was noncontroversial which is why I went through TPM. Thanks for the sanity check. Ibadibam (talk) 23:51, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of places with "Silicon" names, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russian Silicon Valley (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) 08:52, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Link was intentional, but may not be necessary. Ibadibam (talk) 17:43, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Al fresco[edit]

See WP:NOTDIC. If you're unsure of why someone has done something, or disagree, best approach is to leave them a note rather than following behind reverting. If after reading WP:NOTDIC you still feel the topic has merit as an article, then we can open this up for wider discussion at WP:AfD. SilkTork ✔Tea time 15:22, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

See WP:BRD. I respect your frustration—it's annoying to have contributions reverted, especially a kneejerk revert like the one I just made, but I'd appreciate a good-faith effort to build consensus for this change, since it is roughly equivalent to deletion. Ibadibam (talk) 15:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Seattle[edit]

  • Thanks for the information. I didn't know about the newsblog exception. Question though, should that be reworded slightly, since the information is from last year? Onel5969 (talk) 00:39, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
    • That sounds prudent. The IP who made the initial change was a bit heavy handed. Ibadibam (talk) 01:21, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Email[edit]

Hi. Is there any reason you have inactive WP:EMAIL? I wanted to send you some information that I don't feel confident disclosing in public. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:45, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

No reason. Enabled now. Ibadibam (talk) 03:34, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Manwich[edit]

Hi, you reverted Manwich to a broken version. I agree the ", Inc" is unnecessary, but my main reason for editing was to delete the ".". Buster79 (talk) 20:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

You're right. I missed the period. Probably the best thing to do would have been to just delete the period. Less heavy-handed that way. I've gone ahead and done so. Ibadibam (talk) 20:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Ouch! Thanks, and apologies. Buster79 (talk) 19:54, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Re minor edit. Trackless/trolleybus[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Ibadibam. You have new messages at Anmccaff's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Anmccaff (talk) 01:37, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

About semiotics[edit]

Hi Ibadibam. Thanks for asking about "Semiotics of X". I have been seeing a series of semiotics-related articles, placing the template {{Semiotics-stub}} where applicable, and now there is a Category:Semiotics stubs as well. The articles without the sorting key seem to look easier to find on the category - just try and take a look. And, if my edition was inappropriate, please excuse me and feel free to revert it, if it's better that way out. Regards, --Fadesga (talk) 01:35, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Water Is Wide (song) 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • a sixteenth-century song.<ref>{{Gutenberg|no=1054|name=The Water Is Wide (song)|bullet=none}}</ref>}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Eden Foods[edit]

list of breads[edit]

I've asked for semi-protection at WP:RPP. You might wish to comment. Dougweller (talk) 09:32, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Union Jack and flag codes[edit]

Template:Lang-x[edit]

Thank you for fixing my mistake on Template:Lang-x. I do not want to mess things up!!

Latest revision as of 18:58, 12 August 2014 (edit) (undo) (thanked)
Ibadibam (talk | contribs)
(Reverted good faith edits by Thnidu (talk): This page is transcluded for multiple languages. (TW))

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thnidu (talkcontribs) 18:28, 13 August 2014

Face-smile.svg Ibadibam (talk) 18:44, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clatsop, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nehalem. 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) 09:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cacık, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mint. 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) 09:04, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Hot Chicken sandwich[edit]

Merge-arrows.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, Hot Chicken sandwich, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Jeremy (blah blahI did it!) 19:54, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Mister Saturday Night[edit]

Hey There, I wrote an article about Mister Saturday Night a famous party and record label in NYC. Why would it be deleted? Are there changes I can make? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjryan44 (talkcontribs) 15:39, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Tjryan44! You can read the rationale and contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mister Saturday Night. The basis for the nomination is that the article doesn't cite sources that are considered reliable under Wikipedia standards. I searched the web for more substantial coverage, but couldn't find any, so I couldn't determine that the topic meets Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. If you look at the discussion, however, you'll see that another editor, Northamerica1000, had better luck than I did finding sources, and linked to a few. The best thing to do now is to incorporate these sources into the article using citations, and demonstrating that this subject meets at least one of the notability criteria outlined in the WP:MUSBIO or WP:EVENTCRIT guidelines. Ibadibam (talk) 19:22, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

My apologies for misattribution in the "trolleybus" article[edit]

...and my thanks for correcting it. Sorry. I started to copy one thing, moved on to another, and seem to have dropped someting where it didn't belong. ANMcC — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anmccaff (talkcontribs) 19:30, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, splitting comments is always tricky. I usually just add mine below the whole, long comment so as to avoid confusion on my part or that of the reader. Ibadibam (talk) 19:37, 6 January 2015 (UTC)