Jump to content

User talk: Mazewaxie/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5


Why are you always trying to cause trouble?

Dude can you just leave me alone I'm nit a sockpuppet please stop harassing dude I was only trying to add relevant I firmatin since spidey mcu appearances are halted of course Sony is going to put him in their shared universe, please don't get my account banned for absolutely nothing. TreeStump23 (talk) 13:58, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

@TreeStump23: "Of course" in your opinion. On Wikipedia we need reliable sources, we can't take for granted anything. I'm not the only one who's reverting your edits. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 14:00, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Ok but can you at least remove the sockpuppet investigation because I don't even know who hhggtg3279 is, and I did provide evidence for the Mary Jane edits it literally says in one of the interviews with yahoo movies one of co-screenwriters indented Michelle to be a reinvention of Mary Jane. Anyway why do you always like to act horrible to people — Preceding unsigned comment added by TreeStump23 (talk • contribs) 14:04, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

@TreeStump23: Reverting WP:OR is not "act horrible to people". I'm sorry if you feel this way. I opened the investigation because you are making the exact same edits that User:Hhggtg3279 and his sockpuppets used to make, so I have the right to doubt about your good faith. If you are not him, you are not going to be blocked, but if you continue to make the same edits/reverting you are going to be blocked anyway. I understand that you are very passionate towards Marvel (as I am), but that does not allow you to add unsourced and/or poorly sourced content. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 14:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Also why are you just randomly reporting me for something I didn't even do, I don't think that is fair at all, please if your reasonable you will remove that post and stop making claims against people thankyou.TreeStump23 (talk) 14:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

@TreeStump23: Because you are adding unsourced and/or poorly sourced content and making the same edits that other sockpuppets used to make in the past few weeks. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 14:13, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Look even though I'm not that hhggtg3279 guy, even though you put it on there they'll like block my account anyway without checking, I observed that hhggtg3279's way of editing and it is no way similar to mine, the only reason I was editing those pages was due to the recent spider-man news with Sony, if your a true marvel fan you'll remove that post, please don't get my account broken, I've only been on here 19 days and this is my first account, I always used to only edit as anonymous ip's before, but look how well making an account turned out. User:TreeStump23 (talk) 14:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

@TreeStump23: Administrators will check if you are or not a sockpuppet, they are not going to block you without checking. If you are not a sockpuppet, you will not be blocked, at the condition that you will stop adding unsourced material. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 14:19, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Dude please I'll stop adding poorly sourced content please remove the post I beg you they will ban my account from Wikipedia anyway, heck I don't even have the same ip as the hhggtg3279, in any case please be merciful I wasn't trying to cause disruption please please I beg remove that post plesse.TreeStump23 (talk) 14:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

@TreeStump23: If you are not a sockpuppet no one is going to block you, so if what you said is true you have nothing to worry about ("I've only been on here 19 days and this is my first account"). --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 14:28, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Basically what your saying is your not removing it dooming my account, thank you very much, I guess I might as well go back anonymous editing and use a Wikipedia again, lol first time I make an account and I already get accused for something I didn't even do lol.[User:TreeStump23|TreeStump23]] (talk) 14:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

@TreeStump23: I'll try to explain it one more time to you. If this is really your first account, then no one is going to block you. The fact that you are so worried seems to suggest the opposite however. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 14:32, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hope van Dyne (August 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dan arndt was:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Hope Pym instead.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Dan arndt (talk) 05:48, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Mazewaxie! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation 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! Dan arndt (talk) 05:48, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

I am concerned with the repeated reversion of a proposed edit by other contributors and the unaccountable warning effected by you, an administrator

I feel that this is in clear and unabashed violation of a number of Wikipedia policies and that, as an administrator, this course of action is decidedly unfair and an abuse of authority. The proposed edit was not in violation of any Wikipedia policies but the reversion was in violation of several policies regarding BLPs, dispute resolution, edit warring, verifiability, our 'five pillars' and administrator accountability (abuse of privilege). It is worth noting that you did not revert the actions of other parties involved, in a distinctly antagonistic fashion.

Kaykayjohnson1234 (talk) 18:00, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

@Kaykayjohnson1234: First of all I'm not an admin. You changed a lot of stuff that would require WP:CON. Also you reported me for edit warring when I reverted you only once. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 09:57, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


@Mazewaxie: I entirely disagree, my edit was minor but both rational and necessary, as well as well short of anything requiring a general consensus. My mistake, if you are indeed not an administrator (!), however, it's worth noting that you have made a feeble excuse, considering you issued a warning and only administrators can issue warnings. You have certainly although, perhaps unwittingly been party to or instigated an edit war, as my proposed edit was reversed by you, the third user involved, within a 24-hour span and in synchronisation. That could therefore be considered a veritable edit war as it involved an unnecessary series of back-and-forth reverts in a rather short period of time, highlighted in Wikipedia policy. The three-revert rule is a limit, but not a definition, for edit warring and it is perfectly possble to engage in an edit war without breaking the 3RR or even coming close to doing so. I apologise for any misunderstanding and I think it would not be unreasonable for you to do the same.

Kaykayjohnson1234 (talk) 15:05, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Kaykayjohnson1234: Every user can issue warnings. It would have been an edit war if I had reverted you 3 times, but I reverted you only once. I apologize too because maybe the warning was too excessive. Anyway the edits you made require consensus, because you changed topics that can be very subjective. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 15:12, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


@Mazewaxie: The warning was certainly excessive. I'm clearly not a vandal. And, as I've already stated, the three-revert rule is a limit, but not a definition, for edit warring and it is perfectly possble to engage in an edit war without breaking the 3RR or even coming close to doing so. Wiki's words. The page is outdated in some aspects and my edit was intended under the abiding principle of Wikipedia: providing truthful, non-prejudiced and accurate information.

@Kaykayjohnson1234: Listen, a single revert can't be edit warring, also counting that you added POV content as noted by others users that reverted you in the last few hours. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 09:33, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Excelled or exceled.

"Exceled" is incorrect. "Excelled" has two Ls in any version of English, including American. Consequently, I've reverted part of your edit at Donald Trump. -- Scjessey (talk) 12:44, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

@Scjessey: Sorry about that. I used a script for that edit, I didn't notice the mistake. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:46, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
No problem. I saw that you are doing lots of cleanup and I just wanted to make sure you didn't repeat it elsewhere. :-) -- Scjessey (talk) 12:49, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
@Scjessey: Thank you. Happy editing ^.^ --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:50, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Citizen Kane, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Colorization (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

You are most welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:29, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:The Irishman (2019 film) poster.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:The Irishman (2019 film) poster.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

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 deleted 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. DannyS712 (talk) 19:49, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Rotten Tomatoes

Hi, Mazewaxie. I'm a little confused. The title at Rotten Tomatoes is not italicized, not is it italicized in the article body. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:59, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

@Tenebrae: My bad. I thought you were italicizing the title when you are doing the opposite. Sorry for the revert. Happy editing. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 20:01, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
@Tenebrae: I just saw that you have been reverted again. I personally agree with you, but maybe every website should be automatically italicized (I guess?) --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 20:03, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
It's been a topic of discussion. The MOS page doesn't require it, but because someone made it automatic in the "cite web" template, some people think that's carved-in-stone MOS. It's one more example of how some eccentrics on Wikipedia do things in weird ways out of mainstream practice, which I believe make Wikipedia look eccentric, with a resultant loss of credibility. Hopefully, further discussion will move away from such all-or-nothing extremism. Thanks for discussing!--Tenebrae (talk) 20:06, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

The Irishman

Hello. I'll be happy to help. More so, after it comes out, as I don't want to know too much about it until I see it. Thanks for asking. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 16:12, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Great job! Cheers! SassyCollins

Deprecated parameters, cleanup

Hi, thanks for doing work on the Deprecated parameters in the cite templates. I have spotted that this appears to miss some entries in articles. I think that the problem is when spaces are in the parameter, deadurl =no, deadurl= no and deadurl = no are not picked up. Keith D (talk) 11:50, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

@Keith D: Thanks for letting me know. I'll fix that. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 13:49, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Reference Archives

I'm wondering about this. Should I add archive urls or is it something that is only necessary if the site no longer exists? Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 22:08, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

@Samurai Kung fu Cowboy: I personally add archive links to every source I add, because any article could be deleted so it's better to have an archive copy of it. But no, you don't have to necessarily archive everything. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 09:28, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

I read that Wikipedia automatically makes an archived copy of any source added within 24 hours. It's on the Wikipedia section about archiving. If that's the case then is it already there in case the url goes dead? Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 09:56, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

@Samurai Kung fu Cowboy:I don't know about that. But don't worry, most websites aren't going to remove articles randomly. However, I suggest to you that even if you don't add "archiveurl" etc. on the article, you should go on the Wayback Machine, paste the link in the "Save Page Now" box and click "save page" and wait for it to load the captured page, so if the article gets deleted you can easily recover it from there. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 10:00, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you. I read that on the Wikipedia page about archived references though. If you get a chance look it up. So, I think they're archived. Double checking won't hurt though. I appreciate your feedback. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 14:55, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

So I tried to add a URL and it said it captured it. However it said error 404 at the top of the page but then had the page right underneath it. It also said it's captured it 12 times but it didn't seem to have a archive URL. Will it only archive it, if it gets deleted? Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 21:03, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

If it says that has been captured 12 times you're fine. If you paste the url in the main box at http://web.archive.org/ it should show the dates in which it has been captured, and if you click on any of them it will open it. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 09:15, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

ill

Re: "cleanup". Do you think to say "ill" for "interlanguage link" is dirty? It's internal, not for the readers, why make complicated? We have so many things that are broken and need fixing, imho. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:55, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: It's better to use the extended name IMHO. By the way, the AutoWikiBrowser automatically changes those, there must be a reason for that. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:16, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
For whom do you think 17 letters are better than 3? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:26, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: I said that if the AWB automatically changes it there must be a reason. It's not a big deal though, it's fine either way. I don't think it's necessary to start a discussion about it. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:28, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
I am just curious. For me, there is no reason for a change when both are fine, but I'm ready to learn. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:38, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: I understand your point. I only changed it because AWB suggested it. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:41, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Here you can see the template redirects which AWB automatically replaces. All those were added only if there was consensus. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:51, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

I am sorry, but don't get it. English is not my first language, that may be why. I wanted to learn if I should not code "ill", and the answer seems to be no. I also wanted to learn for whom the longer form might be better, and see no answer, but also don't need one. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:12, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: English is not my first language either (I'm italian). Anyway yes, you can use "ill", the longer form it's the actual name of the template, "ill" is a redirect. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 13:23, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
I know that it is a redirect. What I still don't get is for whom it would ever be better to have to read the longer form. I'd understand the few who don't know what it means, but it is worth having the many others read the long thing, several times in one article. I don't know if you know that the template name was changed in 2015, which I thought was no improvement. I like things simple. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:30, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
I can't answer to that because I don't know. Anyway it's okay to use both forms, so there really isn't a problem. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 13:32, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
Rich Farmbrough, you are next to ask the same question: why change a version that is okay to another verion that is okay, while many things are not okay and need a change much more? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:45, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt - Ill is a shortcut, which is fine, and saves typing. Unfortunately it is also meaningless. It renders at the bottom of pages in the template list as III due to the poor choice of font. It's been a long standing practice that things like "{{cn}}" get changed to "{{Citation needed}}", generally when fixing other stuff. This makes things readable for editors, who may well not know what Ill means (to me it says illustration).
Let me know what other things need changing much more, and I'll work on them if I am able.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:02, 9 September 2019 (UTC).
Rich Farmbrough, I undertand to spell out "citation required" instead of "cn" because it shows to readers in the articles. "ill" doesn't, it's visible only to editors, and I believe that there will be some that are now forced to read "Interlanguage link" every time ... (and not like it), sometimes even "interlanguage link multi" (some of which are not "multi"). Please take a look at Goethe Plaque of the City of Frankfurt in edit mode, and imagine "interlanguage link" instead each time. I'd find it distracting. - To go for "citation required" and find citations seems more worthwhile, imho, or add requested infoboxes, photographs etc., see Category:Request templates --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
There is no "Interlanguage link multi" it too is a redirect to "interlanguage link". The real solution, of course, is to provide English articles for these links. I have done some work on facilitating adding pictures, creating lists like this one.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:09, 9 September 2019 (UTC).
I do turn ill-links blue a lot, but no more than one per day, and as each one create an estimate of three new ones, I'd need many helpers ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:14, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
Slept over it. My perspective: In edit mode, I want to see the text shown as clearly as possible, for some innocent who just wants to fix a spelling mistake. I don't want to trouble such a user by long references, so put them in an extra section and call by name, and I want to keep templates as short as possible, so find "cn" and "ill" better. If you meant changing "cn" to "citation required" in the template name, I'm against it as well, - I understand to have it spelled out in the article shown. - One more: if you still feel you want to change "ill" to "interlanguage link", please find a different edit summary, because "cleanup" implies that it was unclean or at least untidy, while - in "my" articles - it's used for a reason. Alternatives? How about adding a comment "ill is short for interlanguage link" to the first of such templates in an article, if you think editors might not be able to find that by searching for "template:ill"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:02, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Italian

You're Italian?! Why on earth don't you have that fact on your User page? You should know that Gerda is correct. She is highly regarded and I advocate that you follow her advice. Cheers to you both! Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 16:27, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

@Gareth Griffith-Jones and Gerda Arendt: Hi Gareth! I thought it was obvious I was Italian since I have the Italian flag on my user page (idea that I stole by looking at your user page lol) and also I have the userbox "User it". I know that she is correct, that she can use the short form too, what I was trying to explain is that I just changed it because apparently is recommended to by AWB. I wish both of you a good day! --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 16:40, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
(ec) Caution: "highly regarded" means different thing, and some regard me as highly disruptive - which I take as a compliment. I believe that we agreed that both ways are okay, - we just differ in thinking if an okay way should be replaced by another okay way, and I say "no", waste of time (+ readers' attention), while I don't know what you think. - My focus is on an Italian topic right now, - perhaps you can find sources? Vespro della Beata Vergine. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:55, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Sure I can help! What kind of sources do you need? --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 17:04, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
I don't know what I need, but expect that a piece first published in Venice might have coverage in Italian which I can't read. Can you find anything about Monteverdi's service in Mantua (Mantova) in church music? I didn't know that he was responsible for his duke's private Sunday services. Anything about dating the composition times of the individual parts of the publication? I read that the first 3 psalms are believed to have been composed for the publications, while other parts may have been composed before. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
Title page of descant(?) part of Claudio Monteverdi's Vespro della Beata Vergine

Here is another part of the music - the descant, compared with the bass already illustrated. I think the Altus and Quitus are bound in the same volume. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:31, 9 September 2019 (UTC).

And here is a substantial life in French. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:50, 9 September 2019 (UTC).
Thank you, Rich. A peer review is open. "cantus" would be "soprano" today. He published part books, no score, - the Renaissance way. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:08, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
Rich, I used the pic in the article, - the lead image is similar, but not close to the section about the first publication. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:23, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Mazewaxie, for you interest in Enea Scala! Can you find anything on a birth year, or more about early life? The standard bio lacks years of performances, and colleagues and conductors. The conductor of the performance I saw, Sesto Quatrini, also deserves an article, eventually ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:21, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I'm searching but it doesn't seem to be the birth date anywhere. I'm gonna keep searching though. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 11:25, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, but I understand that some - mostly female - opera singers want to keep it a secret. I reluctantly removed the known birthday of one of them who was pleading, and defended the missing birthday of a bass singer ;) - What makes you sure the Ragusa is the Sicilian one? Far away from Bologna ;)
Completely different topic: could you translate the instrument in the Vespers with the ill-link, Viola da brazzio? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:12, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Ragusa is only in Sicily (as far as I know), or certainly is the most relevant, so if it was some other "Ragusa" it would have been specified in the various websites that write simply "Ragusa". --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:28, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Edit Here explicitly says Ragusa in Sicily. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:29, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Precious

films welcome

Thank you for quality articles about films and their makers, such as Sergio Leone filmography, for your plans for The Lord of the Rings (film series), for welcoming hundreds of new users, for help with Italian topics and shiny userboxes, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2280 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:03, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you so much for your kind words. I really appreciate that! --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 09:13, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages and AWB

Hallo,

There's a long-standing bug in AWB whereby it suggests adding {{stub}} and {{orphan}} to pages which it "knows" are disambiguation pages because it's changing {{geodis}} to {{place name disambiguation}}, as in your edit here. It's supposed to be being fixed in the next version of AWB, for which we've been waiting for many months.

But any edits you make with AWB are your responsibility, so please keep your eyes open for these cases where AWB is encouraging you to make incorrect edits.

Any disambiguation page ought almost always to be an "Orphan" (there may be the odd useful hatnote pointing to it), and cannot by definition be a "Stub". Please watch out and don't let AWB lead you astray.

Thanks, PamD 11:02, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@PamD: Oh, okay. Thanks for letting me know, I will double check from now on. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

KSJU (Minnesota)

Thanks for adding the orphan tag; that reminded me to put it in the template.

One thing I wanted to point out was that the AWB edit inadvertently created a typo instead of correcting one because of underline syntax. You changed Blazers to Blasers. This is not a typo; Blazers was a mascot for the College of Saint Benedict until just this year. Raymie (t • c) 02:59, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@Raymie: Ok, thanks for pointing that out. Sorry for the mistake. Happy editing! --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 08:41, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
This is for your valuable efforts for contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 09:17, 13 September 2019 (UTC)


Damselfrau

Hello, Mazewaxie. I have added the template "In use" to this article Damselfrau. This template contains the text "please do not edit this page while this message is displayed". Thank you for your edit, but I would prefer for you to wait until I have removed the template. As for this kind of links/link texts: [[Mask|masks]] This is what editing in VE does "automagically" :) Kjersti Lie (talk) 09:48, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Orphan Question

Hi Editor

I'd like to know that you have put a tag "orphan" on my created article , This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions.

i would like to know what's the difference between non orphan or orphan ? i understand that orphan means no other related article links to it , how to remove this tag , any clarification ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MemonBhai (talk • contribs) 11:45, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

I have added redirects and link to article can you please check ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MemonBhai (talk • contribs) 12:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@MemonBhai: It means that no article points there. That there aren't wikilinks on other page that point to the page you created. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:26, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Ok thanks but i have added this line to page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahad_Abdullah_Alasaus "Fahad Abdullah" redirects here. For Qatari Footballer, see Fahad Abdullah" is that good redirection or i should remove it ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MemonBhai (talk • contribs) 12:31, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

You should remove it, that doesn't change the fact that the page is orphan. It's not a big deal though. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 12:34, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Canot

I undid your well-meaning edit to Manitou River (Quebec) and pressed enter too soon, while putting in the explanation. The article refers to Lac du Canot, a lake, not to "cannot". Is there a way to tag the text with a comment or something that says "this is not an error"? Aymatth2 (talk) 13:05, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

@Aymatth2: Hi. Honestly I don't know if there is a template for that. Anyway it's fine, I will not change it again since it was the AutoWikiBrowser that suggested me to, almost certainly because it identified "Canot" as a misspell of "cannot". --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 13:08, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
I seem to remember seeing something somewhere. Not important. Keep up the good work. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:15, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
@Aymatth2: I found the proper template and I added it. I wish you happy editing! --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 13:21, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

brutish or british? - about the editing issue on jojo rabbit

In the character section a Hitler youth instructor is described as "British" this seems unlikely for a Hitler youth instructor during the second world war. Later, in the page the same character is described as "brutish". I have therefore assumed "British" was a typo and changed it to "brutish". Sorry for any confusion caused.Llewee (talk) 13:58, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

@Llewee: I think it's pretty obvious that it was "British" since it was written with the capital letter. Anyway it's ok, don't worry. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 14:00, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
@Llewee: Actually I don't know. You could actually be right about that. Still I don't understand why it used the capital letter. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 14:03, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
@Llewee: I fixed it. Sorry about my revert, you were right. I wish you a good day :) --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 14:04, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
@Mazewaxie: OK, No worries Llewee (talk) 14:10, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

Hello. I'm not sure how you feel about the page but three editors are attempting to delete a lot of it. We have been discussing it on the talk page under character descriptions. The character descriptions themselves have been greatly reduced. However, they still seem to want to delete much of the page. I'd appreciate your feedback in that section. Thank you. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 22:41, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello. If you have an opinion about the portrayal of Bruce Lee section it'd be great if you could chime in on the talk page section. I hope you're well. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 03:16, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Orphan template message

Hi Mazewaxie

Thank you for adding the orphan template message to the Western Sydney Leadership Dialogue page. I have since added a link to this page from the Sydney Business Chamber Wikipedia page. Are you able to remove the orphan message now? I am not allowed to remove it myself, so I just thought I'd let you know that I've added the link.

Thanks! RebeccaMc81 (talk) 08:39, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@RebeccaMc81:  Done --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 08:55, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

A Request

Hi, Mazewaxie. I just have noticed that you fixed references and url at the Messi goal list, can you please do the same at Chhetri goal list and can you please archive the references and citations which are not archived, because i failed to do so. Thank you. Dey subrata (talk) 18:45, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Dey subrata:  Done (I think). Honestly I don't know if I did what you asked me, but I edited the same things that I changed on the Messi goal list, so I hope I helped you. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 18:52, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

The Hamptons

The name of the film festival is Hamptons International Film Festival. It is not called simply Hamptons. The location is being used for brevity on the list of film festivals that the Irishman is appearing in. This requires proper use of "in" and "the" when referring to the Hamptons, a location place. Warm regards. Kire1975 (talk) 20:44, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Kire1975, oops, you're right, I thought the place was called just "Hamptons". Sorry about that. Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 09:34, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

El Camino poster

Can you tag a new source for the poster - I know I can see non-reliable sites with it, but if you can put a reliable source where you got the image and replace the existing one, that would help. --Masem (t) 15:43, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Nevermind, beat me to this :) -Masem (t) 15:43, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
@Masem: It's okay. Thanks for posting though, you never know if someone remembers to update the source. I wish you a nice day. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 15:44, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

The Ryboy Section!

I edited the page you wanted :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryboy42 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

I also want to give a small slice of a seven layered hungarian cake :) == A Dobos torte for you! ==

Ryboy has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.


To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Hey there, I am pretty sure I got you addicted to the I.A.Bot. I must say that it is a very good tool when you are online, adding thousands of bytes of archive a minute. enjoy!

@Ryboy42: Yes. I'm using it on certain articles. Thanks! --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 20:23, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Citation Barnstar
Wow. Rescuing 70 sources with none marked as dead. Just... wow. That's incredible. You are an amazing human being. Thank you for being alive.

If you don't know what I'm talking about I'm referencing your recent edit to Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker. ZombieGizzard (talk) 20:53, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Shortdesc helper

Please don't use Shortdesc helper to add short descriptions to episode articles. {{Infobox television episode}} already handles that and your addition is just redundant. --Gonnym (talk) 08:07, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

@Gonnym: Ok. I thought it was fine adding them. I won't from now on, thanks for letting me know. I wish you a nice day :) --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 09:18, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

At the film article

Mazewaxie, those were nice edits at the film article for 2001. Is there any chance you could leave a comment of how you improved the citations there to be more useful on the FAC page here [1]? If you could give the citations of the article a glance for further improvement, then it might be helpful also. CodexJustin (talk) 18:22, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

@CodexJustin:  Done --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 18:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that. The sources were still found to be lacking at FAC [2] even after you ran your bot for citations and the assessment archived. Is there something more you could do to improve the large number of sources there? CodexJustin (talk) 16:10, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
@CodexJustin: Sorry, I'm not a native English speaker so I don't think I understood what you meant. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 16:14, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
The assessment review for the film of 2001 was closed this morning because the citations (sources) were found to be poor. This occurred after you ran your program to improve the sources. Is there something else that can be done, to your knowledge, to improve the sources in this film article [3]? CodexJustin (talk) 16:18, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
@CodexJustin: Oh, okay I got it. Frankly I don't know, I discovered that bot a few days ago, but if I manage to find other tools to vastly improve the article sources I will surely use them. Thanks for involving me. I wish you a nice day :) --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 16:22, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mazewaxie/Archive_2&oldid=995934057"