User talk:Sumanuil

Hello, I'm not sure if this is the best way to respond to a reversion you carried out on an edit I did on the page Seaton Burn Wagonway - apologies if this isn't the correct way. I received a message from you saying that I vandalized the page. I didn't do that nor was that my intention. I simply found that the page had a few spelling mistakes and I fixed them. There was a mixture of spellings of the word wagon, about half were waggon, and half wagon, and I thought the page would be better with all spellings correct - although if you checked the comment I made on my edit, I did point out that the original spelling was possibly waggon, but this is now considered a British archaic spelling. I also fixed another small nomenclature mistake. I grew up in that area in North East England, so I was simply trying to make the page better. I appreciate your efforts to stop vandalism on Wikipedia, but in this case I think you have misinterpreted my intention. Thanks. 81.101.90.171 (talk) 17:34, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

You "fixed" file names and a reference URL. I don't know what else to call that. - Sumanuil (talk) 22:08, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. I really wasn't sure if this was the correct way to engage. I really didn't change any file names or URLs. If you'd care to check, I simply aligned some spelling inconsistencies within the article itself (changed waggon to wagon) and changed the description of a picture from "the Seaton Burn" to "Seaton Burn". I definitely didn't vandalise the article and didn't try to. I appreciate you looking after the integrity of Wikipedia articles, but in this case, I was simply trying to make an existing article look better. Any chance you could have another look? Thanks. 81.101.90.171 (talk) 22:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

You changed every instance of "waggon" to "wagon". One of those was a URL, three were file names. If you don't believe me, check. - Sumanuil (talk) 22:27, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you mean. My mistake. Just clumsiness, not an attempt at vandalism though, I hope you agree. 81.101.90.171 (talk) 22:40, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Question re removal of image from 2007 New Zealand police raids

Hi Sumanuil, I see you removed File:Antiterrorprotestauck.jpg from the page 2007 New Zealand police raids. I see the notice on your talk page explains that you remove images where the file does not exist or has been deleted. The file still exists as far as I can see, so I was just wondering why the removal? (I appreciate I'm probably missing something, am still learning about Wikipedia & image usage is a tricky area!) Thank you, Chocmilk03 (talk) 04:26, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Antiterrorprotestauck.jpg still exists, Antiterrorraidprotest.jpg was deleted as a copyright violation. The latter was what was on the page. - Sumanuil (talk) 05:32, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

D'oh. My bad. Thank you for clarifying! Chocmilk03 (talk) 21:17, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Speciesbox vs Automatic taxobox

Hi. When describing a taxon other than a species you need to use {{Automatic taxobox}}. When describing a species, as you are with Carthaginian tree frog you need to use {{Speciesbox}}. Don't know what I was doing with the {{Short description}} but that's fixed too now. Please see Which taxobox should I use? for details. Cheers. YorkshireExpat (talk) 20:10, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

I've been using {{Automatic taxobox}} because my sandbox seems to demand it. Any idea why that would be? - Sumanuil (talk) 20:13, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Not sure. Using {{Automatic taxobox}} makes it appear here however, which I've been trying to rid of stuff that shouldn't be there. The ones remaining are special cases for the most part. YorkshireExpat (talk) 20:18, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, using display_parent=2 gets the box to display the subfamily, which I reckon is a resonable thing to do as the stub template calls it out. Sorry for the rubbish summary on the last edit, I pressed return too soon. YorkshireExpat (talk) 20:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Should I abandon this project ?

Should I abandon editing and developing Neural Darwinism? Jtwsaddress42 (talk) 21:20, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

As I've said, just don't turn it into an essay, journal article, or PR piece. - Sumanuil (talk) 22:13, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your input and insights, I've reverted it to the state I originally found it in. I am a bit disappointed because I expected editorial collaboration, not dictation of tone and manner without correspondence and discussion first. Anyway, I now realize this isn't the proper arena for what I was hoping to convey about Edelman's work surrounding the concept of Neural Darwinism, so I'll take that effort elsewhere.

Please take a little time to correct the factual errors in the original article and fill in the details in a tone that you feel is appropriate and will do justice to the topic. I wish you the best.

Jtwsaddress42 (talk) 20:36, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Sir, In regards to your comment on Neural Darwinism - "I asked you not to turn this into an essay.". You did. So, earlier, I removed all of my contributions per your protestations. They were restored by others. Perhaps if you edited and contributed, instead of deleting, things would go smoother. Or maybe, perhaps, a more collegial tone might do wonders... If you were more respectful, you might get more respect.

If you go to the talk page for Neural Darwinism, you will see my response to the restoration. I was happy to retract my contributions and let you do it your way.

As I said on the talk page, I'm willing to clean it up and eliminate the majority of the peripheral material, or even the entirety of my contributions... But I don't want to waste my time if you are going to delete entire sections. My time is more valuable than that. I'd rather work on it, on my own terms and in my own space, which I will continue to do. As I said before, correct the factual errors of the original article and write it in a tone and manner that you deem appropriate - and, that does the topic justice. Jtwsaddress42 (talk) 21:28, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Again, go ahead and fix it. Just be more careful. - Sumanuil (talk) 22:38, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

History of Kentucky

Hi, I saw your message on my about page about my edit summary. After reviewing my summary, I realized that I was being too broad when I described my changes. I apologize for my mistake and thank you very much for pointing this out. :) Jcuber17 (talk) 22:06, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Internet Protocol television page has been vandalised

You were the last person to edit the page before user Atmaniabdelilah turned it into a commercial for his/her website. Please revert the page to your last 17th July 2021 edition (immediately prior to vandalism by user Atmaniabdelilah). 186.223.219.199 (talk) 00:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)