User talk:Alureiter

Welcome!

Hello, Alureiter, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, you can post to the help desk or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- Francs2000 | Talk 14:40, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of military aircraft of Germany in WWI

Thanks for your contribution to this article! It's much appreciated.

Your help would be appreciated

Hi Alureiter, I am currently requesting review for the Bjørnøya article and since you have recently edited there, I thought you might like to look into it again. Please comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/Bjørnøya/archive2, any constructive criticism would be much appreciated. Thanks. Kosebamse 22:46, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ship classes category

Could you let me know why you removed the Farragut-class category from the Category:Ship classes? The Farragut class is a ship class, so appears that it had been properly categorized. Thanks. Jinian 11:32, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, so put the article Faragut class in category ship classes (if it's not already there) since it's about the Farragut ship class, but not the category Farragut class, since it's a collection of individual ships of the Farragut class. Actually, it's more about consitency. We have dozens of such ships of a class cats, but only the two farragat cats were put in cat ship classes. Alureiter 12:14, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon my interuption here, but I am the editor that recently added the ship class to those categories, so I was curious when you changed it. Thank you for fixing that, I see now that I was placing that category in the wrong place. I have since fixed it, and I have added them to Farragut class destroyer (1934) and Farragut class destroyer (1958) which is where that category belongs. Thanks for catching that, and for your explanation. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 12:47, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Consistency is good. Thanks. Jinian 21:34, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for List of the largest artificial non-nuclear explosions

Hello, good work on List of the largest artificial non-nuclear explosions, and thanks for the contribution. However, you did not provide any references or sources in the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. Can you list in the article any websites, books, or other sources that will allow people to verify the content in List of the largest artificial non-nuclear explosions? You can simply add links, preferably as the inline citations, or see citation templates for different citation methods. Thanks! Lupin|talk|popups 00:36, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are the other articles the list links to. - Alureiter 08:23, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Georgia Move

As a past participant in the discussion on how to handle the Georgia pages, I thought you might be interested to know that there's a new attempt to reach consensus on the matter being addressed at Talk:Georgia (country)#Requested_Move_-_July_2006. Please come by and share your thoughts to help form a consensus. --Vengeful Cynic 03:38, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of STN Atlas

The article STN Atlas has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:48, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Link 22

The article Link 22 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTMANUAL.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 13:12, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Renk moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Renk, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 22:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of DM4 torpedo

The article DM4 torpedo has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not meeting WP:GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mr.weedle (talk) 05:17, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]