Hi. When you recently edited World Archery Championships, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Las Vegas (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.
Restoring Military Bases in Washington
You're registered, so do you want to do it? Ill do it otherwise. Ive had issues with the appratchiks here before so Im loath to register. If an admin will delete a category just for shits and grins without any sort of justification something's wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 23:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Could you give William Leveson/recycle a day or so, until we've fully debugged/understood/explained things to T13? (See: User talk:RHaworth#William Leveson/recycle, User talk:Technical_13#Declined_speedy, ). —Sladen (talk) 09:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Waqf, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Imam Muhammad (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.
- This is an interesting problem. The mistake I made is linking to Imam Muhammad, when it should have been linked to Muhammad. The problem is what to do about the honorific? Also, what to do about the statement that follows which looks like an interpretation of a statement in the Koran which is attributed to Muhammad? Fixing this is tricky.War (talk) 15:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- I'll take another look. Perhaps you were looking at the wrong place. I was looking here: Comparison of audio formats. My main concern is that the AMBE codec is represented. Which, look again, isn't.War (talk) 15:40, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
I wish to apologize for harassing you. I've thought about it, and decided that my behavior is / was both unjustified, obnoxious, and uncalled for. I'm sure you think this is just more bullshit, but I really do want to walk away from this nonsense that *indeed* I created. You have my word - for what it is worth - that I will not engage in this type of bad behavior in the future. There is no excuse, but none the less, I feel I owe you an apology - which you are under no obligation to accept and I would expect you not to. I will not vandalize your Talk or Personal page again, I will not "stalk" your editing. Warped War (talk) 05:11, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- ok...I'm happy to devote my time here to learning new things and helping to make Wikipedia the worlds most awesome and accurate body of knowledge. I'm very happy to see you editing articles. I've learned that unsourced opinions (mine in some cases), are not adequate and I will strive to always bring sourced facts to the table. Happy editing! War (talk) 05:49, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Comparison of programming languages (mapping) 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(Click show ⇨)
I would like your opinion on a subject that is near to my heart at Wikipedia, and that is the issue of “trivia” and the difference between “trivia” and “In Public Culture” and similar section titles. It's my opinion that for the most part, “In Public Culture” sections are a way around a general “dislike” for “trivia” sections, but that the content is the same, that the two titles are synonyms. Wikipedia “discourages” so-called “trivia” but does not disallow it. My point is that “In Public Culture” is almost always “trivia”, and we should strive for honesty. If it's “Trivia”, call it “Trivia”. I feel that it is disingenuous to call trivia “In Public Culture” simply because it is considered “low class”. I say, call it what it is or get rid of it. Your opinion? By the way, again, I'm sorry for being a “douche” to you in the past, I'm working on not being “passive aggressive” ... Am I barking up the wrong tree here? =//= Johnny Squeaky 03:36, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
- Personally I think trivia is a waste of brain cells and a waste of time. However, there is some trivia that is the "common knowledge" and then perhaps worth mentioning. I probably wouldn't mention it but people (fans) of the topic might consider the information to be very important. I'm having a tough time thinking of an example so I'll make one up. Let's say you invent Sham Wow II and become rich and famous. You get your own Wiki page and your face on the cover of all the magazines you see in the grocery store isle. Next, pretend you own an orange cat named "Shammy". That fact would be trivia. I don't think it belongs on your wiki page. On the other hand, say one night Shammy decides to sleep on your face (as cats will do) and you suffocated to death...then Shammy may be of some historical and cultural significance. I could conceive of a "In Public Culture" section of the article where a "Shammy" is referred to in popular culture as a "particularly embarrassing death" or when people started giving people they hate orange cats as passive-aggressive way of saying, "choke on this". If you give me an article that illustrates what you are talking about I'll look at and give you a better answer. I hope that was helpful.War (talk) 06:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Amish Mafia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brethren (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.