User talk:Palica

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

Welcome to the Wikipedia[edit]

I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:

For more information click here. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be bold!

(Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 10:32, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)


I am flabberghasted by the serendipity of this great wiki. I just made a suggestion about vacuole,
but with respect to notochord issues.   Then I go to check my watchlist, and you know the rest ...

I need to read all the suggestions, yours align with others, but en avance, I ask,
how many layers of mentors are there, or is it just an amorphous cloud of random good will?
Ken H 10:18, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi, please don't delete the nl: and eo: links from List of Hungarian writers, because despite their titles they actually contain lists of Hungarian writers. Thank you. -- Adam78 15:43, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism Warning[edit]

Thanks for experimenting with the page July 13 on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Werdna648T/C\@ 04:23, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

don't know how you got the impression of vandalism. this is the link to my edit. --Palica 08:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
In hindsight, neither do I. Perhaps I confused which user vandalised the article, as that seems to be your only edit on that page, and nobody reverted it, which I normally do. I can't find any edits of mine in there, so I'll try to see what the problem is. In the meantime, please disregard my previous message until I can figure out why I put it there. 21:19, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

My user page[edit]


I saw that you added this link "sk:Wikipédia:Krčma/Novinky" to my user page. i did asked a question in the page you linked to but it is not a version of my user. Why did you add this link? Were you able to advance the science pearl project at the wikipedia of Slovenčina? APH 09:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

hi, the science perls project on is stagnating due to low amount of editors, but i'm sure it will do better later. sorry for adding the link to krcma/novinky it was my mistake. --Palica 08:48, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
That's ok. I make such mistakes too. APH 09:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

You editted Dark Throne, do you play?[edit]

If so, could you let me know on either my talk page, by adding yourself to the Category:Wikipedians who play Dark Throne category, or both? Thanks!

Lady Aleena 12:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


You are blocked for being an unauthorized BOT, if you would like to run bot in the future please request permission at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval. Many thanks. --WinHunter (talk) 01:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks, I was just adding couple of interwiki links to Will request a bot status for a different account, so if it would be possible to unblock this one. as I use it as a regular account. thanks in advance. --Palica 14:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
I've taken the liberty of unblocking. Rich Farmbrough, 15:37 11 September 2006 (GMT).
Thank you very much. --Palica 13:40, 12 September 2006 (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) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Funtoo Linux[edit]

In order for a subject to have an article, its notability needs to be established. This was not the case, since the article mostly cited WP:PRIMARY sources. Moreover, since it's a GenToo derivative, it's rather unremarkable. Hence my revert. Rhetorically asking why distro X, Y or Z does have an article, is not a very good argument to keep this one. If you want, we can take this to WP:AfD and establish community consensus. Kleuske (talk) 19:16, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I would like to hear community consensus. There are notable differences between Gentoo and Funtoo, so that you can't just say it is a plain derivative with name change. It changes quite a lot of stuff as compared to Gentoo. I have added some more references and resources to the article. Palica (talk) 19:24, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
The subject has already been discussed and redirecting it to Gentoo was the outcome. Also please don't remove my comments when responding to them. Thanks. Kleuske (talk)
Strike that. My mistake. Sorry. Kleuske (talk) 19:27, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Ah, yes. New discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Funtoo Linux (2nd nomination). Kleuske (talk) 19:29, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I realize you put a lot of work into the Funtoo Linux article only to see it redirected to Gentoo Linux, but copy-pasting the entire thing into the Gentoo Linux article causes more problems than it "solves". Not only does it greatly unbalance the Gentoo article, giving disproportionate weight to that one derived/related distro, but more importantly it violates the terms of our license (since you did not credit [link to] the Funtoo article in your edit summary) and comes off as an attempt to circumvent the established consensus (as judged by the closing admin) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Funtoo Linux (2nd nomination) to redirect the article (i.e., not to merge it — and certainly not to move it wholesale into the Gentoo article).

Now, that being said, it would be legitimate to copy the content of one article into another (but only with proper credit) if the intent is to follow that up with further edits to properly merge the one into the other, but given that it has been 4 days since you last edited that article, I have to conclude that this was not your plan. I have therefore reverted your edit; as you know, you can still find the content in the page history of either article. If you wish to do further work on a possible future Funtoo article, I recommend you move the content to your userspace (say, to User:Palica/Funtoo_Linux). But please do not simply revert my revert to restore the same content to Gentoo Linux, unless you plan to quickly whittle it down massively to only the information relevant to an article on Gentoo Linux (I don't see how more than a moderately-sized paragraph about Funtoo could be justified there). - dcljr (talk) 22:11, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

thanks for the feedback, I will work on rewriting it and better integrating it into the gentoo page. Palica (talk) 15:25, 16 March 2018 (UTC)