User talk:力/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 → Archive 5

Proposed deletion of DDRUK

Hi, I have removed the PROD tag you placed on DDRUK, as it has been kept at AfD twice and therefore cannot be nominated for PROD. I have no opinion one way or the other on the merits of deletion, but if you still wish to pursue deletion please feel free to open another AfD. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:32, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of You Are Under Surveillance

Hi, I have also removed the prod tag you placed on You Are Under Surveillance, as it was prodded back in 2006 ([1]). Again I have no objection to taking it to AfD. —KuyaBriBriTalk 03:13, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 19:57, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

May 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm Reb1981. I noticed that you recently removed content from Amazon.com without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please discuss in talk page before remove such a large amount of cited material. Reb1981 (talk) 00:13, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Re: Remove Obama/Bush from top 10k list?

Hi Power~enwiki. Sorry for the late reply. There was indeed a recent proposal to remove the presidents. Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Expanded/Archive_51 contains the most recent proposals to add, remove and swap from the list in the last month or two. Thanks for joining the vital articles project. It is always good to get a new perspective on vitality even if nobody agrees 100% of the time. :) Gizza (t)(c) 23:49, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Current AfD discussions

Per WP:APPNOTE I am drawing attention to two current AfD discussions regarding YouTube:

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:08, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I'm using (roughly) 2 million YT views on a single video, or "100k subscribers" as a threshold for notability, subject to adjustment over the rest of the month. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:42, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Donald Trump

Yes, I am waiting for the final report, or at least an initial report

Not how things are done around here. But I suspect you knew that.

I would also note the repeated warnings about revert wars on that page.

So you're not gonna touch it again? Cool. --Calton | Talk 05:55, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

iVoting at AfD

Hi. Just fyi, iVotes at AfD only become useful when they include an explanation of why an editor thinks that topic should be kept or deleted. And they are most persuasive if they cite a policy-based reason for keeping or deleting. Cheers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:13, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Power~enwiki: See also WP:JUSTAVOTE. North America1000 01:34, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
In some cases, there's really nothing additional to say, but somebody needs to second the deletion. Power~enwiki (talk) 01:41, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Third Opinion

Hello, thank you for contributing to the Third Opinion dispute resolution process. Please remember however in future to indicate which disputes you're removing and how many disputes remain afterwards in your edit summary. More details can be found at: 'Providing Third Opinions' on the Third Opinion page. Thanks! -=Troop=- (talk) 19:05, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

response to ANi comments

Godsy's minor edits are not the issue, it's the long term aggressive harassment and hounding behavior. We all specialize to some extent. There are thousands of active editors doing minor edits, categorization and so on in mainspace, but very few cleaning up spam in userspace. I often work here [2] and its a triage job. There is no requirement for any editor to do everything possible to better an article and I've found that articles promoted into the NPP cue get tagged and cleaned up pretty quickly by editors that specialize in that. I also watch and revisit these pages in the days to follow to ensure they get required attention. Also, respectfully, Pacific Premier Bancorp is a NASDAQ listed $6 Billion in assets bank, and nearly all listed companies meet WP:N Legacypac (talk) 04:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Note - Discretionary sanctions alert about American Politics 2

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

--NeilN talk to me 12:11, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Removing on-their-face credible sources from articles in AfD is discouraged

...as is citing to a book as a whole, making a single cite of two cobbled-together URLs, using cites which are quite likely copyright violations in the long term, and leaving a simple reversion tag when substantially editing a page. All of those are discouraged, I'd say; I'm curious why you'd support them. Anmccaff (talk) 21:15, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Let's have this discussion on Talk:Mental fact. Power~enwiki (talk) 21:15, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

JB

Thanks for your edits... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subuey (talk • contribs) 05:32, 18 June 2017 (UTC)




Improper Close

Discussions should be closed by uninvolved editors. I've reverted your closure here, which was improper. See Wikipedia:Closing_discussions#Closure_procedure. James J. Lambden (talk) 05:47, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

"In addition to formal closes that analyze the consensus of a discussion, discussions may also be closed where someone, usually an administrator, decides that the discussion is irrelevant or disruptive. This practice is used quite often on pages that attract heated dispute, although there are no rules in place governing its use, and there are times when closing a discussion can create even more strife than had existed before." Power~enwiki (talk) 06:16, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Beyond "no rules in place" I don't see specific language allowing involved closes. Where the language is specific it specifies "uninvolved" in all instances. I believe you were the only editor objecting in that discussion. It would be best to allow the discussion to peter out or an uninvolved close. The editor's argument was not entirely unreasonable. James J. Lambden (talk) 06:38, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

I really hate that page, I don't know why I do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subuey (talk • contribs) 05:09, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for helping me out on my talk page! Costatitanica (talk) 18:56, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Power, thanks for acknowledging my hours upon hours of research that brought the page Whataboutism to over 100 sources on the article.

I really appreciate your acknowledgement of my extensive research on this topic.

Thank you !

Sagecandor (talk) 03:41, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Clarification

That section came from Presidency of Donald Trump, and was stated by someone else. I just expanded based on the Wikipedia consensus, although I don't consider Trump one.

PerfectlyIrrational (talk) 21:56, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

You've just come back from being banned for 2 weeks. Making such a change without discussing it on the talk page first is inappropriate. If you don't stop acting disruptively now, I suspect you will be banned indefinitely by ANI. Power~enwiki (talk) 21:57, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

BRD

As you know, this means the pre-edit-warring status should be restored. Please undo your revert. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:36, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

I disagree with your assessment. This was added as the result of a disputed extended-confirmed-edit request today. The pre-edit-warring status is the one from yesterday, without this event on it. Power~enwiki (talk) 20:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Babington's tea room

FYI I removed the PROD. It's a famous tearoom. Established in 1893. It is also a very well-known tourist attraction in Rome, which is why I had no trouble adding six sources. 104.163.153.14 (talk) 04:51, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

6 and 15

Please do tell me why you think my edits are disruptive. I have checked what your contributions were to those articles, and they are to delete some very useful information in the mathematics section. Tell me why you think that information is "irrelevant", because in my mathematics department, checking the mathematical properties of a number on Wikipedia is commonplace. Thank you. Johnny3887 (talk) 03:16, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

There must be at least twenty facts of equal notability as "6 is one of only two positive integers that is simultaneously two more than a perfect square and two less than a perfect cube". It might be relevant on a page "List of solutions to Diophantine equations". Power~enwiki (talk) 03:27, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Ah, a simple misunderstanding, then. In that case, in no way is my editing disruptive; I just added information that you think is better placed somewhere else. I think you are right, but I do not think that this constitutes 'disruptive editing' on my part. Please remove the warning from my talk page. Thanks. Johnny3887 (talk) 03:33, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
You're welcome to do whatever you want on your talk page, including removing the warning. Power~enwiki (talk) 03:35, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Omero

Thanks for your suggestions on the Afd page. Any ideas how to recreate the Omero article to reflect the base in knowledge she brings to Sunday morning TV? I would be happy to research, cite, and write about that. MaynardClark (talk) 20:59, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm not going to have time to do any work on this until July 11. I see no rush to re-create the article before then. Power~enwiki (talk) 02:25, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

AN/I

As you participated in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive957#Proposal: One-way IBAN on Godsy towards Legacypac, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposing IBAN between Godsy and Legacypac. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 03:14, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

The Dreme

"no independent claim of notability"? You don't think a whole section of The Cambridge History of English and American Literature is indepndent enough? (See the Further Reading). PamD 22:53, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

I misread that reference as being to another copy of the poem. Looking again, I agree with you. Power~enwiki (talk) 22:53, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, 力. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Basecamp (company) (2nd nomination).
Message added 03:46, 5 July 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A user posted a comment for you there. North America1000 03:46, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

360 days

Hi - Talk:2017 Qatar diplomatic crisis - please open a chat if you want to change the archive time for stale discussions to one year, such a change is imho ridiculous, as you have tried to do that and been reverted, please seek a consensus on the talkpage for your changes, thanks Govindaharihari (talk) 21:09, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Please note that I added the 21d archiving yesterday for a one-off batch archive; some value between 21d and 360d will likely be appropriate going forward. Power~enwiki (talk) 21:11, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
diff - 360 days is a joke, take it to talk and get a consensus, actually 21 days of stale chat is fine for archiving, thanks Govindaharihari (talk) 21:12, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted

Hello Power~enwiki. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Alex ShihTalk 00:27, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Power. I saw you got this and that you were interested in the push this weekend. If you haven't already, I would recommend reading the tutorial at WP:NPP! Thanks for your interest in new pages! TonyBallioni (talk) 00:29, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
@TonyBallioni: Is there a page that says what the icons mean when I click through to a page? I don't see it on WP:NPP Power~enwiki (talk) 00:31, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Also I'd love a WP:BLP filter, but I suspect that doesn't exist. Power~enwiki (talk) 00:32, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Help at page curation can be found at Wikipedia:Page Curation/Help. WT:NPR serves as the NPP project noticeboard and is useful for both asking questions, reporting issues, and bringing up other things of general interest to people who work in new content. You can suggest new features at Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements. They won't get acted upon unless they are placed in Phabricator, but that is a good place to make a note of suggestions to get feedback. BLP would be tough to sort by because not every BLP will be categorized as such at creation. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:36, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 力, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
  • Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

  • Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
  • The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:

General project update:

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Scott Drury Page

Is entirely self-promotional (unsigned comment from IP 2602:306:3485:e0f0:c1c0:b5ad:c9fd:35d4 )

Regardless of any potential problems with the article, repeatedly reverting the article to your preferred version is not appropriate. As a specific issue with your edit, some mention of his campaign for governor should be included in the article. Also, details like "a GOFUNDME account was recently created in order to raise the$99 to purchase Scott Drury a clock" are not relevant. Power~enwiki (talk) 04:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

But first person quotes about obscure court cases from over ten years ago are ok?

If someone wants to clean up that page and restore even a nominal amount of objectivity I would happily step away. It is obvious that the page is being written by either Mr Drury himself or someone in his office in order to create a favorable impression of him — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3485:E0F0:C1C0:B5AD:C9FD:35D4 (talk) 04:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

AE

Kindly show me where it says I'm only allowed to post in my own section, and if I don't, you're allowed to remove my edit. If you can't do both of those things restore my edit to where it was. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 03:02, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide_to_arbitration#Responding_to_requests "If you must respond to some statement by another editor on the arbitration request, then you must do so in your own section." Power~enwiki (talk) 03:04, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Did you read to the end of the paragraph? Are you a clerk or arbiter? No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 03:08, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Do you want me to ask ARBCOM if my actions were appropriate? Power~enwiki (talk) 03:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm sure ARBCOM has better things to do, and that we both know your action was inappropriate. You're not a clerk and have no right to edit other people's posts. Read WP:TPNO if you have any questions about this. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 03:18, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

@No More Mr Nice Guy: You are only allowed to post in your own section. It says so at the top of the page.

And Power-enwiki, maintaining decorum at arbitration enforcement is the responsibility of the administrators working there, not yours.

Both of you: Don't disrupt the AE board. Doing so can be a short trip to a long block. GoldenRing (talk) 08:29, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Entertainment 'main article' templates

Hi, I noticed you added 'main article' templates to most subheadings of the article entertainment - (diff). I appreciate what you're trying to achieve with that contribution, but I feel that there is now quite a lot of repetition in the lead of each subheading. For example, this is what the "Games" subsection looks like: 

=== Games ===
Main article: [[Game]]
[[Game|Games]] are played for entertainment...

In effect, we have the same word repeated thrice - and this is the case for most of the others (banquests, music, comedy, circus, parades etc. etc.) Perhaps the only one that is different is "children" where the main-article is "play (activity)", although that is also linked in the first sentence of that section.
What I'm trying to say is that I'm not sure these new templates add information to the reader given that their linked article is the immediately following word (like Games) or in a couple of cases just a few words later (like, "Dance: The many forms of dance..."). At the very least if we keep these 'main article' templates we should remove the links in the first word of the prose for that paragraph, or perhaps remove the templates to return it to how it was when approved for Good Article? Your thoughts? Wittylama 09:48, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

After looking at a few similar articles such as Law and Food, I agree that there's a bit too much repetition. I'll do another editing pass later today. Power~enwiki (talk) 18:32, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Note

I was leaving neutrally worded notices, specifically only using the {{Afd notice}} template, on WikiProject talk pages.

Zero user talk pages. Sagecandor (talk) 21:06, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

You did so on TWENTY-FIVE pages! I feel that is clearly canvassing. Power~enwiki (talk) 21:06, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry you feel that way. I didn't mention my opinion whatsoever, but rather chose to instead use the {{Afd notice}} template, which is expressly for this exact purpose. Sagecandor (talk) 22:11, 18 July 2017 (UTC)


Canvassing?

Discussion on a different page Power~enwiki (talk) 23:05, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

You stated that asking for four admins is canvassing. If that's it, may I modify my post and then request just the third closer instead? If that's not it, why saying "canvassing"? --George Ho (talk) 16:08, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea what the WMF is telling you, and if they're telling you that having "four closers" is more meaningful than "two closers" for this RfC, I'm happy to argue with them in person either at their SF offices or at Wikimania. Everyone can tell what the result of the RfC is; I still feel that adding bureaucratic process in the way you are trying to do is in bad faith. Power~enwiki (talk) 18:15, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
I haven't worked for and don't work for WMF, and that kind of assumption or accusation is something I cannot tolerate. Nevertheless, I'll be happy to amend my request to asking for one more editor if you would approve, or you want me to rescind asking for a third closer, right? I also made comments there. --George Ho (talk) 18:21, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
I assume that you are discussing this matter with the WMF, if you are this concerned they are going to ignore the consensus? The difference between 3 and 4 closers is trivial. Power~enwiki (talk) 18:23, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
No, I haven't discussed this with WMF very much, and WMF have not asked or instructed me to have more closers. I just listened to all sides of the matter. Off-topic, but I asked at "Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 135#How to best close this discussion?" whether to have one or two closers. One said unnecessary; other said maybe. Therefore, I went to WP:AN and asked for two closers. Then... voila, a fully detailed summary of the discussion. Anyway, one question: what do you think should one or two closers do to the arguments favoring other options and/or opposing that option and/or concerning about that option? --George Ho (talk) 18:34, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
You did read User talk:Guy Macon#Third closer necessary for referrer info RfC? where I gave my reasons for requesting more closers, right? Could you please explain, in detail, any flaws that you see in my reasoning, and the exact section of WP:CANVASSING that you believe is being violated? --Guy Macon (talk) 22:37, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
I hadn't read that specific page before, but I did read the previous "request for more closers" on WP:AN a few weeks ago, and have read the proposal. Power~enwiki (talk) 22:42, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps canvassing isn't the right word. My point stands that it's ridiculous that you should need additional admins to close the RfC. If you are trying to do so because the WMF feels it will be helpful, I will gladly argue with them about it. If you feel on your own that it is helpful, I will gladly argue with you about it. Power~enwiki (talk) 22:40, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

@Guy Macon: I can close this and move my comments to your talk page, if you prefer. Power~enwiki (talk) 22:43, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. I will talk about it there. You may wish to repeat your NSPORTS argument on my talk page. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:02, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

about the DevOps section in Information_technology_operations

I think if there's going to be a section on DevOps maybe go over the industry evolution of how typically IT Operations (ops) was considered separate from Engineering (devs) and now DevOps emphasizes the need for closer collaboration. Otherwise I think the wiki page stands on it's own without reference to DevOps. Or in other words, I'm thinking: "the structure of Wikipedia page don't have to mirror a particular view of how businesses should be structured". Anyway, just thoughts I'm not married to.

Sp00nfeeder —Preceding undated comment added 14:01, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

You're somewhat right

You're somewhat right, in that talk page is different than main article space.

But about WP:No original research, I think, unfortunately, you are confused about that policy on Wikipedia.

It means we can't do our own research.

It means we can't make up our own assumptions and then put that in Wikipedia article mainspace.

Hope the above is helpful to you. Sagecandor (talk) 03:32, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

It's not an assumption that over 100 sources on the article are from after 2008, and none are from before 2008. Power~enwiki (talk) 03:33, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Sure, you're right about that. Thanks for acknowledging the huge amount of effort I put into the research on the page, Power, I really appreciate that ! Sagecandor (talk) 03:34, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Accidental Click

Hello User:Power~enwiki, I apologize for the revert here. I was scrolling through my watchlist and accidentally clicked 'rollback'! Cheers, AnupamTalk 06:58, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Can you please stop following me

Power,

Can you please stop following me to pages unrelated to previous areas of interaction, as you did, at DIFF ?

Thank you for respecting this request,

Sagecandor (talk) 05:03, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

I would like to repeat once more that your ownership issues regarding Donald Trump-related issues are, IMO, in extreme violation of Wikipedia guidelines, and in a Discretionary Sanctions area. If you don't act in a more collaborative way with other editors I intend to start an ARBCOM case against you in the very near future. I will obviously look at your edit history in filing such a case, if it becomes necessary. Apart from that, I will refrain from following you, and am already refraining from editing article pages you are contributing to. Power~enwiki (talk) 05:06, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. Sagecandor (talk) 05:07, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hidden Tempo (talk) 07:42, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:47, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Inner source

Hi Power~enwiki, you removed inner source from the Software Development Process template. I am not sure why you did it. Would please explain your decision? I think the open source software development process is completely different from all other processes. And so it is inner source, which is the use of open source best practices.

And you removed the inner source benefits from the inner source article. The benefits are reported in scientific articles, published in reputable journals and conferences, such as ACM or IEEE (see references). So why do you want to have this scientific results removed from the wikipedia page? There is no advertising the benefits, because I did also mention the challenges. I also do not think it makes sense to add the info box about software development process to this article, when you want to have inner source on this template (see above). What do you think?

Michaeldorner (talk) 12:45, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I wouldn't call Inner source a paradigm, model, methodology, or framework, so I don't see a place for it on the template. I agree there's no point having the template on the page now; I think I added it only because it was listed on the template. Editing concerns can be discussed on the page. Power~enwiki (talk) 20:23, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Newspaper

I've written a new lede section for Newspaper. Any comments are requested. The old one is in the "overview" section. Power~enwiki (talk) 00:56, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Would be great to have your contribution to the DRN, since you've been very civil and collaborative on other pages. Hidden Tempo (talk) 01:31, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Disputes

Behavioral disputes belong at ANI or AE, or you can ping an uninvolved Admin. SPECIFICO talk 02:36, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm unfamiliar with DRN, and would rather not put material relevant to a discussion there on a different noticeboard until there is comment on that page. Power~enwiki (talk) 02:39, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
That one is for content disputes. You can read some guidance at that page. Good luck. SPECIFICO talk 02:41, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Just a note, Power (and feel free to ignore), but it may be helpful to provide some further background of O-3000's persistent uncivil behavior and disruptions. At the NPOV noticeboard for instance, he repeatedly tried to derail the discussion and demanded its closure. I know it doesn't concern you per se, but at AN/I you really want to make sure you have a strong case to make sure you don't get boomerang'd. If an admin requests or is open to it, I can add a statement as well since I have had numerous unpleasant interactions with this editor and this isn't his first time heading to AN/I for poor behavior. Thanks. Hidden Tempo (talk) 03:05, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't have the slightest idea who did what at WP:NPOV/N and I don't care enough to research it in detail; if you have a statement that's fine. I'm very aware that his claim of "In my decade here, I have never escalated to a drama board." is misleading at best. Power~enwiki (talk) 03:07, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Okay, as much as I agree with you about Objective3000's behavior and find his edits extremely disruptive and unhelpful, I have to say that Mandruss is looking out for you, here. This "Capeo" person just attacked both of us as "pushing a Republican POV," and speaking from experience, once that happens...it's pretty much over. There's nothing you can say once they lump you in with that "I think this person doesn't agree me with politically, therefore they must be punished" group. More and more users will come to pile on and recommend that you get blocked/banned or some other kind of e-whipping. I've seen it many times before. Objective3000 seems to be emerging as "one of the good guys"/like-minded politically, so he is virtually immune from sanctions on these boards. Of course you're welcome to ignore my advice, but I strongly recommend that you explicitly state that you withdraw the complaint and strike your initial edit. It won't end well if admins arrive and start linking to WP:Boomerang. Sorry if I'm overstepping my bounds here, just don't want to see you sustain a sanction. Hidden Tempo (talk) 03:58, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
I explicitly ignore all your advice, and strongly object to any description of my edits as "Republican POV". Power~enwiki (talk) 03:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, it's starting to spiral out of control now. It should be OK to leave open a little longer. Power~enwiki (talk) 05:34, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017

Any further attempts to post on my talk page may result in you being blocked. I intend this to be the last post I make on your talk page. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

To repeat a comment stricken from Guy Macon's talk page: "You're clearly just trying to get as many admins as possible to sign on to your pre-planned statement, regardless of what contributors has said in the thread. That's not "assessing consensus", that's biased campaigning for your point of view. Calling whatever you're doing "consensus" is lying. If you are assessing the consensus, as Only in death says, one admin should be sufficient, though I wouldn't have objected to having a second one. No wonder the WMF ignores you." The last statement may be inflammatory, but I feel it clearly accurate. Power~enwiki (talk) 16:50, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

FYI

You just reported an IP to AIV---could you report it again? There is an edit war going on there, and I accidentally reverted you. Thanks! RileyBugz会話投稿記録 00:40, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Done. I'd ping WP:AN about an edit war on an administrative board, but you may feel that's excessive. Power~enwiki (talk) 00:41, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
I'll just post it at WP:ANI. RileyBugz会話投稿記録 00:42, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Heh, they actually used my IP address geolocation to threaten me after I reverted them... what a joke... 2601:1C0:10B:7D6D:19FC:80A1:3B49:6D26 (talk) 00:56, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

And, now they're blocked. 2601:1C0:10B:7D6D:19FC:80A1:3B49:6D26 (talk) 01:03, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen. Power~enwiki (talk) 01:05, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Previous

The article Previous has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There's no reason to have this Wiktionary redirect here. The redirection tag was added by someone who moved the previous content to another title, but there's no reason to keep this title.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Largoplazo (talk) 02:28, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

No objection; I don't have the "move without redirect" privilege or would have done it that way initially. Power~enwiki (talk) 02:29, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Trumps reasons for firing Comey

Hey, Power. Did you want to discuss your reversion a bit? The critical piece of information that you reverted is necessary to maintain NPOV on that article. Without it, the narrative to the reader is basically "Listen. Trump fired Comey cause of Russia. It was about Russia." Do you feel that Comey's bombshell testimony is not just as relevant as the allegation that Trump asked Comey to let the Flynn investigation go? Hidden Tempo (talk) 21:28, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

The article is about Donald Trump, not Dismissal of James Comey. And the only sentence that said "It was about Russia" was yours. Power~enwiki (talk) 21:33, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Agreed, but there are 3 paragraphs devoted to the dismissal, which serves as a summary. As I stated, the material is POV without including one of the most critical facets of the dismissal. The article does not explicitly state that the dismissal about Russia, but instead implicitly states that it was about Russia with cherry-picked sources that support the narrative. Again, do you feel that Comey's bombshell testimony is not just as relevant as the allegation that Trump asked Comey to let the Flynn investigation go? Hidden Tempo (talk) 21:49, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
How is this "bombshell" discussed on Dismissal of James Comey? (please give me a specific heading or direct quote, that page is excessively long). Power~enwiki (talk) 21:53, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
That article is indeed far too long. What a mess. Anyway, that article should have the quote that we are discussing right now, but the main dismissal article describes it this way:

"I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December. I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign."

Since many people (mainly Democrats and certain media outlets) immediately began speculating that Trump was trying to get rid of the Russia investigation and "protect" himself, it's highly relevant that James Comey refuted that speculation and very directly said that this wasn't the case. Hidden Tempo (talk) 22:04, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Hey, Power. Still waiting for a response, here. Did you want to do an RfC on the talk page or would you rather talk it out on the NPOV board? Hidden Tempo (talk) 19:31, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm uninterested in discussing this further until the Dismissal of James Comey page (or James_Comey#Dismissal) is improved to explain why this is important. I suspect editors at an RfC or NPOV will be even less receptive to your changes than I am. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:34, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Alright, no worries. I already explained why it's important, but I can do it at the NPOV board as well. I'm still required to template you regardless of your interest in the discussion, so don't take offense when you get the notice! Thanks. Hidden Tempo (talk) 19:36, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

The Defiant Kitten

This kitten defies your instructions not to post him and appreciates your Cogman input

‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 14:46, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Note - this is in good fun and I don't mean to violate your talk page if you REALLY don't want cats here. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 14:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Kittens just get archived extremely quickly. Power~enwiki (talk) 17:55, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Duke of Castro

I think the page needs to be locked temporarily, it's just becoming a hotbed for IP vandalism now CaribbeanTruth (talk) 15:03, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

> in math environment

Please, do not use html code in a latex environment. It will produce errors. I fixed it [3]. --Boehm (talk) 09:55, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

OK. I was trying to replace the ones in the Infobox; I didn't realize the global find-and-replace would break things. Power~enwiki (talk) 14:25, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
We don't always agree, but I always appreciate your desire to work towards the ideals of Wikipedia. For that, you get this barnstar. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:09, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Government article

More editors/authors would be useful on the Government article. Power~enwiki (talk) 21:18, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Matthew Tee Kai Woon

Hi. I am Matthew Tee Kai Woon's personal assistant from Bina Puri Holdings Bhd. The profile i posted on wiki is actually a standard corporate profile and is drafted by me. You may check all the corporate websites linked under references. There isn't any plagiarism in this case. I have also created another page for my Group Managing Director Tee Hock Seng, his profile posted by me is also more or less the same as our corporate website. Should you need any clarification/details from Bina Puri Holdings Bhd, do let me know. Thanks. (Chucarmen.bp (talk) 04:32, 4 August 2017 (UTC))

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
Instead of arguing that there were references, you went out and found some. You are a hero.. Rhadow (talk) 01:30, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

I apologize for my tone on Jared Taylor's talk page

I actually agree with your point in principal, but I can also picture what some of the people on that page are going to do with your post, in particular the word "compromise". I also agree with your closing comment on the reliable sources notice board. Thanks for your contribution. Edaham (talk) 03:44, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Cost of Wikishoes

The other day I overheard some of my friends saying that they paid as much as $275 CAD for a pair of shoes. This is an outrageous price. Nike and other shoe companies have tens of millions of dollars, truckloads of money are paid out in "endorsement deals". In the Global South, people can't even afford shoes. The story doesn't add up.

And also: why is the foundation hiding Jimbo Wales' shoe size? This demonstrates a lack of transparency and general malaise of character that doesn't meet the impossibly-high standards that I and many other contributors hold the foundation to. Perhaps members of the foundation should consider primarily wearing sandals, a more transparent type of shoe.

I, for one, am willing to state on the record that I am extremely concerned by these developments and wish for them to be discussed further at the correct forum.

</sarcasm> Power~enwiki (talk) 21:26, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

my edit

Not suggesting anything. Awaiting coroner's report and trial outcomes. See WP:BLPCRIME, can't simply make declarations like that while investigation is in process.

It seems probable, sure, but we need to be neutral here. ScratchMarshall (talk) 23:32, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Unite the Right rally

I've removed this page from my Watchlist, and do not intend to edit it on 16 August 2017 UTC. Power~enwiki (talk) 23:50, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Comparison of Kanban software - your merger proposal

Hello Power~enwiki, while that is not the formal way to close a merge proposal, I have redirected the article to your suggested target without any merging (really no sourced content to merge). I hope that's OK for you - of course any future sourced content can be added to Comparison of Kanban software or a stand-alone product article. Just a short notice to avoid misunderstandings :), thank you for your suggestion to get this improvement going. GermanJoe (talk) 03:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Looks good. Power~enwiki (talk) 03:48, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Your requesting conversation without initiating it

Please stop making disruptive edits.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.

Simply stating "I disagree" in a summary and requesting to talk without having first created a conversation on the particular rings hollow.

You created a section about the fatality count, but you did not create one to express your disagreement with the section titling.

I explained my reasons in my summary and you did not explain yours. It shows a lack of good faith. ScratchMarshall (talk) 16:24, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

  • There are plenty of threads on this already. The basic issue (whether to call it an attack or a "traffic collision" is the same for both, it's absurd to claim its disruptive for not having separate talk threads. And you're right, I'm not assuming good faith. In my opinion your edits are deliberately pushing a point of view under cover of misleading claims of neutrality. Power~enwiki (talk) 16:31, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Your closure of a discussion at WP:Gary Renard

Did you read WP:Edit warring before you closed the thread?  Do you agree that it states that the talk page is the place for discussion?  Unscintillating (talk) 19:30, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The AfD was closed as a protected redirect before you started edit warring. Your attempt to edit war can't move the discussion. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:30, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 力, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

  • Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
  • Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Help!

Hi,

I removed the deletion tag because you left a message in my talk to do so and then justify why. This is my first time editing- just a bit confused?

What specifically can I fix in the article? Because someone shared an article with me about Wikipedia trying to expand it's pages about women so I thought I'd start there.

Thanks, Jacobbailer (talk) 22:57, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything you can do to fix the article. Having an article for the professional teams she played for might help, but I'm not sure that would be enough to meet WP:NSPORT. Her current career as "President and Founder of The Athlete’s Nexus" is almost definitely promotional and not notable. Power~enwiki (talk) 23:00, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

KW Linuxfest speedy deletion request

This is a brand new page, only a few hours old. Please give Wikipedians a chance to improve this article before flagging it as inadequate.

I have added a paragraph pointing out that KW Linuxfest is the only remaining GNU/Linux conference in Ontario, while Wikipedia continues to maintain pages for defunct conferences. --Bob (talk) 02:07, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

!!! (disambiguation)

I have contested the deletion. Please see talk page speednat (talk)

I may have mis-read the criteria. Despite there being 3 entries in the list, there were only two pages. The classification tool says "... disambiguate two or fewer existing Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic)", but other places say it refers to pages that disambiguate only one page. Power~enwiki (talk) 02:53, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you speednat (talk)

Uruk GNU/Linux

Hello. Regarding your proposal for deletion of the article Uruk GNU/Linux, I've deleted the proposal and explained in the talk page why I did so. I do believe that Uruk GNU/Linux is used widely enough to have an article on wikipedia, and it feels weird to find certain articles and videos in different langauges but no Wikipedia article about it! Mustafa Wahhudi (talk) 13:40, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-35

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Syntax highlighting is now a beta feature on Wikimedia wikis with text written from left to right. It will come to right-to-left wikis later. This beta feature is based on CodeMirror. [4][5]
  • You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device or IP address that have logged in to your account before you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can turn this off or choose to get an email notification in your preferences. You can also turn on to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address. [6]

Problems

  • Some pages show the error Lua error in mw.wikibase.entity.lua at line 34: The entity data must be a table obtained via mw.wikibase.getEntityObject. This problem happens on pages with a Lua module that use Wikidata. This has now been fixed and no new pages will get this problem. You still need to fix pages that were broken before and still show the error message. You can see how on this page. [7]

Changes later this week

  • You can block users from sending you notifications. [8]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 29 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 30 August. It will be on all wikis from 31 August (calendar).

Meetings

Future changes

  • In the future you will have global preferences. This means you could set something in your preferences to work in the same way on all wikis. You will not be forced to use global preferences. The developers are now asking if editors need exceptions. This is where you want to use global settings on almost all wikis, but have some wikis where you want it to work in a different way. If you want this you need to tell the developers now. You can do so on the talk page. [9]
  • New filters for edit review is a beta feature to improve recent changes pages. It will work on watchlists from 5 September. [10]
  • The jQuery library will be upgraded to version 3 in September 2017. Wikis can ask on Phabricator to get it early, so they can help find and solve problems now.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

22:10, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Robert McClenon. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Prionus laticollis, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Robert McClenon (talk) 00:15, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Re this

Not misclick, it was a misread, I seem to have missed your signature when I was cleaning up after the sock that posted right after you. Apologies for the trouble. —SpacemanSpiff 23:30, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

  • No problem; I've struck that vote. Power~enwiki (talk) 23:32, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

List of Guild Home Video and Pathé releases

G'day, just letting you know I upgraded your WP:PROD to a WP:AfD at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Guild_Home_Video_and_Pathé_releases. — IVORK Discuss 23:33, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Jaclyn Miles

I am so frustrated that AfD discussions get so little contributions, that they can become dominated by people who have not reviewed the sources, and have the audacity to attack others because they have failed to even put forth the minimum of review of a subject. I am also amazed that people could even think that short mention in a local paper article on a protest could make anyone notable. The whole process is hard to deal with, especially the false claims that I had violated the limitations put on me, which very clearly say once per 24-hours, which I had not come close to violating.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:54, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

KSF

Kaiser San Francisco, maybe we should move it to San Francisco Medical Center but we should keep much as we do with articles on other individual hospitals such as Richmond Medical Center or other kaiser hospitals on the KP template.Wikigirl97 (talk) 22:13, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

  • There's no specific hospital that's a good redirect target. (Which is an argument for keeping the article.) A "List of Kaiser Medical Facilities" might be the best redirect target? Power~enwiki (talk) 22:15, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
What issues does it have?Wikigirl97 (talk) 22:51, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
A regional sub-division of a corporation is almost never notable. However, a specific medical campus is often notable. Inasmuch as this article refers to a specific medical facility at a specific address, I support that it is notable. Power~enwiki (talk) 22:53, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
It refers to the specific medical center on Geary street and it's other buildings nearbyWikigirl97 (talk) 23:40, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-36

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Tech News

Recent changes

  • The RevisionSlider user interface has changed. You can now select revisions by clicking on the bars. You can move the blue knob past the yellow one and the yellow one will move along, and the other way around. [11][12]

Problems

  • Some users have problems loading very large watchlists. It is working better than earlier but the problem has not been solved. The developers are working on fixing it. Until it has been fixed you can turn on "Expand watchlist to show all changes, not just the most recent" in your preferences and see if it helps. [13]

Changes later this week

  • New filters for edit review is a beta feature to improve recent changes pages. It will work on watchlists from 5 September. [14]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 5 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 6 September. It will be on all wikis from 7 September (calendar).

Meetings

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

22:15, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Tim O'Shaughnessy (businessman) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tim O'Shaughnessy (businessman) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim O'Shaughnessy (businessman) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 21:02, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Don't do that

[16]. To you it may be waste of time (why exactly?). To me, and others who have commented it's not. Don't. Let the matter be resolved. Volunteer Marek  21:55, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

BTW, this may end up at ArbCom, but we're not there yet. Hopefully there'll be no need. Volunteer Marek  21:56, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Apple & Onion for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Apple & Onion is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apple & Onion until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.-- I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 03:11, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Quick Q

Did you receive the ping for a merger discussion? I forgot to sign my username before I saved the edit and I am unsure if that affected the ping.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 02:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

  • Yes, that one. Thank you, perhaps if I resign my username it will fix the issue. Feel free to participate at the discussion since you commented on the AfD.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 03:01, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:力/Archive_1&oldid=1142667411"