User talk:ProprioMe OW

May 2015

Hello, I'm DemocraticLuntz. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Bubble gum because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. DemocraticLuntz (talk) 22:26, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi DemocraticLuntz! Thanks for the advices... i'm still in the process of learning, anyway i think my Bubble gum revert was sensed. On line 21 the phrase "In modern chewing gum, if natural rubber made from majestic rubber elephants chicle is used" seems a clear attempt to vandalize the page. Don't you agree? ProprioMe OW (talk) 23:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

June 4

Hello - This is the Communications Manager of the OSA, Ben Rycroft. I see you have undone a number of my edits on the Ontario Soccer page. The information in this article is nearly completely outdated. If you would like to update the information, please feel free. Otherwise, please do not keep reverting my edits

Hi there, have just replied on your talk page about the issue. ProprioMe OW (talk) 21:07, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

ProprioMe OW, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!

The

Adventure

Hi ProprioMe OW!! You're invited: learn how to edit Wikipedia in under an hour. I hope to see you there! Ocaasi Play The Wikipedia Adventure This message was delivered by HostBot (talk) 17:21, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi ProprioMe OW! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 17:26, Thursday, May 21, 2015 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Reverting Vandalism

Hey, I recently noticed you reverting vandalism at Salvador Dalí - thanks for that, by the way.

I thought I should let you know that the method you used to revert the vandalism (pressing "undo" for each individual edit) was needlessly complex. If you just go to the page's history, select the timestamp of the last clean edit, press edit and then submit the page (with a summary such as "reverting vandalism"), you can immediately go back to that version of the page without having to make so many undos.

Additionally, you may be interested in Twinkle, a Javascript tool which all autoconfirmed editors are allowed to use, which includes tools to quickly revert vandalism on pages and warn users that do so.

Have a good day,
Underscorre (talk) 07:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Underscorre! I already realized the better way to revert a sequence of vandalism was the one you pointed out, but had not yet tried.

The main reason was the fact in that case i'd like to write a phrase like the one placed by bots in the edit summary (reverting X by user Y to version by user Z), the single undo feature automatically adding a description... following the "quick" way i should write a little more, but it's indeed much less complex when reverts are more than two or three.

Will follow your advice and have a look to Twinkle as well.

Thank you again, and have a good day too!

ProprioMe OW (talk) 07:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thanks for reverting and fighting vandalism! I really appreciate it! ~HackedBotato Chat with me ♽ Contribs 14:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Wow, a cookie!! Thank you so much ~HackedBotato! :-D

ProprioMe OW (talk) 15:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for removing vandalism on Carbon cycle

Chamith (talk) 12:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much Chamith! Much appreciated :-D -- ProprioMe OW (talk) 13:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for reverting the vandalism on Ned's Declassified! Isabelle♥ 17:53, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much Isabelle♥!!

Rollback

I have granted the "rollbacker" permission to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. – Gilliam (talk) 14:47, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Gilliam, thank you! I'm already using Twinkle to revert vandalism, but will check out the Rollback permission as well. – ProprioMe OW (talk) 15:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks! Widgetdog (talk) 22:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 17:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Templating vandals and bad edits

Please consider "templating" editors who do bad edits. Here is a list of Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace Please avoid the term "vandalism" if possible and some find the term contentious. Many "bad" edits are tests, wp:content dispute, test, and misunderstandings. If the editor does a fifth no-no, report them to wp:AIV so an admin will consider blocking them. Evidence in the form of wp:diffs should be supplied on an AIV. Edit warring (content disputes) should go on wp:ANI/3RR (a pain). And remember, WP:DTTR! :o) Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:31, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, ProprioMe OW. 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)

February 2017

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Novel: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Gamebuster19901 (Talk║Contributions) 18:26, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Gamebuster19901! Twinkle automatically opens the talk page for that purpose... will try to use warning templates more often. I've always been a little dubious about using warnings, as i think "real" vandals care very little about them. Can see, though, your point for other users, particularly when reverting good faith edits. Thanks again :)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Good job! - TheMagnificentist 00:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Wrong Pictures

Thanks for catching the wrong pictures. Slight problem will be though, that as they are not obviously wrong, they will keep coming back as long as they (and/or their category) are still marked with the template and id on commons. Once that is adjusted (preferably with a title adjustmend) there should be peace. Maybe you have done that already, then sorry for the reminder. Keep up the good work. Agathoclea (talk) 20:37, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

location info on NRHP places

Hey, I noticed your edits adding some information to NRHP places articles, and I thought you accidentally deleted some location info and I restored it. Now I see that these edits by you deleted similar info for another. Hey, don't drop that info! Could you please restore it. It seems obviously useful and it is sourced from the NRIS database, I believe.

I get notices of these because your edits must have added a link to some article i created a long time ago; it is kind of random that I checked the changes though. --doncram 23:33, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi there doncram!

I was a little uncertain about the location tag in the NRHP infobox, as many Alaskan articles were containing the information. The Template:Infobox NRHP clearly states that location should be just the city (or to use the nearest_city tag when not inside a town). I've worked on all Alabama NRHP listings and almost none of the articles contained the address in the location line, which was normally mentioned in the article (when important) or just in the NRHP general listing page. Moreover the address is always present, and therefore reachable, in the NRHP paper. I've uniformed to that "standard" and corrected those articles which were not compliant. Thank you for getting in touch, will double check everything and review NRHP listing guidelines in the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places.

ProprioMe OW (talk) 07:39, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

@Doncram: Just to let you know i've just placed back all addressess, as per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places thread. Thank you again, and sorry for the issue... totally my fault. ProprioMe OW (talk) 21:39, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Wow, thank you for going ahead and opening discussion at wt:NRHP and getting this resolved and getting back to me! I was dragging because I figured perhaps I should in fact open a discussion there and get others to weigh in but not liking that because it would seem negative for you like i was hauling you to some awful review panel. Good eye you have for what is written in guidance at the NRHP infobox instructions. The discussion should lead to that being changed. I agree with another one or two editors there who leave the address info (or add it) in the location field, and often/usually don't mention it in the actual text of the article, considering it to be dry infobox stuff. Thanks, hugely! --doncram 02:29, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Hey, i have noticed your improving coordinates info in NRHP articles in Alaska and perhaps elsewhere. I presume you are using Google satellite view or some other means to get better coordinates. I presume you are updating coordinates both in the list-articles and the individual articles when those exist. To take a tiny bit of credit for yourself, and to help in future cleanup/review of all the coordinates, could you possibly please indicate yourself as a source within the {{coord}} template, in the individual articles? Just add "source:ProprioMeOW" within the template. I think the template requires allows for no space characters within that. Thus, for example, {{coord|45.4545|N|70.7070|W|display=inline,title,source:ProprioMeOW}} (for 45.4545°N 70.7070°W / 45.4545; -70.7070). The current {{NRHP row}} template does not allow any way to indicate a source within the latitude or longitude rows in the list-articles, but if you would do this at least within the individual NRHP articles, that would be a help. In the future, some bot will be able to come by and detect that the coordinates were improved, and may be able to detect that the corresponding list-article info is the same and mark it similarly. And most importantly it will help narrow down which coordinates have not been improved from original NRIS-based (sometimes inaccurate) coordinates. In the future the "ProprioMeOW" might or might not be retained or replaced by something else, like my entries of "Doncram", if it is judged that individual claims for credit (although they are invisible to regular readers) should be coded differently, or if your and my use of Google satellite view, if that is what we both use, should be credited to Google satellite instead (although we add more value, we are comparing the Google satellite view to maps or photos in the NRHP document or other sources, too). It will be easy, anyhow, to find all such entries by a bot or by any user using wp:AWB browser or otherwise, if there is any updating or counting to be done. Thanks for considering this. --doncram 20:55, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

@Doncram: Thank you for the hint (had not read too closely the {{coords}} template)! Yup, i'm correcting pretty every coordinate i come across, using mostly satellite views from Google Maps and Bing Maps (sometimes also Google Earth has been quite helpful with its "historical" image functions), cross referencing with maps (oldmapsonline, noaa charts) and of course with what eventually is in the NRHP form. Will add source to coords, and will try to review my previous edits. Thank you again! ProprioMe OW (talk) 21:11, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Great! If you do, you will be in advance of most NRHP editors. Unfortunately we did not pay attention to this early on; all of the original entries using NRIS should have been marked with that as a source, but now we cannot tell which has been improved vs. not. i only learned about the source option within {{coord}} a few months ago. I just opened new discussion section "footnoting coordinates" at wt:NRHP to come back to the issue. Note that per what I suggest further there, that in the NRHP list-articles, you should add a "coordsource=ProprioMeOW" row following the latitude= and longitude= rows. Please do comment there if you like, and we'll see if there are any refinements suggested. What I am suggesting now is considerably streamlined from the best i could come up with in some previous discussions. --doncram 22:16, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

May 2017

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Pilgrim 100-B N709Y, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 00:40, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

To User:BilCat, that was not a "test edit". See discussion section just above, between me and ProprioMe OW, and also see wt:NRHP#footnoting coordinates. It was new style attribution, but proper, by editor ProprioMe OW. I am concerned that it looks to you like vandalism or a test edit. I am not sure how to proceed right now, in terms of marking it differently somehow or educating editors somehow or what, so that edits like this don't look bad to others. I edited there following BilCat to restore the attribution, though maybe my change did not fully revert their change. --doncram 02:22, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

I'd suggest using an attribution name other than that of the user, assuming the user isn't the source, which would be OR. If another name can't be used, then a detailed edit summary needs to be used, which was not done in the edit I reverted. - BilCat (talk) 02:28, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

@BilCat: Hi there. Sorry for the issue. Will try to put more detailed summaries in the future. For this modification i was working back all the 200+ places i've edited in Alaska (checking if i had bettered coordinates on each one by looking at article's history - i had modified Pilgim coordinates on last May 8), therefore i was quite hurrying and avoided putting an edit summary there. I don't know about the attribution and i'm not looking for credit about my edits, but i checked several source for that position (satellite imageries, images in the NRHP listing, referenced material and articles found around the internet about people who visited that historical plane - and this was one of the "easy" coordinate-finding task, other more obscure places have involved cross-referencing a lot of information from a lot of sources). Please contribute to the wt:NRHP#footnoting coordinates discussion, so that we can find a way to avoid these edits to be considered test edits or, worse, vandalism.
@Doncram: Let me know if i should avoid adding source for the moment and/or if i should revert previous attributions. I'm concerned too... moreover i've added to my watchlist only a little number of the places i've edited (all the NRHP listing pages but few single articles). This issue came out just because BilCat took the effort of warning me in my talk page, other editors could be not so careful ProprioMe OW (talk) 10:06, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, ProprioMe OW. 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)

userpage option

Hey, as you know User:ProprioMe OW is a redlink, which makes it seem like a mistake when someone like me tries to ping you as I just did from wt:NRHP. Redlink usernames also convey that someone may be a brand new editor, attracting concern sometimes. I don't happen to get why you don't want to have a userpage, but that doesn't matter exactly. An option that I have seen used is to put in a redirect to your Talk page. That way there is no real userpage, and yet User:ProprioMe OW would show as a bluelink. Just a thot. Thank you for your continuing good work on adding/improving coordinates in NRHP list-articles; i have noticed your progressing along in Louisiana recently. cheers, --Doncram (talk) 20:00, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Doncram, thanks for the hint! actually i've never created an user page since, well, i wouldn't know exactly what to write in it except for three or four lines. I've just used the redirect trick and my user page now shows finally blue :D I had stopped editing for a while and picked Louisiana to start again, then i've noticed you had already done a lot of work there in past years, found several sourced:Doncram coords and other sourced:NRIS as well! Cheers, ProprioMe OW (talk) 21:26, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for creating Southern University Historic District!Zigzig20s (talk) 18:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Jean Baptiste Thibodaux House) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Jean Baptiste Thibodaux House, ProprioMe OW!

Wikipedia editor Mahveotm just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you!

To reply, leave a comment on Mahveotm's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Mahveotm (talk) 10:16, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, ProprioMe OW. 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)