User talk:Difu Wu

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Please assume good faith, and be kind!

N.B.: Unless you request otherwise, I will reply to you on this talkpage. Thanks!

Welcome!

Hello, Difu Wu, 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! Steven Walling 18:48, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Link to my list of adopted typos[edit]

User:Difu Wu/typo Difu Wu (talk) 01:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Mutualism (biology) (disambiguation)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Mutualism (biology) (disambiguation), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Station1 (talk) 06:21, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Talk pages[edit]

I have nominated Category:Talk pages (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 02:33, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nantucket Range Lights edit[edit]

I don't understand the edit you made here. It appears to me to be both undesirable and a waste of your time. The edit summary says, "Repairing link to disambiguation page -"., but that doesn't appear to be what happened.

In a cite, I had written "publisher=[[U.S. Coast Guard]]" and you changed it to "publisher=[[United States Coast Guard|U.S. Coast Guard]]". Since [[U.S. Coast Guard]] redirects to [[United States Coast Guard]], the only change was to eliminate a redirect. On face of it, that's good, but it makes the cite harder to read in edit mode and to repair, so I deliberately use [[U.S. Coast Guard]] rather than [[United States Coast Guard|U.S. Coast Guard]] in all my articles, which being mostly on lighthouses, cite the USCG a lot. My attitude is blessed by WP:DWAP, with a more extensive discussion on this very point at Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups/About fixing redirects.

This is very different, of course, from linking to a dab page, which is undesirable, and should be fixed wherever it occurs.

BTW, you'll have to look at the history to see this. We are now using a template for this cite and I changed it here. . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 20:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I am prone to mistakes, so thanks for your correction. I'm not sure how much harder it is to read, but if you say so, please change it back. My apologies.Difu Wu (talk) 21:03, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. As I said, I changed it out for a template ref. What caught my eye was not the change, which is no big deal, but that the edit summary was wrong. If you're using a bot or tool for this, it seems that it's not pointed at the right problem. . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 21:18, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia article "Fuck"[edit]

Um, your recent disam edit to the article "Fuck", as far as I could tell changed a link from a link to a disam page to a link to a disam page. Very confused as to how anything was repaired. —Aladdin Sane (talk) 20:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I used a semi-robotic tool for that, so perhaps the tool is imperfect. I think I fixed it manually now. Difu Wu (talk) 21:01, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Muscat Ottonel and misspellings using AWB![edit]

Hello Difu Wu, I appreciate your use of AWB to correct misspellings, but in this edit you in fact introduced two misspellings, which meant that you introduced factual errors, at the same time you removed an actual misspelling (by me). As is plainly given in the article, these synonyms for the grape variety Muscat Ottonel in various languages are taken from the reference given, this one, which is a database record from the Vitis International Variety Catalogue. When you know that you are responsible for checking the accuracy of every edit you do using AWB just as if you do them in any other fashion, how can you just assume that there is no language where the spelling is "Muscotaly" rather than "Muscotally" without checking any sources??? So please check sources before making changes like this. Regards and a good new editing year, Tomas e (talk) 14:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I apologise. But at least the other spelling error got corrected now. I'll be more careful next time :) Difu Wu (talk) 14:42, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

… again[edit]

… and again in your edit to correct "transcendante"; see fr:Douze études d'exécution transcendante et al. There's a general principle not to attempt correcting the titles of works (and quoted text).-- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's four complaints in as many days. May I suggest that you slow way down, or maybe even take up some other aspect of helping improve Wikipedia? . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 12:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please suggest some others ways to help improve wikipedia. Let me know what you think. Difu Wu (talk) 14:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
… and this where the title of the opera ''Le jugement de Pâris was incorrectly changed to Le judgement de Pâris. Also: in that article (Marc-Antoine Charpentier), some hyphens for year ranges were, correctly, changed to n-dashes, but unexplicably not all. This is not helpful. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I apologise for all the errors. I tried my best, but I am not god and I do make mistakes. For every mistake I made, I made at least 50-100 good edits. If you do a task frequent enough, you will inevitably make mistakes. Even with an accuracy rate of 99.9%, if you make 10000 edits, you will still make 10 mistakes. As an analogy, crash rate for airplanes are very low, but because there are many flights, plane crashes do happen occasionally. It seems that my good work here is never praised, and people just like to comment when mistakes are made. Please assume good faith here. Nothing is ever perfect, so please just correct the mistakes you see and take it easy, instead of criticising, condemning, belittling. I will be more careful with not correcting spellings in titles, especially those in foreign languages. Please do not be so quick to judge and take offense. Thanks for your patience. Difu Wu (talk) 13:30, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There are two issues here: the first is typo fixing. You, Difu Wu, must remember that there are often false positives on foreign-language text or names, so you must watch out for that, and edit such text conservatively. Secondly, re the endashes in date ranges: that's a new general fix that I recently added to AWB. I think, as you Michael Bednarek say, it correctly fixes quite a lot already, but yes, it doesn't catch everything. I'm working on it to catch more correctly, but want to avoid false positives. Still, I think if it correctly changes the majority while missing a few that's an overall improvement to the article, and will hopefully encourage another editor to finish off any remaining ones. Thanks Rjwilmsi 14:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Rjwilmsi for your helpful feedback! I will work on improving my accuracy rate. Thanks for your patience :) Difu Wu (talk) 14:40, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You![edit]

Thanks, for helping me out. --RapCity2009 (talk) 02:11, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. I'll try my best to help :) Difu Wu (talk) 02:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Errare humanum est[edit]

Hi Difu Wu

I note that you placed a speedy deletion nomination template on the article Curtis Allina. Please note that a full-length New York Times obituary has always (in my experience) been considered to be "significant coverage" in a "reliable source", and when the subject is not related to the publication, a source "independent of" the source.

You may wish to note this for your further patrolling activities.

Regards Bongomatic 02:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no {{talkback}} or other comment on my talk page is required.[reply]

Okay. Thanks for letting me know! I'll watch for that next time. Hopefully when we pass away we would have a NYT obituary as well, so someone can write about us in wikipedia :) Thanks for being kind in letting me know. I see that the tag has already been removed, so that's good. Cheers! Difu Wu (talk) 02:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple issues tag[edit]

Talk:Iohannes_(consul_456)#Multiple_issues_tag --TakenakaN (talk) 02:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: My Gun Go Off[edit]

Hello Difu Wu, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of My Gun Go Off - a page you tagged - because: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. decltype (talk) 03:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misapplication of HotCat[edit]

You misapplied "Category:Locks" to Dębowo Lock - it's a Canal Lock, not a Locking device. Please do not do this again. I have fixed it. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:33, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the article clearly stated that it is a lock. Am I missing something here? Difu Wu (talk) 22:37, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
wikt:Lock. The cat states "See also Category:Locks (water transport)." —Aladdin Sane (talk) 13:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Then "Category:Locks (water transport)" should have been applied, not Locking Devices. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I got it, okay? Locks (water transport) are a type of lock. I have applied the more specific category. If you want to change to a more specific category, that's fine. Just do it. No need to be so condescending. Difu Wu (talk) 00:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Freeflow[edit]

Thanks for indicating that you believe Freeflow requires further citations. However, the article is clearly marked as a stub, which obviates the need for a general request for references. Would you be kind enough to indicate the particular point that you felt was unsupported by adding a {{citation needed}} or by discussion on the talk page, please. --RexxS (talk) 21:36, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I have edited the article again. I will try to remember not to add request for more references for stub articles in the future. Thanks for your message. Difu Wu (talk) 21:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The {{refimprove}} template is not forbidden on stubs, but it's rarely needed. When you're on NPP, you might have to spend a little more time on deciding if stubs that have a single reference need some sort of template – usually {{fact}} will be most appropriate. In the case of Freeflow, pretty much the whole paragraph is covered by the section in Let's Dive, but I've repeated the ref to aid clarity. However, you're right that it doesn't cover how the venturi effect can cause a freeflow - but since Venturi effect is linked in that section, I would argue that the wiki-link is sufficient to provide an understanding of the mechanism of the cause. If you agree, perhaps you'd remove that {{fact}} tag; if not I'll have to search for a basic physics textbook to quote.
The other thing is, could I ask you to review WP:LINK#What generally should not be linked, since I would think that 'air' and 'freezing' are so readily "understood by most readers of the English Wikipedia" that such links are valueless. --RexxS (talk) 22:06, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. Air might not need to be linked, but freezing may be important and particular relevant to scuba diving. Freezing is dependent on temperature and pressure. The wikilink on Venturi effect is probably good enough, but adding more refs cannot hurt, and can only help. Difu Wu (talk) 22:22, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oluf Pedersen (politician)[edit]

He is clearly notable under WP:Politician. I don't understand your speedy deletion tag. --Sasper (talk) 16:50, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article had a citation error to render it like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oluf_Pedersen_(politician)&oldid=338383271 I fixed it and removed the speedy tag, as explained in the edit history in that article. Hope this helps. Next time, try to use preview before hitting submit to avoid citation errors. Thanks! Difu Wu (talk) 17:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Same to you. Try and read the contents before adding a speedy tag, or wait a few seconds to allow the author to correct errors. --Sasper (talk) 19:19, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Whose side are you on.png[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Whose side are you on.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Otterathome (talk) 13:51, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Whose side are you on.png listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Whose side are you on.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Otterathome (talk) 13:13, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Whose side are you on.png

Why should this be deleted? It aptly illustrates Uncyclopedia's concept of 'Editor' and 'Vandal', which makes it encyclopaedic. And the image is clearly free under the GNU license. Difu Wu (talk) 16:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Warfarin[edit]

You made some very specific claims on warfarin, especially with regards to the relative levels of coagulation factors during loading. While I don't dispute these, it would be much better if you provided a reliable source for these assertions, ideally from a high-grade secondary source such as a review. Thank you. JFW | T@lk 11:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind message and not reverting. I have added the references to Warfarin. I hope it is good now. Difu Wu (talk) 19:49, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well done on getting those refs. Very useful. Turns out we were already citing Ansell et al. I've taken the liberty of putting the references in citation templates for consistency purposes. JFW | T@lk 20:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Offer[edit]

Re your recent edit to Jack Offer I see that you added Category:Living people. Sadly Jack is no longer with us. If I find a note of his year of death I will add it to the article, but I'm worried if your bot is automatically adding that category where there is no evidence that they are still living. The absence of a date of death in the article shouldn't automatically be taken as an assumption that they are still alive. For how many other articles have you done the same? David Biddulph (talk) 16:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, and I have no idea he is no longer living. It seems that it is better to err on the side of caution for assuming someone is still living when it is uncertain, as libelous info about living people is potentially much more damaging, and WP has gotten in trouble for this in the past. But in this case, you definitely know better than I do, and I thank you for your correction. Difu Wu (talk) 16:26, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kia Classic Presented by J Golf[edit]

You tagged Kia Classic Presented by J Golf as not citing any references. There are two external links in the article, one to the official web site for the tournament and one to the LPGA official web site. Everything contained in the article is on these sites. I think this more than covers the Wikipedia requirement for citing reliable sources. It also is entirely consistent with the format used for citing facts in other professional golf tournament articles. Thank you for your concern anyway. --Crunch (talk) 23:52, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links are not in-line references. Difu Wu (talk) 00:04, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware of that. In-line references are not necessary in this article according to Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. The policy clearly states that "inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations." If there is specific material in this article that you would like to challenge, or if there are quotes that I am not seeing, please point this out. Otherwise, it is obviously absurd to require inline citations for every element of the article. The content is very straight forward, factual, not controversial, written from a neutral point of view and the references back up the content. Again, please be aware of the formatting of every other professional golf tournament article and the appropriate use of inline citations in those articles. You might also want to familiarize yourself with the work of Wikipedia:WikiProject Golf. Thank you again for your eagerness in your effort to track missing citations in Wikipedia articles. I agree with you in spirit, but I believe you have missed the mark on this article. --Crunch (talk) 13:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ok. I am not challenging the content, but it helps to have in-line references for those unfamiliar with golf for verifications. Please feel free to remove the tags if you disagree. I trust your better judgment in this case, as you most likely know a lot more about golf than I do. Difu Wu (talk) 17:44, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Petit[edit]

Thank you for fixing my silly typo in the article "Benjamin Petit." -- Cuppysfriend (talk) 00:46, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome! Thanks for the kind note :) Difu Wu (talk) 00:48, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barbie Horse Adventures: Riding Camp[edit]

The article you reverted was obviously been vandalised, although I find it a little puzzling that you reverted an anon's edit even if what he/she did was necessary, and so as not to compromise the page. Barbie didn't obviously embark on an adventure to get the Duke Nukem Forever beta files, right? Anyway, that's alright with me, at least we make mistakes, although I just decided to bring this thing to your attention. Blake Gripling (talk) 14:02, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the correction! I thought the content was legit, or so it appeared to me. But I guess I really don't know anything about Barbie, other than it is a fictional character. mea culpa. Difu Wu (talk) 16:00, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback[edit]

I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. –Juliancolton | Talk 02:28, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stop undoing my removal[edit]

I deleted text at the "Paul Fortunato" article, because it wasn't correct. See the discussion section of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.132.210.122 (talk) 19:15, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok.Difu Wu (talk) 20:01, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SQL[edit]

I just wanted to let you know that I am not trying to vandalize the SQL page. I added a citation for my change (Database Systems Addison-Wesley) and a comment on the SQL talk page. SouthLake (talk) 14:23, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ok, sorry about the revert. Difu Wu (talk) 14:40, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I should have added the citation and talk note the first time, so thanks. By the way, I enjoyed your Psalm 2 and Psalm 3 pages. SouthLake (talk) 14:58, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moynat page[edit]

You have nominated the Moynat page for Speedy Deletion and the page has been quickly removed. In fact, I did not have the time to complete the article before you placed the tag. I completed it this morning but an other tag of Speedy Deletion has been placed due to your initial intervention. Could you please re-check the article and the talk page. Thanks. Augustaboulanger —Preceding undated comment added 18:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]

It looks like a good article now. Good job! I have removed the tag. Next time, please put an under construction tag on an article if you need to complete working on it to make it acceptable. Thanks. Difu Wu (talk) 17:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC) Well noted. Thanks. --Augustaboulanger (talk) 20:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

wikiHow[edit]

So far I found you and Eric Wester. I wonder how many other WH users are here.. ;) Randomness, aka Jargon ๏̯͡๏) 11:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great to see you here too :) I think a lot of WH users are also here, whether they use the same username or not. Even Jack edits here also. Difu Wu (talk) 20:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Opiter Verginius Tricostus[edit]

Sorry about some confusion with Opiter Verginius Tricostus ([1], [2])... However, may I ask you to consider creating disambiguation page instead of redirect next time..? Maybe it would prevent others from repeating my mistake by showing why disambiguation in the article's name is needed..? --Martynas Patasius (talk) 21:12, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thanks for your edits. Difu Wu (talk) 21:24, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Summaries[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Louis Brandeis. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 17:43, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will try to remember to do so next time. Difu Wu (talk) 17:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake[edit]

I'm going to assume that this warning and this revert were mistakes. I am reverting your change. This does not seem to be an appropriate disambiguation entry. Sławomir Biały (talk) 17:07, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Do you have any evidence that disambiguation of the term "gyrovector" is needed? Please discuss rather than edit warring. Sławomir Biały (talk) 17:13, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Forrester Research: Competitors link - February 2011[edit]

Hi Difu Wu!

I made a correction to the "Forrester Research" page because of a mixup with the links. Currently the [ [Ovum] ] link takes users from a page that is discussing competitors of the Forrester Research business to a page discussing reproductive biology. My edit changed the link to [ [Ovum Ltd.] ] so that the link would take users from a page that is discussing competitors of the Forrester Research business to the page of one of Forrester Research's competitors, Ovum Ltd.

I think my edit was valid and should be published again because it makes more sense than the current link.

Thank you for you time and your commitment to making Wikipedia a collaborative online community!

70.182.184.162 (talk) 19:21, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2012[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Barack Obama appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this. Thank you. Scjessey (talk) 12:41, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please self-revert your edit to Barack Obama because it is not supported by the source and you have your facts wrong. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:25, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sir: I got my facts right, straight from the court's slip opinion. Please refrain from reverting my edits on the article. Many thanks! Difu Wu (talk) 13:29, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What you should have done is discuss it on the article's talk page and not edit war your version into the article. As soon as someone reverts your version of anything, it is proper to discuss it and not re-revert. Please go to the article talk page and explain yourself. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:36, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, I'd like to point out that this revert was an inappropriate use of the rollback feature, as Scjessey's edit was not vandalism: a normal revert with an explanation why you are reverting is the course of action when revertng a non-vandal edit (although, as Scjessey said above, discussing on the article's talk page would have been the best thing to do). Continued use of the tool in this manner will likely lead to it being revoked from you. Thank you. Acalamari 13:45, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. I have explained my edit in the talk page now.Difu Wu (talk) 13:59, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I appreciate your response. Best. Acalamari 15:55, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for The Meaning of the Qur'an[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, The Meaning of the Qur'an, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Wahj-asSaif (talk) 00:22, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know -- Missing Wikipedians[edit]

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians. XOttawahitech (talk) 15:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Enterobacteriaceae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hafnia. 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) 13:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Colorado Coalition for the Homeless[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 Colorado Coalition for the Homeless, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. SwisterTwister talk 19:31, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Difu Wu. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Difu Wu. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your access to AWB may be temporarily removed[edit]

Hello Difu Wu! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II talk 17:04, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Difu Wu. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Precious[edit]

Quare fremuerunt gentes

Thank you for quality articles such as Psalm 2, Louisville Joint Stock Land Bank v. Radford, Lobular carcinoma in situ and Caeso Fabius Vibulanus (consul), for fighting typos and vandalism, for "I'll try my best to help", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:30, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were recipient no. 2138 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Earth day![edit]

Happy Earth Day!

Hello! Wishing you a Happy Earth day on the behalf of WikiProject Environment and WikiProject Ecology.

When man tries to fight nature, he invariably loses. Nature invariably wins. It is only when man is wise enough to live with nature that he really gets anywhere.

--Elmer T. Peterson

Sent by Path slopu (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Environment and its related projects. © Copyleft 2020

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:51, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your access to AWB may be temporarily removed[edit]

Hello Difu Wu! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II talk 17:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Josh Hannah for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Josh Hannah 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/Josh Hannah until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

Tacyarg (talk) 22:19, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Difu_Wu&oldid=1076706323"