User talk:Reywas92

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


66th Oscars (1994)[edit]

Hi, and happy new year. I've resumed improving Oscar ceremony lists now that I'm done with Christmas, I was hoping if you can give me opinions and comments on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/66th Academy Awards/archive1 as you have done for my other Oscar ceremonies? I would like to receive feedback so I could make necessary improvements. Regards.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 04:38, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

RE: 66th Oscars[edit]

Hi there,

I addressed your concerns regarding Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/66th Academy Awards/archive1 and I made some corrections.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 04:49, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

RE: HIMYM Season 1[edit]

Hello, I addressed your concerns regarding the Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/How I Met Your Mother (season 1)/archive1 candidacy. I hope everything looks good; if not, can you please provide any further guidance? Thank you for your review! --haha169 (talk) 07:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

71st Oscars (1999)[edit]

Hi, I was hoping if you can give me opinions and comments for the 71st Academy Awards regarding Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/71st Academy Awards/archive1 as you have done for my other Oscar ceremonies? I would like to receive feedback so I could make necessary improvements. I truly appreciate your help. Thanks.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 17:02, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

74th Oscars (2002)[edit]

Hi, I understand you are busy, but would you please proofread the 74th Academy Awards regarding Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/74th Academy Awards/archive1 as you have done for my other Oscar ceremonies? I would like to receive feedback so I could make necessary improvements. I truly appreciate your help. Thanks.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 04:57, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Please remember[edit]

That per WP:BRD you are to undertake a dialogue with other editors when your bold changes are reverted and not Edit War. Please also note that until content disputes are resolved the Status Quo before the dispute is maintained until a new consensus is agreed on. MisterShiney 23:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Correct. I'm surprised that an experienced editor like Reywas92 would edit war like this. Per BRD they should stick to the talk page at Talk:House of Cards (U.S. TV series) and get consensus before attempting such a change, especially since it has been challenged. Those subheadings are standard practice and not worth fighting over. Keep the status quo version. -- Brangifer (talk) 01:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

1998 and 2002 Oscars[edit]

Hi there,

Sorry if you are busy, but would you please (if possible) proofread the 70th Academy Awards and 74th Academy Awards? I would greatly appreciate the feedback. Thanks.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 23:09, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

RE:1998 Oscars[edit]

Hi there,

I fixed everything you have suggested regarding the 70th Academy Awards for featured list consideration.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 07:35, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

2013 Oscars[edit]

Hello there,

If you have any spare time, would you kindly check 85th Academy Awards for featured list consideration. I would appreciate the help.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

2007 Oscars[edit]

Hello there,

If you have any spare time, would you kindly check 79th Academy Awards for featured list consideration. I would appreciate the help.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 03:13, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

2003 Oscars[edit]

Hello there,

If you have any spare time, would you kindly check 75th Academy Awards for featured list consideration. I would appreciate the help.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 03:27, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

2014 Academy Awards[edit]

Hello there,

would you kindly proofread 86th Academy Awards for featured list status? I would appreciate the help very much.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 02:25, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

2014 Oscars corrections[edit]

Hi, I made some changes according to your suggestions. Thank you very much for your help.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 04:35, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

59th Oscars (1987)[edit]

Hello there,

If you have any spare time, would you kindly check 59th Academy Awards for featured list consideration. I would appreciate the help.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 20:11, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Historical coats of arms of the U.S. states from 1876[edit]

Hi Reywas92- Thanks again for your initial copy-edits. I wondered if you might think about reviewing this list at FLC, time and topic-interest permitting... Many thanks--Godot13 (talk) 04:02, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Kick the bucket[edit]

Before there was plumbing, prisoners would have a latrine pail. They would flip it upside down, stand on it, and hang themselves. They would then kick the bucket out from under their feet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.189.33.188 (talk) 00:41, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

September 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Limmat may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • centre of the [[city of Zurich]]. From Zurich it flows in a northwesterly direction, after 35 km] reaching the river [[Aare]]. The confluence is located north of the small town of [[Brugg, Aargau|

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:33, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Recent removal[edit]

You seem to have a larger issue with the content of election articles and/or how they are set up in general. I'd suggest you start a request for comment if you want to not see that sort of thing on election articles in general. 331dot (talk) 20:07, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:CT table-related templates[edit]

Category:CT table-related templates, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:31, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to United States presidential election, 2016 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • that they are running, though that does not necessarily equate with viability as a candidate.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:05, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Infobox academic division[edit]

Please reconsider, or revert, your closure at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 December 8#Template:Infobox academic division, which offers no reasoning, and appears to be a vote count rather than an appraisal of the discussion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Do you intend to respond? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Nope. The TFD was running for three weeks, and I found the oppose arguments convincing. You're perfectly welcome to do template transitions on your own (Autowikibrowser may be able to help), make a new TFD, or ask another admin. Reywas92Talk 06:17, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks[edit]

Thank you for the many thanks you've sent, Reywas92. I appreciate that someone recognizes the effort. I'd be interested in learning how to thank someone in the same fashion. Cheers and happy new year! Yoho2001 (talk) 13:03, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Leelah's Law[edit]

Hi Reywas92. I reverted your redirect of Leelah's Law because there is a nine day old merge discussion here: talk:Death of Leelah Alcorn#Merge Leelah's Law. As you can see, the merge/redirect is controversial, with three options on the table. The discussion should remain in place for 30 days and be closed formally by an uninvolved admin.- MrX 11:33, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Electoral history of Hillary Rodham Clinton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Socialist Workers Party (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) 09:00, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Federal government of the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (state) (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) 09:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Happy birthday![edit]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
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) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Canvassing[edit]

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you.

ANI Notice[edit]

Information icon This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Plagiarism Report[edit]

Dear Reywas92,

It is my duty as a sometimes wikieditor to report directly to you that, as it is my knowledge, you added the Duties section to the page Secretary of State of Indiana, and as I have observed, it appears that you have, whether or not intentionally, plagiarized on that page. This plagiarizing is the specific copying of sections from the Secretary of State page on IN.gov. Notice here:

Your article: Duties The Office of Secretary of State is one of five constitutional officers originally designated in Indiana's State Constitution of 1816. Sixty-one Hoosiers have served as the third highest-ranking official in state government. Early duties of the office included the maintenance of state records and preservation of the state seal. But as state government expanded, so did the responsibilities of the Secretary of State. Present responsibilities include chartering of new business, regulation of the securities industry, administering regulations relating to the registration of motorized vehicle dealers, and oversight of state elections.

IN.gov's article (plagiarized sections in bold and italics)

What does the office do and what is it responsible for? "The Office of Secretary of State is one of five constitutional offices originally designated in Indiana's State Constitution of 1816. Sixty-one Hoosiers have served as the third highest-ranking official in state government.

Historically the duties of the office included the maintenance of state records and preservation of the state seal, but as state government expanded so did the responsibilities of the Secretary of State. Present duties include chartering of new business, regulation of the securities industry, oversight of state elections, commissioning of notaries public, registration of trademarks and licensing of vehicle dealerships throughout Indiana. " [1]

This was all accomplished apparently without the use of citation, quotation, or direct on-paragraph reference to the site, which is required in such a case. Correct me if this was not your doing, but, from what i gathered in the page history, the Duties section appeared in your edit. Also I am not aware if any other sections have been plagiarized.

Thank you for your time,

Good will and good luck,

--Deeterboy (talk) 16:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "IN.gov - Secretary of State - About the Office". in.gov. Indiana State Government. Retrieved 3 March 2016. 
Deeterboy, You'll also see from the edit history that I copied it from Todd Rokita, as someone else added the material there where it didn't belong and I moved it to the more relevant article without being aware of the source. Why you're telling me about a six-year-old edit I'm not sure, but you're welcome to do what you want with it now. Reywas92Talk 19:35, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Johann George Elser[edit]

Please note that Manual of Style is a guideline, and is not mandatory. It is not a policy, and edit-warring for purposes of upholding MOS has been strongly criticized by a number of Arbitration Committees. Following MOS blindly without consideration fopr what is best fopr an article riases MOS to the level of a de facto policy. If you wish MOS to become a policy, please start an RfC and do so. In the mantime, please don't do change the position of the image again, the article looks just fine the way it is. Thanks. BMK (talk) 21:12, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Beyond My Ken, I don't follow anything blindly, I believe it looks terrible to have an image on the left beginning in one section and pushing the underlined header of the next to the center of the page, and following guidelines, regardless of their requirement, is not "mucking around". With the number of times I've been reflexively reverted by people who did not actually look at the changes, my single revert is not edit-warring and does not warrant your need for bold italics. Thanks to your reflexive revert, you also undid my copyediting of an incorrect colon. Reywas92Talk 21:28, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United States presidential transition, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Academy of Public Administration (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) 09:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

States[edit]

Please stop redirecting state presidential election articles, those articles are common practice and you know it. Koala15 (talk) 16:16, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Presidential debates[edit]

Just noticed your actions regarding the Democratic and Republican Party presidential debates. I really don't understand your problem with individual articles on widely covered, thus clearly individually notable events. These are so much more notable than probably tens of thousands of articles on particular TV episodes, music tracks or computer games. Don't tell me WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. There are clear notability criteria, and each of these events clearly passes them. I missed the RfC, and actually think these should have been submitted to a regular WP:AfD, but for some reason others did agree with your action. Now would you please at least take care, all content is merged back? You just blanked the pages, but didn't copy over the whole content, which would include quite some cleanup, edits by others, airtime tables and categories. Thanks. --PanchoS (talk) 08:11, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

User:PanchoS: No they really aren't notable by themselves, they're news events, with notability in the context of the election as a whole. AFD is meant for deletion of content of pages as whole, not mergers, and I have been told not to bring merge proposals to AFD in the past, or people want to keep the article not realizing I do want to keep the content but in another location. The one AFD that was started for the ninth debate was likely to go the same way as the RFC to which you were pinged. My Wikipedia philosophy (and possibly that of all eight other commenters there) is that information should be covered as concisely as possible, so if one page can accommodate everything about the debates, why shouldn't it? Why should someone interested in what went on have to go to another nine subarticles after reading the main one? The same goes for the state primaries: sure, you can find important information about the D and R primaries and general, but why should they be separate articles when it's the same topic? One page can report the related info perfectly fine, and I hope to address that soon. I'll check for the differences made, but the cleanup looks like basic changes for article vs. section formatting that doesn't need to go back, including categories. Reywas92Talk 17:53, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Hillary Clinton campaign endorsements[edit]

Hi there. Just throwing you a message regarding the Clinton campaign endorsements article. A few frequent editors of the article and I decided a number of weeks ago to split Clinton's endorsements article into two sections. There is the article of endorsements for her Democratic Party nomination: List of Hillary Clinton presidential campaign primary endorsements, 2016, and another article of endorsements for the general election: List of Hillary Clinton presidential campaign endorsements, 2016. We decided this because the article would be too large if both sections were included. So, there's no need to divide the article for general election endorsements into two sections. Let me know if you have any questions! MrVenaCava (talk) 03:38, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

List of World Heritage Sites in Australia[edit]

Hi Reywas,

I see that an anonymous editor has recreated a separate list for Australia again. I agree with you that it's redundant to have two separate lists, but I'm not really involved enough in this discussion to climb in and revert. --Slashme (talk) 09:25, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Irish Olympic ticket controversy[edit]

Irish Olympic ticket controversy is WP:SUMMARY linked from Olympic Council of Ireland, Concerns and controversies at the 2016 Summer Olympics‎, and Pat Hickey (sports administrator). Better to let it grow separately from each than to make it a child of one. jnestorius(talk) 08:33, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 26 August[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Notification about new RFC[edit]

Because you have participated in a previous RFC on a closely related topic, I thought you might be interested in participating in this new RFC regarding Donald Trump.Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:06, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Happy Birthday![edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge[edit]

50k Challenge poster.jpg You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Street lamps in Chennai[edit]

I fixed the reference and the text myself, and removed the warning. And since not even the source gives power consumption in "megawatt hours", only in megawatt, which is of no use here, I removed that part of it, so that the text now only tells what the cost per month is... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 21:41, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

It's supposed to be megawatts, that's how power consumption is measured when street lamps are in use. And you also reverted a grammar correction I made... Reywas92Talk 03:04, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Utility bills are based on "kilowatt/megawatt hours", so to make it make sense you should either say that "there are 248,000 street lamps that when all are lit draw 27 megawatt", or that "the energy consumption is x megawatt hours, for a monthly cost of x rupees", not "they draw 27 megawatt for a monthly cost of 60.000.000 rupees", since it would make readers think that the cost of electricity (per kilowatt hour) is outrageous in India (automatically assuming it should read "megawatt hours"). And while I might have removed a small improvement in grammar I also corrected your mistake of not changing the access date in the reference... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 03:22, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Reywas92. 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)

TFL notification[edit]

Hi, Reywas92. I'm just posting to let you know that List of Indiana state symbols – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for January 27. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 23:19, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for Presidential Election revert Comment[edit]

Thanks for reverting my erroneous entry on the election page; it was a genuine error I made in misreading the electoral map regarding Nevada and Utah, both of which happen to have 6 electoral votes. Also, I really like your user page "Where I Live" section, and used a variant of it on my own user page. Thanks. BillCook (talk) 17:45, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Reconstruction Era National Monument - thanks[edit]

Thanks for creating the article on the Reconstruction Era National Monument. In case you are interested, I have substantially expanded the article and nominated it for DYK: see Template:Did you know nominations/Reconstruction Era National Monument. Let me know if you're interested in further expanding the article. Neutralitytalk 05:28, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Deprod[edit]

Deprodding of Richard Bowchier[edit]

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Richard Bowchier, which you proposed for deletion. found a journal article about him. Thanks!--Jahaza (talk) 15:52, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

let me help you[edit]

Let me help you with your javascript. there is quite some work there. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 07:01, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Should be better now. You still have PyroSpirits metadata plugin in your vector.js. You can also enable that in the Gadgets section of your preferences, and then remove that line from your vector.js. Gadgets are a bit safer and require less maintenance. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 07:29, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks so much, User:TheDJ!! Several of those items I added years ago before they became defaults or gadget options and I never bothered to remove them; it seemed I could only get only either popups or the contribs colors to work at a time. I got quite used to the nostalgia layout but as long as it has the zero-second hide. Thanks again! Reywas92Talk 19:15, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Apostrophes[edit]

Hi. Please see this bit - "If the singular possessive is difficult or awkward to pronounce with an added sibilant, do not add an extra s". Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:19, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Lugnuts: How in the heck is Tomas's difficult or awkward to pronounce?? Words ending in a long 'ees' sound like the examples Socrates's and Achilles's may be, but not Tomas's. It's more awkward to say Tomas mother, which sounds like successive normal words without a sound indicating possessive, and that is not "how the pronunciation is intended" or fitting the examples provided in the sources. Reywas92Talk 19:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
User:Lugnuts: Furthermore, it's a French name, pronounced Toh-ma with a silent s, so an additional s to indicate possession couldn't possibly be awkward to pronounce and is in fact necessary. Reywas92Talk 19:45, 19 June 2017 (UTC)