- 1 New messages, questions, comments: Put at very bottom of page, see text of this section
- 2 Disambiguation link and bracket bot notifications
- 3 Brodsworth
- 4 Mustang Range
- 5 Rogue Edits?
- 6 City of many chickens
- 7 Random IP edits
- 8 Chinese Mini-Nuke Event
- 9 Oral administration of Propylene Glycol
- 10 Lookout Mountain GA website error
- 11 Template:Cannes Film Festival Best Director Award
- 12 Edit in page "pitts modern school"
- 13 Sex Difference in Intelligence
- 14 Removing my edit
- 15 Revising the edits
- 16 Belarus
- 17 List of Bullpups.
- 18 Janet Jones (artist) page reversion/removal
- 19 Don't revert edits for no reason
- 20 Jay Jays change
- 21 89th MP Brigade
- 22 Blink-182 Name Explanation
- 23 The Morley Academy
- 24 explanation for editing
- 25 sorry
- 26 Arnaoot
- 27 Balkan pan-slavism
- 28 Eleanor Percy, Countess of Northumberland
- 29 A false positive in midwifery article
- 30 Fetterman, West Virginia
- 31 Books and Bytes - Issue 13
- 32 Germany–India article
- 33 Public Protests: Just the TTIP of the Iceberg?
- 34 Editing The Alexander Nevermind Wikipedia page
- 35 DrPhuong213
- 36 slander
- 37 A cupcake for you!
- 38 RfA
- 39 BYU/San Diego
Please put new messages at the very bottom of the page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 08:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC) To clarify, the new item should not be below this message and not below the repeated message after my introductory paragraphs but at the very bottom of the page after every other item on the page. It will help me to understand what you are talking about to add a section heading, identify the article you are concerned with (if your question or comment refers to a specific article), using a link, probably putting the article title in the heading, and sign your edit with four tildes (~~~~) so I know to whom to reply. Keep an eye on this page because I may just reply here if the answer is simple and does not seem to be time sensitive. When I notice an out of order question or comment, I will move it to the bottom of the page and provide a heading if there is none already. Donner60 (talk) 22:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia policies, guidelines; twitter, facebook; what Wikipedia is not; avoiding common mistakes
References to Wikipedia policies, guidelines, instructions, include:
Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Wikipedia guidelines on twitter, facebook: Wikipedia:Twitter. Wikipedia guidelines, policies on external links: Wikipedia:External links. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, which includes not a dictionary, a publisher of original thought, a soapbox or means of promotion, a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files, a blog, Web hosting service, social networking service, or memorial site, a directory, a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal, a crystal ball, a newspaper, or an indiscriminate collection of information. • Wikipedia:Verifiability. • Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. • Wikipedia:No original research. • Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. • Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. • Wikipedia:Citing sources. • Wikipedia:Notability. • Wikipedia:Image use policy. • Wikipedia:Avoiding common mistakes. • Wikipedia:Vandalism. • Wikipedia:Categorization#Articles. • Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles.
User Talk page guidelines
Excerpts Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#User talk pages While the purpose of article talk pages is to discuss the content of articles, the purpose of user talk pages is to draw the attention or discuss the edits of a user. Wikipedia is not a social networking site, and all discussion should ultimately be directed solely toward the improvement of the encyclopedia.
Users may freely remove comments from their own talk pages, though archiving is preferred. They may also remove some content in archiving. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. This specifically includes both registered and unregistered users.
There are certain types of notices that users may not remove from their own talk pages, such as declined unblock requests and speedy deletion tags. See Wikipedia:User pages#Removal of comments, notices, and warnings for full details.
User talk pages are subject to the general userpage guidelines on handling inappropriate content—see Wikipedia:User pages#Handling inappropriate content.
- Personal talk page cleanup: On your own user talk page, you may archive threads at your discretion. Simply deleting others' comments on your talk page is permitted, but most editors prefer archiving.
From the section Editing comments, Other's comments in Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines:
- Fixing format errors that render material difficult to read. In this case, restrict the edits to formatting changes only and preserve the content as much as possible. Examples include fixing indentation levels, removing bullets from discussions that are not consensus polls or requests for comment (RfC), fixing list markup, using
<nowiki>and other technical markup to fix code samples, and providing wikilinks if it helps in better navigation.
- Fixing layout errors: This could include moving a new comment from the top of a page to the bottom, adding a header to a comment not having one, repairing accidental damage by one party to another's comments, correcting unclosed markup tags that mess up the entire page's formatting, accurately replacing HTML table code with a wikitable, etc.
- Sectioning: If a thread has developed new subjects, it may be desirable to split it into separate discussions with their own headings or subheadings. When a topic is split into two topics, rather than sub-sectioned, it is often useful for there to be a link from the new topic to the original and vice versa. A common way of doing this is noting the change at the [then-]end of the original thread, and adding an unobtrusive note under the new heading, e.g.,
:. Some reformatting may be necessary to maintain the sense of the discussion to date and to preserve attribution. It is essential that splitting does not inadvertently alter the meaning of any comments. very long discussions may also be divided into sub-sections.
<small>This topic was split off from [[#FOOBAR]], above.
Note that it is proper to use
<nowiki> and other technical markup to fix code samples.
Please put messages, questions or comments at the very bottom of the page. If you put them here (immediately before or after this paragraph), as some people have done, I may either not see them or more likely not see them very promptly. That will delay any reply from me to you. To clarify, this should not be below this message but at the very bottom of the page after every other item on the page. It will help me to understand what you are talking about to add a section heading, identify the article you are concerned with, and use a link, (if your question or comment refers to a specific article), probably putting the article name in the heading, and sign your edit with four tildes (~~~~) so I know to whom to reply. Keep an eye on this page because I may just reply here if the answer is simple and does not seem to be time sensitive. When I notice an out of order question or comment, I will move it to the bottom of the page and provide a heading if there is none already. Donner60 (talk) 22:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
If you put something here or other than at the bottom of the page despite the above request, and can not find it, and assuming it was not vandalism or abuse, it is probably at the bottom of the page under what I think is an appropriate heading, probably related to an article name in the comment. ......................
I occasionally get one of these notices. I fix the link or bracket, then delete the message, as the messages state is permissible, instead of further cluttering up these pages. Donner60 (talk) 05:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
The contribution is highly relevant and placed in an appropriate place. This is particularly evident in consideration of cost incurred by the contributor's experience (or understanding) of what it cost in the 1960s. I'm really surprised this didn't occur to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 02:50, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Replied on your talk page. Your own experience or understanding is not a good source. However, since similar information is on the page and also is not directly sourced, I deleted the message on your talk page and will not revert the edit if you add it again but I can not know how other editors may view it. Donner60 (talk) 02:56, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, you removed some stuff from the Rogue brewery page becuase you said it looked like a test. I don't know what that means. I looked through the edit history of that page and it's almost all rogue employees doing the writing? It it supposed to be that way? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MerabWade (talk • contribs) 21:35, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- I am not sure how you suppose that the editors are all Rogue employees but I don't think it is necessary to go into that. Wikipedia publishes facts based on verifiable, reliable sources, not opinions or commentary, especially based on blogs or forums, and ones that simply criticize and have axes to grind. I assumed you did not know this and did not have bad intent when you posted your previous changes so I marked it as a test. A longer explanation with reference to Wikipedia policies that I now link would have been better. In any event, now I see that you deleted content in the article, mid-reference, leaving gibberish to start a paragraph. Apparently you have something against Rogue and are not adding or changing content according to Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view. Also, see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. Donner60 (talk) 03:35, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
City of many chickens
You removed saying it was a test. I was just there. There are indeed chickens walking the streets everywhere. Maybe you can tell me if you don't want me to put that there if there is a section where I can add it as there city bird? Feralchicken (talk) 23:18, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- If you have a verifiable, reliable source that you can cite and this is not simply your opinion (See Wikipedia:No original research), let me know. Also, see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia is not a blog, forum, soapbox or publisher of original research or opinion. It is an encyclopedia based on reliable, verifiable, neutral sources. (See also Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.) Donner60 (talk) 23:26, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Random IP edits
Hi, I'm sorry if this is the wrong place for questions, but I think there's been some sort of mix up. I was told that I had made some edits that were considered vandalism, but I have never even edited Wikipedia in the first place. I use it a lot, but I've never edited it. I don't have an account, but it told me that you knew it was me from the IP address. This is a work computer, but I've had it for several months now and never edited Wikipedia during that time. It looked like the edits in question were from the last four months or so? 22.214.171.124 (talk) 01:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC) Also, I just made an account so if you responded to this I could see it. Thank you again. Zacharykopet (talk) 01:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Chinese Mini-Nuke Event
Referenced sources and simple logic is profusely given. Scientific analysis transcends politics. Please at least summarize the data I condensed and simplified in the article somehow, with the referenced peer-reviewed journals explaining the logic of causation here...
Ambrosini, R.D., Luccioni, B.M., Danesi, R.F., Riera, J.D., and Rocha, M.M. 2002. Size of Craters Produced by Explosive Charges on or above the Ground Surface. Shock Waves, 12 (1): 69–78.
Ambrosini, R.D., Luccioni, B.M., and Danesi, R. 2006. Craters Produced by Explosions on the Soil Surface. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 73.
Ambrosini, R.D., and Luccioni, B.M. 2007. Craters Produced by Explosions above the Soil Surface. Mechanica Computacional, 26: 2253. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:B34B:A940:F051:AB0F:3A76:DE48 (talk) 03:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- You can certainly do this. The only problem that I saw with your additions was that they would likely be challenged for lack of citations. I assure you that politics has nothing to do with it as far as I am concerned. Since you have the citations, just add them as footnotes to support your text. There is no need for me to rewrite it as you are knowledgeable about the topic and know what the sources say. Help:Footnotes, Wikipedia:Citing Sources and Help:Referencing for beginners are pages with information about citing sources if you are unsure about how to do this. Thanks for the reply. Donner60 (talk) 03:38, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Sir, my above words are my own, but half of what I wrote to you was removed somehow, certain syntax and grammar in the public article modifications, and on here, both subtly warped, making my mind seem "eccentric" in an unflattering way, these changes not from MY END ... Genuinely puzzled, and I leave the NSA to this, I suppose. I know not what to think, period, now. Freaked out slightly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:B34B:A940:F051:AB0F:3A76:DE48 (talk) 04:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- The edit histories show no other user or IP address modified the above message or the article after your edits and before my reply or revert, respectively, both of which in turn did not modify anything you wrote. I am no computer expert so I cannot even guess at an explanation. Donner60 (talk) 04:28, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Oral administration of Propylene Glycol
Please consider my addition to this section:
A recent case of propylene glycol poisoning from excess whiskey ingestion has been reported, in which a young man required ICU admission for respiratory depression and a significant osmolal gap metabolic acidosis.
I think it is relevant, but have not had much practice with editing. I'd like to try to site this article for the above addition: http://hic.sagepub.com/content/3/3/2324709615603722.full.pdf?ijkey=zv5XbFAllOicgL4&keytype=finite
- I have deleted my message and restored your edit. I misinterpreted it. I left a little longer comment on your talk page. Thank you for calling this to my attention and I am sorry for the mistake. Donner60 (talk) 19:47, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Lookout Mountain GA website error
I attempted to edit an incorrect link in the Walker County, Georgia article. The "City of Lookout Mountain, Ga" link currently listed (http://www.cityoflookoutmountain.com) takes one to a page with oriental text and is definitely not the website for the city. The correct URL is http://www.lookoutmtnga.com. (126.96.36.199 (talk) 23:05, 10 September 2015 (UTC))
- You are correct. I must say it was really weird to test the old link and see the Oriental characters come up. Sorry for the mistake. I am deleting the original message on your talk page in the manner prescribed by the style guidelines (strike through). I have restored your edit. Thanks for bringing this to my attention and I hope you will be encouraged to add further useful edits to Wikipedia. Donner60 (talk) 23:10, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Template:Cannes Film Festival Best Director Award
188.8.131.52 (talk) 23:21, 10 September 2015 (UTC) Hi,Donner 60! Table "Template:Cannes Film Festival Best Director Award" is repeated twice. Please, correct it. Apologize about my bad English, and so on. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 23:21, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
- I only see the template contents shown once in the current version of the template. Are you referring to a different page or am I missing something? Donner60 (talk) 01:23, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
- Now I see from your edit summary that you were apparently concerned about the double entry in the article about Sergei Yutkevich. I removed the double entry from that article. You were editing the template itself which not only blanked the template but would not work to solve the problem with the Sergei Yutkevich article. It now seems that everything is correct. Thank you for alerting me to this. Donner60 (talk) 01:22, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Edit in page "pitts modern school"
I have done some editing like-1.added chairman 2.added website address 3. School address at the page of school "pitts modern school".
My changes have been removed and i got a message as : "Hello, I'm Donner60. An edit you recently made to Pitts Modern School seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 02:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)".
Please reconsider it.All changes i have done are correct.please make the change visible and applicable. Thankyou! Tapas ranjan mahto (talk) 02:46, 11 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tapas ranjan mahto (talk • contribs) 02:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
- I have deleted my message on your talk page. I have restored your edit except that I corrected the number of students from your number of 22000 to 2200. I was suspicious of that number which is why I tagged the edit as a test. Now I see that it must have been a typographical error. Sorry for the confusion but now all the changes appear to be correct. Donner60 (talk) 02:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Sex Difference in Intelligence
This is John Smith, a few minutes ago you removed an edit because I didn't provide the source but I actually DID provide that source and if the edit is still available please recheck it. If I did manage not provide a source, can you please cite which one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Deranjo Smith (talk • contribs) 04:08, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
- You referred to "another study in Spain" but I see no further identification of it or reference to it. You also wrote "Therefore most IQ studies on sex differences tend to be representative of college students not overall population" without identifying a source for that. I think that unsourced edits to this article are likely challenged with regularity so it would be better to provide the references than get into a dispute about the contents (not with me, but with others who may take a greater interest). See Help:Page history for information on the "View History" tab where you can see previous versions and edits. Donner60 (talk) 04:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
- How do I contact the author of the page "Sex differences in intelligence"? I wanted to talk to him about my deleted edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Deranjo Smith (talk • contribs) 17:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Removing my edit
- You changed Cloud based applications to Butt based applications. Donner60 (talk) 04:07, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Revising the edits
My name is Jzermene Van Ornum, I had my adding into the HTHMA deleted (it was the ip address before), The director of School, Robert Kuhl, has given me permission to add anything, but no inappropriate things, if you don't believe me, I will show you the email. Please respond, thank you Jvanornum2019 (talk) 23:00, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
- Frankly, I don't believe you. You have added and changed information inconsistently and added an obviously bogus year change to 2025, changed numbers back and forth and put in something about a student hurting himself after losing in a game to his 2-year old sister. Or was it a 5-year old sister? You used both. Donner60 (talk) 23:04, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Since this is a big school, the ip's are all the same in the school, I promise you, my friends think it's funny changing things without the Director's permission, I on the other hand did. Jvanornum2019 (talk) 23:15, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
They also don't have a wikipedia (so did I before) account, so all the changes linked into 1 ip address, & it was the school's ip address (All the chromebooks/computers are controlled by Hightechhigh.org), If you still don't believe me, I will give you the email I sent to the director for permission. Jvanornum2019 (talk) 23:17, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
The whole email:
Jzermene Vanornum <firstname.lastname@example.org> 2:22 PM (2 hours ago)
to R Hello Mr. Kuhl
My name is Jzermene Van Ornum, a 9th grade student, may I add something in the HTHMA's Wikipedia, it will not be innapropriate, thank you.
R Kuhl <email@example.com> 2:24 PM (2 hours ago)
I made this account so I can separate from the whole School ip's to wikipedia. Jvanornum2019 (talk) 23:29, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
- OK. That sounds like a reasonable explanation. I am sorry that I did not give you more credit for acting constructively but without the explanation, I had no way to know that was the school IP address and not your own. So I could only think that you made the edits. I am glad you got an account. Protect your password and do not let anyone else use it, or leave your account unattended at school or in a public place, and you will be alright. Please go ahead with appropriate edits. Donner60 (talk) 01:12, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- I left some links to pages with useful information about editing and writing for Wikipedia on your talk page. Donner60 (talk) 01:31, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, since the school is based with the same ip, they can make the same edits with 2+ people, so you have to be on the lookout on that Ip. Thank you for putting in the consideration. Jvanornum2019 (talk) 04:56, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- I have rolled back my revert and restored your edit. However, I believe you removed the URL from the first edit and did not replace it. That was what I saw. (Please double check that.) I am sorry I did not scroll further; that was my mistake. If I had, I would have noticed that you obviously intended to fix the citations. Please accept my apology and I hope you will continue to edit. I am striking my message on the user talk page before the redirected page and repeating this message on the other page as a mistake. I repeat this message to be sure you will get it. Donner60 (talk) 01:09, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
List of Bullpups.
I apologize for not adding a source. I changed those three years on the P90, F2000, and Famas because of the year they began production, not design. If you look at their wiki pages it will say what I put. Thanks!220.127.116.11 (talk) 23:54, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation. Without a source or an explanation such as this in the edit summary, I could not be sure whether the change in years was valid. Donner60 (talk) 01:33, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Janet Jones (artist) page reversion/removal
Hello Donner60. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Last night, you made a reversion to Janet Jones (artist), a page marked under construction as part of a meet-up. You may not have realized that the new user involved was working in a library, under the guidance of Wikipedia Administrators (see Anne Delong), as well as several librarians and other Wikipedians. The new editor was focused on formatting, prior to inserting relevant content with citations. Unfortunately, your abrupt reversion/deletion (under 30 minutes from posting) was seriously discouraging to this editor, who comes with significant knowledge resources that would be highly valuable to Wikipedia. While your overall efforts are appreciated, you should give pages marked with under construction templates (see below) the stated week to complete their collaborative work.
|This user talk page or section is in the process of an expansion or major restructuring. You are welcome to assist in its construction by editing it as well. If this user talk page|
As you know, while there are many users with technical sophistication, quality articles require people with exceptional writing and research skills. Patience with them on initial edits and posts would go a long way to improving the overall quality on Wikipedia.
- Thanks for the heads up on this. I obviously missed it. I was using Huggle last night and I either missed the tag or Huggle did not show it. As you probably know, Huggle shows the changes, not the entire page, so occasionally something in an unchanged part of the page, or an earlier edit, might not be seen. No excuse, of course, but it may be what happened. Either way, I will pay more attention to this possibility in an effort to avoid this problem in the future. Donner60 (talk) 21:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- Actually, now that I have gone back through the history of the page, I see why I did not see the template on Huggle. It was not added to the article until after my one and only reversion of the additions. It was a later editor who reverted the content after the template was added. Nonetheless, I will take your message as a reminder to be vigilant when editing with Huggle. Donner60 (talk) 03:20, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Don't revert edits for no reason
You reverted a clearly described edit I made within seconds of me making it. Obviously, you didn't even bother to read it, and you certainly didn't have the courtesy to give any coherent explanation of why you reverted. Such destructive behaviour is entirely detrimental to the aim of building an encyclopaedia. Don't do it again. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 03:04, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- It appears that I pushed the wrong button because I can see no reason for my revert. As unfortunate and unintentionally aggravating as it may be, mistakes happen. This could be easily corrected and indeed you have reverted the edit so there is no need for me to roll my edit back. Simply bringing it to my attention would be enough for me to recognize a mistake. An apology would ensue. I will assume you do not know about the levels of vandalism and disruptive editing on this project and the need for editors as well as Cluebot to quickly review recent changes in order to control it. Again unfortunately, neither the humans nor the bot are infallible. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Civility. Donner60 (talk) 03:16, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- I am of course aware of vandalism. My edits are very easily distinguished from vandalism, being obvious improvements accompanied by a clear edit summary. But that doesn't stop people reverting them for no reason at all, as you did. If you aren't able or willing to look at edits before reverting, you shouldn't revert. And if you do actually look at them, and decide that you need to revert them, then you should have the courtesy to explain why in an edit summary. "(HG) (3.1.15)" is not a useful edit summary though I see you leave that one a lot. Reverting people's work for no reason is a personal attack. I suggest you read WP:NPA and WP:VAN. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 14:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Jay Jays change
I deleted the information as some of it is now incorrect. I also updated the logo which is their current logo, as per their website and Facebook page, in addition to their brand description
If you could please revert the page back to the changes I made, I will make sure that I describe changes in Edit Summary going forward — Preceding unsigned comment added by Birtcho (talk • contribs) 03:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- I struck the original message on your user talk page and I have rolled back my edit to the latest version by you. You explained that you were in the middle of editing the page, which was the reason for the deletion of content. Thank you for the explanation and I am sorry I jumped the gun on this one. Go ahead with your edits; I hope you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia. Donner60 (talk) 03:56, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
89th MP Brigade
I appreciate you reviewing my changes. I am new to wikipedia and have been tasked by my military unit (93D MP Battalion) to add pages for us. I did not mean to remove any info box from our parent unit (89th MP Brigade) page. I am merely adding basic info and links. I also accidentally started a 93rd MP Battalion page that I changed and redirected to 93D MP Battalion. Please let me know if I made any other mistakes. Also still figuring out talk hah Bsn015 (talk) 03:52, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. I suspected that you may have made an inadvertent change so I am glad I left a specific message. I will take a further look at the articles. I left some links to pages with useful information that can help you in editing and writing for Wikipedia on your talk page. Donner60 (talk) 04:12, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- The 93D Military Police Battalion page should have an introduction similar to that in the article for the 89th Military Police Brigade. Even though it is inserted under the infobox on the edit page, it will, or should, push the infobox to the right side of the page and opposite the opening text rather than on top of it. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Military history for a page with information about editing military or military history articles. Donner60 (talk) 05:52, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
sup. i edited the Blink-182 List of Recorded songs. i was partially incorrect. here's your source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPJMUzMrFP0 2602:306:BDEC:1D0:FD1C:1C0C:90F0:C89B (talk) 04:49, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks. Will you add a corrected sentence with the source? I left a little longer comment on your talk page. Donner60 (talk) 05:56, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
The Morley Academy
- The Morley Academy may no longer have a sixth form but that is no excuse for also adding nonsense about the "4th Reich" and "concentration camp." Donner60 (talk) 08:51, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
explanation for editing
Hello Donor60 This refers to the editing of page Agha Shahid Ali . How on earth can you call it vandalism when I am authenticating it by adding his fathers page. I was just adding to the information. You must do your full research before making any such allegation and threatening to block. I pity your narrow outlook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali1872 (talk • contribs) 07:02, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
- I deleted my first message on your talk page and I have rolled back my reversion to the last version of the article by you. I simply made a mistake. Now that I look at your edit, I see that it was a good faith effort to improve the article. I am not sure why I pressed the reversion button so I either did not understand the edit or simply hit that option by mistake. I am sorry for the mistake and hope you will continue to make useful edits to Wikipedia. Donner60 (talk) 07:11, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks and thanks for bringing this to my attention. Everyone makes mistakes. Sometimes one has to be told about it or they are likely simply to go on and not realize it happened. I think the important thing is to recognize and correct them quickly and work toward the best result. Donner60 (talk) 07:22, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Images and pages linked from there for help. You also may find the following pages have useful information about Wikipedia: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view,Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Getting started; Introduction to Wikipedia; Wikipedia:Simplified ruleset; and Wikipedia:Simplified Manual of Style.
My source is only I am Syrian and I know my ethnic Arnaoot Albanians are living with us in my city. The were mostly soldiers in the Ottoman army and they have been living in Syria fore decades. Nezam mazen (talk) 21:59, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, even if your information is correct, Wikipedia does not base content on personal experience, knowledge or opinion. Wikipedia is based on reliable, verifiable, neutral (third-party) sources, which must be cited if an entry is challenged or is likely to be challenged, which I think you addition would be. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. (A minor point: it was in the wrong place on the page.) You also may find the following pages have useful information about writing and editing for Wikipedia: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Getting started; Introduction to Wikipedia; Wikipedia:Simplified ruleset;Wikipedia:Simplified Manual of Style; Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources, Help:Footnotes Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Thank you.
Why you delete my corections in this article? About pan slavism in ethnic macedonians... Ethnic macedonians not exist prerior to 1945... there is a plenty of discutions and articals with sources about this in wikipedia. Actualy ethnic macedonians not exist at all, they are macedonians by nationality, not by ethnicity, but thats other problem. So majority of historians in the world exsept yugoslavs defenatly not suport the climes of existing of ethnic macedonians prerior 1945. So its imposible to exist pan-slavism among nation and ethnic group that stil not exist!
About the denying the slav belongs of bulgarians. Its imoprtant subject of the article pan-slavism in the Balkan. The serbian nationalistic and comunistic doctrine deny the slav belonging of bulgarians. Propagandateing among the population in exyugoslaviq that the bulgarians are turko-tataro mongols from asian race, and its stil very popular in that area. How this is not important in subject of panslavism? The fashizoid serbian clims that bulgarians are tatars, turcs, mongol, asians is a basic for the serbian panslav national doctrine and vision about Balkan slavs and pan-slavism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 18:40, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- I have left an explanation and some helpful links on your talk page. I apologize for not leaving a message when I reverted your edits as editing tests. I explain that I would not have done this if I had a major problem with the substance. I went about in the wrong way but you reverted my edit and another editor has made some helpful changes so the matter seems to be fixed. I made a few other remarks and left some links to helpful pages on your talk page. Again, I am sorry for the inconvenience and my mistaken handling. Donner60 (talk) 21:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Thank you! I apologize for my ëmotional answer! I apologize for my poor english! I appreciate youre eforts and work about subjects, also youre respective altitude, despite my probably not very calm notes! cheers men! Also to the guy who corect my misteks, also thanks!
- No problem. Again, I do not blame you for your response. I am sure it was frustrating not to get an explanation at first and I must take responsibility for not giving you that right away. Then you would have spared most, if not all, of the frustration. Yes, also thanks to User:Yamaguchi for the corrections. Donner60 (talk) 03:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Eleanor Percy, Countess of Northumberland
Hi Donner60, nice to meet you on my first edit! You had written: Hello, I'm Donner60. An edit you recently made to Eleanor Percy, Countess of Northumberland seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. No, it was not a test or mistake. She was not married to John Locke as listed on the right hand banner (uncited & unsourced). The site quoted from in the Wikipedia article does not have this marriage, nor does any other source. So it would be good if it were removed to stop the genealogical confusion. My thanks Answerstoeh (talk) 15:25, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
- I am sorry I made a mistake on that. I should have taken a little extra time to be more certain. I restored your edit. I hope you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia. I placed on your talk page some links to pages with useful information that can help you in editing and writing for Wikipedia. Donner60 (talk) 02:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
A false positive in midwifery article
- Per WP:SIZESPLIT, more than 60 kb.
- Per WP:CONSPLIT, is not the same "profession" than "professional". It is not the same dentistry than dentist, law than lawyer, physics than physicist, midwifery than midwife, etc. Different articles for different concepts. All the information about education, training, regulation and licensure corresponds to the professional (midwife) article.
- A lot of Interlanguage articles links to the midwife article.
I started "Split" discussions on talk pages of both articles. I had a false positive, and I reported it. Please, could you tell me what other steps should I take to finalize the edit? Thank you. --Rodguerrer (talk) 03:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
- I have rolled back my edit to Midwifery. I think the Midwife article is as you wanted it. I saw the edit to that article, and the summary that it was a split, and thought it was fine, and passed it by. Then, I reverted the corresponding edit to Midwifery, which was obviously a mistake if the first edit was fine. I should have been more alert and put two and two together. I think I was thrown off by the previous reversion by Cluebot, which one can see when using the Huggle program, but also the fact that Huggle does not show the whole page, only the change. That can lead to a mistake (infrequently) if one does not see the whole picture. I am sorry for the mistake and hope this will not discourage you from continuing to contribute to Wikipedia. Donner60 (talk) 04:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
- Just to keep everything together, I add this from the beginning of my later message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message in the manner suggested by the guidelines (strike through) because it was a mistake as the following note explains. Also, I notice you have been using Twinkle and are probably familiar with Huggle (making my mistake more embarrassing). Also, I am not changing what I wrote about Huggle but my explanation is rather simple or superfluous to anyone who is familiar with it. Also, since you have been contributing to Wikipedia, my word of encouragement may be less important than my explanation and apology. Donner60 (talk) 04:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I saw your message on User:Magnolia677's talkpage. Did you take any pictures of historic buildings and the main roads while you were there? It would improve the article a lot if you could upload them to Wikimedia Commons and add one to the infobox. Perhaps User:Coal town guy can help too.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:52, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
- I have no pictures. I actually passed through the Fetterman location (now absorbed into Grafton) on a railroad hi-rail car about 35 years ago. The information in the article is from the sources quoted. I wrote my contribution to the article a few years ago but I don't remember any pictures in those sources. I wrote the article because of Fetterman's significance to events at the start of the American Civil War, not because I happened to have passed through the location or had any special knowledge. I do remember it because it struck me at the time as the name of a later (1866) Native American/Army battle, the Fetterman Fight, and I remembered it mainly because of that coincidence. Sorry I could be no help with a picture. Donner60 (talk) 04:21, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 13
Reverted the "Germany–India relations" article but took care to redact the disruptive/inappropriate reference tag (which got added automatically by my URL sources inclusion tool) and which is an unfortunate oversight. You will see that the rest of the updates are made in good faith and appropriately and abundantly referenced. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 22:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for telling me about the problem and for adding a fully corrected version. I deleted the original message from me on your talk page with strike through. Donner60 (talk) 22:21, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks :)
Public Protests: Just the TTIP of the Iceberg?
This article fails to represent the growing level of and protest against TTIP within the EU and UK. Despite this, comments highlighting public concern have been removed. WHY? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 22:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
- I see it was an edit just before yours which added "The End of Democracy in Europe?....Well, Yes. According to Kevin Rees, but, What do I know?" and my edit did not remove it. I did not notice that. I also think that the addition of "(for US business)" is neither neutral nor accurate considering supporters think Europeans will also benefit. It seems that the rest of your edits could be considered supported by the sources without the need for additional sources. I am sorry I included the remark first mentioned as part of your edit and indeed, another editor had to remove it. I am sorry I did not review and handle this better and did not leave a more specific note. I would have no objection to your restoring the rest of your edits but for the parenthetical phrase which I think the text and sources do not support. Donner60 (talk) 00:22, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Editing The Alexander Nevermind Wikipedia page
Hello I'm trying to create a wikipedia page about Alexander Nevermind and his career up to this point and once it seemed as if i had made some progress on the page it then sent me a editing conflict error notification and said that i needed to contact you in this way. before i started editing when i would search Alexander Nevermind it would just forward me to a wiki page about Prince the Musician. flattering as that may be im not writing about prince. do i need to create a new page in order to finish what im trying to do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 09:18, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- Alexander Nevermind is a Prince alias. If you wish to create a separate page for Alexander Nevermind, which I assume is the Prince alias and not a separate person, I suggest you create a new page and title it Alexander Nevermind (Prince alias). I would be aware that someone may challenge it as included in the Prince page. In that case, it would be better just to add more sourced content on Alexander Nevermind on the Prince page. If there is a separate actual person named Alexander Nevermind, I still think you need to create a new page with a title such as Alexander Nevermind (musician). If you do this, you will need to provide references to show that this is indeed a separate person from Prince. I saw no such references but I only needed to see that it was a Prince alias to know that the redirect to the Prince page was correct. I deleted my first message on you talk page in the manner prescribed by Wikipedia guidelines (strike through) because your message to me shows you were in good faith. I added some links to pages with useful information that can help you in editing and writing for Wikipedia. Donner60 (talk) 21:34, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
thank you for the info and yes i am indeed writing about a separate actual person named Alexander Nevermind who is an Artist ,Musician and Magician that is located in Colorado. In this case would i have to make a new page under Alexander Nevermind (Artist) or Alexander Nevermind (artist, musician and Magician)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 23:25, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- You should pick one word for the parenthetical expression. See Wikipedia:Article titles for more information. Also, be sure you can show that the person is notable and support this with citations to reliable, verifiable sources, which means they can not be from the subject but should be from neutral sources. For further information about editing or writing for Wikipedia see: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources, Help:Footnotes Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Getting started; Introduction to Wikipedia; Wikipedia:Simplified ruleset; and Wikipedia:Simplified Manual of Style. Donner60 (talk) 02:07, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
sir you are slandering my master teacher you need to remove that information because it is very false. he is not serving a 135 year sentence for child molestation he is serving that sentence for racketeering the child molestation charges were dropped. you need to remove your post about the master teacher Dr York Nuavyon (talk) 22:13, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
- It is sourced. Your deletions and additions are unsourced and not supported. Donner60 (talk) 22:56, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
A cupcake for you!
|For being the rollbacker Wikipedia both needs and deserves. GABHello! 22:03, 9 October 2015 (UTC)|
Thank you for your watchful eye. As a little FYI, all the edits for the BYU/USD women's soccer match tonight were done by me. I work as a staff writer for a local paper on Friday Night's covering area high school football games. I have listened to the Friday Night WSOC BYU games 3 of the past 4 weeks and 4 of the last 7 total via my smart phone. I usually update the scores as the game is going on so I won't have to spend extra time on it at the end. Tonight I waited until the first score of the game, which was in the final 6 minutes. I typically do not log in with my username and password on the work computer solely because I don't want to risk anyone else having that info. So in this case, all 3 edits were actually made by me. I logged on after you reset everything because I wanted to point out that it was all correct and shouldn't have been reset, which is why the stat link was added. The only mistake I made on any of it was accidentally listing the USD penalty as a goal instead of yellow card on the 1st edit.
- Edit 1- Added scoring, penalties, officials, and attendance (all taken from the Stat Broadcast link).
- Edit 2- Added the Stat Broadcast link as a reference and corrected the yellow card that was accidentally listed as a score for USD WSOC.
- Edited 3- Added final result and score.
- Edit 4- Will add the BYU page recap as the summary and the Deseret News article as a reference next to the score. This is being done shortly.