User talk:203.173.186.163: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 07:41, 8 October 2015

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create an account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:

Create new pages and rename pages
Edit semi-protected pages
Upload images
Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed

If you edit without an account, your IP address (203.173.186.163) is used to identify you instead.

We hope that you choose to become a Wikipedian and create an account. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Happy editing! SwisterTwister talk 07:20, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A comment

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you recently removed some content without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 04:24, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I take it that you mean MoovWeb. I have undone your edit and explained why. I thought you would have realised why I did that edit. 203.173.186.163 (talk) 06:39, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

Hello, I'm DexDor. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Portal:United States because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DexDor^(talk) 04:42, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@DexDor:, I used that sort order because the Greek letter put it in the category under the Latin letter of P. Portals are best filed near the start of the page in a category, hence the * sort order. 203.173.186.163 (talk) 04:49, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

The use of Rho is per WP:SORTKEY. Note: Portals are normally also linked by a box in the category text. DexDor^(talk) 04:53, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All that is not really relavent since portals should be given a higher status than merely being lumped amongst the actual articles in a category. 203.173.186.163 (talk) 04:57, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The use of Rho means that the portal is not "lumped amongst the actual articles in a category"; it's shown after articles (see, for example, Category:Apple Inc.). Why should portals "be given a higher status" in the listing of pages in a category? (e.g. should a Wikipedia book also be given a higher status than articles?) (as well as usually having a link from near the top of the category page). If you disagree with WP:SORTKEY then propose changes on its talkpage. DexDor^(talk) 05:22, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 24, 2015

Yes, I am adding these lists because I know that I wanted more information about trails in different states and thought others would too. You have assumed that I'm not going to add more information to the trails and just leave them as is. I have a lot that I want to add and make available for everyone at one source. I would appreciate you not cutting everything down before I can even build it.
Stonefire89 (talk) 14:46, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The list you are trying to delete (List of Hiking Trails in Alabama)

Whatever it is you are trying to do -- you are doing it wrong. The AFD is not formatting properly. As a non-registered IP, I don't think you should be doing this. You should register and seek assistance at the administrator noticeboard. Quis separabit? 21:04, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have now tried the admin notice board but they said go elsewhere. 203.173.186.163 (talk) 23:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 25, 2015 - Edits

I made a mistake with the Connecticut bit. However, I have seen on many articles, that are not my own, have addresses in the content. Also, it is very frustrating that you keep trying to cut down everything that I put up. I don't appreciate it. Stonefire89 (talk) 21:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You need to check and double check the info you add to avoid errors.

If there is an address in an article, and I rarely see one, it would be in an infobox. It is not true that I am cutting down "everything" that you put up. I am simply trying to get your additions in line with the rest of Wikipedia. You also have to realise that anything that you add is not your own. 203.173.186.163 (talk) 22:02, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying that the articles are something that I own but something that I put work into. So don't assume your thoughts and opinions are facts.

Well, then if you know where they are supposed to go, then put them there instead of just erasing everything that took me time to find. I have seen address' in the article itself. You may not have experienced it for yourself does not mean it is untrue for others.

I made an error when changing a state on a category. I did double check it. A few times actually. But I obviously overlooked the error by mistake. Like I said, a mistake and one that I owned up to very easily.

Stonefire89 (talk) 22:38, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For addresses see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_36#street_addresses and WP:NOTDIRECTORY. I also challenge you too find an article that includes the full address in the body of the article because I have never seen it. 203.173.186.163 (talk) 23:16, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want me to find it again, I will do my best to find it again. However, that is not a good reason to just delete the information. Put it in the infobox if its supposed to be there.

Stonefire89 (talk) 00:07, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

Hello, I'm Denisarona. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Joke without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Denisarona (talk) 10:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Denisarona. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Rock polishing without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Denisarona (talk) 10:38, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Soaper, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. eurodyne (talk) 04:38, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Humpty Sharma Ki Dulhania. Denisarona (talk) 05:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, 203.173.186.163. You have new messages at Talk:Grey alien.
Message added 07:06, 6 September 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 07:06, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit

Thank you for your interest in editing Wikipedia, 203.173.186.163. Your edit to {{R from given name/doc}} was successful, but because it was not considered beneficial to the page, the edit has been reverted or removed. It was reverted because that redirect category (rcat) template populates the category you removed, and it is standard practice to include populated categories in these templates' documentation pages. Thank you very much!

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please consider the creation of a free User account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Frederic Slater

Hi. I see you made an edit to Frederic Slater. What is the reason for not considering the subject part of the Pseudoarchaeology category. - given his views about Egyptian colonization of Australia and his use of material culture (archaeological sites) to demonstrate it - would this not make him a Psuedoarchaeologist? Garyvines (talk) 23:27, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK - what consensus are you referring to. Slater's work is specifically referred to as archaeology and he established the Australian Archaeological and Education Research Society. The period he refers to Egyptian migration 'the late paleolithic and the neolithic ages" is prehistoric in Australia, if not in Egypt too, so how is this history?Garyvines (talk) 01:45, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We probably should remove Psuedoarchaeologist and Psuedohistorian since it is not actually referenced in the article. As editors we can only add categories that are based on the article which is based on refs. Can you find a ref for him being called a Psuedoarchaeologist? We bath know some of his ideas are wrong but was he just a product of his time? 203.173.186.163 (talk) 20:30, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know

You put your little rant in the wrong place. It should have been aired here . I moved it. Don't bother thanking me. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 20:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was not a rant. It is a genuine concern that has no hallmarks of being a rant. 203.173.186.163 (talk) 20:18, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Saber-toothed cat ‎

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Saber-toothed cat ‎ . Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:31, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can I suggest that if you oppose part of an edit you don't revet the whole edit.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.186.163 (talk) 01:14, 30 September 2015‎

POV tag on Gulistan, Dhaka

Thank you for drawing attention to Gulistan, Dhaka with this edit. Please augment the POV tag with some explanation on Talk:Gulistan, Dhaka of how the article fails to represent fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on the topic. Is neutrality compromised, for example, by omission of some of the information in the cited sources, or do you know of other sources with different points of view that have been ignored? If a specific actionable issue cannot be identified, perhaps one or more different cleanup templates from among Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup would be a better fit. -- Worldbruce (talk) 23:35, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs a rewrite with a better style. Things like "unbearable traffic jam" and "but there are no flower gardens at this place" is POV writing.

Understood. I agree the article needs a rewrite with a better style (or simply deletion as a non-notable road/neighborhood). However,

"Unbearable traffic jam" is poor writing, but would only violate POV if it didn't represent "fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of the significant views published by reliable sources." The cited source describes traffic congestion that causes an 11-km journey to usually take an hour. Purple prose should be avoided, especially where concrete numbers are available, but "unbearable" is a fair characterization of what the source describes, and there are no obvious sources of other views - that there are no traffic jams or that delays are insignificant or not inconvenient. I've rewritten the sentence without the subjective qualifier.
"But there are no flower gardens at this place", doesn't violate POV either. There isn't a range of sources, some of which say there are flower gardens, and some of which say there aren't, so this isn't an unbalanced summary of the sources. The problem is that no sources have been put forward that say anything about the matter one way or another. It's a statement of fact that needs a citation, and can be removed as original research if no reliable source is forthcoming. For now I've tagged it with {{citation needed}}.

It's possible that the article violates POV in other ways, but because the specific problems identified have either been resolved or fit more properly into other types of cleanup, I've removed the POV tag for now. Worldbruce (talk) 23:25, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! DVdm (talk) 08:18, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note - can you please explain what the purpose of, for instance, this edit is, and then this one? TIA. - DVdm (talk) 08:20, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would have thought those edits are obvious. It is as per the info at WP:CAT. 203.173.186.163 (talk) 18:29, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not obvious to me (certainly not without an edit summary). With that first edit you added an empty pipe ("|"), and with the other edit you removed one. I don't see any difference between the original versions and the new version and nothing on WP:CAT explains about that empty pipe. Can you explain in a few words? - DVdm (talk) 06:38, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It sets the sort order in the category pae itself. A space places it at the head of the list. 203.173.186.163 (talk) 07:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 06:39, 8 October 2015 edit DVdm (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 137,469 edits →‎Edit summaries: Not obvious to me ← Previous edit		Revision as of 07:41, 8 October 2015 edit undo 203.173.186.163 (talk) →‎Edit summaries Next edit →
Line 138:		Line 138:

	::Not obvious to me (certainly not without an edit summary). With that first edit you added an empty pipe ("\|"), and with the other edit you removed one. I don't see any difference between the original versions and the new version and nothing on [[WP:CAT]] explains about that empty pipe. Can you explain in a few words? - [[User:DVdm\|DVdm]] ([[User talk:DVdm\|talk]]) 06:38, 8 October 2015 (UTC)		::Not obvious to me (certainly not without an edit summary). With that first edit you added an empty pipe ("\|"), and with the other edit you removed one. I don't see any difference between the original versions and the new version and nothing on [[WP:CAT]] explains about that empty pipe. Can you explain in a few words? - [[User:DVdm\|DVdm]] ([[User talk:DVdm\|talk]]) 06:38, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

			:::It sets the sort order in the category pae itself. A space places it at the head of the list. [[Special:Contributions/203.173.186.163\|203.173.186.163]] ([[User talk:203.173.186.163#top\|talk]]) 07:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)