User talk:Fowler&fowler: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
→Mail: ty |
||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
==Mail== |
==Mail== |
||
{{You've got mail}} [[User:Code16|Code16]] ([[User talk:Code16|talk]]) 00:45, 2 February 2019 (UTC) |
{{You've got mail}} [[User:Code16|Code16]] ([[User talk:Code16|talk]]) 00:45, 2 February 2019 (UTC) |
||
:Thanks for taking time out of your understandably hectic schedule. I've tagged them. [[User:Code16|Code16]] ([[User talk:Code16|talk]]) 14:01, 3 February 2019 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 14:01, 3 February 2019
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Thanks for the thumbs up to me
Thanks for the impressive resume on the ANI, though I think none of it was relevant to that dispute. :) I was impulsive to roll back. I need to be more careful. Thanks, once again. I don't think this is the last we shall see of HighPeaks. AshLin (talk) 16:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
- @AshLin:You are most welcome. I don't entirely agree that it is not relevant on Wikipedia, though in an ideal world it shouldn't be. Sometimes we are dealing with editors who don't grant the works of others the good faith or the intellectual respect that they a priori deserve. To quote WP rules to them is unproductive as they pay only lip service to the rules. However, to occasionally remind them that their interlocutors are real people, living lives whose track records belie interpretations of bad faith, is an effective option. This is all I did; there was no hype. There was no need for hype. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:22, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks anyway, :) AshLin (talk) 14:54, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
FYI
[1]. Pings don't work in edit summaries apparently. --regentspark (comment) 14:34, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
- And if you don't know this fact about pinging, what are the chances I would? :) I noticed Bidaris, or some such. None of the sources mention this clan name though. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:45, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
IVC - citation errors
These edits of yours caused multiple cite errors. Please double check, would have fixed it myself, but I am almost certain you would be starting unproductive insult(s), trolling and edit warring with me:
However, recent geophysical research suggests that unlike the Sarasvati, whose descriptions in the Rig Veda are those of a snow-fed river, the Ghaggar-Hakra was a system of monsoon-fed rivers, which dried up around the time that the civilisation diminished approximately 4,000 years ago.[1][a][2]
(Highpeaks35 (talk) 17:53, 31 January 2019 (UTC))
- @Highpeaks35: Please post this at the article talk page. That way all article-related improvement posts will be in one place. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:37, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Code16 (talk) 00:45, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking time out of your understandably hectic schedule. I've tagged them. Code16 (talk) 14:01, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
- ^ a b Giosan, L.; et al. (2012). "Fluvial landscapes of the Harappan Civilization". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 109 (26): E1688–E1694. doi:10.1073/pnas.1112743109. PMC 3387054. PMID 22645375.
{{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in:|first=(help) - ^ Maemoku, Hideaki; Shitaoka, Yorinao; Nagatomo, Tsuneto; Yagi, Hiroshi (2013), "Geomorphological Constraints on the Ghaggar River Regime During the Mature Harappan Period", in Giosan, Liviu; Fuller, Dorian Q.; Nicoll, Kathleen; Flad, Rowan K.; Clift, Peter D. (eds.), Climates, Landscapes, and Civilizations, American Geophysical Union Monograph Series 198, John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 978-1-118-70443-1
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).