User talk:Serial Number 54129/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
Disambiguation link notification for June 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Simon Gilbert (tenor), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Orfeo and The Impossible Dream. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Our interactions
Hi Fortuna. I'm posting here regarding what is going on over at the Edit-warring page and the statement that you and I have collaborated on fish pages. I have looked at our interactions using the interaction checker - nothing there about fish. I have looked at your contributions over the last couple of months - nothing there about fish. Is the editor correct to say that we have collaborated? Feel free if you want to delete this message and answer at my Talk page. I forgot to mention - I hope the smelly feet problem gets better soon ;-) DrChrissy (talk) 15:36, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- @DrChrissy: No, I think you are precisely right: I had double-checked that myself earlier, and, as you say, no sign (or smell!) of fish. I think it should probably be taken for what it was; a baseless accusation intended to demean other editors and impugne their motives. This, perhaps, should not be unexpected, considering that editor's history- it seems like a default response. This was a very good point! Muffled Pocketed 15:41, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the speedy reply. To be honest, I work so much on here and with so many other editors I was dreading a reply from you such as - "don't you remember that time we created the article on flying fish" or the like. OK, I'll bring this up at the noticeboard. It is not a major issue at all, but I think people should know it is a completely baseless statement which misleads the community. DrChrissy (talk) 15:47, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
A7
Hi - A7 does not apply to an entire species, only specific animals, such as someone's pet dog "Fido" - "This criterion does not apply to species of animals, only to individual animal(s)
". I've improved one of your recent tags and reverted you on one other. Thanks -- samtar talk or stalk 12:43, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, I do agree most of these pages need deleting
-- samtar talk or stalk 12:48, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- I'm sorry if I have been a little heavy handed about it: I didn't notice the distinction between species and individuals. It was only the unreferenced ones I nominated- there's a few more with a ref or two that I left. Muffled Pocketed 12:55, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- Not a problem! I think the deciding admin will still choose to delete the majority of them -- samtar talk or stalk 12:57, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- What would you have suggested as an accurate reason for CSD (if any)? I did wonder about 'no context'; but didn't think that would apply either? 'Custom rationale'?! Thanks for your advice, Samtar.Muffled Pocketed 13:02, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- I've been thinking about that too - I would actually suggest either bringing that up in the AN/I thread and seeing if an admin would consider doing a mass deletion, or starting an AfD and listing all the non-referenced articles there. Either way, we get some community concensus about what to do, poor DinoLover's page doesn't get filled with CSD notices and the pages get dealt with! Just my 2c -- samtar talk or stalk 13:06, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- I've been thinking about that too - I would actually suggest either bringing that up in the AN/I thread and seeing if an admin would consider doing a mass deletion, or starting an AfD and listing all the non-referenced articles there. Either way, we get some community concensus about what to do, poor DinoLover's page doesn't get filled with CSD notices and the pages get dealt with! Just my 2c
- What would you have suggested as an accurate reason for CSD (if any)? I did wonder about 'no context'; but didn't think that would apply either? 'Custom rationale'?! Thanks for your advice, Samtar.Muffled Pocketed 13:02, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- Not a problem! I think the deciding admin will still choose to delete the majority of them -- samtar talk or stalk 12:57, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- I'm sorry if I have been a little heavy handed about it: I didn't notice the distinction between species and individuals. It was only the unreferenced ones I nominated- there's a few more with a ref or two that I left. Muffled Pocketed 12:55, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanking
Apologies. That was done to get your attention. Won't do it again. Imeldific (talk) 16:29, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- Well, if it was unintentional, then there's no hard feelings. And every now and then is fine. But every two minutes?! In any case, you don't need to get my attention, I assure you :) Muffled Pocketed 16:32, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Haydn's Orfeo
I stumbled across a sandbox of yours, changed a bit, but don't know ow to solve Haydn's Orfeo, which is the same opera mentioned a little later as if it was a different one, L'anima del filosofo? - Operatic habit: no need to link the composer when the opera has an article ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:57, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- Many thanks Gerda Arendt- unfortunately the article is in userspace now. Since this is as far as my opera knowledge goes... Need some expert eye. Apparently he's even a baritone, not a tenor... Thanks though :) Muffled Pocketed 19:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- When the voice type is not certain, "(singer)" is a good dab ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:19, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- ps: Gabriele Schnaut went up from contralto to soprano and back again, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:21, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
Thank you for your continued diligence and civility  -- samtar talk or stalk 14:32, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
|
A barnstar for you!
|
The Anti-Flame Barnstar | |
| Heated Conflict Not A Problem For You --VarunFEB2003 (talk • contribs) 09:51, 12 June 2016 (UTC) |
- really true for u VarunFEB2003 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
- I am afraid the irony is lost on me. Must be too subtle for me to get. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 17:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Oi!
Watch your edits! Hope all is going well -- samtar talk or stalk 09:48, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
- @Samtar: I really do apologise! I got that thing with a temporary server crash message, so went back and reposted. I guess that resulted in your edit conflict too! Sorry about that 😢 Muffled Pocketed 09:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
It's really interesting that WP's guideline on royalty means Johanna gets an article, even though she was a 2 year old baby. It's frustrating. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 10:42, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
- @Paul Benjamin Austin: Yep: See: User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi#Princess Johanna of Hesse and by Rhine
Muffled Pocketed 10:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry i lost track of the earlier discussion. It's such a stupid guideline. She wasn't even really a princess as there was no Grand Duchy of Hesse for her to be Princess of. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 10:52, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
The user has edited since the thread has opened. He/She is ignoring it, just like (s)he's happy to ignore the explanations of what WP:CITEVAR means and what a citation style is. What if (s)he continues to ignore it? We all go on our merry way as if nothing happened? Josh Milburn (talk) 16:13, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
- @J Milburn: Look- The point I was really getting at was: by that time, there were three- three- admins all arguing the toss with each other. If that had been 'ordinary' editors (regardless of any sanction to come) that would have been hatted, or collapsed, or something. Surely. Who knows- maybe he has looked at the thread and seen how it's ended up. Just saying. Not suggesting he escape (clearly he should not) scott-free- but at the time I was just trying to subtly indicate what scraps look like to the wider community, that's all. I think 'unseemly' summed it up well (and allowed me to temporarilly feel like Louis Mazzini...
- Thanks for the message, though. Muffled Pocketed 16:25, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Neville–Neville feud
Rather than me causing another " ******* edit conflict" - to quote your edit summary - would you mind correcting refered to referred in Neville–Neville feud - thanks - Arjayay (talk) 17:31, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
- Arkell v. Pressdram speaks for me on these matters. Yours, Muffled Pocketed 18:00, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
TWL HighBeam check-in
Hello Wikipedia Library Users,
You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:
- Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
- Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see Wikipedia:HighBeam/Citations
- Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thank you. 20:35, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Reference desk trolling
You reverted good faith edits at the Reference desk (which can only be trolling) and had the nerve to claim you were reverting a troll. Are you incapable of doing anything constructive? 79.77.28.185 (talk) 18:02, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
- I know. I love it. Easy Like Sunday Morning. Muffled Pocketed 18:04, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Eagle Eyed
|
Sharp Eyed spoter of detial |
| New to this game so thanks for picking up on the 'nonsense' of a photograph of a 40 year old independent village book shop. Have now added ref and citations instead. Through people like you I learn! Ipingalex (talk) 14:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC) |
Talkback
Message added 06:25, 23 June 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Techtrek (talk) 06:25, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- It is so obvious that user King col is the same person as the IP address. In my last two edits, I have corrected exact same mistake that was made by the user King Col and one made by the IP address [1] [2]. Both of them are adding links as references to talkpage text without creating a dummy reference list. It is very clear and obvious that King col logs out to edit to avoid bringing scrutiny to his user account and when the page was finally locked, he started editing using his account. I will request an administrator to block this person for acting as multiple people which is fraud.
Can you please report him for this now that I am agreeing to only edit the talkpage, it would be completely unfair if he starts to vote stack. --Techtrek (talk) 06:37, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
"rv unexplained removal of content"
Please revert yourself. I have already started a discussion on the talk page about whether that material should be included on the main page, and per WP:CONSENSUS that material should not be included until that discussion is concluded.
Consider this a warning for edit warring behavior and casting aspersions in the talk page history. The change was clearly explained. --Izno (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the revert on my talk page. Sorry about the above--I'm just quite confused in this instance about why I'm the one being reverted. x_x --Izno (talk) 17:53, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:52, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Template Abuse
WTF is this about? Did you not bother to read what you were templating about before you posted a template on my talk page? Is this plain ignorance on your part, a joke, or simply trolling? Whatever it is, in the future I'll thank you to put the slightest bit of thought into whatever you bring my way before you do it. :bloodofox: (talk) 02:20, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- Slapping a tag about "ANI not agreeing with me" is both incorrect and immature bullshit. If you've got something to say, then go ahead and say it rather than harassment via inappropriate templates on my talk page. :bloodofox: (talk) 08:36, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Help and advice needed
If u see on administrative noticeboard for edit warring on this discussion u will see that whatever edits I had made were in good faith and not vandalism. However the IP whom I had helped create that article reported me because I had made some good faith edits which he considered vandalsim. He thinks I am WP:NOTHERE. There may have been incidents in the past that may have depicted me as here not to build an encyclopedia but then I learnt and I am mending my ways. Still I am being seen through the image of a guy not here to build encyclopedia. Fortuna I plead u too alow me to show my improvement. I really want to build an encyclopaedia. Pls give me one chance of proving myself, I am no more interested in making my user page and stuff. Pls give me a fresh start. I shall not do things which WP:NOTHERE people do. Once chance is all I neeed. I am too new and too small just a 13 year old. I have told you everything and I seek help. Many thanks and sincere regards --Varun ☎ 06:54, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
| Loving the humour earlier! Because It made me laugh, here is a barnstar! You have a really good sense of humour. Enjoy! Class455fan1 (talk) 15:36, 29 June 2016 (UTC) |
- @Class455fan1: Many thanks, 455 Right Away, Stationmaster! Muffled Pocketed 15:40, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Never knew you liked trains mate! Class455fan1 (talk) 15:44, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
- No choice really Muffled Pocketed 15:46, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
- No choice really
- (edit conflict) @Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Never knew you liked trains mate! Class455fan1 (talk) 15:44, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Rm trolling.
Some falafel for you!
|
Guess you don't like cheeseburgers, huh. That's fine. Have some falafel instead! JohannSnow (talk) 22:34, 2 July 2016 (UTC) |
Edit summary
In this edit summary you didn't specify a reason. Furry-friend (talk) 11:56, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Outing
Who did I out? I am choosing to edit using an IP. Many individuals do so. 173.52.99.208 (talk) 18:39, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't understand. 173.52.99.208 (talk) 18:50, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
WP:AN3
May want to take a second look at your report for 193.92.80.130. Looks like some of the content was cut off. TimothyJosephWood 12:55, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Timothyjosephwood: Thanks for pointing that out- I noticed it earlier, and had forgotten about it in the midst of various other exciting things. It does look like part of my post, I agree; but see here- it's actually at the very beginning of the next case filed. Now that's interesting. I might be overly suspicious, but that following case is effectively two-reporting-one (following a recent acrimonious AN/I), and I wonder if one of the parties actually wrote the entry 'off-site', and emailed it to the other to then lodge...? The receiver then, failed to copy and paste accurately, leaving one of their email addresses visible...
- Now that would be tag-teaming! Cheers, Muffled Pocketed 13:09, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
A cup of coffee for you!
|
Thank you so much for your support, lets drink it together.  — TOG 14:56, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
|
Please comment in the discussion on the talkpage re this edit. Tragic has nothing to do with. Whether the article should selfies that may have resulted in animal injuries or deaths is the point. What's next? Including selfie where someone stepped on a bug? Meters (talk) 23:28, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia mirrors and WP:G12
Just a heads up that if an article you are nominating for WP:G12 is estabilshed like Tunnel rat (on-Wiki for more than a decade), you should check the dates on the Wikipedia article and the other page to see if it is in fact other pages copying directly from Wikipedia and not vice versa. Thanks, ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 16:30, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Patar knight: D'oh!
Done Muffled Pocketed 16:33, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
AfC notification: Draft:Arity/Prolog32 has a new comment
Your submission at Articles for creation: Prolog32 (July 9)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Arity/Prolog32 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
Hello! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Daniel kenneth (talk) 15:53, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
|
@Daniel kenneth: I'm afraid I don't know what you are talking about; if you look at my User page, you will see that I have no need to use the AfC process (and indeed, have not for some years!). Muffled Pocketed 16:04, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Prolog32 has been accepted
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant 17:55, 9 July 2016 (UTC)@Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant: Please see the note I left just above... in response to being told it had not been accepted. Cheers. Muffled Pocketed 17:58, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Ya well, I just reviewed it again. There were two or three typos, and I think one instance of a comma before the reference. I am trying to figure out why you were using afc lol. I am a computer languages expert myself. The article you created looks good. Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant 18:03, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant: I did not submit the article. Muffled Pocketed 18:09, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- That is odd. It was in the AFC que to be reviewed. Did you write that article? Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant 18:13, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- No. It was written like this by E1025561student.tuwien.ac.at (who, to be fair, seems not to have been with us since 3 June); all I did- here and here- was wikify it, turn it into wiki-English with some copy-editing, formatting, and layout etc. Wtf. Cheers for the (less than deserved) barnstar :) Muffled Pocketed 18:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- That is odd. It was in the AFC que to be reviewed. Did you write that article? Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant 18:13, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Barnstar of Diligence |
| Thank you for creating another article at Wikipedia. Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant 18:06, 9 July 2016 (UTC) |
A kitten for you!
Thanks for your appreciation on my comments at Talk:Mustard oil
RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 09:06, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Teamwork Barnstar |
| For teamwork on discovering a nasty sockpuppet. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 19:31, 11 July 2016 (UTC) |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
| Views/Day | Quality | Title | Content | Headings | Images | Links | Sources | Tagged with… |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 105 | 
|
Bhaji (talk) | 
|
|
|
|
|
Add sources |
| 169 |
|
Palak paneer (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Add sources |
| 6 |
|
Dahi machha (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Add sources |
| 13,593 | 
|
Pakistan (talk) |
|
Add sources | ||||
| 483 | 
|
Plotter (talk) |
|
|
|
|
Add sources | |
| 6,124 |
|
Aaliyah (talk) |
|
|
Add sources | |||
| 39 |
|
Kashmiri literature (talk) |
|
|
|
Cleanup | ||
| 36 |
|
Islamia College (Lahore) (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Cleanup |
| 113 |
|
Wikiversity (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Cleanup |
| 210 |
|
Signet ring cell carcinoma (talk) |
|
|
|
|
Expand | |
| 36,212 |
|
Hillary Clinton (talk) |
|
Expand | ||||
| 218 |
|
Timeline of Pakistani history (1947–present) (talk) |
|
|
|
Expand | ||
| 10 |
|
Queens' School, Bushey (talk) |
|
|
|
|
Unencyclopaedic | |
| 1,091 |
|
Printer (computing) (talk) |
|
Unencyclopaedic | ||||
| 6 |
|
Falconer School (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Unencyclopaedic |
| 126 |
|
Cần Thơ (talk) |
|
|
|
|
Merge | |
| 38 |
|
Pachadi (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Merge |
| 551 |
|
Submarine sandwich (talk) |
|
|
Merge | |||
| 135 |
|
Urdu literature (talk) |
|
|
|
Wikify | ||
| 3,553 |
|
Manson Family (talk) |
|
|
Wikify | |||
| 48 |
|
Bill Woodfull (talk) |
|
|
Wikify | |||
| 9 |
|
Emmanuel Chima Ugokwe (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Orphan |
| 3 |
|
Juliette Winter (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Orphan |
| 8 |
|
Hari Joshi (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Orphan |
| 71 |
|
Yeoh Tiong Lay (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Stub |
| 25 |
|
Pakistani poetry (talk) |
|
|
|
|
Stub | |
| 32 |
|
Sarapatel (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Stub |
| 47 |
|
SP Setia (talk) |
|
|
|
|
Stub | |
| 11 |
|
Great Finborough (talk) |
|
|
|
|
Stub | |
| 5 |
|
Lilownai (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Stub |
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:49, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Signature
Might I respectfully suggest that you read WP:SIG#CustomSig, and change your signature back to something that includes your username ("a customised signature should make it easy to identify the username"). Appearing to post messages as one "Muffled Pocketed" is not big and it's not clever: it's just silly and confusing. Eric Pode lives (talk) 13:01, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Wass all the fuss 'bout, hic? Cheerio (talk) 13:21, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Mr rnddude: I don't know cornflakes. User:TurtleTalkContribs 16:14, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- I would instead suggest creating Account Muffled Pocketed whiCh redirects to avoid future impersonation. VarunFEB2003 I am Offline 12:39, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- I'm sure that's excellent advice for one wishing to maintain a dual identity on Wikipedia without suffering any personal inconvenience. It fails to address the more fundamental point that adopting a pseudonym, entertaining though it may be to your wikichums in the back row, can only lead to misunderstandings and confusion among the rank-and-file editors with whom you interact, and is in clear breach of a Wikipedia guideline. Eric Pode lives (talk) 23:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- I would instead suggest creating Account Muffled Pocketed whiCh redirects to avoid future impersonation. VarunFEB2003 I am Offline 12:39, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Mr rnddude: I don't know cornflakes. User:TurtleTalkContribs 16:14, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi, you removed a BLPPROD here, but as far as I can see, all "references" are either dead links or do not mention the subject of the article at all... Am I missing something? --Randykitty (talk) 06:04, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Randykitty: AfD is the way to go, and it deserves to be there. It was a malformed BLPPROD, as- crap though they were (and still are)- it did have sources (opinion / interpretation). Either way, you don't my permission to do whatever you want to do. Cheers! And thanks below too :) Muffled Pocketed 08:59, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that is not what WP:BLPPROD says... "Article contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc.), which support any statements made about the person in the biography." The sources present do not even mention the person concerned, so they don't support any statement about that person... --Randykitty (talk) 09:24, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- On that bombshell, I'm off till 7PM. Wikibreak time! Muffled Pocketed 08:59, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Randykitty: AfD is the way to go, and it deserves to be there. It was a malformed BLPPROD, as- crap though they were (and still are)- it did have sources (opinion / interpretation). Either way, you don't my permission to do whatever you want to do. Cheers! And thanks below too :) Muffled Pocketed 08:59, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- I have also checked all of the supposed citations, there is nothing in any of them to suggest that the information given is accurate. Perhaps send it to AfD? or can BLPPROD be stuck back to the article, I know normal PRODs cannot but as I recall there is some exception in the case of BLPPRODs. Mr rnddude (talk) 06:15, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- There's something weird going on here. The factual accuracy of a related article is questionable. Check out Mey Chan and these 2 articles on the Indonesia wikipedia id:Mey Chan and id:Mulan Jameela. I'm looking at this now. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 11:08, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- Nominated for TNT as it is a BLP violation. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mey Chan. The author has been blocked for socking. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 12:54, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- There's something weird going on here. The factual accuracy of a related article is questionable. Check out Mey Chan and these 2 articles on the Indonesia wikipedia id:Mey Chan and id:Mulan Jameela. I'm looking at this now. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 11:08, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
could you please explain further...
You left a link to WP:ASPERSIONS on WP:Articles for deletion/Eglinton LRT Carhouse.
The wikipedia's body of official wikidocuments is very large, and I hadn't read that one before. If I read it properly its guidance suggests people who think someone is lapsing from a policy should clearly and tactfully explain their concern, on the other contributor's talk page, or in an appropriate fora.
You didn't actually say whose comments triggered the concern that lead to that link. If it was something I wrote, I'd appreciate it if you followed the advice of that wikidocument, and left me a clear explanation for your concern, on User talk:Geo Swan -- or here if you prefer.
Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 12:09, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
May want to fix
Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, I think your userpage has been copied to your user talk page? I don't think it was intentional perhaps need to remove. Mr rnddude (talk) 10:47, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Fixed Vanjagenije (talk) 10:50, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Vanjagenije: Thanks very much. But- see my question below to RNDdude, how did it happen? Any ideas? Muffled Pocketed 10:54, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Yes thanks for pointing it out Mr rnddude! :p -the question is, when? Look at the page history- it would be a massive amount of text added, but there's no sign of it? Se what I mean? Muffled Pocketed 10:52, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Cheers for that Vanjagenije, I ended up on a new page and very confused after replying to the above. Haha. I thought the same thing FIM, I was looking at the talk page history trying to figure it out myself. Mr rnddude (talk) 10:54, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, is it possibly a transclusion issue, refer to thread Lulz (on this page) which links to something also linked on your user page (also Lulz). Mr rnddude (talk) 11:05, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- I got totally confused. But it's nothing to do with the present state of affairs, so back to DEFCON 2 ;) thanks for tidying up around here Mr rnddude Muffled Pocketed 11:09, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- I just realized that I don't need to ping you on your page... sorry for the double pings (notification and message). Mr rnddude (talk) 11:08, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- User page was mistakenly wp:transcluded here by AKJatt in this post. I fixed it in this edit. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:16, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Of course, the colon instead of a pipe- well spotted! Thank you Vanjagenije Muffled Pocketed 12:23, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- User page was mistakenly wp:transcluded here by AKJatt in this post. I fixed it in this edit. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:16, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Archiving
Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, can you do some archiving of this talk page? It is very large, and editing it is very slow. Recommended maximum size of a talk page is 175KB (see here), and this one is over 500KB large. I see that you have automatic archiving enabled, but the "age" parameter is set to "30000" hours, which is more than 3 years. Should it be "3000" maybe? Vanjagenije (talk) 12:24, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Unbelievable! Yes that would be more like it. Mr rnddude mentioned it above, but I assumed that was his steampowered laptop :p ;) Muffled Pocketed 12:26, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- You changed it from 10000 to 30000 in this edit, but you obviously forgot to change it back. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- I'll have you know my steam powered laptop is one of the finest around. :) Mr rnddude (talk) 12:30, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Fortuna, I see that you archived some posts manually, using the OneClickArchiver, but those posts are now at User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi/Archive 1, while you previous archives are at User_talk:Fortuna_Imperatrix_Mundi/Archives/2015/January and similar. OneClickArchiver does not recognize yearly and monthly archives, but only numbered archives. Now, you have a mix of numbered and monthly archives. I think you should revert your edits, and just change the "age" parameter at the top of this page to some smaller number (1000 for example), and let the bot do the job for you. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:54, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry, Vanjagenije I didn't seem to get a ping for this. Can it be the other way round? The OCA is more flexible. But yes, I just noticed the different archives- can they be merged? Muffled Pocketed 13:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Would edit source; Ctrl-A and then Ctrl-C work, open a new archive or use the old and then just Ctrl-V into that archive at the bottom. Then have the new archive deleted. Simples? Mr rnddude (talk) 13:33, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree with you, the numbered archives are better. You should merge them manually. Maybe move User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi/Archive 1 to User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi/Archive 2 and then merge all previous archives to (new) User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi/Archive 1 page. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:38, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry, Vanjagenije I didn't seem to get a ping for this. Can it be the other way round? The OCA is more flexible. But yes, I just noticed the different archives- can they be merged? Muffled Pocketed 13:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Fortuna, I see that you archived some posts manually, using the OneClickArchiver, but those posts are now at User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi/Archive 1, while you previous archives are at User_talk:Fortuna_Imperatrix_Mundi/Archives/2015/January and similar. OneClickArchiver does not recognize yearly and monthly archives, but only numbered archives. Now, you have a mix of numbered and monthly archives. I think you should revert your edits, and just change the "age" parameter at the top of this page to some smaller number (1000 for example), and let the bot do the job for you. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:54, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Excellent work FIM, you've managed to archive one of your talk page sections to SoftLavender's archives, well, she's in for a rude disambig surprise. Haha. Aw, it's already been fixed, ah well [3]. At least it exists historically. Mr rnddude (talk) 15:00, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- This is why I don't copy/paste others' settings :D — TOG 15:04, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Guys, I'm making a complete balls-up of this archiving. It takes yonks and all I've managed to do is tie up every Admin from here to Hounslow. *FFS* Apologies are due you, Softlavender, too. Muffled Pocketed 15:07, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- I came here to say the same thing but it has been done. FYI ClueBot III isn't archiving as per User talk:ClueBot Commons VarunFEB2003 I am Offline 12:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- @VarunFEB2003: The reason you find it to be 'done' is because it was THREE DAYS AGO. So, no, you didn't 'come here to say the same thing'! Also Cluebot has nothing to do with me, anymore :) Muffled Pocketed 18:15, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- I came here to say the same thing but it has been done. FYI ClueBot III isn't archiving as per User talk:ClueBot Commons VarunFEB2003 I am Offline 12:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- Guys, I'm making a complete balls-up of this archiving. It takes yonks and all I've managed to do is tie up every Admin from here to Hounslow. *FFS* Apologies are due you, Softlavender, too. Muffled Pocketed 15:07, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- This is why I don't copy/paste others' settings :D — TOG 15:04, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
This article's history shows that it has been developed in stages by multiple authors since 2010, so it can't be a straight copyvio of anything - and there doesn't seem to be much connection with the item you have cited in your G12 nomination. Did you mean that one particular section was a copy of one section of that pdf doc? If so, it's not a case for G12 which applies only in unequivocal cases, where there is no free-content material on the page worth saving and no later edits requiring attribution
. PamD 09:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
- Mmmm thank you for that PamD; it is a 95% copyvio of a 2005 article by Ashdown-Hill and Annette Carson. Thank you. Muffled Pocketed 09:48, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
- For the benefit of talk page watchers ... discussion continued at Talk:Thomas FitzGerald, 7th Earl of Desmond. PamD 11:34, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I must not have been paying attention to use "Capital letters" while editing that article, but thanks for letting me know about it. Mona778 (talk) 06:34, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:43, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Tilt?
Why is this talk page currently tilted by 5 degrees? It's amusing and all, but it takes much longer to load (and edit, I've just found out). --A D Monroe III (talk) 21:16, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
- The page load is due to the excessive size rather than the tilt, however I've removed the tilt as it severely impairs the page's functionality, making most of it unreadable. This is covered under WP:SMI. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:22, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Sro23, A D Monroe III, and Zzuuzz: Yes, thank you for that. I was enthusiastically experimenting, but forgot to revert it back before going on current Wikibreak. Which I incidentally accidentally set for a week duration rather than 48-hours. D'OH. Cheers! (FIM) 2A02:C7F:BE16:8400:4969:5D33:C7F3:3874 (talk) 09:05, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hehe, that looked a bit inconvenient! Better stick to just tilting the TOC, like on my page. I haven't had any complaints, just a few "that's pretty cool".[4] Though possibly some people feel too seasick to even post on the page. Bishonen | talk 09:39, 27 August 2016 (UTC).
- Dead right! @Bishonen: Can you revert this edit please? Cheers! (FIM) 2A02:C7F:BE16:8400:4969:5D33:C7F3:3874 (talk) 10:02, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hehe, that looked a bit inconvenient! Better stick to just tilting the TOC, like on my page. I haven't had any complaints, just a few "that's pretty cool".[4] Though possibly some people feel too seasick to even post on the page. Bishonen | talk 09:39, 27 August 2016 (UTC).
- @Sro23, A D Monroe III, and Zzuuzz: Yes, thank you for that. I was enthusiastically experimenting, but forgot to revert it back before going on current Wikibreak. Which I incidentally accidentally set for a week duration rather than 48-hours. D'OH. Cheers! (FIM) 2A02:C7F:BE16:8400:4969:5D33:C7F3:3874 (talk) 09:05, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm just curious
Overlooking caps, can you explain the reason of your amendment to my edit? Mona778 (talk) 14:26, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
September 2016
Close
Seeing as a BOOMERANG appears to be likely on its way back around...might be a bit premature for a close? TimothyJosephWood 17:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
- Timothyjosephwood: Point. But see here- afficionados of aboriginal sporting implements will probably appear here too ;) Muffled Pocketed 17:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
FWIW, I figured the fellow at the help desk was just a rowdy teenager. Thought maybe they might be taken off guard enough by a real response to an obviously racist question that they might actually take the time to read a little bit. TimothyJosephWood 20:45, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Just a friendly question
Hello Mr Fortuna, Im a newbie here so I may not know the rules well. So tell me, how do I voice suggestions to wikipedia if I can't even leave one on talk pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A03:4A80:5:41E:41E:F426:AEEC:4EDA (talk) 12:10, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- 2A03:4A80:5:41E:41E:F426:AEEC:4EDA: Allow me to answer a friendly question with a friendly question; how do you expect your talk page questions to be taken seriously when you make article edits like these...???? Muffled Pocketed 12:14, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Pinging GB fan, of whose work, of course, you will be aware. Muffled Pocketed 12:17, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Oh that wasn't me, sorry I'm using a shared IP. I will sign up before making edits next time. I've answered your question. Now please answer mine: How do I voice suggestions to Wikipedia if I can't even leave one on talk pages?? Thanks for your concern. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A03:4A80:5:41E:41E:F426:AEEC:4EDA (talk) 12:21, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- That wasn't you, six minutes previously? Of course not. Naturellement. Muffled Pocketed 12:25, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Yes. It was not. PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTION! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A03:4A80:5:41E:41E:F426:AEEC:4EDA (talk) 12:30, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- You are lying, and no-one will believe otherwise. To answer your fucking question; You are electing to add controversial and unsourced material to one of the most high-profile and active pages out of the five and a half million on the entire site, and you honestly can't see how this is viewed as little more than trolling? Right; now you have the answer to your question, rest assured that any further edits to that page of a similar nature by you or this IP, will be considered trolling. You have already been reverted by an administrator- any continuance of this behaviour will result in a request for administrative interventon. Muffled Pocketed 12:36, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for your kind reply and advice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A03:4A80:5:41E:41E:F426:AEEC:4EDA (talk) 12:46, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- You are lying, and no-one will believe otherwise. To answer your fucking question; You are electing to add controversial and unsourced material to one of the most high-profile and active pages out of the five and a half million on the entire site, and you honestly can't see how this is viewed as little more than trolling? Right; now you have the answer to your question, rest assured that any further edits to that page of a similar nature by you or this IP, will be considered trolling. You have already been reverted by an administrator- any continuance of this behaviour will result in a request for administrative interventon. Muffled Pocketed 12:36, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Yes. It was not. PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTION! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A03:4A80:5:41E:41E:F426:AEEC:4EDA (talk) 12:30, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- That wasn't you, six minutes previously? Of course not. Naturellement. Muffled Pocketed 12:25, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Oh that wasn't me, sorry I'm using a shared IP. I will sign up before making edits next time. I've answered your question. Now please answer mine: How do I voice suggestions to Wikipedia if I can't even leave one on talk pages?? Thanks for your concern. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A03:4A80:5:41E:41E:F426:AEEC:4EDA (talk) 12:21, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Why are you giving me a warning?
?? Govvy (talk) 11:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) Because you are edit warring with another editor. This is highly disruptive and could lead to a block. Class455 (talk) 12:09, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
I am not edit waring, I requested a page protection because I felt the 3 separate IPs were going to edit war against my rv's. And this is what I get. Govvy (talk) 12:12, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
- (by talk page stalker) (edit conflict) @Govvy: Read the warning. You made three reversions on Barnet F.C. in less than 24hrs which violates WP:EW, hence the warning. The only exception to EW is reverting vandalism and that doesn't appear to be the case here unless you're claiming the IP was introducing deliberate factual errors. This looks like a content issue and you shouldn't be edit-warring over it. Use the talk page. Chris Troutman (talk) 12:14, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
- They were deliberate factual errors know. Govvy (talk) 12:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
- (Barnet F.C.) Any of you want to revert his horrible use of WP:Overlink then? O and wait he introduced factual errors again. Govvy (talk) 12:34, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
- They were deliberate factual errors know. Govvy (talk) 12:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Humphrey Stafford (died 1442)
Hello! Your submission of Humphrey Stafford (died 1442) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 12:53, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Social worker
Yes, I did see it. I was the third person to delete that article. Deb (talk) 14:42, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
I would like your comments in the AfD there, if you could! Thanks! VarunFEB2003 15:24, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I think they are different and should not be merged. I created one or both. Discuss at Talk:Banzai Cliff where i contest the speedy deletion. --doncram 19:10, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- I have replied. They can't be different- your two articles were almost word-for-word mirrors! Muffled Pocketed 19:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Help
Could you tell me are references that are not linked counted as references like those on Charles-Edouard Levillain. There are 5 refs in total but only 1 is linked. So are the other 4 considered refs. Thanks! VarunFEB2003 05:09, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
- Morning VarunFEB2003. Yes that's fine mate- the ones that aren't linked are just what we would call 'hard copies'- the actual books in libraries, for instance. You know, the way you can read a newspaper online or a real one? Muffled Pocketed 05:15, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi A pov pusher with ip edited the page without consensus. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:25, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Panam2014: Yes, I completely agree. Muffled Pocketed 13:27, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- I demand a return to the ante bellium version. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:28, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- You mean status quo, ante bellum means before the war. Unless you've involved yourself in an edit war, ante bellum does not apply. On the offchance that you are involved in an edit war, Pyrrhic victory applies (i.e. you may be victorious, but, it will cost you the war in the long run - post editwar blocks). Mr rnddude (talk) 14:18, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Mr rnddude probably without knowing it, the editor is correct- a pretty serious edit war on the article, and a completely poxy discussion has taken place at Talk:ISIL territorial claims#infobox dispute (spot on about the pyrrhic aspect!). There's a virgin RfC awaiting you too if you wanna get stuck in... Muffled Pocketed 14:24, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I 'spose I shouldn't be surprised given the topic of the RfC; ISIL and Infobox, probably the two most contentious topics on Wikipedia, now that is going to be a doozy to sort through. I'm not sure what you mean by a virgin RfC though? Mr rnddude (talk) 15:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, quality topics. It was virgin then- I'd only just posted it to the TP so there had been no comments. Sullied now, of course ;) Muffled Pocketed 15:18, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Ah, yes now I follow. Sorry I only deflower RfCs, once that's done I'm out :P, I kid of course. I'll take a look at it. Should be a barrel of fun if nothing else. The fallout might be quite spectacular too. If the last ISIL RfC (List of Islamic Terrorist Attacks) and the last Infobox RfC (Noel Coward) are any indicators this RfC may indeed boil over into two separate warring factions. Or, perhaps the pro and anti infobox campaigners will settle their differences on this battlefield (not too hopeful). Mr rnddude (talk) 15:23, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, quality topics. It was virgin then- I'd only just posted it to the TP so there had been no comments. Sullied now, of course ;) Muffled Pocketed 15:18, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I 'spose I shouldn't be surprised given the topic of the RfC; ISIL and Infobox, probably the two most contentious topics on Wikipedia, now that is going to be a doozy to sort through. I'm not sure what you mean by a virgin RfC though? Mr rnddude (talk) 15:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Mr rnddude probably without knowing it, the editor is correct- a pretty serious edit war on the article, and a completely poxy discussion has taken place at Talk:ISIL territorial claims#infobox dispute (spot on about the pyrrhic aspect!). There's a virgin RfC awaiting you too if you wanna get stuck in... Muffled Pocketed 14:24, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- You mean status quo, ante bellum means before the war. Unless you've involved yourself in an edit war, ante bellum does not apply. On the offchance that you are involved in an edit war, Pyrrhic victory applies (i.e. you may be victorious, but, it will cost you the war in the long run - post editwar blocks). Mr rnddude (talk) 14:18, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- I have reported the IP to the edit warring noticeboard for violating the 1RR restrictions on the page. Class455 (talk) 16:09, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- I was going to withdraw the report after what you said, but I was edit-conflicted. Class455 (talk) 16:16, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- I demand a return to the ante bellium version. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:28, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi you didnt, its okay :) Class455 (talk) 16:25, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Maybe this unit needs to return to the yard and stock up its buffet car :D cheers! Muffled Pocketed 16:28, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Talkback: you've got messages!
Message added VarunFEB2003 12:24, 16 September 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Archiving
How about a small bit of it! The page's again gone out of control!! VarunFEB2003 07:21, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We'd like to invite you to participate in a user study closely related to SuggestBot. User:Another Article is seeking to understand more about the workflow and time commitment of contributors to the English Wikipedia. As part of this study you will occasionally be prompted to answer questions about your editing activity, and these questions should never take more than a minute or two to complete. The intended length of the study is two weeks, but your actual time commitment is totally up to you. If you would like to see more details you can read the project proposal at Research:Measuring editor time commitment and workflow (on meta), but if you are feeling bold and would like just like to sign up right now you can add the line importScript("User:Another_Article/workflowstudyclient.js"); to your common.js. Contact User:Another Article if you have any questions about this study!
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:47, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Abyssinian people
Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, What I added is completely unrelated to what Soupforone opposed. — EthiopianHabesha (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Your message
Hi, I saw your message on my talkpage. Not to worry, no harm done. Thanks! Gerard von Hebel (talk) 17:20, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Hebel: Cheers! I was on the phone at the time, and just as I thought I was touching one bit, the screen edged up and it was the rollback thing. Take care! Muffled Pocketed 17:23, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Need AN/I's help?
No, I'm WAY past that :) Thanks for the close. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:56, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- No worries ;) did I guess right? Muffled Pocketed 13:58, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- Nope, Vote (X) actually. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:00, 2 August 2016 (UTC)