Jump to content

User talk:Llll5032/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Signpost: 28 November 2022

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thanks

[edit]

Llll, I just wanted to say thanks for disagreeing in a respectful way. A lot of these topics can get heated. An editor who stays respectful even after an extended disagreement is something to be acknowledged. Springee (talk) 22:45, 10 March 2021 (UTC) The above was typed out before your post here [[1]] and still stands after Springee (talk) 22:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks, Springee. I often like your ideas, and I appreciate our respectful discussions too. Llll5032 (talk) 07:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This may come across as odd since I just reverted one of your edits but yesterday I was thinking I wanted to reiterate my message above. I find that even if I don't agree with the edits, I feel that I can have good faith that your edits are generally a positive and if I disagree in any particular case it's probably a difference not big enough to worry about. So again, kudo's to you. Springee (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Of course and same to you, Springee — I just tried some compromise language in the article that may work for you. We may have occasional differences in interpreting WP:DUE and WP:NPOV, but we can work these out. Llll5032 (talk) 15:28, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, even with our recent article level disagreement, I want to reiterate what I said above. It is still completely true. Springee (talk) 19:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I recall you writing somewhere that good-faith disagreements lead to a better encyclopedia -- I fully agree, and also appreciate your thoughts on the article talk page. Llll5032 (talk) 21:04, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism/Warning

[edit]

@Llll5032

Reported with this and examples including, but not limited to, past violations/warnings from other accounts. (e.g. edit warring, biased vandalism).

All edits reverted to @Llll5032

Please review WP:BESTSOURCES, WP:ABOUTSELF, WP:ONUS, and WP:EPTALK (editing is not warring, but reverts are), and discuss on the article talk page why the disputed content should stay in the article. Llll5032 (talk) 05:21, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the entire issue though, hence the report. Wikipedia guidelines clearly state that although multiple sources from one website need secondary reference, it's not a reason to warrant complete deletion; in this case, you deleted the entire show section. Also, it looks like you deleted the report from your talk page, which also violates Wikipedia guidelines. I'm not going to send another report, but a simple look through your talk page shows that you're notorious for this, as well as biased editing. The previous request is already submitted, along with every other example of these type of actions coming from your account, and there's no reason to continue warring. Machiavellian Gaddafi (talk) 05:29, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For example, erasing Wikipedia admin posts are against the guidelines, as you did here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Llll5032&oldid=prev&diff=1126409909 Machiavellian Gaddafi (talk) 05:32, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please WP:AGF. I thought your repeat post was a mistake so I mistakenly deleted it, although deleting content from a user talk page is probably allowed. I will respond at the board. Llll5032 (talk) 05:39, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're continuing to assume that I haven't read these articles. If you look through the pages history, you'll see that I'm chipping away at validating and giving secondary references to several different topics within the article. Again, although many of these references come from the same website, they are not invalid or against guidelines. There was also an issue with deleting valid references, one being the association to vice media that was given in a very valid article from and approved source. I understand that cleaning up is part of what we do here, but you're overreaching. As aforementioned, you have a history of that. I didn't request for a total ban, but rather that you're locked out from editing this one page for at least some time. I don't want to argue about it, as we're both editors that are doing what we can to make Wikipedia better, and I would never go into any of your edits and change anything based on my personal feelings. I guess we're going to have to leave it up to the board to review my complaint. You do a good job on a lot of your edits, but you do tend to overreach. It's not a big deal, but I'm asking you to let me please fix the minor reference issues. Expecting an email with various articles included in it tomorrow, and I will implement them once I receive them. Machiavellian Gaddafi (talk) 05:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for saying that I do a good job on many of my edits. I take WP:PRESERVE seriously for established articles and well-sourced content. I would not object to your re-inclusion of Vice if it is sourced to a RS that also describes Censored.TV (otherwise it can be considered WP:SYNTH). Llll5032 (talk) 06:07, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Llll5032, Machiavellian Gaddafi is incorrect, which isn't surprising as he is a very new editor, you can remove any messages you want from your talk page except for unblock requests should you find yourself blocked. And these comments have bordered on being a personal attack that you are handling very gracefully. If he hadn't mellowed his words in his last message to you I was going to post a warning on his talk page about casting aspersions. Liz Read! Talk! 07:51, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 08:53, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 January 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 January 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:14, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gavin McInnes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 February 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 February 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Steven S. Biss

[edit]

Hello, Llll5032. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Steven S. Biss".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 14:09, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 April 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:17, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 May 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 May 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When are will you be ready...

[edit]

to remove the need for more citation and better citations to be added to the page on Francis Parker Yockey? StrongALPHA (talk) 18:19, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the article has better citations now, so I moved the template to a section that still needs better sources. Thanks. Llll5032 (talk) 00:36, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 5 June 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 June 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 July 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:14, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for improving the Murray Rothbard article

[edit]

I just skimmed it, but it looks like you did a lot. Prezbo (talk) 13:24, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this kind note, Prezbo. Llll5032 (talk) 13:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

huge list of non-notable people on article 'Hudson Institute'

[edit]

Hello User:Llll5032, you may be able to help me with an article where I think that some editor (have not even looked at who they are yet) went crazy -- in my small opinion -- and created a huge list of people that they thought were notable enough to list in a section (dedicated to this list of people) on the article Hudson Institute. Can you please take a short look at the section Notable personnel over at the article and let me know your opinion on the appropriateness of including such a (huge) list. My view is that the entire section (list and all) should be removed. All of those people are listed somewhere on the website of the organization itself and my view is that such a list has no place in an encyclopedic article. My view is also that the list simply provides gross and inappropriate advertisement for the organization, which is completely and entirely inappropriate for any encyclopedia and also for WikiPedia (as encyclopedic as it claims to be). If you agree with me, can you express your opinion over on the Talk page of that article (Talk:Hudson Institute) and bring some friends along with you if you can, to help squash this madness. I will defer to your opinion and those of other accomplished contributors if this kind of madness is deemed to be appropriate for WikiPedia (as I tend to always do anyway). My comments on this matter are already on the Talk page. Thanks for any help in this matter. --L.Smithfield (talk) 10:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, L.Smithfield, I may not be able to participate after being contacted because of WP:CANVASS. I know you don't want to violate the rules, so you should look at the canvassing guideline.
It is a very long list, and in my opinion it was much more proportionate before those recent edits. There is good guidance about such lists at WP:NOTDIRECTORY #1, WP:LISTCRITERIA, MOS:USEPROSE, and WP:LISTDD. "Notable" on Wikipedia means "notable enough for their own article"--another good reason to revert to the prior stable text. Articles with links to personnel with Wikipedia articles are common, and WP:ABOUTSELF rules allow some limited citations of the group's website, so I doubt that you could gain consensus for removing the whole section including the notable names. But the WP:ONUS policy would be on your side for reverting, and other editors of the article appear to agree with you. Llll5032 (talk) 13:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice (very useful). I am deferring to (settling for) the reduced list produced by User:Iskandar323. Thanks again. --L.Smithfield (talk) 15:38, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should PragerU's description include their own stated purpose?

[edit]

"...advances Judeo-Christian values" is one of the most common ways they describe themselves in many places, but even though that is also covered by secondary sources it does all derive from their self-published description, is that all good for being in the lead? I feel like it's all good if I just cite a source but it is a bit of an odd one now that I think about it. MasterTriangle12 (talk) 06:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, MasterTriangle12. In my opinion, it would be most DUE if secondary or tertiary RS use the description in their own voice. But if BESTSOURCES are noting the self-description, then it could be DUE if the RS are cited and the article notes it is the subject's self-description. Could it also could be more DUE for a later sentence or paragraph in the top section instead of the first sentence? Perhaps more editors will have opinions at the article talk page. Llll5032 (talk) 06:22, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers, I'm thinking it might be better just left as the mention in the body, especially since reading about how the term was kinda a political construction and there are less nebulous terms that are more applicable. It would probably be good to have some mention of the prominent theological messaging though, I'll go through the sources at some point since several comment on it. MasterTriangle12 (talk) 06:24, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 July 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

[edit]

Hello Llll5032!

  • The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
  • We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
  • Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
  • Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
  • If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:50, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 August 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oliver Anthony

[edit]

Hi there! Just here to say: I love this kind of competing to achieve the best copy edit in this article. Well, not exactly competing, but I guess you know what I mean. Have fun! ;) Boscaswell talk 06:15, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Boscaswell, thanks for the friendly competition, and the friendly note too. Llll5032 (talk) 15:44, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, Llll5032! ;) Boscaswell talk 22:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paul Gottfried, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Intelligencer.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 September 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:36, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:35, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Thank you for being a voice of reason on Talk:Weaponization of antisemitism, directing discussion back to P&G instead of fighting to push a point of view. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 07:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 March 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merging weaponization of antisemitism

[edit]

It's becoming clear to me that this article's supposed topic is barely present in literature, and its valuable content belongs on Criticism_of_Israel#Criticism_of_Israel_and_antisemitism (which has a broader and more real scope that can receive lots of the information on the weaponization article that doesn't belong there). Do you agree with proposing a merge there? I ask because I've never proposed a merge before, and I don't know about the process. Zanahary (talk) 02:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zanahary, I'm not certain and I have never merged an article. But it is probably better to keep discussion about all this centralized on the article talk page. Llll5032 (talk) 03:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The formatting of your comments is going to pot in the ongoing discussion. There's a part out of alignment and two unsigned parts now. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Llll5032 (talk) 10:50, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Igor Fruman for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Igor Fruman, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Igor Fruman until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RM/Tags

[edit]

This is the last time, For example, the long-running neutrality dispute about the title is so specific, one deals with title issues via an RM, not by tagging, wikilawyering and walls of repetitive text. Selfstudier (talk) 11:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 June 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 July 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

[edit]

[2] Coretheapple (talk) 14:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weaponization

[edit]

I am concerned that your behavior, together with that of another editor, is bordering on disruption. Your objections to the article title in the face of continuing consensus to maintain it smacks of WP:IDONTLIKEIT rather than a serious attempt to improve the article. Thanks for your attention. Selfstudier (talk) 08:29, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 September 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:05, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Monty Bennett, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Real Deal.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dallas HERO

[edit]

I am not sure the addition of these to a BLP is appropriate under COAT. I did leave a message for the SPA and offered to collaborate here if you are interested as well. I believe this received more than just local coverage and would likely qualify for a page. CNMall41 (talk) 18:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your offer, CNMall41. I just noted the addition at article talk, in case you would like to discuss there. I am hopeful you will agree that it fits the WP:WINAC portion of the COAT essay. Llll5032 (talk) 16:31, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reflist-talk added following your comment

[edit]

Hi there! I added Template:Reflist-talk following your comment at the Gun show loophole talk page. This changes the appearance and location of the reference list so it remains with your comment, rather than the living at the bottom of the talk page. I added this after your signature and did not change anything you had written. I wanted to give you a heads up as I would never want to mess with another editor's talk page contribution. Let me know if you feel this was inappropriate. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:40, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit was good. Thanks, Myceteae. Llll5032 (talk) 02:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I realize, ideally, the {{Reflist-talk}} template would go before your signature line but I didn't want to adjust anything before the sig. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:16, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Llll5032/Archive_2&oldid=1263657962"