User talk:Inother
Welcome
[edit]
|
Nomination of Charles, Prince of Wales's visit to the west of Ireland for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charles, Prince of Wales's visit to the west of Ireland is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles, Prince of Wales's visit to the west of Ireland until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
June 2015
[edit]
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Kieran Wallace a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. JMHamo (talk) 13:43, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- You have some nerve. I did no such thing. See here. I am not going to repeat it all. --Inother (talk) 15:52, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- It certainly appears you cut and paste, based on the article history. Could you clarify what you did? --BDD (talk) 16:18, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- I moved it so as to preserve the article history. We cannot be looking at the same article history if this is the conclusion you have come to. --Inother (talk) 16:49, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- What about this edit? It's now at Kieran Wallac since Anthony Appleyard performed a history merge, which generally is only necessary to repair cut-and-paste moves. Anthony, are we going to keep the misspelled version, or can we retain this history elsewhere? --BDD (talk) 17:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about a "Kieran Wallac" but that appears to be the work of someone else. I moved "Kieran Wallace" to the common disambiguation "Kieran Wallace (footballer)" so as to preserve the article history. --Inother (talk) 17:16, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, some of this is difficult to explain, and I think we're using different terms. Anthony Appleyard created "Kieran Wallac" to preserve history—your move of "Kieran Wallace" to "Kieran Wallace (footballer)" moved the whole article, including its history. So that first link I showed you was an edit you made, just not when the page was called "Kieran Wallac". A few edits later, you can see this edit of mine changed "Kieran Wallace (footballer)" into a redirect to "Kieran Wallace"—again, that edit history is now at "Kieran Wallac". I want you to understand I'm not upset with you or anything. It's just that this edit was either a cut-and-paste move or something remarkably similar to it, and I want to make sure you know that such moves cause a lot of problems. --BDD (talk) 17:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- Which is why I originally moved it to "Kieran Wallace (footballer)" - since "Kieran Wallace" is a not infrequent name but at the same time there was a need to preserve the article history. The difficulties seem to have then arisen from the very (and unnecessarily) quick contributions of others, moving "Kieran Wallace (footballer)" over and back, introducing misspellings and so on. --Inother (talk) 17:40, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, some of this is difficult to explain, and I think we're using different terms. Anthony Appleyard created "Kieran Wallac" to preserve history—your move of "Kieran Wallace" to "Kieran Wallace (footballer)" moved the whole article, including its history. So that first link I showed you was an edit you made, just not when the page was called "Kieran Wallac". A few edits later, you can see this edit of mine changed "Kieran Wallace (footballer)" into a redirect to "Kieran Wallace"—again, that edit history is now at "Kieran Wallac". I want you to understand I'm not upset with you or anything. It's just that this edit was either a cut-and-paste move or something remarkably similar to it, and I want to make sure you know that such moves cause a lot of problems. --BDD (talk) 17:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about a "Kieran Wallac" but that appears to be the work of someone else. I moved "Kieran Wallace" to the common disambiguation "Kieran Wallace (footballer)" so as to preserve the article history. --Inother (talk) 17:16, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- What about this edit? It's now at Kieran Wallac since Anthony Appleyard performed a history merge, which generally is only necessary to repair cut-and-paste moves. Anthony, are we going to keep the misspelled version, or can we retain this history elsewhere? --BDD (talk) 17:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- I moved it so as to preserve the article history. We cannot be looking at the same article history if this is the conclusion you have come to. --Inother (talk) 16:49, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- It certainly appears you cut and paste, based on the article history. Could you clarify what you did? --BDD (talk) 16:18, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks all for your input, I'm just glad it's resolved now. JMHamo (talk) 17:47, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- All I'm saying, Inother, is that with this diff, you added a lot of content to convert a redirect into an article. A diff that only moves a page looks like this and specifically says "(No difference)". I do think the situation is resolved—I'll follow up with Anthony about the misspelled version—just be careful when you move. Use WP:RM or WP:RMTR, or ask an admin for help, if you're at all unsure of how to proceed. --BDD (talk) 18:50, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- @JMHamo:: Kieran Wallac arose because of a typo when histmerging. I have corrected the histmerge. Sorry. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:45, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
I was not aware of a "Kieran Wallac" until it was mentioned here. I have explained countless times what I did. I followed the correct procedure. I moved "Kieran Wallace" to "Kieran Wallace (footballer)" to preserve the page history. I added no content whatsoever. It was very simple. It really should not be this complicated. I know perfectly well how to move a page. I did just that so it is not possible that it was me who "added a lot of content." There is no way that I could have done that if I moved it in the first place. --Inother (talk) 23:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, you're saying that diff I kept pointing out to you is some kind of error? --BDD (talk) 00:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
- If I moved "Kieran Wallace" to "Kieran Wallace (footballer)" (and preserved the article history as intended before being accused of not doing so) I do not understand how it is possible (or makes any sense whatsoever) that I can have done a "copy-and-paste move" with the same thing. The only conclusion that I can come to at this stage is (because then several moves were made in quick succession by others without any patience to allow the results of the move be completed) that there must have been some sort of edit conflict. I followed the correct procedure and cannot see what this fuss is all about or why I must explain it again and again. --Inother (talk) 13:09, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Category:Coimbra Group
[edit]Category:Coimbra Group, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 18:34, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
'Catholic' category
[edit]Hi. Please do not add religion categories to biographical articles unless the person is notable because of their religion, in accordance with WP:BLPCAT. Thanks, BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 17:03, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Inother. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Category:People associated with the anti-austerity movement has been nominated for discussion
[edit]Category:People associated with the anti-austerity movement, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:54, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
The article Galway Anti-Monarchy Campaign has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
WP:GNG and WP:NORG not met. Subject is a small group (according to the sources containing perhaps 10 members) who took part in short-lived protests in 2015. Where subject org is covered in sources, it is always trivial/passing mentions.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 12:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)