User talk:Xxanthippe
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of User:Xxanthippe
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Please place comments about articles on the talk page of the article, not on this page, and put new comments at the bottom
Dummies guide to archiving my talk page
1. Open the talk page for edit.
2. Create an archive by searching for "User talk:Xxanthippe/Archive N" where N is the Nth archive.
3. When search tells you that this page does not exist create it by clicking on the red link.
4. Copy the contents of your talk page into this archive and add ((archives|auto=yes|search=yes|)) as the first line [replacing the () brackets with {} ].
5. Save this archive and delete the transferred material from current talk page. Finished. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:37, 13 July 2016 (UTC).
You're not a new editor, so you should seriously know better. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 02:40, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you very much
The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.
By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.
Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.
If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.
Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 11:11, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
P.S.: if you reply to this message, please {{ping}} me. Thank you. -TT
- Thank you for your thanks so graciously put. Xxanthippe (talk) 08:03, 26 May 2018 (UTC).
Women in Red June Editathons
| ||
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Notice of discretionary sanctions
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Template:Z33 Jytdog (talk) 07:42, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- The placing of the above template on this page may be related to these links [1] [2]. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:57, 9 June 2018 (UTC).
- You can treat the notice as some kind of combative thing, or you can be mindful of it. If you keep editing in violation of PSCI you will end up topic banned from editing such topics. Everybody chooses their own path here. Jytdog (talk) 06:11, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
- And I see that you have put three templates [3] on the talk page of another contributor to the RfC. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:31, 14 June 2018 (UTC).
- You can treat the notice as some kind of combative thing, or you can be mindful of it. If you keep editing in violation of PSCI you will end up topic banned from editing such topics. Everybody chooses their own path here. Jytdog (talk) 06:11, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
- The placing of the above template on this page may be related to these links [1] [2]. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:57, 9 June 2018 (UTC).
- Comment. User:Jytdog has been indefinitely blocked [4] from editing Wikipedia by the WP:Arbitration Committee. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:46, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi. As I stated in my edit summary, the recently (some days ago) added content does not have any source. I have asked the editor who added it to provide sources. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:37, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response a [citation needed] notice is helpful. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:41, 9 June 2018 (UTC).
- The cn tag is ususally used for unsourced content that has been in the article since a relatively long time. Very recently added content should preferably be removed. Otherwise Wikipedia would be flooded with cn tags. In this specific case, I leave the solution up to you. Do what you feel is better. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:47, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks: the material seems well-sourced in the Meyer reference. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:02, 9 June 2018 (UTC).
- Can you provide the relevant page and quote? Before the text I removed is a sentence added by the same editor. That sentence has a source, Meyer page 132. I checked Meyer on GBs and on that page Wogar is not mentioned. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks: the material seems well-sourced in the Meyer reference. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:02, 9 June 2018 (UTC).
- The cn tag is ususally used for unsourced content that has been in the article since a relatively long time. Very recently added content should preferably be removed. Otherwise Wikipedia would be flooded with cn tags. In this specific case, I leave the solution up to you. Do what you feel is better. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:47, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
The extract that you want to delete: Much of this centers around his identify as there are many discrepancies regarding the identify of Wongar in the forewords of his books. In his book "The Track to Bralgu'" the foreword mentions that the author B. Wongar is part Aborigine, while in his book "The Sinners", the foreword mentions that the author B. Wongar is in fact a mixed race American Vietnam veteran seems to me to be a fair synopsis from Meyer's well-sourced PhD thesis on these literary frauds. I suggest you take the matter up with the person who first inserted the material into the article. I have transferred this thread from my talk page to the B. Wongar talk page, which is its proper home. See the note at the top of my talk page. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC).
- I do not want to add or delete anything. I only want to make sure all of content of Wikipedia is sourced to reliable sources. If you can not not provide sources, including the correct pages and quotes, do not add content again. It is disruptive no matter your good will. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 10:50, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
In my opinion
Rajendra Rathore (chemist) manages to pass NACADEMIC. It'll be interesting to learn your take(s).......∯WBGconverse 03:16, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- The easy way is to take a look at his citation profile on Google scholar. Best wishes. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:02, 25 June 2018 (UTC).
July 2018 at Women in Red
| ||
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
August 2018 at Women in Red
| ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 11:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
Unprecedented behavior and Vandalism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Proposed_deletion
Your act was a pure act of vandalism and malice... your claim proposal was 100% ungrounded and done for your personal reasons. You are holding a vendetta on me and I will not play your game. You have been warned.
Markoulw (talk) 02:30, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- This is the diff[ [5]. I have no personal reasons relevant to you. Please do not issue threats against me. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:38, 26 July 2018 (UTC).
- I note that the articles that you wrote have been deleted at AfD and that you have been banned as a sockpuppet. Xxanthippe (talk) 12:38, 12 August 2018 (UTC).
- This is the diff[ [5]. I have no personal reasons relevant to you. Please do not issue threats against me. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:38, 26 July 2018 (UTC).
Warning by Kudpung
Take this as official - do not post again on my talk page. Even to add a link or correct a typo. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "official"? Do you mean policy-based or a personal request? In the edit that you deleted [6] from this [7] thread, and which I copy below for reference, I offered a solution for ending this time-wasting to and fro. I am sorry that you ignored it but continued to present false information about the matter here [8]. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC).
- @User:Kudpung. From looking at this edit[9] I have concluded that you have been harassing me in an attempt, possibly in your mind, to earn Brownie points from the Women in Red project by attacking what you suppose to be a critic of them. Now that you have had a bust-up [10][11] with that project I hope that you will stop harassing me with further personal attacks and threats including instructing me toPipe down [12]. It's a bit rich to be told you are a misogynist by somebody who makes an edit so sexist [13] that a woman user asks for it to be changed for future use[14]. Your response to her request was not gracious. See also [15]. I found this[16] edit to be particularly incongruous: when you were whining about admin-baiting while simultaneously making personal attacks and threats against me. Here[17] you ask me to give your talk page a "permanent pass". I will be happy to oblige provided that you stop making personal attacks and threats against me either explicitly or implicitly. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:16, 13 August 2018 (UTC).
- Pardon my intrusion but I feel that you're badgering. This is not productive. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Your intrusion is welcome. I am finding that this matter is a vast waste of time. I have made a proposal to end it which has been ignored. I would like it to stop if the badgering of myself (like being told to "pipe down") stops too. If false claims about me are made[18] I feel that I am entitled to respond. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Knock it off, and dial down this completely unnecessary dispute, Xxanthippe. You are skating on very thin ice. Try silence instead. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:41, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- That is a good suggestion. I hope you will urge it on the other people involved. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:47, 14 August 2018 (UTC).
- My suggestion applies to everyone involved in this and similar disputes, and I will repeat my advice wherever I conclude that it will be useful. I will remain silent while observing the situation elsewhere if I do not believe that my comments would be helpful, but I will remember. I noticed this thread, and this is where I have chosen to comment at this time. Please retreat from the confrontation. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:14, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Cullen328. Was this pile-on threat really necessary? I see that another editor commented on your even-handedness in the matter.[19] Xxanthippe (talk) 05:10, 17 September 2018 (UTC).
- My suggestion applies to everyone involved in this and similar disputes, and I will repeat my advice wherever I conclude that it will be useful. I will remain silent while observing the situation elsewhere if I do not believe that my comments would be helpful, but I will remember. I noticed this thread, and this is where I have chosen to comment at this time. Please retreat from the confrontation. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:14, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- That is a good suggestion. I hope you will urge it on the other people involved. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:47, 14 August 2018 (UTC).
- Knock it off, and dial down this completely unnecessary dispute, Xxanthippe. You are skating on very thin ice. Try silence instead. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:41, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Your intrusion is welcome. I am finding that this matter is a vast waste of time. I have made a proposal to end it which has been ignored. I would like it to stop if the badgering of myself (like being told to "pipe down") stops too. If false claims about me are made[18] I feel that I am entitled to respond. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Xxanthippe, you will be blocked very quickly if you refactor other user's posts to change the meaning. See WP:TPO. I have reverted it. You are welcome to remove posts from your talk page if you don't like them. FYI Cullen328. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry about that. Maybe a double heading would have been more appropriate. Xxanthippe (talk) 08:14, 14 August 2018 (UTC).
Comment: Following the debacle of his editorship of Signpost Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ceased to be an administrator on 16 August 2018.[20] Xxanthippe (talk) 05:10, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
and was later resysoped without community discussion [21] on 26 October 2018. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:42, 19 November 2019 (UTC).
Kundpung's behavior led to a complain about harassment at AN/I [22] and an Arbitration request [23]
Complaints about Kudpung's behavior had been made at AN/I before 2015, 2017, 2018 but dismissed without action.
As a result of the arbitration of 2020 Kudpung's position as an administrator of Wikipedia was terminated on 29 February 2020. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC).
September 2018 at Women in Red
| ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
October 2018 at Women in Red
| ||
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
RfC withdrawn and restated
You had !voted at an RfC. I withdrew and restated it. See RfC on the intersection of WP:BLPSPS and WP:PSCI restated Jytdog (talk) 15:39, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Get ready for November with Women in Red!
Continuing: | ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:41, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging
RfC on which you !voted, has been amended
In response to objections, I struck the two year mortatorium thing at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(people)#RfC:_Amendment_for_BIO_to_address_systemic_bias_in_the_base_of_sources. I'm notifying everybody who !voted. Jytdog (talk) 14:08, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Re: D. H. Lawrence
I just thought it would be interesting to know. I guess not, eh? WQUlrich (talk) 02:17, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
- You are welcome to explain. Best wishes, Xxanthippe (talk) 02:44, 5 November 2018 (UTC).
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Xxanthippe. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
December 2018 at Women in Red
Continuing: | ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
December 2018 at Women in Red
Continuing: | ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
Ada Lovelace copyedit
Hi there, Have you checked my earlier copyedit to Ada Lovelace yet? As you reverted it, I thought I'd give you time to come back to me on it, but haven't heard anything from you yet. Please give me some feedback. As I stated in my follow-on edit, I'm a proofreader/copyeditor by profession, so I'm basically interested in improving the text and presentation of wiki articles. Ada Lovelace has been in the local news a lot lately as the people of Nottinghamshire are campaigning to get her on the £50 note, hence my current quest to improve her article. You should be able to see from my previous edits over the past couple of weeks that I can be trusted! So if you're not happy with my entire copyedit of the Early life section, then would you rather I did it in small stages (more transparent but also rather tedious)? By the way, I arranged for the article to be semi-protected for the next 3 months as it was being plagued by IP vandalism. Cheers, Rodney Baggins (talk) 21:49, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- An editor who is challenged after making substantial edits to an important and well-established article should follow WP:BRD and discuss the matter on the talk page of the article, not here: see the top of this page. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:43, 5 December 2018 (UTC).
- You're the only person who's objected to my edits so I wanted to open a personal dialog with yourself, but failing that I will proceed more cautiously. I don't see the point in opening up a discussion on the Ada talk page that would basically just say: Any objections to me improving this article? What would be the point in that!? Rodney Baggins (talk) 07:55, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- The point is that it would be consistent with WP:BRD. There are many other watchers of the page apart from you and I. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:39, 7 December 2018 (UTC).
- You're the only person who's objected to my edits so I wanted to open a personal dialog with yourself, but failing that I will proceed more cautiously. I don't see the point in opening up a discussion on the Ada talk page that would basically just say: Any objections to me improving this article? What would be the point in that!? Rodney Baggins (talk) 07:55, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
ANI-notice
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
January 2019 at Women in Red
 January events:
|
February 2019 at Women in Red
 February events:
|
Greetings,
I'm sorry but I have to insist. This article - and many others as well - make a bad confusion between the two notions of lattice and structure. A lattice is an abstraction that represents the periodicity of a crystal structure. Atomic positions in the unit cell can be anywhere, not only on lattice nodes. This is something that many non specialists get wrong, unfortunately. Mahlerite (talk) 16:38, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
- Me again. am I getting it right that you do not care to reply? I'm going to post in the discussion page of the article, before correcting it again. Regards. --Mahlerite (talk) 22:08, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
March 2019 at Women in Red
   Please join us for these virtual events:
| ||
|
|
Thank you for your advice
Thanks for pointing me to the PROD page to nominate an article for deletion (Antibodies from lymphocyte secretions). It turns out the author has many other pages in the process of deletion, so I feel validated!Logophile59 (talk) 16:46, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
April editathons at Women in Red
April 2019
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)
May you join this month's editathons from WiR!
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
June events with WIR
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:43, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Broken link
A heads up that you have broken link to WP:PROF#C1 in your !vote at WP:Articles for deletion/Danai Koutra. If it were in an article, I'd fix it for you but I never feel comfortable editing somebody's talk page or AfD comments. Btw, I appreciate your willingness to consider new information. Msnicki (talk) 23:29, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thx. Fixed. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC).
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
- Hi Xxanthippe! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 03:49, Friday, June 14, 2019 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
July events from Women in Red!
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Copyright and speedy deletion
When the charge is that the content is in violation of our copyright policy, a notability criterion is not relevant. Uncle G (talk) 00:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- Copyright is nothing to do with AfD. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:18, 1 July 2019 (UTC).
- What you did had nothing to do with AFD. Why did you remove a copyright violation speedy deletion notice claiming a notability criterion as justification for doing so? Uncle G (talk) 00:27, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Bad test
I have no idea what thing did you intent to test, but the namespace 1 pages of actual articles would do better without Twinkle rubbish. Go elsewhere with it, please. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 05:31, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
- This user has been blocked from editing Wikipedia[25] because of persistent incivility. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:49, 12 September 2019 (UTC).
August 2019 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 06:46, 29 July 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
September 2019 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:25, 27 August 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Joan of Arc
You blanket reverted ALL of my edits without providing any indication what you are objecting to or why. Please state your reasons or at least which edits you are objecting to. Str1977 (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
- Please follow Wikipedia procedure WP:BRD. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:29, 13 September 2019 (UTC).
- Okay, I will post my question on the article talk page. If I don't get an answer there, I guess you have no objection. Str1977 (talk) 06:05, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
- Posted on talk page of Joan of Arc: Thank you for following WP:BRD and bringing a discussion to the talk page. User:Str1977 has made 6 consecutive edits to Joan of Arc, 4 without edit summaries and 1 with an incomprehensible edit summary. His edits seem mainly to be changing Roman Catholic to Catholic and coronation to anointed. There may be theological issues of WP:POV here and the changes in this sensitive area need to be justified by sources. User:Str1977 may like to open an RfC in Portal:Catholicism or elsewhere. Under WP:CAUTIOUS it the responsibility of the changer of an article to justify their changes. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:24, 14 September 2019 (UTC).
- Okay, I will post my question on the article talk page. If I don't get an answer there, I guess you have no objection. Str1977 (talk) 06:05, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
October Events from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:36, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Removing unsigned comments on talk pages is not "edit warring." Akmal94 (talk) 01:58, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
- Policy please. I note accusations of continual edit warring on your talk [page. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:02, 2 October 2019 (UTC).
November 2019 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:59, 29 October 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
About AfD discussion
My apology for misunderstanding. --CaeserKaiser (talk) 10:21, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
| Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Howard Jacobson
Thanks for this edit on 26 July
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Howard_Jacobson&diff=908025185&oldid=907950358
I am having a lot of trouble with the user Jontel, as it is clear from their edits that they are a member of the hard left and are removing (or at least attempting to minimise) all criticism of the Labour Party over the well-documented antisemitism issue. Rodericksilly (talk) 13:37, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
December events with WIR
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:44, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Happy Holidays
|
Thank you for continuing to make Wikipedia the greatest project in the world. I hope you have an excellent holiday season. Lightburst (talk) 23:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)|
Happy Holidays.jpg) .jpg)   Hello Xxanthippe: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 18:00, 24 December 2019 (UTC) ,_cropped.jpg)
January 2020 at Women in Red
Good luck Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune. Merry Christmas!!Hi Xxanthippe, thanks for all you do on Wikipedia, and for all your help at BLPN. My you have a wonderful Christmas and a Happy New Year. (and if you don't celebrate Christmas please feel free to take that as a Happy Hanukkah, a great Dhanu Sankranti, a blessed Hatsumode, or whatever holiday you want to insert there.) Zaereth (talk) 08:55, 25 December 2019 (UTC GA for Moberly–Jourdain incidentHello. In regards to Moberly–Jourdain incident, I was going by Talk:Moberly–Jourdain incident. As it's currently a GA, the icon shouldn't be removed. If you feel that it no longer passes GA, feel free to do another Good Article Reassessment. However, this article is currently GA unless it get delisted. Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:33, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Arbitration case openedYou 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/Kudpung. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 28, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, CodeLyokotalk 05:01, 14 January 2020 (UTC) Is there a chance you have unintentionally misspelled your user name in the section title? --GRuban (talk) 17:21, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
February with Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:32, 28 January 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging Abraham–Lorentz forceHello, I've wanted to notify that I've re-added the some of recent content on surface plasmons back to the Abraham–Lorentz force article. I think my recent additions got mixed up with a previous edit that used Arxiv as a source; the content on surface plasmons cited highly cited papers from reliable, peer-reviewed journals. The best, Myxomatosis57 (talk) 07:43, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Pass by commentYour comments on Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Proposed decision are unnecessary and inflaming. The gender thing is completely unfounded and provocative. RHaworth isn't female but he was desysoped. What's the point of bringing up "venue of the 2020 Wikimania" which has now spilled WP:BEANS and is potentially jeopardizing Kudpung's participation in it because he is now aware of it due to your comment? I had to spell it out for you lest more redundancies. Sad Boy Jesus (talk) 13:07, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Important NoticeThis is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
March 2020 at Women in Red
|
.jpg)
