User talk:Nick1372

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

I regularly delete all of my disambiguation page link notices to keep my talk page clean. I apologize if this causes any problems.

Nick1372, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi Nick1372! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Hajatvrc (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:17, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


Hey, Nick, I fixed your infobox on All My Babies' Mamas. The template was just fixing two right-aligned curly brackets at the bottom. Christinaster94 (talk) 02:09, 16 January 2013 (UTC) Thanks, Christianster Nick1372 (talk) 02:20, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages![edit]

WP teahouse logo 3.png
Hello, Nick1372. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived. Message added by Jayron32 04:01, 29 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.

Talk:Coach Ernie Pantusso[edit]

Thanks for the assessment in just one Project. Now if you can do that on other two Projects in the same talk page... --George Ho (talk) 04:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I am not a part of WikiProject Comedy or WikiProject Fictional Characters. I'm really not supposed to grade it on their behalf. I could cheat a little and grade the Comedy one, but cannot do the same for Fictional Characters, as their grading system is slightly different. I'll put it up on both WPs for assessment, and if they're not answered in a reasonable amount of time, I'll just do it myself. Ok? Nick1372 (talk) 20:42, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The American Baking Competition[edit]

If I may request that you'd be more polite in your edit summary. I didn't not change anything, it was announced as the French Pastry week on the show, and if CBS website wants to call it Patisserie, that is up to them, I put in what I see in the show. There was in any case no intention of using the show title when it was first done, it simply stating the theme for the week. I now see however that you had put in the title beforehand, but someone else had deleted it, and so I wouldn't know that this is what CBS website says. So please don't be rude about a good faith edit especially when I did not change what you put in, someone else had deleted it. Hzh (talk) 17:44, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry if my comment was rude. I didn't mean to be. I had just assumed that the titles of the sections were only based on the titles of the episodes, as the others were all corresponding. I guess it could be interpreted either way. Anyway, I'm sorry for the misunderstanding.
I think it would be better to just make it set in stone what the section headers are for. Would it be okay if I changed all six section headers to the episode titles (with quotation marks to signify that)? Then we could add the theme in the summary. The reader of the article would then get both information. Here's an example:

Episode 6: "Patisserie"
Episode six aired on July 3, 2013. Its theme was French pastries (sometimes called patisserie). These included tartes, Napoleons, and choux.
The tarte tatin was the signature bake. The contestants were required to complete it in two hours and fifteen minutes. For the technical bake, the bakers were required to make 4 Napoleons, using Paul Hollywood's own recipe, in two and a half hours. For the showstopper, the contestants had to make a choux tower in four and a half hours.

Does this seem good to you?
Again, sorry for the misunderstanding, and I hope we can resolve it without any bad feelings. Nick1372 (talk) 03:11, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't have strong feeling either way, so as long as it consistent, then that's fine. Hzh (talk) 16:10, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Coach Ernie Pantusso[edit]

You graded it as C-class. How much work must I add? From primary or non-primary sources? --George Ho (talk) 02:49, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

@George Ho: There were three problems that made the article only a C class, and fixing them should be able to elevate it to B or higher.
  1. Referencing actually isn't the big problem here, but it would be nice to have additional referencing for the character section. If you could find episode recaps or something similar online, they would be very good. If all else fails, you do have the option to cite the episode itself.
  2. The sections don't exactly conform with the layout the Manual of Style suggests. That should be modified.
  3. The big thing is that the article should be expanded in general. There should be info on how the character affected the world and how the character was conceived. The aforementioned MOS can show you more.
Hope this helps, Nick1372 (talk) 04:50, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Mobile Power User[edit]

Nick, my name is Kenan and I'm the mobile product manager at the Wikimedia Foundation. I've noticed that you are one of the most prolific users of our Wikipedia Mobile Editing, and would love to talk to you about mobile editing. This would be a great opportunity to shape the way that this feature develops. We are also particularly interested right now in a pattern that we've seen in mobile editing and would love to get your feedback.


KWang (WMF) (talk) 23:19, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sinqua Walls, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Necessary Roughness (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)