User talk:Tomdo08

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



Hello, Tomdo08, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Crossmr (talk) 02:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Be precise[edit]

How could anyone be anymore precise than putting a citation needed tag directly after the words they want citation for? I would understand this statement if you were removing sections tags which state the section needs citation, but you're removing tags that are directly attached to sentences. They couldn't be anymore precise.--Crossmr (talk) 02:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

What I meant was not preciseness of tag location, but preciseness regarding the fact which a citation is wanted for. Maybe "correct" would have been a better word? I wrote a short text regarding that topic. The reason for all this is that as a reader I often find text which is unreadable because of to much of this tags, as an editor I often ended up removing or relocating wrong tags instead of making the text better, and now I am not even looking for this tags anymore. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 12:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Editing the Time article[edit]

Please take a look at the Time article and see, if in your opinion, the lede is still too long. I did some editing (moved some paragraphs down). If it is still too long, you can let me know here. I doubt I will move any more material out of the lede, but your opinion will be taken into consideration. Thanks. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 06:23, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your interest in my opinion. I placed a correlating section in Talk:Time. Tomdo08 (talk)
Thanks for your response. That is a really good critique. It was more than I expected. I replaced the {{Lead too long}} template with a {{cleanup}} template, which directs interested parties (with a note) to your section on the talk page. If I can figure how to place a link to that section in the {{cleanup}} template, I will do that. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 03:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
You can place links in template arguments, too. In this case this would be {{clean up|article|Please see talk page section [[Talk:Time#Lead in of article|Lead in of article]]}}.
Again I would have done that myself. But somehow the "Time" article is especially resistive with my internet connection. I wonder if someone will discover time travel by me editing it :) -- Tomdo08 (talk) 13:04, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space[edit]

Information.svg Hey there Tomdo08, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Tomdo08/workshop/Susan B. Anthony: Abortion dispute. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

  • See a log of files removed today here.
  • Shut off the bot here.
  • Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I wrote some notes here, now moved to my area for ideas, bugs, design errors. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 10:21, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Francisco (name)[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Francisco (name), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Francisco. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 12:26, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

This bot is too fast: I am right in the middle of a transfer edit. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 12:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:25, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Spiritual death / Spiritual death in Christianity[edit]

When you moved the page, did you change all the appropriate incoming links? They mostly look to be about Christianity, so intended for the old page not the new? As page mover it's your job to tidy up after the move. PamD (talk) 00:19, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I checked all links (and changed, if appropriate). Most were referring to the general concept. Indeed, some original links to Spiritual death in Christianity had been utterly wrong due to the special interpretation(s) on that page. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 01:18, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Vorlage:=[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Vorlage:= requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Jimmy Pitt talk 16:28, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I am looking for the tag to ask for deletion, but cannot find it. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 16:33, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
{{subst:proposed deletion|reason}} is the thing for such. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 16:52, 12 December 2010 (UTC)


Nice one with this edit, bubba. You add another entry for the same thing immediately under the first entry?

*POM, a brand of pomegranate juice marketed by POM Wonderful
*POM Wonderful, a brand of pomegranate juice

Are you a marketer for POM juice trying to take advantage of Wikipedia, or are you just an idiot? I'm inclined to think you are selling the stuff, but I can't really know that. (talk) 02:00, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Obviously in a bigger resorting and reformulating edit I forgot to delete a line I had reformulated. "Idiot"? See, who's talking. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 01:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
I don't think that was obvious at all, but I accept your explanation. Sorry to have spoken to you in that manner. (talk) 03:23, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
By the way, I see that, while you are highly proficient in English, that it's not your first language. As such, let me inform you that the phrase "See, who's talking." should actually be rendered as, "Look who's talking". Similar verb, no comma. Happy editing! (talk) 03:25, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Gilgamesh & Mosaicism[edit]

I noticed that you, like me, found the assertion on the article Gilgamesh that he suffered or experienced genetic mosaicism to be suspicious. I am writing to ask you if you had an opportunity in the intervening months since adding your comment to Talk:Gilgamesh to determine the credibility of that assertion. My own intuition is that the claim is junk science, as the use of the expression "revealed" carries a quasi-religious connotation, and there is certainly no significance to the fact that the parts of Gilgamesh's patrimony are "specific." I tried to enscapulate some of my findings on the Talk page, but in summary they are: * I cannot find the text or even an abstract of the cited article; * I cannot establish the degree of scientific rigor exercised by the editors of "Genetics in Medicine," the journal I believe to be represented by the abbreviation "Genet Med". Do you have any guidance or suggestions? I have promised on the Talk:Gilgamesh page to delete the offending passage if no defenders emerge within fifteen days of today. KASchmidt (talk) 03:49, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Currant (disambiguation)[edit]

Hello, Tomdo08. Regarding the proposed deletion of Currant (disambiguation), which is a redirect to Currant: if you check the first paragraph of Wikipedia:Proposed deletion, you'll see that the process cannot be used with redirects. As such, I have removed the deletion template from that page.

If you wish to move Currant to Currant (disambiguation), the way to go about it is outlined at Wikipedia:Requested moves, specifically this section, which deals with requesting potentially controversial moves (an uncontroversial page move is one that no editor could reasonably disagree with, which is not the case here).

I hope this is of help.

Regards, (talk) 18:10, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Apsaravis, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sacral, Fossa and Pubis (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) 12:02, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Theseus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aethra (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) 18:34, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Merge proposal for Mare (folklore) and Alp (folklore)[edit]

Hi. Regarding your merge proposal, I noticed you placed {{Merge}} tags on the two articles, but I have replaced them with {{Merge to}} and {{Merge from}}. The effect is that:

1) the suggested merge is in the Alp (folklore) -> Mare (folklore) direction, and
2) when people click on the "Discuss" link on the tags, they are directed to Talk:Mare (folklore) and not on two different talk pages. (Avoiding creation of two threads)

Hope this is ok by you. --Kiyoweap (talk) 05:22, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


Hi. I see that you have edited Template:Popdens. Could you please take a look at Template talk:Popdens and comment re my questions there? Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:20, 26 January 2014 (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) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)