User talk:Shellwood/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

About the vandalism[edit]

I had left my account logged in and my ipad on, i am very sorry and it will not happen again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VanZa39 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

HG[edit]

Which filters do I use to find vandalism in HG?--Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 22:11, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Thegooduser: Just set it on default and you will eventually see it in the queue. Shellwood (talk) 22:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 22:29, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping: You had an RfA![edit]

Hi, see User talk:Jimboswife ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:40, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Shellwood. You have new messages at Boothsift's talk page.
Message added 00:20, 8 January 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

It's Boothsift 00:20, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Coffin Birth should not be an entry on Wikipedia. It is a slang phrase. The medical term is already on the page and should be the only entry. Is Wikipedia going to be like Urban Dictionary now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.10.61.128 (talk) 19:52, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Coffin birth is the name of the article, if you think something should be renamed then discuss it on the article's talk page and seek consensus there. Shellwood (talk) 19:56, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey:) I am DEVYN+RO$E and i made those edits to my wiki: Devyn Rose, not logged in. How can i prove my identity so that my edits remain because I'd like the truth to be told. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DevynRose1 (talk • contribs) 20:54, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DevynRose1: Thanks for disclosing your relation to the article. Wikipedia is very clear on it's policies concerning biographies of living persons, unsourced material can be removed at any time. It might sound harsh at first glance but we are not interested in the "truth", what is required is that material must be verifiable, backed by reliable sources. As for confirmation of your identity I can see that other users already answered this question for you on your talk page, I suggest you follow their advice. Shellwood (talk) 22:15, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your quick vandalism removals on Trevor Lawrence (American football) during the National Championship! Warpaltarpers (talk) 05:16, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Warpaltarpers: Thank you very much for this. Shellwood (talk) 06:14, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
We've crossed paths so many times on vandalism-reverting sprees. I can't even count the number of times you've beaten me to reverts. Let's keep fighting the vandals! Linguist111my talk page 14:55, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Linguist111: Thanks a lot, this is much appreciated and you do a fine job yourself in keeping this place in order! Shellwood (talk) 15:25, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Advice of you[edit]

So sir how I make a different wiki on this subject (mahara) , Abhinav Singh dasila (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Abhinav Singh dasila: Hi, I suggest that you use references when making new edits instead of uploading pure text. And remember that the aim of the lead section in every article is to briefly summarize the most important things about the subject that the article covers. Shellwood (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please clarify the revert reason[edit]

Hi Shellwood,

You have reverted my references stating its promotional but that was not my intention. Can you please clarify why it is considered as promotional ?

Reason for my edit : Actually it was missing some references hence added for the same similar to how others have added precedant references.

May I know why the below few references added by others in the same article is not considered same way from 2017 but only my changes alone considered promotional which was added yesterday. 

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chutney

  References section:  #5 , #15

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_cuisine

  References section : #3

Thanks Papi

@Papisri123: I reverted your first edit to Tamil cuisine for the very same reason as the other users did, please don't add links to your personal blog among the references and there was no explanation for why it was included there either, blogs in general are rarely used here, see WP:BLOGS. I believe that you already had a discussion about this on IRC when you got your block lifted. As for Chutney you will have to ask the user who reverted your edits about that. Shellwood (talk) 01:18, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Shellwood: I have checked the existing other references which also pointed to their blogs but why those were not removed. It should be consistent in this case as well. can you review/revert the few other personal blogs references as well which also looks like related to their own personal blogs. Thank you Papisri123 (talk) 13:00, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal at 212.50.169.140[edit]

Hello. I noticed you reverting edits most recently several in a sequence to the MIDI article, by user 212.50.169.140 . Their entire contribution history consists of only these non-constructive kind of edit. Their talk page consists of only many warnings about refraining from vandalism. They have ignored all warnings, and even inserted comments to editors into a visible article during a revert war. They were blocked twice already. Nothing is stopping their clear vandalism. They should be banned. DocRuby (talk) 15:05, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much[edit]

for reverting vandalism on Johnny Sins. I was going to do it myself, but you stepped in. Xyz403 (talk) 16:37, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for clarification[edit]

What is even particularly going on at that village pump on permanently semiprotecting the refdesk? I see a lot of IP edits with random, jumbled words that are usually moderately offensive. Please help me understand the matter, as I have no knowledge of the current issues with the refdesk and vandalism. Thank you! Neot/c 14:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Neolytical: The reference desks have long been targets for spam by vandals and long term abusers. That is why the community is considering to indefinitely semiprotect them, making it impossible for IPs and non-autoconfirmed users to post there. Shellwood (talk) 14:25, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That makes more sense now. Thank you! Neot/c 14:28, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why cannot my name be added to Wikipedia ? Snehaexpression (talk) 19:24, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Snehaexpression: No article=no entry to the list. We don't add people to lists like that unless there is an article about them. Shellwood (talk) 19:28, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Dear Shellwood, following your recommendation I added a discussion on the talk page of the article Talk:World_War_II_looting_of_Poland PrecisePlatypus (talk) 17:58, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Shellwood (talk) 18:00, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

create an wiki page gaurav dubey 08:13, 20 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gd2998168 (talk • contribs)

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Oh well, you have beaten that vandalism I was tried makes report oh well.

Keep it up! ~ Junior5a (Talk) Cont 10:57, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Junior5a: Thank you! Shellwood (talk) 11:00, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! ~ Junior5a (Talk) Cont 11:03, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Budham Singh vandalizer[edit]

Howdy. I wonder when the Wikimedia is going to range block the mobile editor, who's been making disruptive edits on India related articles, these last several months. GoodDay (talk) 16:21, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@GoodDay: Good that you highlight this issue, I wasn't sure of what IP you were referring to at first since there is so much vandalism on India-related articles these days, but I can guess which one you are talking about now. With that said, adding a little background info there should be no problem in getting a range block for this through a normal AIV report. Shellwood (talk) 16:51, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No matter how many of these articles get 'temporarily' protected, the mobile editor merely moves to other related articles. His actions are expected, but the administrative communities inactions are frustrating. GoodDay (talk) 16:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

edit summary[edit]

in french - [1] I do not hold much hope for good productive general conversation... JarrahTree 10:53, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove my edit on NAS daily[edit]

He has teased it on Facebook WhatsApp and Instagram OrnitAvni (talk) 14:32, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@OrnitAvni: That is a aggressive point of view with too much weight on the very specific terminology encouraging puffier words. So no, "teasing" someone is not the goal at all, violating policies so I do not think you provide some sheer justification or lack a competence required while editing with fellow peers. 182.58.172.35 (talk) 12:54, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Anti-Vandalism barnstar[edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
You deserve it.. No doubt you should get take a look at WP:RFA but I think (some) may reject because of lower participation in some discussions, it does not matter at all, My respect for you and kind regards, 182.58.172.35 (talk) 12:48, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A heroic barnstar for a heroic user![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
A true patroller fights against the emobdiment of evil: vandalism. Together as a community, we push back that evil.

Continue the fight as a hero of the wiki. You've done did good, lad. 

- pivotman319 (give me a heads up thru user talk.) 18:17, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Pivotman319: Many thanks for this! Shellwood (talk) 21:44, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Shellwood: You're welcome. Keep that anti-vandalism streak going! - pivotman319 (give me a heads up thru user talk.) 14:25, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors![edit]

The 2018 Cure Award
In 2018 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 17:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:50, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sock-puppetry Investigation[edit]

On Boeing 737, you reverted edits by SupersonicTransportList and he is part of a sock puppet investigation below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/73.64.52.124#02_February_2019

Just wanted to let you know, MosrodTalk 16:39, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mosrod: Thanks for letting me know, good work! Shellwood (talk) 16:40, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism to ancient dates[edit]

Hello, Shellwood,

I've been spending hours reverting vandalism that a series of IP accounts (66.210.239.21-66.210.239.25) made over January and February. There are hundreds of edits primarily to year articles (like AD 82) and biographies of ancient figures (like Marcus Atius), where the editor altered the birth or death date by a year or so. This has resulted in several categories being deleted since it appeared that no one was born or died during certain years and the categories were empty when that was really not the case. Since not a lot of content was removed (often the edits are 0 bytes), these tiny edits are hard to detect and often were individually reverted by well-intentioned editors while the IP accounts' edit histories were not examined.

I'm writing to you because as I've been reverting this vandalism, I've seen your edits to these same types of articles. I'd like to ask you that if during your editing, you see this pattern of vandalism, if you could let me or another admin know so we can block these accounts. Needless to say that these edits took little time to do but involved much more time cleaning up. Thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 21:45, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Hi and thanks for the message. I am sorry to hear this and embarrassed to say I didn't see any pattern back then but I will keep my eyes open now. I do remember their first edit to Marcus Annius Verus Caesar. I actually went on to check the source via JSTOR and it says "born 162/163" so I assumed good faith, but I can see now that their second edit to that very same article clearly shows their intentions. Shellwood (talk) 22:33, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you[edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For all the times I think I'm the only one out there reverting vandalism, I find you've been there for ages, doing a far better job. Thank you. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:02, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: Thank you very much Nick! Cheers! Shellwood (talk) 09:42, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sunflower seed[edit]

Intro: There are three types of commonly used sunflower seeds: linoleic(most common), high oleic, and NuSun developed for sunflower oil. What are NuSun seeds may I ask? Is this some kind of advertisement? Thank you. 𝖇𝖉𝖆𝖓𝖍 03:33, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bdanh: Hi, I have no idea about this. NuSun is a redirect to Sunflower oil and it appears to be some sort of brand. It dosen't seem fit in the lead, but again I am not familiar with this topic. Shellwood (talk) 12:47, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hindering the improvement of an FA class article[edit]

Hello MR.Shellwood. This message is about a serious matter of vandalism done by a wikipedian named RegentsPark on the page of Eddie Vedder. As you can see that the Legacy section in the forementioned article needs to be expanded. So helping the community to solve the problem, I added a quotebox which consist of a quote by Roger Daltrey about Eddie which has more than 40 words, none of which has been altered and so it is obliges to all the laws and rules of Wikipedia. But RegentsPark removed it just because i am a sockpuppet. I won't try to defend myself because i know nobody wants to understand. Now here comes the vandalism, even if i am a sockpuppet than you should block me but not revert the edit unless it is disruptive. The edit was not disruptive in any way as you can check by yourself but still regent vandalised by hindering the development of the article. Please address him about it as he won't listen to me. Even if i am a sockpuppet, i have always tried to help this platform but provocation caused me to commit a mistake which i am sorry about. REGARDS 2405:204:A5AA:EAEE:ED50:B36:E6B3:DC1 (talk) 07:06, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing my information from page[edit]

Hello,

I wanted to remove my information from my husband's (Ernie Sabella) page. You reverted the change saying that 'Wikipedia isn't censored'. Since I am not a public person like my husband is, I do not understand why I'm not able to remove information that I don't want everyone to read. Isn't that what GPDR is all about? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheryl Sabella (talk • contribs) 13:38, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for your hard work, you're a name that often beats me to reverting things. RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 22:07, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@RhinosF1: Thank you and keep up the good work you too! Shellwood (talk) 16:17, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's very much appreciated. RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 17:19, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for helping out! A Dolphin (squeek?) 15:00, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@7 qz: You're welcome! And thanks to you as well! Shellwood (talk) 15:10, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! :) A Dolphin (squeek?) 15:11, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dogon edit[edit]

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Africa#This is Wonderful. If you look at WP:FTN you'll see a different sort of problem relating to the Dogon - Temple and his book plus Nommo. Doug Weller talk 20:15, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:16, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

En stjerne til deg![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for continuing to fight vandalism on Wikipedia, keep up the good work! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 00:10, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Vif12vf: Tusen takk! Shellwood (talk) 05:42, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the funny thing[edit]

I know the IP at the Pinochet article is most likely a vandal who thinks he's proving some point but... like... Marxist is a little bit broader than socialist, since it also includes some An/Coms, etc. so I think they're so uneducated that they don't realize what they're writing isn't actually an insult, it's just too vague. LOL Simonm223 (talk) 21:56, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On Carles Puigdemont's Roots in Carlism (aka Francoist traditionalism)[edit]

Why are you not letting me add relevant information from reliable sources to the biography of a fugitive from justice with a shady political past?

Is the Huffington Post not a reliable source? Nor it is El Mundo, the spanish leader on online news? What do you understand as a reliable source? Would an academic work do (I am myself an academic)? Incidentally I am not sure how to sign this, but by all means get in touch with me ...! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.44.7.41 (talk) 18:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Several other users have reverted you already, please don't restore the material again without gaining consensus on the talk page. We dont consider blogs to be reliable sources and also mind the three-revert rule. Shellwood (talk) 18:42, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that: I did not know about the three-revert rule - but why can others revert me repeatedly but I can not revert them?

I am not citing blogs. El Mundo is the leading online news outlet in Spain and the Huffington Post is not a blog, and the article that I am sourcing is by a very reputable historian. How do I make this point? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.44.7.41 (talk) 18:49, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So this [2] is not a blog? Shellwood (talk) 18:54, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


You're right. Apologies, I did not see that. It is by a reputed historian though, so I thought it would be better than a much worse journalistic source. I will write to Faraldo himself for another reference - will an academic one do?

Thanks also for helping me get on with this wikipedia business - it must be obvious I'm rather new at this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.44.7.41 (talk) 19:02, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Amazing

How do you do it? I try to get revert stuff but you have a system. Thanks for the tireless work. Harp seal Akrasia25 (talk) 00:18, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Akrasia25: Thanks! See WP:HG. Shellwood (talk) 08:53, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

you were just dealing with[edit]

[3] - JarrahTree 10:55, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@JarrahTree: I see, thanks for letting me know about this. Shellwood (talk) 10:57, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
more predictable than the afternoon rain in the Indonesian wet season...JarrahTree 10:58, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help with edit war[edit]

[4] Another editor undid my edits, for which I provided rationale, without offering any rationale of their own. When I reverted their undo, they immediately re-reverted and accused me of vandalism. Additionally, I believe the other party has a close relationship with the article's subject and is and has been engaging in conflict-of-interest editing, and I would like to share this concern in greater detail in a forum where I will not run afoul of Outing rules. Can you assist please? Damon Killian —Preceding undated comment added 22:01, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Damon Killian: Hi Damon, I have no knowledge about Nik Richie, but having a quick glance at the lead section it looks a bit odd per MOS:BIOLEAD, perhaps paragraph about the TheDirty.com retirement and the Instagram quote could be placed elsewhere in the article? In either case I would advice you bring the issue to the article's talk page and make your case there. Shellwood (talk) 22:18, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Shellwood -- (Redacted) Having said that, if you would like to intervene in the dispute regarding whether Damon Killian's edits are consistent with Wikipedia policy, that is perfectly fine with me. However, this individual's other conduct has crossed the line and will result in legal action being taken against him, so please be aware that the dispute involves more issues than he has disclosed to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DS Cable (talk • contribs) 00:10, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Linking cases of vandalism[edit]

Thanks for reverting https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Willinsky&diff=886960546&oldid=866725447.

FYI, this individual has related vandalism under several different Wikipedia users/IP addresses:

Asmecher (talk) 00:00, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Raisi[edit]

Your image havenot better quality from before image. please donot change image. Mdaneshmandi (talk) 20:16, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdaneshmandi: If you look at the revision history you will see that it was an IP who changed the image. Shellwood (talk) 20:22, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019[edit]

Hello. I see that you have recently removed some info from The Washington Post Wikipedia page that I added that you should not have removed. The Washington post is a liberal biased paper as I have cited. I’m not sure why you removed it but just know that it is accurate information and should not be removed. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1014:B025:C63D:A029:D9FB:6E67:E0E7 (talk) 22:47, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Several other users have already told you in their edit summaries that the source you use isn't reliable, I suggest you follow their advice, besides the political position of the newspaper is discussed below in the article. Shellwood (talk) 23:01, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Nick Ahlmark". Thank you. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:39, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.17[edit]

Hello Shellwood,

News
Discussions of interest
  • Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
  • {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
  • A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
  • There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.
Reminders
  • NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.
NPP Tools Report
  • Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
  • copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
  • The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

User:Shellwoodd. Nzd (talk) 07:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I've lost count of the number of times you've beaten me to a revert, especially on University of Cambridge just now. Keep up the good work! :)  vwilding  talk 20:50, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Vwilding: Thanks a lot and your contributions are much appreciated as well! Shellwood (talk) 20:58, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Federal and state environmental relations reversion[edit]

Hello,

I just ran across this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Federal_and_state_environmental_relations as The article is written in a very editorial fashion. It appears that someone attempted to remove the editorialized content, but that you reverted the change on March 21st citing "unexplained content removal" in the edit. Would you mind giving it a second look? I'm not an expert on the subject, so I'm not comfortable making edits, but it seems that the article was in better shape before your edit than after.

Thanks. --Elf of doriath (talk) 05:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

USSR anthem revert[edit]

Hello, few moments ago you've reverted my edit of USSR anthem page. I'm very curious how's this a "Huggle"? I'm a native Russian speaker and I can clearly say that word Отечество means Fatherland, there's no two ways around it. I've edited the section of "Literal" translation, I didn't edit other ones, that provide translations done by certain authors. Would you care to explain why did you revert my changes?

My bad, sorry for the mess. Shellwood (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I appreciate your work. Good job and keep it up! Wario-Man (talk) 10:01, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Wario-Man: And thank you for your efforts as well! Shellwood (talk) 10:11, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Your doing a great job Keep it up!! :) ―Mikemyers345 (talk • contribs) 02:40, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Mikemyers345: Thank you as well for your contributions! Shellwood (talk) 19:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Nice work. Just a heads up, you might want to keep an eye on the Deadweight wiki page, it's currently being vandalized by "meme" edits from reddit users. Jessiluvvv (talk) 02:38, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Swedes[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Swedes. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Shellwood/Archive_7&oldid=1139396408"