User talk:SunCountryGuy01/Archives/3
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I'm not sure what you did here. Something wrong with the template I guess. Also, this script might help if you think you are going to be reviewing AFC/R requests often. Cheers, —GƒoleyFour— 00:57, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
File mover
Hi, to show a need for file mover you should have asked for quite a few files to be renamed to show that you know what should be renamed! The example file was a poorly named one that you could request a rename on! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:44, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Paparazzi eye in the dark tags
Hello again friend, several hype links were introduced, and words edited in the text to make it more neutral on the paparazzi eye in the dark page but 2 tags still remain. I am unsure if I am supposed to remove them myself or you or another moderator? Need help thanksDustyairs (talk) 15:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Please explain?
Please explain this edit, in which you reverted my revert. The IP posted that message on the article talk page sighting it as "This is a record of the exchange between user John Smith and myself" when if fact it was exchange that took place on between me and the IP on my talk and has no business being on the article talk page Pol430 talk to me 22:52, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, Pol430. I saw this too and agree that you should not have removed the IP's posts to the talk page of the article. --Diannaa (Talk) 23:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 23:06, 10 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
{{helpme}}
I need to know why my page was deleted Best Place at the Historic Pabst Brewery. How can I make it more encyclopedic? Can I get the original template back?? It took me HOURS to write it and seconds to have it deleted. I didn't even get a chance to discuss how to change it first. I need it for class. Please!!!!!!
(Butterflyangelblue (talk) 00:14, 11 March 2011 (UTC)) butterflyangelblue
I will userfy it for you in a minute, but I will have to then edit it to remove the final paragraph (which you can still read in the history) as that's far too promotional to stay. Ronhjones (Talk) 00:44, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- Now at User:Gabriele449/Best Place at the Historic Pabst Brewery Ronhjones (Talk) 00:53, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Request for assistance in Best Place page
Would it be allowed without the tours information? What else can be changed?
(Butterflyangelblue (talk) 00:16, 11 March 2011 (UTC)) butterflyangelblue
Possibly merger of WikiProject Espionage and WikiProject Intelligence
Dear Gabriele449,
I have been in discussion with the WikiProject Council over concerns of WikiProject Espionage, WikiProject Intelligence and WikiProject Military Intelligence. I have suggested that WikiProject Military Intelligence will stay with the WikiProject Military History since Military History as a WikiProject is well established by itself.
My proposal is WikiProject Espionage and WikiProject Intelligence to be merged as one WikiProject, keeping the WikiProject Espionage name and userbox. I've suggested that WikiProject Intelligence could possibly help fill holes with WikiProject Espionage. Unfortunately, the founder of WikiProject Espionage has not been actively contributing since May 5, 2010. Therefore I've suggested if this "merger" does go ahead that there should be some "structure" of members such as "coordinators" then the more users who join can become normal users or anything else built from scratch. You can see my discussion with the WikiProject Council by going to the talkpage on their main page. Feedback would be appreciated there to keep all of the discussion at one place. Once again feedback would be appreciated. Adamdaley (talk) 00:22, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- I appreciate your feedback at WikiProject Council. Finally someone else has joined the conversation! Yes, I understand what you're trying to say because it seems like more articles have been WikiProjected as WikiProject Intelligence rather than WikiProject Espionage. I only have have concern, the userboxes for WikiProject Intelligence the first one has WikiProject Intelligence' would you be able to take out the ' by any chance? It might be just a typing error, still it doesn't look good for the WikiProject. You have to remember all the WikiProject Espionage articles will have to be re-tagged to WikiProject Intelligence. So far I haven't heard anything from WikiProject Military History. You are the first one out of the two WikiProjects Espionage and Intelligence to come forward and provide a compromise to my suggestion, while I appreciate people contributing to my suggestion. Hope to see how thing's go and I would certainly join WikiProject Intelligence if WikiProject Espionage is closed by the WikiProject Council. Adamdaley (talk) 23:52, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Bad-faith reversions
Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
Regarding your repeated reversions, without explanation or edit summary, to the article Black Prophet, please stop. Weakopedia (talk) 07:32, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- The above templated paragraph does not seem very appropriate, but I also did notice this revert. Was this an error? If so, please slow down a bit and check more carefully. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:35, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Henry Hazlitt
I undid your reversion of the Henry Hazlitt article. I have checked: no material has been lost, including referenced sources, amid the many edits recently done there. In fact, the article has greatly improved, and corrections of fact have been made, as the history and checking the sources shows.Pelagius2 (talk) 03:58, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| For keeping my user page clear of vandalism. Thomas888b (Say Hi) 11:01, 11 March 2011 (UTC) |
Please take care when posting warnings on novice user talk pages. Posting an external links warning for an edit that contained no external links will only confuse and discourage novice editors. Rklawton (talk) 18:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Please also take care with your edit summaries. The edit you reverted appeared to contain personal opinion and not spam. Yes, the edit should have been removed pending reliable, verifiable sources, but no, it wasn't spam. Rklawton (talk) 18:57, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Futaba, Fukushima,
you reverted the anon change hutaba to futaba, but there is a town called futaba near the damaged reactor. I dont know. Sandpiper (talk) 19:03, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- hardly the point. it seems likely the change is correct whereas what is there now is incorrect. I do not know, but this needs to be investigated which is correct rather than a simple revert. was the original insert cited?Sandpiper (talk) 19:16, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- I corrected this, the IP got it right. You (Gabriele449) should check before you revert edits. Google is right there ->... --Pontificalibus (talk) 19:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Re: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Chzz 2
You really should have talked to Chzz before doing this. Unless something within the last week or so, when I last brought this up, he's going to flat out reject the offer. As much as I'd like to see him with the mop myself, he is of the belief that the risk outweighs the reward. Mind you if he does decide to run, I can think of a half dozen people that will line up to co-nominate him, myself included. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:46, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) And me, but after this recent convo on my talk page, I don't think he feels up to running for Adminship yet despite my assurances he is a good candidate. Pol430 talk to me 12:54, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Re:
User:Gfoley4/Talkback —GFOLEY FOUR— 17:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks
for both your support and good wishes. Got to start learning things now. Might keep me out of mischief. Peridon (talk) 20:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that you reverted an edit by an IP editor seconds after I had accepted it. The person that died on his Segway had bought the company, but was not the inventor. Consequently I suspect that the removal of this entry is correct. If you concur, I am happy to restore the version with the entry removed. Many thanks, GILO ACCIDENT & EMERGENCY 21:40, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. GILO ACCIDENT & EMERGENCY 21:49, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Generally, a statement of the actual license is necessary, along with the fair use claim. I'd be happy to undelete it for you, if you desire, or you can just upload it again. Cheers. lifebaka++ 03:56, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
- Done. I've removed the old licensing information and replaced it with {{subst:nld}}. This gives you seven days to replace the template with an appropriate license. Cheers. lifebaka++ 21:52, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:09, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 March 2011
- News and notes: Foundation reports editor trends, technology plans and communication changes; brief news
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: New case on AE sanction handling; AUSC candidates; proposed decision in Kehrli 2 and Monty Hall problem
- Technology report: Left-aligned edit links and bugfixes abound; brief news
Account Creator
Hello Gabriele449, you can request tool access [1] and then I believe that you have to follow the instructions after you make the request. Just so you know, tool access is usually denied to anyone with less than 6 months experience. Alpha Quadrant talk 01:47, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
account
I don't see the point in having an account actually. Except for creating pages (and editing some pages instead of pestering people with {{editprotected}}) there's not much it's needed for. 184.144.160.156 (talk) 03:09, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Administrator?
Thanks for the vote of confidence. Honestly? I considered it once, but it's not really my thing; I'm not good at bureaucratic stuff like that, really. I much prefer doing what I'm doing as an editor; I think I have more freedom that way. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:09, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
OTRS
Hi, the guidelines about OTRS are at Wikipedia:Volunteer Response Team and the process for volunteering is described at m:OTRS/volunteering which is also the place to apply once you have read the guidelines and followed the suggestions; please also take time to carefully read m:OTRS/introduction which includes a link to the demonstration system that you can play with. There is no particular pre-requisite experience required, however any applicant is judged on the basis of suitability to be trusted with confidential correspondence and the evidence of emotional maturity to deal well with what might be difficult complaints or questions. Cheers Fæ (talk) 06:34, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
SEED Infotech
This was not clearly promotional. The user has clearly made an effort at improving the article's tone, and simply slapping a default message they've already seen back on is both discouraging and completely unhelpful for telling them what they need to fix. Please give more detailed, personalized rationales when reviewing articles that are borderline and don't clearly fail the criteria. Thanks. sonia♫ 06:35, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Earwig Musc Company
Hi Gabriele449, you declined my review request for my newly built Earwig Music Company article with the only and simple reason that this article had been "salted" - even though the guy who salted it gave me the advice to ask for a review ... ... would you please be so kind as to look here [[2]] and advice about further procedure --- Thanks in advance !!! StefanWirz (talk) 12:52, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- At the top of this page it says "assume good faith". I suggest that this edit was a failure to assume good faith. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:41, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Renaming an account
In response to your message at my talk page: The only users who can rename accounts are those with the bureaucrat flag (I would be happy to do it for you, but I am only an admin and a request for the bureaucrat flag is probably not in my future). Wikipedia:Changing username explains a few technical details about it. As long as the new username you want isn't currently taken, you can request the change at Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple; to my knowledge they tend not to deny requests unless they can think of a good reason, so you shouldn't have a problem.
If the username is already taken, you can usurp it if it has only a few edits; requests of this sort go to Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations instead. Let me know if there's anything else you need. Cheers. lifebaka++ 23:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
My account creator request
I recently requested tools for account creator. I want account creator to help other users and make an effort to improve the Wikipedia by performing the correct tasks needed.--Gabriele449 01:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Disruptive Editing
Please stop your disruptive editing. You have already been warned for making multiple reversions without edit summary or indeed without discussion at any point. Unfortunately, as your contributions in general show, you do not seem to understand Wikipedia policy enough to make only uncontroversial reversions, as many of your reversions are inappropriate.
This also is reflected in the new articles that you have "created", which are all of rather poor quality in comparison to other encyclopedia articles. If you are incapable, due to unfamiliarity with the English language or any other reason, of creating a suitable Wikipedia article that follows all of its principles then you are in position to be reverting the work of others without stating your reasons.
Some of your reversions were appropriate, but the failure to provide any edit summary or initiate discussion with other good-faith editors was not, and combined with the inappropriate reversions I would suggest that you are doing more harm than good to Wikipedia.
Please consider reading the Wikipedia policies before you revert the work of others. Your editing simply isn't of the quality that would give anyone confidence in your ability to revert appropriately. Weakopedia (talk) 09:07, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:30, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
gAN nomination of Timeline of the Fukushima nuclear accidents
I note that you removed the nomination from WP:GAN. This page is updated by a bot so the nomination has been re-inserted. If you wish to withdraw the nominastion, just delete the nomination template from the article talk page. This would be a good idea as the nomination would be quick-failed as it is a rapidly unfolding current event. You may wish to read WP:Reviewing good articles#About the process. Cheers. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC)