Jump to content

User talk:Legacypac

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Heyyouoverthere (talk | contribs) at 21:56, 22 September 2017 (→‎3d/3rd: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


NPP

Legacypac (talk) 06:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Note DGG used the wrong template here. He meant NPP as the heading suggests. Legacypac (talk) 16:50, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2016–17 Swansea City A.F.C season has been accepted

2016–17 Swansea City A.F.C season, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 23:54, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Taku's Draft subpage

Hi,

I just wanted you to know User:TakuyaMurata/Drafts is no longer in use and also several of the pages linked there are redirects to the mainspace. -- Taku (talk) 09:20, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks. Legacypac (talk) 09:24, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you are open to it, I wonder if we can just have private talk, that might be more predictive. You suggested I moved some draft pages to my user page. This doesn't make sense to me: isn't the purpose of the draftspace to hold drafts? If you think some drafts are problematic (i.e., not notable), they will still be problematic if I moved them to the user page. In other words, why the space where they belong matter? You also keep mentioning age: again why does it matter they are 6 months old or 6 years? I have been resistant since it's just not making sense. -- Taku (talk) 23:26, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Taku and others

I am not sure what Taku is telling you in the previous message. What I want to tell you is that it is probably not worthwhile taking Taku's drafts individually to MfD as you did for draft:algebra over a monad. Taku has more than 150 drafts some of which have not been touched for three years and nearly all of which are of dubious notability. We have recently been successful in reducing the draftspace heaps of Mad7744 and Adem20. It might be worth raising Taku's stuff at WP:ANB.

Others to watch with large draft space presences are: Captain Assassin! - seems to be turning them over but has a few very old ones and BD2412 - 2000 draft articles - let us wait to see how many are still in draft space in twelve months time. (Note that my draflis.php reports may blow with database errors - they are hammering it rather heavily. If you re-load immediately, they should work because enough has moved into the server's cache.) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:25, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent info. I'm not planning to deal with the math ones one by one. There are ongoing discussions Wikipedia_talk:Drafts and on the Math project that my odd nom is helping along. We might be going to the notice board soon but I'm seeing movement now on his position. Expansion of G13 Wikipedia_talk:CSD will be a useful tool for these situations. Legacypac (talk) 14:06, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Your submission at Articles for creation: Abramov Shatiel Semenovich has been accepted

Abramov Shatiel Semenovich, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Antonioatrylia (talk) 19:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

I just wanted to thank you for all your support on the ACTRIAL talks everywhere. Your words are measured and carry just the right level of impact to help those understand who might not have been following the action too closely.. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:39, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We really need ACTRIAL and your long hard work to push it through is amazing. I'd do more work on it if I knew what to do. I've been cleaning up Draft space in preperation for a potential big uptick in Drafts due to ACTRIAL. There is a proposal ready to close at CSD_ talk re G13 that will help immensely in setting the table for ACTRIAL. Legacypac (talk) 15:44, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don'tt personally believe there will be such a big increase in pages to AfC. If there is, most of them will be easy deletes. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:51, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 August 4#The Duke of Kent

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 August 4#The Duke of Kent. --Nevé–selbert 19:52, 5 August 2017 (UTC)Template:Z48[reply]

Hidden Drafts

Hi Legacypac. I have written a database report which finds pages in the draft namespace that aren't part of the AfC process. I have made it available, here (watch out, huge page). Hope this is helpful to your work. Regards, FASTILY 09:00, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Argyle Township Court House has been accepted

Argyle Township Court House, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sulfurboy (talk) 22:43, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Australian Historic Homesteads has been accepted

Australian Historic Homesteads, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sulfurboy (talk) 22:43, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Erethia tinifolia has been accepted

Erethia tinifolia, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 00:50, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. VQuakr (talk) 01:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Get a grip. This is a false accusation. I restored my changes after you wholesale reverted them, with the incorrect claim I was making a major policy change. My edits did not change the policy at all (as noted in my summaries) but did set it up to be changed easily soon. Note the G13 expansion RFC has past 30 days, gone a week without comments, and has very clearly passed. But hey, by all means keep building the case for a block against you for personal attacks. Accusing an editor of edit warring with zero justification is not ok. Legacypac (talk) 01:16, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:PantherMan

Hey, not sure you will notice, but it appears PantherMan sent this reply in response to your notification that their draft had been nominated for deletion. This user's talk page is on my watchlist after I sent them a warning some time ago. I think they're slightly naive about how Wikipedia works. Ss112 02:08, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No I'm CSDing hundreds of pages and not watchlisting all the talk pages. I'm watching that one now. Thanks. Legacypac (talk) 02:12, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, it could be about the article at AFD currently. Who knows. We've got eyes on it now. Primefac (talk) 02:13, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone move this page to Template space to match it's parent? Draft:Template:TEDx/doc. I have no idea if I'm allowed so someone else can. Legacypac (talk) 02:19, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested a history merge into Template:TEDx/doc. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 02:47, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]


A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
You have tagged lots of drafts for G13 under the recently updated rule. Keep going! GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 01:14, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A query...

Any ideas to your submitting of Draft:Manoj Vedprakash Pandey and consequent rejection. The subject has zero notability and most likely intended to use WP as a promotional medium. It was outright G13-eligible.Cheers!Also see the personal website for some idea.Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 09:36, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On its face the guy is a notable writer - or blowing smoke. Likely the later but I felt like giving a little chance. Deleting it is perfectly fine by me. Legacypac (talk) 09:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

fake news as she iis written

That was a workspace for a different version of fake news. I don't remember the exact content, but I am pretty sure we were done with it. 15:48, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

L

Warning

First of all, do not leave templates on the talk pages of experienced editors, as it shows you only wish to be disruptive and not talk things out. Secondly, consider this your warning about edit warring over multiple pages. If you keep it up, I will see to it that you are blocked alongside Taku as your editing is just as bad. Stop this nonsense while you are ahead. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 21:58, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've reported you. If you are an experenced editor you already know not to modify other people's signed posts, especially after they restore the unwanted changes. Legacypac (talk) 22:01, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TPO, policy overrules your feelings. Get a clue. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 22:02, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
TPO does not support what you are doing and the disruption you are facilitating. Let's have an Admin look at your behavior rather than further discussion. Legacypac (talk) 22:06, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguating or fixing links, if the linked-to page has moved, a talk page section has been archived, the link is simply broken by a typographical error, etc. It doesn't get clearer than that. Also, two reverts is not an edit war. So you will only be seen as further disruptive. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 22:08, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning, even on your own talk page. Striking text constitutes a change in meaning, and should only be done by the user who wrote it or someone acting at their explicit request." but nice try to use a carve out for non-controversial stuff. Legacypac (talk) 22:17, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you incapable of reading? "Some examples of appropriately editing others' comments" right below that. Seriously? — nihlus kryik  (talk) 22:30, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
exceptions for uncontroversial stuff don't override the principle at the start. You have now vandalized many of my signed posts after I warned you. You need to be blocked to stop this disruption. Legacypac (talk)
Actually, that's exactly what it does. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 22:34, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I apologize for my behavior

I should not have reverted your edit. The whole golden rule thing; I would not have liked if that were done to me. Please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are appropriate. No worries; it won't happen again. Fluous (talk) 21:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ya its ok no need to get into a revert war over word order. Legacypac (talk) 21:26, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN

Don't panic, nothing you've done wrong - just a discussion which vaguely involves you -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 12:01, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Oon Jin Teik

You are now edit-warring. Your comments are not helpful to improve the article. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:29, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not edit warring. You know better than to remove talk page comments to hide your WP:OWNership behavior. Legacypac (talk) 17:31, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Case opened

You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 13 September 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Mkdw talk 05:22, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recommendation

Regarding this; I suggest dropping it and ceasing creating further drama. Good day. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 02:40, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How about reverting your own changes to my signed posts? That would be the correct action. Legacypac (talk) 02:50, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Promising drafts discussion closed

I have closed a discussion that you participated in here. The result was a consensus to begin using the template. Cheers, Tazerdadog (talk) 22:27, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

L

Suggestion

Hello. Are you interested in creating an article about this please? There are lots of RS on google.Zigzig20s (talk) 07:16, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There might be one already. I don't create pages. Legacypac (talk) 07:18, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, there isn't, although it is mentioned in Jack Kershaw's article. But there are definitely enough RS for a full-fledged article.Zigzig20s (talk) 07:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead and start it. What an ugly statue! Legacypac (talk) 07:39, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure I have the spare time to create a good start-level article right now...Zigzig20s (talk) 10:22, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've started a stub in use: Nathan Bedford Forrest Statue. I will expand it in the next few days, but I don't have time to spend 10 hours on it in one sitting.Zigzig20s (talk) 04:40, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also started Nathan Bedford Forrest Bust. Since you've done such an amazing job with the statue, please do expand the bust too if you can. Thank you!Zigzig20s (talk) 06:13, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The history section includes cross-burnings. Over a bust. I can't even.Zigzig20s (talk) 08:23, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. The depth of available criticism is amazing on the Nashville one. Legacypac (talk) 08:30, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's totally weird. I need coffee now.Zigzig20s (talk) 08:36, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Great job on the monstrosity. Do you intend to expand the one about the bust too please?Zigzig20s (talk) 15:37, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
When I get some time. The first needs some cleanup and maybe reordering the sections. Legacypac (talk) 16:16, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. If someone uploads a picture on Commons, it could become a popular DYK.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:38, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is also the Confederate Private Monument.Zigzig20s (talk) 11:37, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify

Do you not want to know who those anonymous donors are? That is why I added the Clarify tag that you've just removed.Zigzig20s (talk) 01:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The sources said they were anonymous. The tag makes it look like the info is unsourced. Legacypac (talk) 01:26, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's sourced. But perhaps the anonymity can be uncovered?Zigzig20s (talk) 02:10, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone writing a $1.2 million check can ensure the source stays unknown. Anyway, who cares. Likely an alumnus of the school. Legacypac (talk) 02:16, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maxwell House Hotel

This needs more work if you are interested.Zigzig20s (talk) 05:19, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Award

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For all your hard work on the List of monuments and memorials of the Confederate States of America article. Thank you! Fluous (talk) 00:51, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC submission

Hey, you recently submitted another draft of mine, Draft:Lars Trier Awards, as an AfC. Fortunately or unfortunately, I already created/revised an article based on that draft (List of awards and nominations received by Lars von Trier), so an AfC submission doesn't really make sense. Therefore, you could delete the draft (or whatever the right thing to do is in that situation). But this problem leads me to a question you might be able to answer. Since I can't delete the drafts after I made them into an article, what can I do so they don't get pointlessly submitted later? Should I blank them or is there something else I could do? I have currently two other drafts like that. Thanks Felida97 (talk) 20:21, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Normally you should move the Draft to mainspace with the move button (hidden under more). If you already copy pasted you should redirect the Draft to the mainspace page or request a history merge. I've redirected this one. Legacypac (talk) 22:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will do that for the other ones. Felida97 (talk) 23:38, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About Draft:Ynez Johnston - thanks for the wake-up

Hi Legacypac, and thanks for your message.
The context of this draft is here. The page was copied in almost its entirety from this commercial gallery's website. The user who created the page hasn't edited since March 2017. ) I'll put some work into the draft.
Pete AU aka--Shirt58 (talk) 09:34, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just working a long list of stale drafts and that one was very short. She's definitely notable, I might even work on that page too. Looks interesting. Legacypac (talk) 09:48, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted for Arthur Rubin case

In relation to your evidence submissions at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin/Evidence#Evidence presented by Legacypac, please be aware that the Arbitration Committee does not take evidence on subpages into account. Please remove the link to all such subpages from the Evidence page, and transfer what material you want to submit for consideration to your own section (within the confines of the word limit). If you would like an increase in this limit up to 1000 words, please ask on the talk page. Please also note that the scope of this case should also be discussed on the talk page. For the Arbitration Committee, Mdann52 (talk) 19:48, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, "please dance precisely to Arbcom's tune because they're not taking this case or anything related to TRM seriously. It would be better if we could ban TRM from Wikipedia altogether, so we're really disappointed that you and a number of others have seen fit to disagree with Arbcom's attempts to hang, draw and quarter TRM here and even more disappointed that no evidence has been given to allow us to do that, we'll have to do that ourselves with our completely unbiased Arbs, some of whom have (ironically) been uncivil to TRM". Yup, that's how it works. Is there a mechanism for abolishing this shambolic bunch and calling new elections early? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:40, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
TRM, I don't have the experience at ARBCOM you do (nor do I want to!) but it looks like I need to sit at a computer and rework my evidence tonight. I don't think AR will be banned but perhaps he will lose the tools which will make him less dangerous. Legacypac (talk) 20:36, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you - of course, if you do need to request a word extension, feel free to do so. Let me know if you have any questions on this. Mdann52 (talk) 20:56, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hi Legacypac, any advice on how to publish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Blue_Cone_Monochromacy ? Renata.sarno (talk) 19:09, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for noticing I've requested the page be reevaluated. Happy to help. You can go to the tool bar and look for More. Under there is Move. Select Article and it's moved. Then edit out all the AfC stuff in the draft to clean it up. This is assuming you are confident it is ready for mainspace. Alternatively wait for feedback from AfC. Legacypac (talk) 19:14, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A small tweak to Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/G13

I've made a small tweak to the 'User talk:Yourname' link at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/G13 using [[Special:mytalk|your talk page]]. This will take the reader direct to their own user talk page, which is what I think you were intending, for the user to find the name of a deleted page on their user talk page. This will avoid difficulties with users going to a page ('User talk:Yourname') that does not exist. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:40, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, that was my intent but I did not know where to link. Legacypac (talk) 02:44, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Legacypac's WP:ASPERSIONS. VQuakr (talk) 02:20, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of fictional characters with disabilities

Just curious about how the list went from being approved to being deleted to being restored - I saw each happen but I was on a work computer away from home and my work ip is blocked, preventing me from editing. I'm glad it's back - I don't usually do lists so after a certain point I put it in to the articles for creation to get a second opinion for publishing it. So I was puzzled to have it deleted as untouched since I was waiting til it was agreed before doing any further editing.... ☕ Antiqueight haver 11:59, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Antiqueight, to answer your question, it was because the draft was nominated (improperly) for G13 (i.e. "stale draft") deletion. The error was noticed and the draft was restored.
Legacy, I know everyone makes mistakes, but given that you submitted the draft and G13'd it (after it had been accepted) it leads me to think you're blindly clicking without looking. Please be more careful with this sort of thing Primefac (talk) 14:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]
Weird it was already accepted to mainspace yet still showed up on the StaleDraft report. Thanks to whoever caught that. Legacypac (talk) 15:51, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like the report isn't updating as often as it should (or as often as would be ideal), since you submitted the draft one day before it was accepted (two days before it was CSDd). It was restored due to a REFUND request. It could also be a cache issue on your end; might be worth talking to MusikAnimal about it. Primefac (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks all for the reply. I was dead curious as to how it had happened. Glad it's restored. I'll put in some more time on it. ☕ Antiqueight haver 16:26, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there have been some report issues. A few deleted pages kept showing up on the list. I've noticed a few promoted or redirected pages continue to show on list the next day. Normally I catch them, but evidemtly missed this one. I got to the bottom of a list which once had 10,000 pages on it - and over 5,000 when CSD G13 expanded several weeks ago. There have been only a handful of what could be considered errors and complaints and a whole lotbof promlematic lages deleted. This list has no sources - I'm surprised it got accepted a AFC, but it's ok. Legacypac (talk) 16:27, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did get your ping at User talk:MusikBot/StaleDrafts/Report/AfC, and indeed it looks like I forgot to commit the code that makes the AfC version of that report. It's there now! :) Will updating daily be enough? The queries take a little while to run so we can't do it in real time or anything. I suppose you'll always have to re-check the revision history and make sure the draft hasn't been modified since the report was made — MusikAnimal talk 16:40, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'll comment on the report talk pages. Daily is plenty often. Legacypac (talk) 16:53, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:RhoLands

Re. User:Unknown :) — fortunavelut luna 06:37, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

thanks for spotting out my mistakes. please I need assistance seeing I am new to Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rexjae (talk • contribs) 14:51, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Legacypac, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

  • On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
  • Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Anand Padmanabhan Page Deletion

Hi Legacypac

Can you please let me know why the page on Anand Padmanabhan was deleted? I have also given a reason for this page to be present in the encyclopedia. Please let me know if you can get back to me on this?

The page did not make a creditable claim of significance.[1] Legacypac (talk) 18:59, 20 September 2017 (UTC) pinging User:RickinBaltimore who would be Admin to talk to and who should delete the talk page too. Legacypac (talk) 19:02, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ismail H.A. Ziyaeddin (September 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by I dream of horses was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
The inline citations seem to link back to the article. It's suggested you have at least three inline citations, and ideally five or more anyways.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
 I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 07:45, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! Legacypac, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!  I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 07:45, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Ismail H.A. Ziyaeddin has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Ismail H.A. Ziyaeddin. Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 05:43, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ismail H.A. Ziyaeddin has been accepted

Ismail H.A. Ziyaeddin, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 05:45, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3d/3rd

Hey

In regards to the 3rd Cavalry Regiment, I was looking on Fort Hood's page and saw the 3d and that stuck me as odd so I changed it from 3d to 3rd. To me 3d means 3D such as in movies at first glance. Then I released my mistake and reverted it. The 3rd CR is also known as 3d as in emblazoned on various aspects of 3CR life. When I was stationed at Fort Hood as a Muleskinner I used to question it but was told that is the way it is and goes back in history that way, as per the 3CR museum. If you can, stop on by the museum, or the inside the III Corps main building and just past the giant bronze horse there are several plaques and stuff documenting it.

http://www.hood.army.mil/3d_acr/ https://www.facebook.com/3dUSCAV/ https://www.dvidshub.net/unit/3CR


Oh and : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:3rd_Cavalry_Regiment_(United_States)#3d_versus_3rd

Heyyouoverthere (talk) 21:56, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Legacypac&oldid=801937137"