User talk:Serial Number 54129/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Serial Number 54129. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Judo do
Hello Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Judo do, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not a test page. Although the author is going about things the wrong way, and currently seems to have thrown his toys out of the pram, there is a possible subject here and he should be given the chance to develop it if he can. The earlier "hoax" deletions were because of claims that it was an Olympic sport, but this seems to be a real, though doubtfully notable, variant of Judo. JohnCD (talk) 21:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Wiki Ed course pages
Hi there! I saw that you marked Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/North Dakota State University/PSYC 480 History and Systems of Psychology (Fall, 2015) for speedy deletion. I've undone this. That page is the on-wiki version of a course page for a course participating in Wiki Education Foundation's Classroom Program. Student editors in these classes are aware that their usernames and wiki activities are public, and we ask instructors to discuss with their students ahead of time the implication of choosing an identifiable or anonymous username. Thanks for looking out for malicious outing, though... it's definitely a problem in other contexts!--Sage (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:03, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Sometimes when you look at a case that has been archived but there's no archive link, it's because of the Wikipedia software. All you have to do is use the purge link in your interface if you have one, or use the key combination that does the same thing in your browser. At that point, the link should just pop in and it will look normal. If it doesn't, don't manually edit the page. Instead, let an SPI clerk know of the problem. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Cheers User:Bbb23, I thought I was going mad! I'm sure it wasn't there when I posted that, and yet when I looked back through the history it was there all along! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 13:05, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Inappropriate comments
Could you please stop the unhelpful, inappropriate comments on Talk pages, SPI and the such; especially related to TeaLover1996. I have reverted many of your edits now and it's becoming disruptive. JMHamo (talk) 17:15, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Please desist from refactoring other users' edits. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 17:34, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Specifically stuff like - [1] JMHamo (talk) 17:39, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Did you get it? Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:06, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Specifically stuff like - [1] JMHamo (talk) 17:39, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
September 2015
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Henry VI of England may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- became completely unresponsive to everything that was going on around him for more than a year. (Henry may have been suffering from a form of [[schizophrenia]], according to modern authorities, as
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:52, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Done
Hello, I noticed that you deleted my edit. It is just that the ref that is on Hillsborough's article is not only undated, It is also no longer on Sheffield City Councli's Website. Croydon173314 (talk) 15:12, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
I undid the page move as the reasoning behind it is a clear violation of Wikipedia's policy for no original research: regardless of whether she was legally entitled to it or not, she did use the title of "Princess" and it is definitely part of her common name. German (non-)royals are even still using it today.Cebr1979 (talk) 18:57, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- You do not know what you are talking about. What they self-identify as is irrelevant. Cheers! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- No, it's not. Please review.Cebr1979 (talk) 19:02, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- This is to be discussed on the article's talk page, not here. Goodbye. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:03, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- No, it's not. Please review.Cebr1979 (talk) 19:02, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Reply to trolling
Sorry... do you think you can 'ban' people from your talk and carry on posting on others? Grow up. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 06:35, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Could you give Princess Johanna of Hesse and by Rhine a look over and add it to your watchlist? Paul Austin (talk) 15:45, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks Paul, have done so; the article looks OK to me, or am I blindly missing something? -not an impossibility by any means! I will say that the '"Family curse" section seems not particularly relevant to her personally, but I wouldn't insist. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi
- My concern is, that as a number of Wikipedians have pointed out, Germany legally abolished royal and noble titles and styles in 1919, the Grand Duchy of Hesse ceased to exist in 1918 and i doubt that the Hesse-Damstadt family would have provoked the known anti-monarchical Hitler by giving her an overt royal title. Paul Austin (talk) 16:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- Good point. It's out of my period I'm afraid but it is rather obvious now you come to mention it. So it should be moved to simply Johanna of Hesse and by Rhine then? Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 16:03, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- I think it should. Feel free to move or edit or change. She was never a Princess of Hesse and by Rhine. This is a relic of monarchist fanboys editing Wikipedia. She was never Princess Johanna. Paul Austin (talk) 16:10, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- Paul- that's done. I guess the monarchists will go mad, if there's any still around. Does this affect any other articles do you know? -I'd expect so, but wouldn't know where to start! Anyone alive after 1919??? Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 16:20, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: from what i've seen, a lot of living German and Austrian members of former royal, grand ducal and princely families have Wikipedia articles calling them by titles which ceased to exist after WWI. Again, monarchists at work. Both Germany and Austria have not had royal and noble titles since c. 1919. Paul Austin (talk) 16:32, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- I think it should. Feel free to move or edit or change. She was never a Princess of Hesse and by Rhine. This is a relic of monarchist fanboys editing Wikipedia. She was never Princess Johanna. Paul Austin (talk) 16:10, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- Good point. It's out of my period I'm afraid but it is rather obvious now you come to mention it. So it should be moved to simply Johanna of Hesse and by Rhine then? Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 16:03, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- My concern is, that as a number of Wikipedians have pointed out, Germany legally abolished royal and noble titles and styles in 1919, the Grand Duchy of Hesse ceased to exist in 1918 and i doubt that the Hesse-Damstadt family would have provoked the known anti-monarchical Hitler by giving her an overt royal title. Paul Austin (talk) 16:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jawad Botmeh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palestinian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:22, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Not vandalism
Hi there Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. Thanks for your work patrolling. Please don't use the vandalism template for edits that are not vandalism, like you did here. There's a specific template for advert edits: {{Uw-advert1}}, and it's offered by Twinkle. If you're not finding what you need on the Twinkle selections, there's more options available at Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:20, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
- do wot That character whose username you suggested showed a CoI has already changed it once already. Fucking classic:
Being discussed with the user. I hope!!! All the best, cheers. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 10:44, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
- What happens to these is they go in the holding pen and get checked again in a week or two to see what they are up to. The vast majority (over 99 per cent) cease editing when they are made aware of the policy. Any who persist get blocked. I wish the folks doing the renaming would be a little more careful and make sure the new username does not also violate policy. Alas -- Diannaa (talk) 13:41, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
- Indeed Diannaa. Thanks too for pointing out that error and also for direction to that template page, very useful! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 13:49, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
- What happens to these is they go in the holding pen and get checked again in a week or two to see what they are up to. The vast majority (over 99 per cent) cease editing when they are made aware of the policy. Any who persist get blocked. I wish the folks doing the renaming would be a little more careful and make sure the new username does not also violate policy. Alas -- Diannaa (talk) 13:41, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Irish general election, 1977, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Irish general election. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Done cheers Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 11:11, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi - looks like you are very quick off the mark! You undid some of my work while I was still adding information, and then you undid some more of it while I was hunting down a reliable reference. A bit more patience would have saved us both a bit of time and effort. I've added three reliable sources to the Tottenham link now - they're everywhere, and it would have been far easier to check that rather than risking an edit war. I can add more if you like. Next time, waiting more than a handful of minutes before reverting would be advisable, and refraining from shouting would be nice. PS - did you really think that someone could confuse the Tottenham Marshes and Welsh Marches? Grutness...wha? 00:50, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
- Well; at least you learnt, Grutness... shame it took multiple reversions for you to do so. Ciao. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 08:28, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Can you take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Little Miss Nobody (American murder victim) ? Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 14:38, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:02, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:20, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:28, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Recent edits
Hi there.
I'm a little confused over a couple of your recent edits - Talk:Masturbation and Club International[2] seem to be somewhat out of line? Chaheel Riens (talk) 21:50, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Reversing Edits
I was adding links to Thomas Percy, 1st Baron Egremont. How is that an unnecessary alteration? Furthermore, how was consensus established when it hasn't been discussed?Chchn (talk) 20:40, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
What the hell man?
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
[3] Fine I won't help you guys out if you don't care...even so, was there really any need to be so rude? 78.40.158.50 (talk) 07:49, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
- I refer you to the remarks I made to you above. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 07:53, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
- You emailed it yet? Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 15:06, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
"My" threats are not cretinous
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
They have plenty of io, dean
Badoom, tish! 92.54.161.242 (talk) 19:09, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- But no-one gives a fuck. As you have had somewhat succintly demonstrated before you. Ciao
Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Try to be a bit more serious, thanks
Look, could I recommend you pleaee start acting a bit like a serious user? Suggesting others to mail their colon is not particularly serious, nor is suggesting that anyone who reported your disruptive buddy be banned just because, well, because you want them to be banned. It becomes especially ridiculous when you want to ban users for a month just for having posted in an ANI discussion where you yourself has posted more frequently than some of them. Jeppiz (talk) 15:39, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
- If you have investigated your case against FLCC and presented it as thoroughly as you presented that one, you'd be begging for an award of punishment :D you've randomly found a diff without having a clue about context. A word of advice: that way ^ the boomerangs fly :D ciao Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 15:41, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
- Actually there is plenty of context. You have a very long pattern of dropping in silly comments in situations where they are not helpful and this is but one example out of many. I echo what Jeppiz says and ask you to stop making silly little comments everywhere, they add heat to situations without adding anything useful. I assure you that any boomerang will fly in an oddly straight direction in this situation. HighInBC 16:44, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
- Actually I'd like to know why that AN/I remark was out of place? I was deadly serious in my response to FLCC's offer. And am certainly not the one tying up thousands of bytes on that page :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (talk • contribs) 16:46, 18 January 2016
- Obviously none then. Cheers! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 16:02, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Actually I'd like to know why that AN/I remark was out of place? I was deadly serious in my response to FLCC's offer. And am certainly not the one tying up thousands of bytes on that page :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (talk • contribs) 16:46, 18 January 2016
- Actually there is plenty of context. You have a very long pattern of dropping in silly comments in situations where they are not helpful and this is but one example out of many. I echo what Jeppiz says and ask you to stop making silly little comments everywhere, they add heat to situations without adding anything useful. I assure you that any boomerang will fly in an oddly straight direction in this situation. HighInBC 16:44, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
| Hi, thanks for your overall maintenance work on Wikipedia. I really appreciate work you do on various admin boards. We need more editors like you to keep Wikipedia clean. Thanks. -- Human3015 It will rain 18:56, 18 January 2016 (UTC) |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:17, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:24, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Your note Regarding assuming good faith
Since you seem to have appointed yourself my better [4], kindly explain to me where I went wrong in eventually assuming bad faith in Qed237 (talk · contribs), who is someone who repeatedly edit warred with me, without any explanation of what they were doing or why, and whose only interaction with me was an increasing level of warnings and threats? I explained my actions at every stage, I opened discussions, I did everything asked of me, and the end result, as you can see, is that none of my changes to the article have actually happened - even though most of them appear to be entirely uncontroversial, and not even Qed237 objects to them being done. He made a series of completely unjustified reverts, just because he objected to one small part of my changes. If I am not allowed to assume bad faith in those circumstances, might you permit me to assume he is simply incompetent? Now, with that said, I'm off to make those edits yet again, and finally, someone will have actually improved Wikipedia by turning a shit article into a less shit one. Rabono26 (talk) 19:39, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- Do as I say and not as I do? CassiantoTalk 22:57, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- Rather hypocritical I think: since it was a direct response to you. However, more importantly, since you "banned" me from your TP, what exactly do you think gives you the right to troll mine? The answer, if you're unaware, is none. Ciao! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 16:01, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- That seemed a satisfactory response! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.39.212.59 (talk) 15:36, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
3RR warnings
Hi - before you report someone to AN3, please be sure to give them a 3RR warning using {{uw-3rr}}. The user you reported is new, and I can't block him for 3RR when he only got a level 3 unsourced content warning. It's not the same, and we can't assume the newbies know that we have a 3RR policy. I've warned him appropriately now, so if he reverts after this he has no excuse. I didn't say this in my close, but both edit-warring editors should have been warned and reported, not just the new one. Thanks for the report, and let us know if it continues. :-) Katietalk 18:54, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you want me to do. Is there something I can help with? — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:07, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Well, the editor has been blocked now. But I thought you might like to revert our discussion as a) it wasn't very friendly, and b) not very pleasant for him to return to when he was helpless to do anything about it. Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:14, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
ANEW
I was the reporter, not reported. The actions of others stepping in to revert the edit-warrior made the complaint moot, so I rescinded it. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 23:20, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
March 2016
I wasn't making test edits. I changed "Neither the bacchanal that takes place in the third episode nor the explicit romance between Vera and Lombard, which never got physical in the novel", which is an incomplete sentence and does not make a lot of sense, to the grammatically correct "The bacchanal that takes place in the third episode does not happen in the book, nor the explicit romance between Vera and Lombard, who never got physical in the novel." -- Noneofyourbusiness (talk) 05:55, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
I see that you're repeatedly removing the bold formatting (the ''' markup) from around the article title in the lead of this article. Our formatting convention is that we generally format article titles in such a way.
If you think that the article titles should not be formatted like this, then please start a discussion as to why not on the article's Talk: page. Don't just revert it, that's seen as WP:EDIT WARRING and is strongly discouraged here. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- Note it was consequential to a mass-reversion of IP sock-puppetry, as per WP:DENY. Unfortunately, as you know, Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius. Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 10:40, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- Wow. Did you really just say that? Andy Dingley (talk) 11:11, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- It is used metaphorically today, of course. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 11:13, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- But all the same, if you're out-of-state and you're likely Chinese (or just living in a country with a large Chinese population) you're all just the same and to be treated as if you're all in cahoots? Wow. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:18, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- I assumed you were speaking hypothetically, since you hadn't had the courtesy to inform me I was being discussed. I now realise you just didn't understand. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 12:14, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- But all the same, if you're out-of-state and you're likely Chinese (or just living in a country with a large Chinese population) you're all just the same and to be treated as if you're all in cahoots? Wow. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:18, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- It is used metaphorically today, of course. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 11:13, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- Wow. Did you really just say that? Andy Dingley (talk) 11:11, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello there. :) You reverted my removal of a template from Richard Caring. Can you tell me how one can tell it is autobiographical? So I can learn. Thanks in advance. Juicebaby (talk) 14:18, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| :-) Adamstraw99 (talk) 18:28, 20 March 2016 (UTC) |
- Whatever I did to earn that, Adamstraw99- thanks very much! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:34, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Pings
Hi. Just to let you know that this won't work, because pings only work if they're done correctly at the time the comment is signed and saved. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:40, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
OK, problem here: although a few genealogies seem to make him a knight, Horrox says "although he was never knighted" (my emphasis), so we need a different title for the article. Maybe Christopher Conyers (bailiff), since his office as bailiff of the liberty of Richmond seems to be the principal one he held? Choess (talk) 17:13, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yep. Christopher Conyers of Hornby, Lancashire; Sir Christopher Conyers of Sockburn. Good catch! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 17:48, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- (forgot to ping, @Choess: ) Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:04, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Are you OK with the proposed title? I can move it and clean up the redirect. Also, I hope you don't mind citation templates; I used Template:Cite ODNB for the ODNB article, which I thought looked a bit neater than the bare URL. Choess (talk) 18:41, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- No worries about the bare refs, the fact that I use them is purely reflective of the fact I -don't - know- how- to do it your way! May I suggest the dab is along the lines of (feudal bailiff) or (bailiff of Richmond): purely because bailiff on its own, I think, has a rather different connotation today? Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:46, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Are you OK with the proposed title? I can move it and clean up the redirect. Also, I hope you don't mind citation templates; I used Template:Cite ODNB for the ODNB article, which I thought looked a bit neater than the bare URL. Choess (talk) 18:41, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
FYI
This is a duplicate warning. They only made one edit to that page. I'm sure this user will get blocked if they keep vandalizing, but I wouldn't want some admin at AIV to delay it because of improper warnings. Just sayin'... - theWOLFchild 23:04, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Thomas Harrington (knight)
- added links pointing to Lancastrian, Battle of Northampton and William Harrington
- Fine rolls
- added a link pointing to Fine
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Done Many thanks. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 12:59, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Cebr1979
I don't want to continue there, esp. since they can't respond--but whether the original misreading was innocent or not, the battlegroundish commentary they build on it it was not. Besides, consider how much they had to be browsing through my history or ANI before they found it (I have had very limited interactions with Flyer, I think): that also is seriously troubling. Drmies (talk) 14:00, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
- Fair point; and such deep-water trawling does suggest an absolute intention at finding something (indeed, anything!) to use. Carry on! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 14:03, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
- Will do, thanks. Such blocks make me sad, though: editors who could otherwise do good work dig themselves into a hole and keep digging. Drmies (talk) 14:10, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
At Cebr1979's talk you have stated the interpretation "could be valid, according to the link". Please re-read the claim and the link because the link does not support the claim. The qualification in the comment is what a person subject to stalking would say if they wanted to obscure any trails that may lead to their identity. If someone I had rarely interacted with asked me if I am the same person as John Smith at Facebook, I may suggest I could be because I'm not going to enter into a 20-questions game to provide information about my identity—that in no way suggests I would therefore create sockpuppets at Wikipedia. The claim is totally bogus and it should be removed from the page as it is completely without evidence, yet is stated confidently with a link the gullible may accept, and therefore is the start of a smear. Johnuniq (talk) 00:11, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, that's certainly one interpretation- cheers. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 03:29, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you...
for all your good work here, but... please try to avoid syntax errors like the one which led to this edit. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 22:42, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
- Wouldn't want to put you out of a job. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 06:26, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Something quick before this IP gets temporarily blocked again and I have to start using a different one...
In regards to your comments here, it is extremely refreshing to see an admin who actually has a head on their shoulders! Bbb23 and Diannaa are the only other two I can say that about (though, admittedly, it's not like I've encountered every admin Wikipedia has to offer but...). It takes a special breed to see through BS (even if sometimes the BS is mine but, you also saw through other people's) instead of sticking by "friends."Cebr1979 (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
- (Non-administrator comment) but thanks for the promotion I'm sorry things have ended up like this. I dare say I'm not meant to encourage you but... that's really rather clever what you did there. I ask no questions / get told no lies Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 03:54, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
- Also, I did wonder what the 'R' word was...? Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 05:55, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Pseudohistorians
David Irving has written: "Nazis quite quite clearly killed millions of Jews" "There is no doubt at all that the Nazis in their 12 year rule inflicted nameless horrors on large segments of their population, including the Jews" Does this sound like the words of a holocaust denier to you? Manifest Truth (talk) 10:44, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Very fucking willingly, I'm sure! Cheers! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 10:47, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:38, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thomas Courtenay, 6th/14th Earl of Devon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Topsham. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
I find it unlikely you think that removing the accreditation information from the European Graduate School's page somehow means it's no longer accredited, but I can't imagine what! else you could have meant by your comment about the diff showing that it isn't accredited. Could you please clarify? I've cited the accreditation in the discussion. Hobit (talk) 14:25, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Merger discussion for List of motor yachts by length
An article that you have been involved in editing—List of motor yachts by length —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 78.148.69.211 (talk) 16:19, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Disruptive behaviour?
if you are referring to my 'neighbourhood' rant, it is only correct to repair the damage done to the english language by us barbaric americans; if you are referring to the 'oak park' discussion, i was confused by an edit made to my page and reached out to the editor who made it, i tried to be as courteous as possible and if i seemed impolite it was definitely not purposeful; and if you are referring to the vandal counter, I HAVE URGES! and i undid it afterward (and before you messaged me) because guilt. No matter what, i have not been in any way malicious, i was not trying to offend or "harass" anyone, and am slightly puzzled (and bothered) that you contacted me because of it. if this post seems in any way "disruptive" to you, i assure it is not meant to be either, so chill mang, chill. JonCruz14 (talk) 22:41, 12 April 2016 (UTC) JonCruz14
User TheBellaTwins1445
There, I'm not trying to vandalize Wikipedia, I don't even know why are you putting this tome ? since the one who persists adding irrelevant images, information etc... is the user HunteWinchester123, I'm not seriously trying to vandalize anything all I believe I'm dong its my work of being an editor on Wikipedia, and why did you just warn to me when you should also of do it with that user. I would seriously want an apologize If I do something, but I don't seriously think I should of being just the one who is getting punished.TheBellaTwins1445(talk) 7:35, April 13, 2016 (UTC)
If you don't believe me here I left you some of his edits.
Additionally, can you please provide context on why I'm just getting this message too, since Im not the only one. Thanks.TheBellaTwins1445(talk) 7:35, April 13, 2016 (UTC)
Just take a look of her/his edition from April 13, 2016, In this one he or she don't even explain their/her changes, she has delete relievable information, add sources that I already mention are unreliable, birth name wasn't necessary as it was already mention on the page to her/him and persistently wants to add unnecessary images on the article, here is the edit so you see I'm not lying. And this is why on the main reasons I'm trying to make a call to you to stop this.TheBellaTwins1445(talk) 8:52, April 13, 2016 (UTC)
A somewhat WP:TEDIOUS discussion, since you have already been warned by the ADMINISTRATION about your edit-warring. Goodbye. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 08:37, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for suggesting the merge, can you please comment on it as well? WannaBeEditor (talk) 08:47, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
You're right, my edit was crap. I wanted to get rid of the red links while keeping your previous edits with minimum effort on my part.
That was an honest mistake, an oversight, sloppy. It was NOT on purpose, malicious, vicious or vandalism (you didn't claim that, I know).
Before you accuse others of lying or fake edits, you might wanna check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith
Hope that helps, 84.167.64.228 (talk) 19:59, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
- No, sorry. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 20:00, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Andra Fuller
- added links pointing to Black Jesus and 2016 Academy Awards
- Ned Maguire
- added links pointing to Jail break and Patrick Donnelly
- Abhishek Verma (businessman)
- added a link pointing to Congress Party
- Bahar Kimyongür
- added a link pointing to Belga
- Mark Ormrod (historian)
- added a link pointing to Membership
- Patrick Donnelly (IRA)
- added a link pointing to Jail break
- Port of Ventspils
- added a link pointing to Lavia
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Done cheers Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:18, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 00:54, 16 April 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Comment for you there from another user. North America1000 00:54, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
A page you started (John Watts (historian)) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating John Watts (historian), Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi!
Wikipedia editor Blythwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
I've added a link on the John Watts disambiguation page and categories. This article could do with some citations from independent sources, not just self-authored and his institution, assessing his importance, though.
To reply, leave a comment on Blythwood's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Do you want to tell me why you've just reverted the edits I made to this page? I'm in the middle of re-writing it. Sheesh! Xyl 54 (talk) 21:41, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- That should be obvious. In the meantime, I've done a little to ensure it doesn't happen again. Good luck with it: it should be GA at least. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 21:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- "Yeah, sure, but"? No, it wasn't obvious... And "it should be GA at least"; is that sarcasm? Xyl 54 (talk) 21:59, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- No; it means it should be GA at least. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 08:27, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- "Yeah, sure, but"? No, it wasn't obvious... And "it should be GA at least"; is that sarcasm? Xyl 54 (talk) 21:59, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Nouman
No problem, it's easily done, and it makes sense not to press the fully-automated Twinkle button for an already-open case. Happy sockhunting. --McGeddon (talk) 10:31, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Anca Verma
- added a link pointing to Romanian
- Surrey Chapel, Norwich
- added a link pointing to Church
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:48, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
- Done cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 09:50, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Editing the toseland wikipedia article
Good afternoon I am currently editing the Toseland article as part of a university wikipedia assignment and I have noticed that most of my edits have been removed. I just want to know what are your further plans with this article and what problems I need to address in order to avoid future situation like this from taking place ever again. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billo-Conteh.M (talk • contribs) 11:43, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Ongoing discussion at Talk:Coverage of Google Street View
Please continue the discussion here, I have asked you a question and still have not answered me.
Talk:Coverage of Google Street View
Pablothepenguin (talk) 11:45, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The second removal was of material that was NOT tagged as unreferenced; your copy / pasting of your previous edit-summary was lazy and did not apply to the edit in question. I would also like you to draw my attention to the policy which supports your statement. Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 12:20, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
I'll see how you get on with developing this page by yourself for the time being. Bmcln1 (talk) 15:34, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Laura Branigan little brother Billy was born 1957 in Mount Kisco
I changed my mind. I am curious how you will solve the problem with both Lauras and Billy Branigan's birth year, 1957. Remember they were siblings, and siblings usually don't have the same birth year. As Devilmanozzy wrote to me "1957 stays"! And US Public Records says about Billy..28 Feb 1957. So it must stay, or what do you think? Or will you find a new birth year to Billy, when you decided Laura was born 1957 and not he? If you do, you must convince Laura's siblings Susan, Mark and Billy and of course public records that they are wrong. It might be difficult for you, though my contacts with Laura's former neighbours, classmates, sources, clips, photos from the 50's and 60's were not reliable. But I am sure you will find sources that will surprise us all that Billy Branigan was born 28 Feb 19xx! Btw..I have found more about Billy. His voting record with his voting number and also February 28, 1957. Are they also fabricated by me? If yes, how did I do it? I have no clue myself. Good luck and we are many who loves this "edit war" you have created so good on your own. And at last...Laura Branigan was born July 3, 1952 in Mount Kisco. Doesn't matter how hard you work for it. Once again, good luck in your delicate problems!--Born53 swe (talk) 08:53, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:04, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
A page you started (The Drewe family of Broadhembury) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating The Drewe family of Broadhembury, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi!
Wikipedia editor Samtar just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Great work
To reply, leave a comment on Samtar's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Disambiguation link notification for May 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bonville–Courtenay feud, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Abingdon, King's peace and Upcott. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
WrestleMania 32.
Try using the talk page to explain your edits, when requested. It seems like the polite way, when there is a content dispute. Your summary didn't really resolve anything. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 07:25, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Actually, that wasn't quite as polite as it could have been. What I should have said was "could you explain to me why that content was restored, because I currently consider it to be detrimental to the overall quality of the article?" Spacecowboy420 (talk) 10:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Stay off Talk
Please don't post to my user Talk anymore Fortuna, unless official WP business. IHTS (talk) 00:05, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- And if I get namechecked, that will make it official WP business. So you better make sure that don't happen. Hope you understand; I doubt it. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 09:48, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Let's make this clear: I don't have to do anything for you. A ping doesn't make WP official business. Courtesy notices re AN, ANI, etc. are WP official business. Other than that, stay off my Talk page. IHTS (talk) 02:49, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I hardly think so ;) Nice block log by the way :D haven't you got a big one :D Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 07:24, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Let's make this clear: I don't have to do anything for you. A ping doesn't make WP official business. Courtesy notices re AN, ANI, etc. are WP official business. Other than that, stay off my Talk page. IHTS (talk) 02:49, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Provide reasoning
[13] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.89.239.32 (talk) 17:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Edit summarry provided. Ciao. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:23, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Rm trolling: IP has been called to account at AN/I. I understand meaning of Rm trolling, what does the rest mean for deletion:"IP has been called to account at AN/I".
- This will explain it better than I ever could :) Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Do you think it was forum shopping. Similar activities were done by the other editor. See:[14] and [15] then it wasn't called or flagged as forum shopping or where do you think policy-wise the trouble lies.59.89.239.32 (talk) 19:07, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- This will explain it better than I ever could :) Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Rm trolling: IP has been called to account at AN/I. I understand meaning of Rm trolling, what does the rest mean for deletion:"IP has been called to account at AN/I".
- @Favonian: warned you against shopping; I advise you that this converation may possibly constitute similar. Just an FYI. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:12, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- {@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: asking reasoning for your deletion isn't considered as forum shopping. But since you are disinterested in replying. I will stop here.Ciao. 59.89.239.32 (talk) 19:16, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- @Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: kindly ask this User:TJH2018 to stop with disruptions on your page. Its O.K if you want the editor to fight for you, otherwise this is trolling when two editors are talking and an another one joining in to fight.
- You have been reported for vandalism Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:29, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Well that is nice and the reasoning for this might be removing disruptive trolls when we were talking, if so dont give the answer for your other action its implied59.89.239.32 (talk) 19:33, 18 May 2016 (UTC).
- You have been reported for vandalism Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:29, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Jackob Bernoulli
Hello Fortuna. The page you moved to Jackob Bernoulli has been moved back to Jacob Bernoulli. If you still consider that Jackob is better, please raise a proposal on the article's talk page and obtain consensus before further action. Apuldram (talk) 18:27, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- @Apuldram: Actually it should be Jakob Bernoulli, as per WP:COMMON; policy reflects the already-established WP:CONSENSUS of the community, so of course needs no subsequent ratification. Cheers. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:34, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
My talk page.
Just a polite request, that you do not post anything on my talk page (including templates), unless required to by Wikipedia policy. Thanks and have an awesome day! Spacecowboy420 (talk) 07:45, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Templates do not qualify. Also to inform you, your post stinks of hypocrisy. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 07:50, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- If you are required to place a template on my talk page, then go ahead. If it is not required by Wikipedia policy then don't.
- I don't really care what you think my post stinks of, I just see nothing to be gained from interaction with you, and would prefer to not have you posting on my talk page. Thanks, Buddy! Spacecowboy420 (talk) 07:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Nonsense. Unfortunately this isn't a legislative assembly, and you, new though you are, do not get to pass your own bylaws. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 07:58, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I'm trying hard but failing to understand why exactly you are so desperate to post on my talk page. I made a polite request, instead of making threats. If you really want to get into some fascinating online argument about the technicalities of wikilawyering, go find your fun elsewhere, this has already become very tedious. Thanks, Bro! Spacecowboy420 (talk) 08:06, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- On the contrary, I'm merely fascinated by the breath-taking hypocrisy of banning someone from your TP, and not being able to keep your fingers off this one. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 08:13, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I'm trying hard but failing to understand why exactly you are so desperate to post on my talk page. I made a polite request, instead of making threats. If you really want to get into some fascinating online argument about the technicalities of wikilawyering, go find your fun elsewhere, this has already become very tedious. Thanks, Bro! Spacecowboy420 (talk) 08:06, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I would imagine that from your responses to me, and the lack of a "please don't post on my talk page" request, that you had no issue with me posting here. Don't worry, I won't waste my time on your talk page again. (unless required to by wikipedia rules) - Thanks mate! Spacecowboy420 (talk) 08:24, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Yes stick around, you'll find that some editors need not descend to that level of childishness. Mate indeed. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 08:32, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I see you have several editors asking you to not post on their talk pages except when required by Wikipedia practices like noticeboard notices. Please abide by their requests, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, and consider whether your talk page comments might come across as antagonistic. Liz Read! Talk! 09:55, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Antagonism is reciprocal User: Liz, and you might want to look at why some editors respond that way; in the most recent examples, after I was trolled on another TP, and most recently after advising an editor that he was edit warring. I'm sure you take those issues even more seriously than comments on my talk. In the meantime, be assured I will give those requests the deference they deserve. Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 10:07, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I see you have several editors asking you to not post on their talk pages except when required by Wikipedia practices like noticeboard notices. Please abide by their requests, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, and consider whether your talk page comments might come across as antagonistic. Liz Read! Talk! 09:55, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Yes stick around, you'll find that some editors need not descend to that level of childishness. Mate indeed. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 08:32, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I would imagine that from your responses to me, and the lack of a "please don't post on my talk page" request, that you had no issue with me posting here. Don't worry, I won't waste my time on your talk page again. (unless required to by wikipedia rules) - Thanks mate! Spacecowboy420 (talk) 08:24, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I ought to clarify the above statement in more detail, for watchers, passing editors, etc.
- When Liz says "you have several editors", she actually means (in recent months, anyway) two, as 'several,' Wikionary tells us, from the seventeeth-century, has meant 'a number more than two'.
- When IHTS banned me from his TP, it was because I commented in response to this comment by an IP. This is not just any IP; this is an WP:LTA, user Vote (X) for Change, who had previously that day been mass-reverted by myself and others on Wales' TP here, and earlier under another IP, had posted on BethNaught's page and was reverted; and finally posts on IHardlyThinkSo's page. Which was not reverted; and, indeed, is still there.
- The second is far simpler. Spacecowboy420 does not like being informed that he is (almost) edit-warring and approaching 3RR: his immediate response is to delete the template and impose a 'ban.' It is possible that he believes that WP:CIVIL trumps WP:AGF; it does not; they are mutually inclusive.
- Lastly, my personal opinion is administrators should probably not tell editors to desist from things before they have done them: this suggests, rightly or wrongly, a lack of faith.
- This is background, not a rallying cry or a debating point. Cheers,
- Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 13:12, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Ogle, 1st Baron Ogle, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Forfeited and Neville. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:43, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
User:Chow chun wai/Alice Lai Nga Yu
Just in case you haven't figured it out, when a page has been deleted, a user may request a WP:REFUND. An admin who grants the refund may decide to 'userify' the article by placing the undeleted page in the user's space. Although it is now a user's subpage, it can show as being "created" by the admin who did the refund. Six months later, when it hasn't been worked on any further, you nominate it for deletion as a stale draft, but your automated script thinks that the admin who did the refund is the person who needs to be notified about the speedy notice. You may want to consider having a quick look at whom you are sending notifications to, and perhaps removing any erroneous ones. --RexxS (talk) 15:25, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Why is User:Geogre so significant to WP? Muffled Pocketed 15:33, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- You probably need to read a few of the articles listed at User:Geogre #Latest de novo articles to get some idea. Then make your own mind up. --RexxS (talk) 20:19, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Doesn't seem to have been obsessed by references; but fair play on the feller. Thanks for that info above by the way; didn't release that a refunded article is technically the Admin's. Due mainly to the fact that I don't think I've seen a refunded article before. Cheers! Muffled Pocketed 20:56, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Most writers in the early days didn't have the same obsession with citing every sentence. Geogre would simply read up on a load of sources and write the article from what he'd learned from them. At the bottom of the page he'd note which his principal sources were. He always cited any direct quotes of course. If you think about it, that's pretty much how all previous encyclopedias (and many scholarly works) were written. The articles are no less supported by reliable sources; it just takes more effort for those who want to verify them. --RexxS (talk) 21:43, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Less bureaucracy? I see what you mean on many of those articles. Is that him in the photos you have? Muffled Pocketed 22:36, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Most writers in the early days didn't have the same obsession with citing every sentence. Geogre would simply read up on a load of sources and write the article from what he'd learned from them. At the bottom of the page he'd note which his principal sources were. He always cited any direct quotes of course. If you think about it, that's pretty much how all previous encyclopedias (and many scholarly works) were written. The articles are no less supported by reliable sources; it just takes more effort for those who want to verify them. --RexxS (talk) 21:43, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Doesn't seem to have been obsessed by references; but fair play on the feller. Thanks for that info above by the way; didn't release that a refunded article is technically the Admin's. Due mainly to the fact that I don't think I've seen a refunded article before. Cheers! Muffled Pocketed 20:56, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- You probably need to read a few of the articles listed at User:Geogre #Latest de novo articles to get some idea. Then make your own mind up. --RexxS (talk) 20:19, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:43, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Imelda Marcos
We just reached a consensus at the talk page.Imeldific (talk) 11:36, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Question
Filing an SPI in a case like you describe is often closed out of hand. The best way to address it is to privately contact a member of the SPI team, probably better a CheckUser, who can decide whether to investigate outside of the SPI process.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- Check. Err... like you Bbb23? Muffled Pocketed 17:22, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- If you like. Please bear in mind that I don't generally reply to e-mail, so if I have something to say, I'll post it here.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:02, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- BTW, for notifications (pings, etc.) to work, the ping or other template must be included in the same edit that you sign. You signed in your first edit but didn't put in the template until the third of the series. I came back here just to check, not because I received your ping.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:06, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- If you like. Please bear in mind that I don't generally reply to e-mail, so if I have something to say, I'll post it here.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:02, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Another 3RR report about Battle of Ia Drang
Hello Fortuna. see this AN3 report in case you have any comment to make. You filed a report about the same page earlier but it expired with no action. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 20:35, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks EdJohnston, just did (ironically just before you posted). I think that what I filed could be considered a lucky escape for both of them- temporarily. But the thing has been a tit-for-tat for months over multiple articles; if no-one else has got involved in them, perhaps it's because their behaviour has locked editors out? Could be possible. Muffled Pocketed 20:41, 1 June 2016 (UTC)