Email this user

User talk:NottNott

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
User talk
  • If I left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Whisperback|your username|Topic section}} on my talk.
  • If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Whisperback|NottNott|Topic section}} on your talk.


Throw me a message!

vn-∞ This user page has been
vandalized many, many times.

Thanks for the Heads Up[edit]

Thanks for the heads up about the Amethyst page, I just thought noone had gotten around to it yet. However, I do see why it was initially deleted. The number of articles and reviews about Amethyst in comparison to ones about Pearl, Garnet and Steven is very small. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrUniverse114 (talkcontribs) 18:13, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

@MrUniverse114: No worries! The SU collection of articles have plenty to work on admittedly. You'll have a blast Face-smile.svg -NottNott|talk Notify me with {{re}} 18:19, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi this is MrUniverse114 but I had to create a new account because I've forgotten my password for my old account but each time I try to reset my password using my email the reset email NEVER shows up! I really don't want to use this account because all of my work is on my old one, I was wondering if there was anything I could do and I didn't know who else to ask, sorry if this is an inconvenience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrUniverse98 (talkcontribs) 21:33, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

@MrUniverse98: Hey, no worries at all! As far as I'm aware there's nothing you can really do, if you check out Help:Logging_in#What_if_I_forget_the_password.3F. My advice would be to move your old userpage and talk over to your new account and set up a WP:Committed identity so that this never happens again. A committed identity is a cryptographic hash function with a string of characters that is encrypted one way and nearly impossible to reverse engineer. You can do this almost as a 'fallback' to make sure this doesn't happen again - read the guide or ask for further help. As for recovering your old account it seems pretty unlikely if you can't remember the password. -NottNott|talk 22:39, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

(unknown request)[edit]

Hello Kaungboymadmangyi (talk) 09:16, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

@Kaungboymadmangyi: Hey there, welcome to Wikipedia. What's your question? -NottNott|talk 14:28, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Your message to me announcing censoring of my information on the unsupported allegation of info unbalanced[edit]

Is there a particular fact that I provided that you would like to take issue with? Would it not be appropriate for Wikipedia censors to name their issues as opposed to blanket censorship of facts that make the censor squirm for unrevealed reasons? The primary reason that I entered the edit was that the approved information provided was by Wikipedia was contrary to the findings made by the Courts in the Country in question. May I very politely suggest that the unbalanced part is not on this end of the net? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:19, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

@ Hey there, welcome to Wikipedia. I reverted your edit because it wasn't written in a balanced way and could be read as speculative - the first part seems okay but 'there must be other reasons for the attack on the INTER TV station. , This is not to say that there are not special challengers for News Providers in Ukraine. etc. WP:Verifiability states that All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. - so I've removed it because there weren't sources for these statements. I hope you can see my reasons for a revert, and by citing more sources and adapting your writing style for balance it would definitely be a constructive edit. Feel free to message me if you have any questions. -NottNott|talk 02:28, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Oh common man![edit]

Your site they are likely to read.

Let it be there so that they get the message - a few days or weeks. Then, be glad to remove it, no problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:15, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

@ Hi there, welcome to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion so I've reverted your edit. This is a collaborative encyclopedia project, not a means of communicating with a corporate entity - you must do that by yourself if you wish to voice your concerns. -NottNott|talk 17:21, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the greeting.[edit]

Thanks NottNott for the early greeting. I have put a bit of a story on my talk that hopefully explains the username. Lazybobsautorepairs (talk) 17:43, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

@Lazybobsautorepairs: Hey, as you probably know by now I've left a message on your talk page. -NottNott|talk 18:07, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Your Warning about Alexis Texas[edit]

You get to know that Mr Pete is the former husband of the pornoghraphy actress Alexis Texas If I am wrong prove it Twixx31 17:19, 16 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twixx31 (talkcontribs)

@Twixx31: You should provide a link here to back up your claim. If not, it cannot be verified and it shouldn't belong on Wikipedia. -NottNott|talk 17:20, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
@Twixx31: After a search it looks pretty clear that this is true. I'm struggling to find a reliable source to back this up, but this information for the time being should definitely be in the article. Face-smile.svg -NottNott|talk 17:26, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

NottNott Don't be a Stupid ! The Indians always do that by putting there names . That's is her real husband Mr Pete Or see the historical of the changes ! Twixx31 17:26, 16 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twixx31 (talkcontribs)

@Twixx31: See my reply above - I think your claim is right. The information should be added to the article. -NottNott|talk 17:28, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

NottNott sorry for call you a stupid 😢 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twixx31 (talkcontribs) 17:30, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

@Twixx31: No problem! Do you have a good link that could be added to the article to back up the claim? While a Google search makes it clear that it's true, a reliable source is still needed to add it to the article. Face-smile.svg -NottNott|talk 17:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

italian language[edit]

hello. i am Pangaglia. i have read your message on my page. i want you to know that i cited some sources and i have already discussed the change in the discussion page. you are thoose ones who did not cite any source. --Pangaglia (talk) 21:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

hi. i am pangaglia. i want to say that i cited raliable sources and i had already discussed in the talk page. you , instead , are thoose ones who did not cite any source. best regards.--Pangaglia (talk) 21:00, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello Pangaglia. I reverted your edit because it seems to remove well written content and replaces it with what seems to be of a lower quality language-wise. Two of the sources are people which aren't easily found or searched for while one is on a law which isn't necessarily about the Italian Language itself unlike the previously sourced article which seems more relevant. Looking at the talk page discussion there appears to be no consensus as well as disregard for WP:NOR, a policy. Given the quality of English in your edit as well as how hard the writing is to understand, I recommend you stop restoring your edit and stop your long term edit-warring over the page. Thank you. -NottNott|talk 23:02, 24 September 2016

hi. i am pangaglia. my edit is not of low quality and it is not hard to understand. if there are grammar mistakes , it is sufficient to correct them , instead of changing the whole article. what does it mean that two sources are not easily found or searched for? you can easily find them in internet. maybe they are not well known to thoose dialects fans but they are reliable sources. gian battista pellegrini , graziadio isaia ascoli are good sources , as well as other sources like saggio sui dialetti gallo italici. what does it mean that the article is more rilevant than law 482/99? law 482/99 states that most of the idioms you call languages ar not. that law was made thanks to the contribution of the most important italian linguists. i will revert your changes. you say that there is no consensus. so , if you do not agree with my edits , why don't you discuss in the discussion page? i am the only one who has discussed and has explained why i made the edit and why i don't agree. you , instead , keep on reverting my edit without discussing about the topic , without telling me why according to you , italian dialects are languages. you just say you are right and i am wrong and you find useless excuses in orther to revert my changes , excuses like "you have not cited sources" (when i have) or even "your sources are not easily found". this claim that it is not easy to find them is nonsense. so , if you don't agree and you think that italian dialects are languages and they should be treated in the same way as linguistic minorities , why don't you discuss it? maybe because you do not know whay to say. if you don't agree with my view , discuss it in the discussion page. p.s firs it is "ndar" , not "nare". and annà and ndar are not regional varieties of standard italian. they are dialects. this is a proof that the article is not as well written as you said.--Pangaglia (talk) 20:53, 2 October 2016 (UTC) if you have thought it was not well written you could restore one of MY previous versions , wich where longer and explained things better.--Pangaglia (talk) 21:10, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

@Pangaglia: With respect, your English really isn't of the highest quality from what I and other editors (Denisarona, RunnyAmiga) can tell. Furthermore the sources you have cited seem to be people and not actual documents which make it hard for someone to see where you have got the information from. A talk page message accusing seasoned editors of vandalism (i.e clear malicious intent to disrupt the wiki) doesn't inspire confidence. Looking past this, it's hard to understand what you're saying - maybe some other editor on the talk page who understands the topic more would be willing to make the corrections you suggest but it seems highly unlikely at this point.
While you may have put a lot of time into your revision, I'd recommend just letting it go. -NottNott|talk 20:22, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

RfC for page patroller qualifications[edit]

Following up from the consensus reached here, the community will now establish the user right criteria. You may wish to participate in this discussion. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:50, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, NottNott. 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)

New Page Reviewer - RfC[edit]

Hi NottNott. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:49, 23 November 2016 (UTC)