User talk:The Banner

I try to the best of my knowledge and belief to contribute to the small red block of the image

Archives (Index)

2024/January 2024/February 2024/March 2024/April 2024/May 2024/June 2024/July 2024/August

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for your edits to disambiguate the incoming links to Kick-Ass (comics)! Steel1943 (talk) 22:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. The Banner talk 23:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

• Never mind, but you can keep the Barnstar, even though the links weren't disambiguated. Steel1943 (talk) 00:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

• The link fix had the same effect. The created redirect went to a disambig page while it was clear that the intended article was something else. So I have solved the multiple links to a disambiguation page. The Banner talk 09:17, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

• Though that may be the case that possibly all currently-existing links to Kick-Ass (comics) may refer to the subject in Kick-Ass (comic book), consensus has been formed on other similar discussions where if a "character" and a "comic book" article exist, then the title with the disambiguator "comics" should redirect to the disambiguation page, which was the point of the move discussion I started on Talk:Kick-Ass (comic book). A related redirect, Wolverine (comics), had a more complicated case, given that the title was previously the title of Wolverine (character), but the links to the redirect were split up referring to its move destination, Wolverine (comic book), Logan (comics), or some other random "Wolverine" comic book that doesn't yet have a Wikipedia article. Steel1943 (talk) 17:42, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Wall's (ice cream) may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 "[]"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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Peter Principle

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Peter Principle. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

St Kilda Football Club article

Hello, Thanks for your DAB link edits to the article. I just, however, restored this article to an earlier version due to multiple IP sockpuppet edits by an indefinitely blocked editor (his editing style is very obvious). In the process I had to undo your edits. I apologise for any inconvenience. Cheers, Afterwriting (talk) 01:49, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll manually restore your edits where appropriate when I have some time ~ unless you know how to do it quickly some other way. Afterwriting (talk) 01:51, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

I gracefully forgive you. The Banner talk 08:28, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 October 2014

• Op-ed: Ships—sexist or sexy?

• In the media: College player falsely linked to sports scandal by Wikipedia; the Nobel Prizes

• Arbitration report: One case closed and two opened

• Featured content: Bells ring out at the Temple of the Dragon at Peace

• Technology report: Attempting to parse wikitext

• Traffic report: Now introducing ... mobile data

• WikiProject report: Signpost reaches the Midwest

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:48, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Brian J. Costello

Your and others' comments on the entry for Louisiana, American South and Mississippi Valley historian, author, archivist and humanitarian Brian J. Costello are quite severe and unfounded. I have worked with him on several projects related to historical and cultural preservation and promotion and, indeed, he is knowledge is mind-bogling and he is, indeed, a living person and not a "hoax." His innate modesty and humility is, doubtless, the reason why he and his work has not previously appeared in Wikipedia. I took it upon myself that justice be done to him and countless others of his caliber so that their works and accomplishments do go noticed in the world of Wikipedia. As an author myself, I intended to contribute entries related to American, European and Near Eastern historical and cultural interest. If the reception for this, my initial entry, is indicative of what I will have to contend with, then Wikipedia is not for me, nor my colleagues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Okelousa (talk • contribs) 13:43, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but there are certain guidelines for the notability of people. Important with that is that you deliver reliable, prior published, third party sources (WP:RS). And articles shoul;d be neutral, something what was not the case. Your own motivation makes clear that you do not have enough distance between you and the subject. The Banner talk 19:05, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Jadoon

My apologies for my revert on Jadoon, it looked as if it was an accidental of some sort as it removed a LOT of information which included citation to seemingly valid sources. I'm still getting used to this, I'll be sure to look out next time. --Kethrus///Talk To Me 13:19, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

No problem. The Banner talk 13:20, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:JPY

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:JPY. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

'Fake merger'

What fake merger? Here's the article before the redirect and here's the discussion that led to the merger. 93.109.171.237 (talk) 21:19, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Where is the official merge-proposal? I see none. But I did see a repeated placement of earlier removed text. The Banner talk 21:24, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

A merge proposal/discussion isn't required before performing a merge. I didn't look at the history of this article to see if any of the things I added were in it before. I thought some of the history in Çamlıköy, though unsourced, seemed plausible, so I copied it over. Also, if we're to ignore that you unjustly accused me of performing a 'fake merger', if your beef's with the merger, why did you revert my first edit? 93.109.171.237 (talk) 21:43, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Why did you not follow procedure and do a proper merge proposal? Usually, a merger is subject to an open discussion, nor a hidden one. The Banner talk 21:46, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

The discussion on User:Dr.K.'s talk page was for getting rid of the duplicates. There was no discussion for the merge, neither open nor 'hidden'. Stop trying to grasp at straws; you were obviously in the wrong for accusing me of performing a fake merge. 93.109.171.237 (talk) 21:58, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

So it was not even an merge proposal, as you stated just before.

But to play it nicely: add only sourced and neutral content (conform WP:RS and WP:NPOV) Everything else will be removed. End of discussion. The Banner talk 22:04, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I thought about the idea of merger before redirecting but the duplicate articles were recently created and were not contributed to, or largely contributed to, by the creator alone. Therefore I redirected without any merge proposals. The IP editor duly informed me on my talk and after I performed the redirects s/he rescued some unsourced history with proper attribution in their edit summary. There was no intent on their part of a fake merger. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 22:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

To be more exact, Çamlıköy was first created as a redirect page to Kalo Horio/Çamlıköy by the creator of the latter, Passportguy. Subsequently, it was converted to a dab page, which in September 2014 was unilaterally converted by an IP into a duplicate article by adding the unsourced history. IP editor 93.109.171.237 expressed his reservations to me about the history, although in the end s/he added it to the main article. I don't mind if the unsourced history stays out of the main article, especially if sources cannot be found to support it. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 22:45, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

But what mr. IP was doing, was restoring earlier removed, unsourced information. And after seeing some remarkable moves before (Kalo Chorio moved between three locations and two nation states), I just take the tough stance: no sources, no content. The Banner talk 22:48, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I did not contest your removing the text I merged from Çamlıköy. I just thought you were a little abrasive in saying it was a fake merge and in the way that you responded to me here. A tough stance doesn't mean you gotta make unsubstantiated assertions and then refuse to retract them. 93.109.171.237 (talk) 22:52, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

It was not a merge, it was restoring info. (See 27 September). That Bir1akce started fooling around after that, does not matter. The Banner talk 23:00, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Right, but I didn't know that. I think you can see how I could've taken that to mean that you were questioning my sincerity. Anyway, yeah, let's move on. 93.109.171.237 (talk) 23:09, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

After Banner explained it, I saw that the unsourced history was removed on 27 September by him/her from the main article. In any case, neither the IP editor 93.109.171.237 nor I knew about this, and now that I examined the edit, I fully agree with Banner's removal of it. I think IP editor 93.109.171.237 added it hoping that someone could source it or improve it. I thought so too in the beginning, but I don't think it is salvageable, after giving it a second look. As a closing remark, editor 93.109.171.237 has helped fix a big mess regarding this topic and in general, s/he has contributed greatly to the cleanup of Cypriot onomatology. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:37, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Ok. At least on the subject of restoring the unsourced history everyone is on the same page. In this topic area, that's real progress. As far as the fake merge allegation, I don't think it was, but given this is Banner's talkpage, I don't want to put pressure on him/her and I think that my part here is done. Thank you both. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:06, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

On further investigation it is apparent that 27.32.217.108 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is the same as Bir1akce. I don't think this is an IP sock of the user but it may be the user editing while logged out. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 01:22, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

At as a closing accord in this play, I had to revert some templates to get everything back to the right place. I think I have to send in my fellow countrymen to conquer the whole island and restore peace. And learn them drink Guinness. The Banner talk 09:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

The bits I restored yesterday seem to have been (mostly) copied from Lefka. There's some references there, but the prose is horrible. 93.109.171.237 (talk) 10:14, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I would revert that article to the version of BGWhite on 1 October 2014. We might have to clean up all articles edited by IP:27/Bir1akce. The Banner talk 10:18, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

In fact I just did the revert. looking up the detail of the merge proposal for the harbour, I found some close paraphrasing but with the "Greek" names replaced by "Turkish" names. The Banner talk 10:29, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. That port is closest to Karavostasi, not Lefka, though. 93.109.171.237 (talk) 10:48, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Template:Nellore district

I obey your statement, but there are n number of villages, it is better to add an extra template named as villages in xxx district (in Andhra Pradesh), but still its ok for now, if it is excess we'll try. I want to let you know that I've readded content like Mandals because in your undid revision it was lost at this edit. Anyways thanks for info. I need some help regarding templates if you can see at Template:Cities and towns in Prakasam district and some pages in Category:Andhra Pradesh cities and towns by district templates. Any suggestions, thanks in advance.--Vin09 (talk) 03:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I found those templates because you had linked "see also". But the list of villages is not overly long while linking to a category is frowned upon. You can add villages that do not have an article (yet) to a template. The Banner talk 09:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

But I read that non-existing articles should not be added, it was clearly written in all those templates by its user who created. Fine, I saw that User talk:The Banner is being seen in Category:Andhra Pradesh cities and towns by district templates this page.--Vin09 (talk) 16:38, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

A minor typo of your hand added my talk page to that category, now fixed. You typed [[Category:Andhra Pradesh cities and towns by district templates]], what added my talk page to the category. But by typing [[:Category:Andhra Pradesh cities and towns by district templates]] with an extra colon before category, it becomes a link. You should use this trick also when you want to link to a template, instead of adding it. The Banner talk 18:43, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

It is better to avoid red links, but it is not illegal. Common practise is to only add red links of articles that will be written in the near future (say: a month) or as part of an ongoing project. The Banner talk 19:27, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 October 2014

• Featured content: Admiral on deck: a modern Ada Lovelace

• Op-ed: Hong Kong's Umbrella Revolution—a wiki-protest

• In the media: The story of Wikipedia; Wikipedia reanimated and republished; New UK government social media rules; death of Italian Wikipedia administrator

• Traffic report: Death, War, Pestilence... Movies and TV

• WikiProject report: De-orphanning articles—a huge task but with a huge team of volunteers to help

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:22, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Tourism International

The discussion was closed as "keep", further explanatory given by myself was that there is no consensus to delete. It's a standard phrase that I generally use as further explanation. Given that there are no delete !votes in that discussion, it would be quite inappropriate to close it as "no consensus" as there are in fact users who !voted keep. Please do not refactor my comments or change any discussions that I've closed. If you disagree with the closure statement, you're welcome to message me or take it to deletion review. Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 20:09, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

The way you wrote it, is rather ambiguous. I read The result was keep. After being relisted twice there is no consensus to delete. as "keep as no consensus". If that is wrong, change the wording. The Banner talk 22:38, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Timeline of the Napoleonic era

ShadowNinja1080 (talk · contribs · logs)

With regards to this edit the edit. As we are dealing with a new user, and this is their first large edit to Wikipedia, please ping the user and explain your reasons on talk:Timeline of the Napoleonic era for the revert. -- PBS (talk) 12:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done The Banner talk 15:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Michelin stars

Hi, about your reversal edit in {{Michelin stars}} (edit talk history links # /subpages /doc /doc edit /sbox /sbox diff /test) (you changed svg back into gif). It surprised me because you mentioned a performance issue in List of Michelin starred restaurants in the Netherlands. An interesting article that is!

I assume you know, in general an svg file is preferred over a gif file (examples). Also, we are not supposed "don't worry about performance, unless performance is an issue" (I can give more links if you like so, but I think you are familiar with this topic).

To check the performance issue you mentioned (long loading times of the article) I did some research. I created {{Michelin stars/sandbox}} with svg files as I proposed. I then previewed the article six times: three times in current state ({{Michelin stars}}, gif's), and three times with the sandbox ({{Michelin stars/sandbox}}, svg's). I replaced all templates with the sandbox. Note that the template is called 2587 times.

From Parser profiling data:

gif1

CPU time usage 19.537 seconds

gif2

CPU time usage 14.617 seconds

gif 3

CPU time usage 16.725 seconds

svg1 (2587 replacements)

CPU time usage 17.013 seconds

svg 2

CPU time usage 19.785 seconds

svg 3

CPU time usage 19.245 seconds

Parser profiling data, six tests (from preview)

;gif1 Parser profiling data: CPU time usage 19.537 seconds Real time usage 22.049 seconds Preprocessor visited node count 45898/1000000 Preprocessor generated node count 63722/1500000 Post-expand include size 1059813/2048000 bytes Template argument size 106447/2048000 bytes Highest expansion depth 9/40 Expensive parser function count 3/500 Lua time usage 0.300/10.000 seconds Lua memory usage 2.93 MB/50 MB ;gif2 Parser profiling data: CPU time usage 14.617 seconds Real time usage 16.625 seconds Preprocessor visited node count 45898/1000000 Preprocessor generated node count 63722/1500000 Post-expand include size 1059813/2048000 bytes Template argument size 106447/2048000 bytes Highest expansion depth 9/40 Expensive parser function count 3/500 Lua time usage 0.300/10.000 seconds Lua memory usage 2.92 MB/50 MB ;gif 3 Parser profiling data: CPU time usage 16.725 seconds Real time usage 18.832 seconds Preprocessor visited node count 45898/1000000 Preprocessor generated node count 63722/1500000 Post-expand include size 1059813/2048000 bytes Template argument size 106447/2048000 bytes Highest expansion depth 9/40 Expensive parser function count 3/500 Lua time usage 0.352/10.000 seconds Lua memory usage 2.92 MB/50 MB ;svg1 (2587 replacements) Parser profiling data: CPU time usage 17.013 seconds Real time usage 21.735 seconds Preprocessor visited node count 45898/1000000 Preprocessor generated node count 63638/1500000 Post-expand include size 1183989/2048000 bytes Template argument size 147839/2048000 bytes Highest expansion depth 9/40 Expensive parser function count 3/500 Lua time usage 0.356/10.000 seconds Lua memory usage 2.93 MB/50 MB ;svg 2 Parser profiling data: CPU time usage 19.785 seconds Real time usage 24.796 seconds Preprocessor visited node count 45898/1000000 Preprocessor generated node count 63638/1500000 Post-expand include size 1183989/2048000 bytes Template argument size 147839/2048000 bytes Highest expansion depth 9/40 Expensive parser function count 3/500 Lua time usage 0.297/10.000 seconds Lua memory usage 2.93 MB/50 MB ;svg 3 Parser profiling data: CPU time usage 19.245 seconds Real time usage 24.612 seconds Preprocessor visited node count 45898/1000000 Preprocessor generated node count 63638/1500000 Post-expand include size 1183989/2048000 bytes Template argument size 147839/2048000 bytes Highest expansion depth 9/40 Expensive parser function count 3/500 Lua time usage 0.341/10.000 seconds Lua memory usage 2.92 MB/50 MB

From this, I conclude that the page loads very slow indeed. That is, only once, right after an edit; and in every preview; after that every loading or page opening for reading is fast. However, I see no big difference between gif and svg. So the slow loading is not caused by the gif/svg difference. (If I miss something so far, please tell me).

That says that we can switch to svg files without causing this problem. And since svg is preferred, we should do so. (Of course, the page can use a good check for other issues).

Another problem from your edit is that from this one article, the template would be restricted for all articles. That means that the article causes the problem and spreads it, not the template. And so that must be solved in or through that article.

I propose to use the svg files in the template, and --independently-- look for improvements in the article. What do you think? -DePiep (talk) 09:52, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I use that article quite often, as base for the articles about restaurants. I noticed a severe deterioration in loading times down here. That is why I am very reluctant to the change. But, that is not a 100% no.

Another thing is style of the etoile. Yours is very thin and has a rather bleak appearance. Perhaps you can change that a little (giving it more "body").

Then the question of how to use it. I think the easiest option will be to develop a second template. The present one, used in the "normal" articles can be altered to use the SVG. The new one, used in the list/overview articles like List of Michelin starred restaurants in the Netherlands, List of Michelin starred restaurants in Ireland and the list of Great-Britain that is still on my wish list, can use the GIF.

Perhaps not the best solution technically, but I think the most workable. (By the way, I have not a clue why SVG is preferred, although I have heard about this preference before.) The Banner talk 11:03, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Good plan to make that second template for gifs, isolates the psossible issue. I'll start that, and report here. btw, I do not think that speeds up the page (as the tests indicate), but if you think it useful I'm fine with that.

svg, in general, is better scalable (finer lines & color-borders in every size).

'More body' = thicker lines in the scg you mean? will look into that, later on. -DePiep (talk) 11:28, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Indeed, a bit thicker lines. Good for people with less than perfect eyesight. The Banner talk 11:33, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I see, now both in one page: template:Michelin stars/testcases. Will take care after the name split. -DePiep (talk) 12:31, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

• I have created {{Michelin stars (gif)}} and made pages List of Michelin starred restaurants in the Netherlands and List of Michelin starred restaurants in the Netherlands to use that (no other pages by me); Ireland only has 195 times that template). The others can use {{Michelin stars}}, the default template. If you see issues, tell me. -DePiep (talk) 14:10, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
• Talk better continue at Template talk:Michelin stars. -DePiep (talk) 14:17, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello The Banner:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – JudeccaXIII (talk) 19:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Thanks! Much appreciated. The Banner talk 20:24, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Tq

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Tq. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

'Unhelpful edits'

Why are these edits 'unhelpful'? [1] 31.153.72.171 (talk) 13:40, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

It's been some time, so I'll speak my mind. This is the second time I've had to come to your talk page 'cause you left a careless summary. Why won't you at least come to me and explain why -- exactly -- my changes are unhelpful? Also, I think you've let Twinkle get to you. If reverting multiple edits wasn't made so easy, you'd have a better think if reverting is the right choice to make. (I'm the same person as above; I've had to restart my router, so my IP changed.) 213.7.147.34 (talk) 23:29, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

You better create a normal account instead of using IPs. Secondly, it has nothing to do with Twinkle, just with strange edits. That I don't recognise you as neing the same, forgive me. With different ISP you make that a tough job. The Banner talk 03:31, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Okay, what was strange? 213.7.147.34 (talk) 09:56, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Unexplained removal of a comment from a discussion

Can you explain why you removed a comment of mine from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Carbon0901? Except under quite special circumstances, removing another editor's comment from a discussion page is unacceptable, and if you do think there are valid reasons for making an exception in this case then you need to explain those reasons. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:49, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

No, I can not explain that. I do not even remember having done that. I fear, I misclicked something. My apology for that. The Banner talk 10:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

OK. Things like that happen to all of us sometimes. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:02, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 October 2014

• Featured content: Go West, young man

• In the media: Wikipedia a trusted source on Ebola; Wikipedia study labeled government waste; football biography goes viral

• Maps tagathon: Find 10,000 digitised maps this weekend

• Traffic report: Ebola, Ultron, and Creepy Articles

• Recent research: Informed consent and privacy; newsmaking on Wikipedia; Wikipedia and organizational theories

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

2013–14 Plymouth Argyle F.C. season

	2013–14 Plymouth Argyle F.C. season
	you sent me a message re 2013–14 Plymouth Argyle F.C. season I've been editing and contributing too, I believe I have fixed all the six issues. Didn't know if I was supposed to reply or exactly how to reply so hope this is an ok method. Ps I'm new to editing so am finding my feet. Thanks for your imput Adam ADZC7 (talk) 23:00, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

a) You could have replied in normal text, without borders or picture.

b) My sincere compliments about solving those links to disambiguation pages. I knew that they were hidden in templates, what makes them more difficult to solve. And then you told me that you are new around here, so a little despair crept up. But you did it! Again my compliments! The Banner talk 23:40, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes as soon as I found the mistakes it was easily rectified as football related stuff is my passion it wasn't hard to change them. Cheers again and just out of intresti used Dablinks to find the faults. Is it better to use another repair of system and does the one you mentioned need to be downloaded to my desktop. Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ADZC7 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

I liked the results and that is what counts. There are several tools available tot solve dab-links, so you canb pick the one that suits you best. Good luck with it! The Banner talk 00:18, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Bart Baker

Hello, The Banner. You have new messages at Wbakeriii's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wbakeriii (talk) 21:54, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Doc Mentillo

You are capable of doing good work, making positive contributions to wikipedia. You referred Doc Mentillo to me for assistance. I looked on Google (what i keep suggesting you do). I'm 12 pages deep and haven't found a single Reliable Source. The guy is a self sourced media phenomenon. In other words, this one appears to be a good NOM. You also nominated Omovie Kingsley Emumejakpo. It was another piece of unsourced and unverifiable junk. Good NOM. You will note I did not challenge you on it. Keep doing good things, you won't see me challenge them. Don't do bad things (you do know what those are), I won't have any excuse to challenge your work. Trackinfo (talk) 09:11, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

I am definitely not the axe-wielding maniac that you seemed to see in me. I believe that AfD is a way to improve Wikipedia. That you only seldom agree on that point, is just a minor fact of life. Different people, different opinions, different approaches. The Banner talk 09:48, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (November 2014)

Hello Wikimedians!

The TWL OWL says sign up today :)

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• DeGruyter: 1000 new accounts for English and German-language research. Sign up on one of two language Wikipedias:
  • English signup
  • Deutsch signup
• Fold3: 100 new accounts for American history and military archives
• Scotland's People: 100 new accounts for Scottish genealogy database
• British Newspaper Archive: expanded by 100+ accounts for British newspapers
• Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
• Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
• JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Why did you delete all my contributions on 1848 and 1849?

Hi, I observed that you deleted all my contributions on these years pages. Please specify why? It is not fair that somebody works hours or days to contribute to the Wikipedia, and his contributions to be deleted without any explanation. I did not put citations to all my contributions, because on that page there were no citations to the other contributions too. But if you need citations, I can provide you. But you removed my contributions that had citations also. So please write to me and say what was the problem. If I made something wrong, say it to me and I will fix it. But do not just throw to the toilet my 6 hours work. My contributions were made because there are too few contributions on Hungary, and I wanted to help. sylvain1975 — Preceding undated comment added 07:15, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

The low quality of work you produced, see you own talkpage for an earlier request to up the quality. Check the links you produce before saving, do not expect that others will fix the links to disambiguation pages you produce. I already did a lot but I have enough now. The Banner talk 10:48, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 November 2014

• In the media: Predicting the flu, MH17 conspiracy theories

• Traffic report: Sweet dreams on Halloween

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:02, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Blues Fiddle

Could you add useful information to this page instead of approaching it by mass-deletion? If you look at the edit history, you'll see that new information is being added daily. If you could help instead of hinder this process, it would be appreciated, not only by me, but by the people looking for this information. Could you specifically stop deleting the Mississippi Sheiks Discography section? I can't see any reason why you would remove everything referencing these artists. They made the greatest contribution, quantitatively to the canon of recorded violin blues.

They have their own article. Info about the band should be added there. The Banner talk 11:13, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Blues Fiddle

Blues fiddling is such an obscure topic, and particular blues fiddlers even more so, that it's exceedingly difficult to find information online about it. The people who have researched these topics are not academics per se, and neither are their websites academic journals. They are still authorities on the subject nonetheless. Most blues fiddlers have no pages attached, so the lists in this article actually represent the most concise gathering of information available, possibly, anywhere. You are the only person deleting them. If you would stop doing, the result will probably be that more readers and editors will contribute associated links to artists without pages, will organize the material in a way that time constraints have limited thus far, and will bring the page closer to perfection. It's an ongoing process, that at this point you would be of more help by aiding in sourcing, or rewriting, or making associated links.

November 7, 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 442macsat (talk • contribs) 16:00, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Still you are the one to provide reliable sources. You have seen my suggestion, perhaps you better act on them. The Banner talk 21:01, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 213.7.147.34 (talk) 12:50, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Fine, I have requested a topic ban and interaction ban for you. The Banner talk 12:57, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for improving those templates about China squads.

大梅伦敦登顶 (talk) 02:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Software

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Software. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Logentries Revert

Hello!

I saw you added the templates back to the Logentries page. I had previously gone through and rewrote promotional content from a neutral point of view and removed inappropriate external links. Wondering what other suggestions you have for cleaning it up. Thanks!

--mrJARichard   ✎ discuss 15:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC)