Jump to content

User talk:Seagull123: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Tag: MassMessage delivery
Line 108: Line 108:
Recently, I mentioned on the talk page for Charles VIII that there was a major error, saying that Charles had a regent. He didn't. The same mistake exists on the Anne of France page. This is a serious error. One of the people who regularly edits for Wikipedia, Whaleyland, who actually is a history professor, didn't necessarily agree with me, but gave a well-informed explanation. To this day, the article remains as it was.
Recently, I mentioned on the talk page for Charles VIII that there was a major error, saying that Charles had a regent. He didn't. The same mistake exists on the Anne of France page. This is a serious error. One of the people who regularly edits for Wikipedia, Whaleyland, who actually is a history professor, didn't necessarily agree with me, but gave a well-informed explanation. To this day, the article remains as it was.
My point is that I don't understand the purpose of the talk pages if they don't result in important changes being made in the actual article. You don't have to agree with my opinion, since I'm not an expert on French history, but I think the actual articles should be edited by people who have some minimal knowledge about the subject and don't simply rely on Google. If you could do something about this, it would be helpful.
My point is that I don't understand the purpose of the talk pages if they don't result in important changes being made in the actual article. You don't have to agree with my opinion, since I'm not an expert on French history, but I think the actual articles should be edited by people who have some minimal knowledge about the subject and don't simply rely on Google. If you could do something about this, it would be helpful.

Thanks for your response. Navigating all the different pages is confusing, but I'll try one of the links you posted. Thanks again.
Thank you,
Thank you,
[[Special:Contributions/131.95.1.238|131.95.1.238]] ([[User talk:131.95.1.238|talk]]) 20:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)Dana Gower
[[Special:Contributions/131.95.1.238|131.95.1.238]] ([[User talk:131.95.1.238|talk]]) 20:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)Dana Gower

Revision as of 17:58, 4 November 2016

Il disprezzo

I've linked this article to Wikipedias in five other languages and added some referenced critiques. The synopsis is my own work. OK? Clifford Mill (talk) 16:28, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, thank you Clifford Mill!  Seagull123  Φ  19:40, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of RainPearl/sandbox/Team Shanghai Alice (new version)

A tag has been placed on RainPearl/sandbox/Team Shanghai Alice (new version) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 21:44, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of RainPearl/sandbox/Reimu Hakurei

A tag has been placed on RainPearl/sandbox/Reimu Hakurei requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 21:44, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 July 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nigel Farage, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MEP (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Letters of last resort, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chief of the Defence Staff (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for feedback on ShopStyle addition

I just wanted to thank you for your feedback on my ShopStyle page creation. I really, really appreciate that you took the time to respond to my edit notes. I'm an on and off editor, so every time I venture into something new, I'm a bit insecure about it all. Without people like you, I'd be a lot more lost. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TineWiki (talk • contribs) 09:37, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@TineWiki: Smiley You're welcome! Your comments made me smile . I'm glad I managed to help you, and if you need any more help or anything, I'd be glad to do so!  Seagull123  Φ  16:40, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 July 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chill Bill

Why did you delete Chill Bill??? JustDoItFettyg (talk) 00:20, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@JustDoItFettyg: I tagged Chill Bill for deletion under criterion A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, with Anthony Bradbury later deleting it. Criterion A9 says that "any article about a musical recording or list of musical recordings where none of the contributing recording artists has an article and that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant" may be deleted. The recording artists of Chill Bill didn't have articles themselves, and the Chill Bill article didn't indicate why it was important. That's the reason I applied the deletion template. If you want to write the article again, maybe write a draft first, or use the Article Wizard. Hopefully this answered your question.  Seagull123  Φ  18:26, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

REQUEST TO REVIEW MY PAGE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSAMA_CHANDIO — Preceding unsigned comment added by TV WEB NETWORK (talk • contribs) 13:03, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, @TV WEB NETWORK, the article OSAMA CHANDIO doesn't, at the moment, explain how the subject of the article is significant or important. All articles on Wikipedia, especially those about living people, must be about notable subjects, and be verifiable with reliable sources. A notable person is someone who "has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject", and I don't believe that Osama Chandio has received significant coverage. I do think that the Your First Article page is a good read, and will explain clearly about writing good articles on Wikipedia. And then, if you wish to write another article, I do think that you should use the Article Wizard as this will allow you to receive feedback on the new article before it is published. Hopefully you'll continue editing and contributing to Wikipedia! But if you need any more help, feel free to ask me another question. Thanks.  Seagull123  Φ  13:26, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

please will you review my page [Mehran TV News]]TV WEB NETWORK (talk) 13:33, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As a thank you for helping Bharath9856 with their questions. :-) Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:20, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Zackmann08: Thank you for that cookie! It's no problem helping people ;-)  Seagull123  Φ  17:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 August 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:32, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 August 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:41, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RiskAoA review

Hi Seagull- would you mind reviewing RiskAoA it has been selected as a candidate for deletion, and you seem to have a good finger in the wind for the issues brought up. Thank you. 74.96.151.44 (talk) 03:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 06 September 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 September 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 October 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

talk pages

Hello, Seagull123! I'm the person who started the regency discussion on the Charles VIII page. I use a university computer, so I just saw your message and thought I'd ask you about the talk pages. About four years ago, on the Sherlock Holmes page, I took issue on the talk page with a person who was insisting that Holmes' age was different from the one given by Doyle. There was a great deal of discussion on the talk page; people agreed with me and then the entire subject was deleted from the talk page. It remains wrong in the article to this day. Recently, I mentioned on the talk page for Charles VIII that there was a major error, saying that Charles had a regent. He didn't. The same mistake exists on the Anne of France page. This is a serious error. One of the people who regularly edits for Wikipedia, Whaleyland, who actually is a history professor, didn't necessarily agree with me, but gave a well-informed explanation. To this day, the article remains as it was. My point is that I don't understand the purpose of the talk pages if they don't result in important changes being made in the actual article. You don't have to agree with my opinion, since I'm not an expert on French history, but I think the actual articles should be edited by people who have some minimal knowledge about the subject and don't simply rely on Google. If you could do something about this, it would be helpful.

Thanks for your response. Navigating all the different pages is confusing, but I'll try one of the links you posted. Thanks again. Thank you, 131.95.1.238 (talk) 20:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)Dana Gower[reply]

Hi @131.95.1.238, let me start by saying I'm not an expert on French history either, and I haven't read the article in question (I've had a quick look at it though). The point of talk pages is "to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page" (WP:TPG), so make sure you have asked editors on the talk page first, before taking further action to change the article elsewhere. You also mention another editor with whom you had discussion, I would suggest you bring it up with them at their talk page, as I am not involved in this discussion. If you feel that there is still no correction or change taking place, have a look at the accuracy dispute guideline, which aims to give information on what to do when an article is factually incorrect. If the first few sections on that page haven't resolved this problem, then have a look at the dispute resolution page, which "describes what to do when you have a dispute with another editor". Finally, to your point that "articles should be edited by people who have some minimal knowledge about the subject", note that "anyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles, except in limited cases where editing is restricted to prevent disruption or vandalism" (WP:ABOUT). This is one of the core principles, or "five pillars", of Wikipedia. But if this is something you wish to make Wikipedia policy, visit the village pump, where you can discuss ideas for Wikipedia. This is all I can do for you, hopefully it helped, but if it didn't, click here to ask another question, or just leave another message on this page. Thank you,  Seagull123  Φ  10:12, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Seagull123&oldid=747841254"