User talk:Yopie

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

| Archive page

Thanks Yopie[edit]

Hi, I am Guilatshalit, and I wanna say Thank you Yopie for your comments, I hope to improve my articles and keep on editing wikipedia, thanks for your advice , now I will preview my articles before I edit , thank you so much.

czech prime ministers[edit]

I have another source that podivinsky is member of kdu-csl note that candidate number 8 is clearly marked as independent.

Bailiwick of Utrecht[edit]

I just undid the edit you made to this article, which was to remove the definition of this source. The effect of your change was to leave the citations pointing to nothing, like this:[1] I agree that the cited source is not great, but it is the source, and the information it provides seems plausible. One way to deal with dubious sources (all sources are dubious, but some more than others) is to tag the source definition:

Aymatth2 (talk) 23:00, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hrabischitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Osek. 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) 09:32, 12 October 2014 (UTC)


Hi Yopie, if you want I would send you some informations regarding this topic. Could you enable transmission via email? Thank you :) SR-7v (talk) 17:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC) —"Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender" SR-7v (talk) 12:51, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Dear SR-7v,

thank you for your offer about informations. But I know about The Armorial Register Limited all necessary - names, etc. I know, that this article is blantant advertising. But I´m not against them personally, so I dont need some secret informations. If you want help, please vote in mentioned vote.--Yopie (talk) 17:43, 1 November 2014 (UTC)


Hi, are you sure you checked the talk page? If you check the main discussion in Talk:2013 Egyptian coup d'état you will found all discussions: it a coup and there is a consensus, so what are you talking about sir? , you revert my cited content , it's a vandalism and you prevent me from edit, (please read WP:HA) Ibrahim.ID »» 18:19, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

If it a "revolution", wikipedia will change it but nothing changed since July 2013, there are many discussions and requests to change it, but all it are rejected, a lot of editors Support "coup", isn't it enough? the majority of the sources recognize it a "coup", please check this source from The Guardian itself: [1] and this one: [2] , check also CNN - BBC - The Telegraph , also If you check others wikipedias, you will find all it use a "coup", no one call it a "revolution". 'second: In any military coup, they call it a "revolution" to give him the legitimacy, so the controlled Egyptian Media and El-sisi supporters and allies call it, but the fact is different, the NPOV is not mean you refuse any disputed content, 90% of information are controversially, so when you refuse write this information , it will be clearly biased! also there is no consensus against write this information --Ibrahim.ID »» 09:18, 2 November 2014 (UTC)