User talk:KahnJohn27

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

Your submission at AfC King's Bounty: Dark Side was accepted[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
King's Bounty: Dark Side, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Coin945 (talk) 15:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to King's Bounty: The Legend 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:
  • |publisher = [[1C Company]]<br/>[[Atari]]<small>([[North America|NA]]<small/><br/>[[Nobilis Games]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:45, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Sikkimese elections[edit]

Hello KahnJohn27. Can I ask you to stop removing the redlinks from the template. As I noted in the edit summary (I don't know if you saw it?), WP:REDNOT makes it clear that redlinks are perfectly acceptable in templates like this (in fact it specifically refers to election templates):

Red links generally are not included in either See also sections or in navigational boxes, nor linked to through templates such as {{Main}} or {{Further}}, since these navigation aids are intended to help readers find existing articles. An exception is red links in navboxes where the red-linked articles are part of a series or a whole set, e.g. a navbox listing successive elections, referenda, presidents, sports league seasons, etc.

If you still want to remove them, I suggest starting an RFC on the template talk page. Cheers, Number 57 08:56, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@User:Number 57 Then maybe we can just remove the brackets and keep the years. The red links do not serve any purpose at all. KahnJohn27 (talk) 04:38, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
They encourage article creation!
As for the talk page archiving, I don't think you messed mine up - you added some tabs to some lines, but I don't think it's a problem. Re your question, it was instructing you to add {{Archives|auto=yes|search=yes}} to the top of your talk page (which I've done in this edit). The WikiProject tags bit was only relevant if you were doing it to an article talk page. Do you want to turn on automatic archiving too? Number 57 10:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
@User:Number 57 Thanks but I don't think I need automatic archiving. Also thanks for guiding me on archiving. However there is a problem, whenever I type anything into the searchbox of the archivebox, no search result from my archives. One more thing those red links have been lying around for quite some time and nobody has bothered to create an article about them nor I think they ever will. It's no use keeping them. KahnJohn27 (talk) 04:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Hmmm, I've no idea why the search isn't working. It may be best to post a query at Template talk:Archives. Re the elections, someone will create them. There is a feed of new election and referendum-related articles, from which I see a reasonably steady stream of Indian State Assembly articles being created. Someone will create them one day! Number 57 10:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

A cupcake for you![edit]

Choco-Nut Bake with Meringue Top cropped.jpg Thought you might need one. HelenOnline 10:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014[edit]

Information icon Please do not attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Robin Williams. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. I've removed part of your comment. Talk:Robin Williams is solely for discussing how to improve Robin Williams. If you have an issue with that editor, bring it up on their talk page.MusikAnimal talk 14:24, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

ANI subsection[edit]

Sorry, it was me who put your comment in a subsection. I didn't want it to get lost as had my request for help, which became a conversation about something else altogether by editors who aren't even admins. HelenOnline 13:17, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

@User:HelenOnline Doesn't matter. It's okay. KahnJohn27 (talk) 07:01, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't think Richard is referring to you. HelenOnline 13:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wasteland 2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wasteland. 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) 09:13, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Guten Tag[edit]

  • I tried to summarize the ongoing count at Robin Williams, please check my numbers. I have three categories named since people expressed three possible outcomes. Some people want 1) all children named, some want 2) just notable children and some want 3) NO names and NO numbers. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I just noticed above with User:HelenOnline that you thought I was attacking you ... Am I reading that correctly? It is funny that your opponent, User:Winklvi, thought I was attacking THEM and they wrote me on my talk page that I was referring to them. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:34, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Now I see the original discussion. No, I wasn't talking about the RFC which I contributed to by agreeing with you. I was referring to the original controversy which required you to do all that work at the RFC just to satisfy one disgruntled person. Sorry for the confusion, you aren't supposed to name people in discussions, just the ideas that are brought up. That leads to confusion some times. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 20:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 2 persons not one. But I didn't start the Rfc to satisfy them or anyone actually. I only started it in order to take the opinion of as many people as possible on this issue. Anyway sorry for the misunderstanding. Happy editing! KahnJohn27 (talk) 20:43, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Since you have an interest in the notability issue at Robin Williams, here is another one Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 September 18 for Susan Lindauer. Decide one way or the other, but it involves notability guidelines and people are diametrically opposed on the issue. More eyes are better than fewer. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 22:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC) ‎

Disambiguation link notification for September 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wasteland 2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Bard's Tale. 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) 09:20, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Mythology[edit]

Definition by Oxford English dictionary:-

It may also stand for things that are pre-historical. Bladesmulti (talk) 06:23, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

@Bladesmulti I didn't say it is not real. I said it is mythological which means can't be confirmed whether it is true. Also I don't think the table is needed. If you want to keep it okay but I think you should properly edit it first. It contains many mistakes. KahnJohn27 (talk) 06:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
I used to think, just like that before, and someone else had provided me this same definition. Bladesmulti (talk) 06:39, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
@Bladesmulti It's (the defintion) not entirely true but it is somewhat true. Are all myhts true? Simply no. Some are and some are not. Then again some are half made up and half true. KahnJohn27 (talk) 06:49, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Information icon Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Resident Evil: Survivor 2 Code: Veronica a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Resident Evil Survivor 2 Code: Veronica. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you.