User talk:ErraticDrumlin
Yinus Musah
[edit]Hi ErraticDrumlin, generally we avoid listing a nationality if there is significant ambiguity with that, for example born in X, represents Y. While there are some different angles for Musah, he was born in and now represents the U.S., so I'd probably go for that if anything. There would no harm in excluding the nationality if you feel there is a significant clash with his upbringing and youth football, as it's not relevant to his notability either. There's no hard and fast rules really. Kosack (talk) 07:55, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
[edit]Hello, ErraticDrumlin
Thank you for creating 1990 Faucett Perú 727 disappearance.
User:Joseywales1961, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Consider re-writing the lead as both reference 2 and 5 state there were 15 people altogether onboard, the lead says 6 crew, 10 staff plus their families - this may lead people to believe there were more people on board - Thanks for the in-depth interesting article!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Joseywales1961}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
{{Re|Joseywales1961}} Thank you for reviewing and for your comments! Yes I'll try and sharpen up the lead a bit more, the sources which say there 15/18 on board were from the day of the crash so were later corrected, so its a bit confusing. But I'll try and clarify.~~~~
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
JW 1961 Talk 20:29, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Career statistics tables
[edit]Please double check your formatting, organisation, and maths - I've sorted out your various mistakes at Nathan Trott. GiantSnowman 22:27, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
[edit]
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Suffragette bombing and arson campaign is a Brilliant article that reveals a history not usually discussed. Well done for putting this together. Brilliant resource for the many suffragettes in Wikipedia. Victuallers (talk) 07:28, 9 June 2021 (UTC) |
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Coi
[edit]"If there is a problem with an article about yourself, a family member, a friend or a colleague, please read Biographies of living persons/Help. If you spot a problem with an article, you can fix it directly, by clicking on the "Edit" link at the top of that page. See the "edit an article" section of this page for more information. "
All additional information is verifiable sources. It is not spin. That is hurtful and untrue. Other editors included in the development of this article clearly were happy for the edits to remain. They are not meant to be disruptive, they add additional information about the judges findings. The edit to the other article was because I thought that it read better. I came across it when trying to figure out where you were at. That's all. Regarding your initial edit, you deleted everything. There is relevant information about the judges decision. It is now balanced by the addition of other sources. I took nothing away, how can more information be bad?.. The sockpuppet added information that doesn't relate to the sources cited, and a lot of suppositions. I left that. I thought if others are happy, I'll just add for balancing, from verifiable sources. That is NOT spin. No-one else had a problem with my additions for a month. You deleted everything, I feel that that is disruptive. I was not paid for editing, and may have previously misunderstood the guidelines, but apparently one can fix a problem with an article, if it's declared, when I understood I did explain why. Please see my reply. Everything is verifiable, so there is no reason or justification for deleting everything. If you read through you'll see that there was insufficiency in the original artical, with omission, and incomplete information, and inaccurate quotes. I don't understand why you don't think that a reader can understand both sides with the benefit of all the information to hand. I don't want an argument. I'm not familiar with Wikipedia, but I'm actually trying to make good additions. It's a shame you just felt the need to delete it all without leaving the up to date information. Beautiful Rosie (talk) 18:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Coi
[edit]sorry, I just saw your comments in the talk page. The "somehow managed to find them guilty" is a direct quote from Mr Clegg KC who was a central figure in the original trial and successful appeals. It's not a personal commentary Beautiful Rosie (talk) 19:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
I've had to tell someone about your comments and dominating. It's made me very uncomfortable. It very much feels personal. Beautiful Rosie (talk) 16:06, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Beautiful Rosie (talk) 16:12, 26 March 2023 (UTC)https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ErraticDrumlin
[edit]
don't know if I've done this correctly, but I've attempted very much to let you know Beautiful Rosie (talk) 16:12, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
"Goldster"
[edit]from Scotland to China and loving Germany!..hi could you tell me more about "Goldster"it sounds great 80.43.237.201 (talk) 00:59, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Goldster actually sounds crap!
[edit]I was being sarcastic!shockingly Goldster actually sounds like a shit idea and it's CEO!a grease slings creepy old fella!sorry mate 80.43.237.201 (talk) 03:08, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)