User talk:Bazonka

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Thank you Bazonka, I am new to wiki and I don't like that mistake made on the Englebert H. page, (the cluebot accusation) Not true, I hope you reported it as all I did was put the ISBN numbers on and I didn't remove anything or make any changes. Will that false positive mess up my chances and am I flagged now for trouble? Is there anything I need to do to clear my user name? cydorsmCydorsm (talk) 14:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

@Cydorsm: Don't worry about it. ClueBot is an automatic program that sometimes gets it wrong. I flagged it as a false positive with the ClueBot system, so there'll be no black mark against your name. Let me know if you have any other questions - I'm happy to help. Bazonka (talk) 14:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Would you be able to look at the Richard G. Thomas page and resolve the COI/ it was not a COI/admission on that page maybe on another talk page, but it was removed Cydorsm (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2016 (UTC). thanks!

@Cydorsm: I'm not quite sure what the problem is. It's not WP:COI unless you are Richard G Thomas yourself. Using his biography as a source is covered by this guideline: WP:BLPSELFPUB, so should be OK as long as it's not too biased, and note that point 5 of the guideline states that the article must not be based primarily on this source. So if you can balance it with other sources then it should be OK, otherwise you might need to remove some of the content from the biography. Also, you will need to reference the biography properly each time you use it as a source - putting it in the bibliography is OK as well, but this does not serve as a reference to the article's content. Bazonka (talk) 19:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank You, that clears up the issue, and no I am not the subject in this article (I am female); I will take a look at those links for references again, however they are somewhat confusing, but again thanks for your help. Cydorsm (talk) 20:25, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Cydorsm: References aren't that difficult. Just click on the Cite button at the top of the edit window, pick the right template (probably Cite Book in your case) and a wizard will appear which will do most of the hard part for you. Bazonka (talk) 21:37, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Abkhazia infobox RfC[edit]

Farm-Fresh eye.png Due to previous participation in a discussion on the subject, you are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Abkhazia#RfC on Infobox. CMD (talk) 12:55, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, but I have no strong opinion either way, so I'll stay out of it. Bazonka (talk) 10:05, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Mediterranean Sea[edit]

Hi, sorry to disturb you - is there any chance you could make a contribution to the discussion on the above page regarding the inclusion of Northern Cyprus on the list of countries with coastlines on the Mediterranean. Thanks. Denisarona (talk) 15:39, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Lemmium listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lemmium. Since you had some involvement with the Lemmium redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Dane2007 talk 23:46, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Bazonka. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Re: Recent reverted edit on geocaching[edit]

Hi, I see that you reverted my edit on the geocaching earlier. Could you please tell me how I go about 'tagging' dead links, so I know for future reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mojo0306 (talkcontribs) 17:49, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

@Mojo0306: You need to add {{deadlink}} before the </ref>. Have a look at WP:KDL. Incidentally, I checked the link that you deleted and it worked fine, so I don't think it needs to be marked at all. Bazonka (talk) 21:57, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

ahh here is wishing a peaceful ocean for the coming year[edit]

long time no speak

methinks the oceans of the world need more quiet...

coincidentally met a shipping man in our local shopping centre this afternoon

(he had bad memories of valparaiso whatsmore...)

trust you have a HNY JarrahTree 12:10, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year to you too! Bazonka (talk) 18:54, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

if they cannot even weed out imbeciles from positions of power[edit]

then their fact book is clearly wrong - viz recent on Indian Ocean, sigh JarrahTree 02:08, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Columbia Graphophone Company[edit]

Because the Columbia Graphophone Company was a British company and therefore a British article, British spellings are used. Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:50, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

@Steelbeard1: You are quite correct that BrE should be used in that article, but in this case it's an irrelevant argument. License (and hence, licensed) is the correct verb spelling in all varieties of English. See MOS:S and any English dictionary. Bazonka (talk) 14:06, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Account creator granted[edit]

Wikipedia Accountcreators.png

After reviewing your request for the "accountcreator" permission, I have enabled the flag on your account. Keep in mind these things:

  • The account creator right removes the limit on the maximum number of new accounts that can be created in a 24-hour period.
  • The account creator right is not a status symbol. If it remains unused, it is likely to be removed. Abuse of the account creator right will result in its removal by an administrator.

If you no longer require the right, let me know, or ask any other administrator. Drop a note on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of the account creator right. Happy editing! — xaosflux Talk 17:42, 15 September 2017 (UTC)