User:Velella/archives/Archive 6

This talk page contents prior to 1st October 2011 have been archived. Please feel free to start new discussions below.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

My warning

Hi, I see here you gave a final warning to an IP user for spamming. I've just reverted this edit which I believe qualifies as promotional. I'm wondering if you'd like to pursue whatever the correct course of action is as, frankly, I have no idea what is supposed to happen next once a final warning has been reached. Regards, LordVetinari 11:34, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Apologies but I have been away for a couple of weeks - this IP appears to have stopped editing so that the issue appears to have been resolved - I will maintain an occasional watch just in case it returns.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree, and thanks for following up. BTW, for my own knowledge, can you please direct me to some useful WP:something page that describes the next course of action after a final warning. Thanks again. ClaretAsh (talk) 08:46, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

The next stage is to file a manual report at Administrator intervention against vandalism which is reasonably quick and easy. Alternatively Huggle and, I suspect, Twinkle do the task automatically following a level 4 warning. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   08:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that. ClaretAsh (talk) 09:23, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Comment?

Would you mind commenting on a content issue in Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) here? Some of the article's content and its source is being questioned by another editor who has repeatedly removed or altered it without I believe justification. Dan56 (talk) 01:27, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Apologies (see above). I regret this is outside my knowledge and hopefully is now resolved.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Periflex

Thanks for your interest in my work. Please have a look at the rewritten article about the Periflex camera. I hope it conforms to your kind suggestions. With respect, Jan von Erpecom 16:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Securitization

I amended a portion which was not sourced and which is actually dubious to (i) past tense and (ii) sourced to a company rather than a single person in this company. In fact, given the lack of references (even searching on the web), the correct course of action is to delete the whole paragraph, which I will do now. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.220.80 (talk) 22:41, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Nita Ambani - Dhirubhai Ambani International School

Hi Velella,

In the Career Section of the article on Nita Ambani there was an revert from Nita Ambani to Kishore Ambani. I wanted to clarify that Nita Ambani was accurate information provided and I'm reverting it by providing a stronger citation. Kishore Ambani is in no way related to Dhirubhai Ambani International School.

Nita Ambani Proof

MuzzammilB (talk) 05:27, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

My revert was from Kishore to Nita - which you have confirmed was correct - and thanks for the confirming reference. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   12:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

North American College

Hello, I am a faculty member at North American College in Houston, TX. We are a new college offering 4-year Bachelor degrees in three disciplines: Business Administration, Computer Science and Education. Our website is www.northamerican.edu We are accredited by ACICS which is a recognized accrediting agency by the US Department of Education. The problem I am having is to create a page under the title: North American College as it redirects to Pontifical North American College. I tried to cancel the redirect but you did undo it. How can I resolve this? Am I supposed to create a page like NORTH AMERICAN COLLEGE (HOUSTON, TEXAS)? Which seems the only plausible way currently. Please advise. Thanks, Osman Nal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osmannal2 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I have fixed it up as North American College as a stub article but it needs to be referenced and expanded otherwise it may be proposed for deletion as not notable and unreferenced. Hope that this helps. Regards.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

About the promotion of TRED

I believe the editions I did were constructive as real information with good sources were added . If this is not allowed, then what is supposed to be?? Otherwise, it's information, not promotion.--187.90.249.134 (talk) 22:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

There was only one source provided which was itself a weak source and looked like a reproduction of a press release. The group has not produced anything at all and is only rumoured to to make a release in 2012. As such it is all unreferenced crystal ball gazing. If the group releases material and becomes notable , then is the time to add information.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   09:02, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Velella. You have new messages at R000t's talk page.
Message added 13:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I am r000t (talk) 13:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

THANK YOU: Reservation in India page

Hey, Thanks for the edits on the Reservation in India page. I am working on the page for an assignment for one of my classes at Mills College so thanks for the edits you did in terms of organizing the article. I know you haven't done so but please do not delete anything we put up on the article and I would love for you to look over the edits we make over time and give us feedback on our talk pages. Thanks again! Kkhari29 (talk) 21:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Please rest assured that I only delete material that appear to be wrong. In this case,as I understand that this is work in progress, I will hold back from any editing to allow you a free hand for the moment. Best of luck with the assignment!.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Kkhari29 (talk) 05:04, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Dispute over Spirulina

Dear Velella - you edited a grammar mistake on a controversial thread a few hours ago. If you're interested there is a discussion going on to determine a new NPOV:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Spirulina_(dietary_supplement)". Thank you. --Rdavout (talk) 17:34, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Kappa Kappa Gamma

Hi! I'd like to ask about this edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kappa_Kappa_Gamma&diff=459173320&oldid=459173098

It seems that I'd only cleaned up the information, putting it in better place in that section whilst including all the same details, while you reverted my edit as "unsourced speculation". However, all of the information can be found readily in the references which are already included in the article's section, including a NYTimes article. I was only being bold with my edit, keeping the flow of the article clear (i.e. removing the word "alleged" from the first sentence which had appeared twice; putting his suicide more appropriately on the section's tail - since his death didn't really have to do with the sorority anyway...)

Perhaps we could come to consensus on an edit? Thanks. 38.109.88.218 (talk) 16:28, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The reason for my revert was your change from "....Mr. Ivins may have been driven to suicide...." to "... who is alleged to have been driven to suicide by unfounded allegations ..."

Your edit introduces two separate allegations which raises the spectres of others who have made these allegations but for which no reference is made to indicate the identity of these persons. The original version was much more neutral and avoided these ambiguous allegations. Hope that that helps.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:37, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

No, that's not quite right. The edit as I found it had the two separate allegations...reading, "...who is alleged to have been driven to suicide by unfounded allegations..." in the lede of the Bruce Ivins section. I thusly removed that from the section-lede and moved it to the bottom of that section to read "Mr. Ivins may have been driven to suicide by the accusations with regard to his involvement in the the attacks. Because he died before charges could be filed, no court case will be brought to fruition on this matter, nor on the matter of his involvement with KKG or other sororities." You then reversed my edit with the note "rvt unsourced speculation" and the Huggle tag.

All sources for the info I properly included can be found in the NY Times article which accompanies that section (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/science/10anthrax.html), as well as in sources 3 through 5 of the Bruce Ivins article. I'm not the most efficient formatting editor, but the facts are well sourced and I do believe my edit was strong. Perhaps you could assist? Thanks again. 38.109.88.218 (talk) 21:19, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Velella. I see you've continued editing over the past week, but haven't addressed my comments above. I'm going to assume you see my edits were valid as I described, and will re-include them to the Kappa Kappa Gamma article in the next day or so. Thanks again for your input. 38.109.88.218 (talk) 17:42, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Both links 3 and 5 of the Bruce Irvins article are dead links and reference 4 provides no support. Nor do I see support in the reference that you have quoted. What we have is a release of anthrax, a scientist accused of its release, the suicide of the scientist - all fact but no ostensible proof that said scientist released the anthrax. So where is the source that says "...who is alleged to have been driven to suicide by unfounded allegations ...". I can't even see the word alleged. To be alleged, somebody has to allege something - there must be a capability of saying "alleged by xxxxxxx" We don't seem to have that xxxxx, do we ? 20:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

RIGHT! Which is WHY I removed the "alleged" from the article (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kappa_Kappa_Gamma&diff=459173098&oldid=455363382). It IS asserted in many places that Ivins acted in that attack, per http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/06/AR2008080601400.html (and the NYTimes article), which is cited in the Kappa Kappa Gamma article already. But you UNDID my edit here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kappa_Kappa_Gamma&diff=459173320&oldid=459173098 , with a note of ""rvt unsourced speculation" and the Huggle tag. Perhaps we could do without the part of the edit about the motivation for his suicide, but there is ample citations for including that he was involved in the anthrax attacks. And, you can see, inclusion of ivins in this article has been re-hashed before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kappa_Kappa_Gamma/Archive_3 . Please advise. 38.109.88.218 (talk) 03:29, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Message Me

Instead of calling me a vandal you could have messaged me back. Dont hide from the fact that you dont know somthing so you choose to delete it. I have now restored that information and quoted sources. I hope thats better and now you should read up on the story and gain some insight and do your job properly. OK! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodman44 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

You have provided no reliable source whatsoever to justify what is potentially very damaging and probably libellous information. To support such an assertion like that you need a robust and reliable source and that certainly isn't YouTube. On a general note, notoriety affecting children would, in my view, require the strongest possible justification for inclusion and not just someone's vicarious enjoyment of the predicament of others.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   20:29, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Regulation of the release of genetic modified organisms‎

I spent hours researching and writing an article, so I hope you understand why I might feel a little bit annoyed when someone comes along and changes it without offering a good reason. The order is important because each section is supposed to link to the next and changing the order changes the flow. And it is logical as I have explained on the talk page. Can you please read it an leave a response. AIRcorn (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I disagree and have replied at article talk page.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:08, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Gloria Jeans is advertising in Wikipedia

Hi

I have a personal blog (www.LearnAboutAustralia.com) in which I write about Australia. I wanted to share the information that I put in my Blog with the readers of Wikipedia. However you removed the links to the completely relevant articles that I had put in some pages because because you believed I was advertising!! Gloria Jeans is a brand and belongs to a private company. How come Gloria Jeans can even have a page and advertise for its brand in Wikipedia, but if I place a link which is about Coffee Menu in Australia, it is assumed as advertising!?! It's stupid isn't it?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Learnaboutoz (talk • contribs) 23:59, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

It was exactly that - you have a blog and all your edits were to promote that Blog. That is not acceptable editing practice on Wikipedia - simple.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   00:45, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Sony Ericsson Xperia Arc S

Hello Velella. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Sony Ericsson Xperia Arc S, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to products. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 17:21, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

And of course i should inset that this article is about the best phone of Sony Ericsson, I do not know about America or Europe but in asia it has good sale and of course my phone is arc s :) --Faramarz^♚♔♚ 14:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Changing article's name

Hello, I've created this page, if you want change an article's name you can proceed from here, don't change the name manually because it will damage my contributions (as creator of the page). Thanks --Faramarz^♚♔♚ 09:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I neither changed its name nor moved it as you will see if you check the edit history of both this and its redirect. I revered my temporary reversion of the redirect. Some other editor later decided to change the redirect to the article.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   17:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh! i didn't pay attention and i apologize for this unduly comment. sincerely --Faramarz^♚♔♚ 10:07, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit at Watt: energy vs power

You were doubtless thinking of the calorie, but you put its definition in watt - I reflexively typed "rv v" in my edit comment but that may have been a bit harsh; sorry. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:34, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. I was looking at Watt, Joule, Ampere and Kilowatt and somehow conflated the information between them to come up with a brilliant insight that I thought would be insightful for readers. Trouble was that it was wrong - brain just in temporary melt-down I suspect!  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   18:24, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Ashlee Herlin

Hello Velella. I am just letting you know that I deleted Ashlee Herlin, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:37, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Vandal

Let the vandal be. I have already reported him. | ^help_dןǝɥ | 21:13, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

For reverting the IP that vandalized my talk page. –Chase (talk / contribs) 19:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

No worries. He got fixed in the end!  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with 24/7 Real Media article

Much appreciated. Standard2211 (talk) 20:56, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Amazon river dolphin

Have actually been reading up on them in our uni library and amazingly this is one of the many odd myths surrounding them! It's the only one I could remember. When I'm next back in I'll find the book to cite it with and pop in a few of the other myths too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.161.210 (talk) 11:40, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Gallery Chez Valentin

Hello, I'm from the gallery Chez Valentin in Paris, I'm the owner of information concerning french artist Laurent Grasso, so all of my information provided are true and verified. The references added are the two websites of Gallerie Chez Valentin, on which you will find artist information, and Sean Kelly Gallery.

Thank You very much ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galeriechezvalentin (talk • contribs) 12:38, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Your reply gives me great concern that you have been editing with a significant conflict of interest. Please read the guideline urgently and please refrain from further editing until you are certain that your editing practice is consistent with guidelines.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   13:16, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Removing my topics while they are valid of Remkoolhaas

Dear User, you have deleted my topics while I am one of the people who are sitting in the Real Estate Corperate of Ymere in Amsterdam. I also have discussed with the the local residents,the employees of the Real Estate Corperate. How can you delete my topic while all this happened is true and has been taken place in the living complexes of Remkool Haas. The residents are either victim or guilty what happened in those complexes. How dare you to put those topics of Vandalism while what happened has been true even the Police knows. I am also a resident of Remkool Haas and have seen al this happening in front of my street. Those building lack safety and living standards at the moment. You are putting the real subject out of the line, you can't hide what is true. I have to complain about you of privacy breachment. You give me false allegations that I am spamming, doing vandalism, if you count that up it really looks that I am charged for nothing. My apologies you can't charge someone while what has happened is true, where do you come from the Netherlads or a foreigner country. All we want is the truth that's it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Work number1987 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Because it makes serious allegations, none of which are backed up by any source of reference. In addition it was difficult to understand and I suspect that English may not be your native tongue. If you can find robust references, especially for the racial allegations, I would strongly suggest finding a native English speaker to help with copy-editing before posting here. Also re-posting the same complaint on several User's talk page is generally considered to be canvassing which is deprecated here  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   13:14, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Bullet Records

I've asked for semi-pp of the page. At least one of the IP accounts is I think User:ClarkMusic - possible Clark Enslin - as the IP edits only started after I put a COI notice on his talk page. The registration of the trademark isn't in dispute but he/they don't get that existence of a registered trademark doesn't prove the existance of the record label either trading or defunct. NtheP (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Velella. You have new messages at Mike Rosoft's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A Barnstar For You!

		The Userpage Shield
		In recognition of reverts to Vandalism on my user page, it's my privilege to award this to you. --Slazenger (Contact Me) 23:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - the first in 7 years and 29000 edits! Must obviously try harder!.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   16:45, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion - Pirates of the Caribbean 5 (2013 film)

I have removed the Speedy Deletion from Pirates of the Caribbean 5 (2013 film), see the article's talk page for more detail. Callanecc (talk) 15:18, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Jellied Eels

Dear Velella this is what I wrote to Denisarona 30 minutes ago - which you would have seen on my talk page where you added a comment - p.s. we are not just "adding in links"!! Either change them or remove them, we don't care, we are just doing a service to wikipedea visitors based upon peoples genuine interest in finding out the correct recipes which we research, and which other people have linked to.

First message - I should probably have left notes in the edits that we are doing today and tomorrow on certain Wikipedea pages, but did not feel it was necassary at the time - I am the editor of HistoricalFoods.com where a lot of references on wikipedea food pages point to - the site has moved name and domain to RecipeWISE.co.uk so all of the old links on wikipedia pointing to historicalfoods.com are now dead, the exact same recipe or article can be found on our new named website recipewise.co.uk ... by altering all the names accross today and tomorrow we are attempting to clean up all the dead links - but you keep changing them back ... ??? so either they need to be removed or changed.

From Denisarona - If you had stated why the edits were being made then they wouldn't have been reverted. Check out Edit summary for further guidance. Denisarona (talk) 13:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

My reply - Like I said, not a noob, didn't think it was necassary as the pages are all quite niche and not particularly contentious with editors. We don't put the links here, we are just helping people out by changing the link to point to the correct address, (they seem quite popular as the links show up in our analytics) while changing nothing else on the page ... but yes, I could have added something into the pages talk - thanks.

Second reply - thanks Denisaroa - we were 301 ing the new links accross but the site has now been pulled offline so the new site needs the new links put into wikipedea to be updated, we will be doing about twenty page changes (just the links). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.160.136 (talk) 14:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

FrischBits

FrischBits

WHY IN THE WORLD do you keep deleting FrischBits from the Frisch School Wikipedia page? It is an important part of Frisch, and it would be preferred that it stay there. If you wish to shorten it, do so, but do not get rid of any information or destroy the grammar, two things you have done countless times in the past. Your stubbornness really baffles me. Shbangbang (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Stephen Huynh

I'm afraid your bot is too sensitive. Please clarify your comment at my talk page and undo your edits to the article. Thanks. 218.250.159.25 (talk) 11:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

User 218.250.159.25

Dear Velella, please see this. Just FYI. Cheers AKS 18:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I do begin to despair and wonder whether we are just are just Troll feeding !  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   20:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

• I am bit disappointed by action of other Admin (even though the action did not involve me directly). Please see this and this. Do you want to step into the first discussion? I have raised objection as although you had rightfully reverted edits on Stefan Wong (actor), your decision was overruled. Cheers AKS 08:11, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Wales

Hello, Velella. You have new messages at Rannpháirtí anaithnid's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Uniblue

Hi Velella, Could you please consider removing the speedy deletion tag on the above article.Kindly view the talk page. I would be more than happy to improve the article if the user advises how. It seems he went through all the pages that i created and recommended them for deletion. Thank you for your time and effort. regards Keithmonti (talk) 17:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I didn't nominate it, another editor did. I simply replaced the AfD tag that you deleted. Having said that, if I had seen the article I would have probably nominated it for AfD too  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   17:23, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Natalie Mendoza

Hi.

Regarding Ms Mendoza, her original wikipedia page from 2006 put her DOB in 1978. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natalie_Mendoza&action=historysubmit&diff=75960549&oldid=40703290

It was changed to 1980 in July of 2010, then to 1982: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natalie_Mendoza&action=historysubmit&diff=373055685&oldid=373054951

Then in December 2010 back to 1980: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natalie_Mendoza&action=historysubmit&diff=400624531&oldid=400425583

Back to 1982 in September 2011: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natalie_Mendoza&action=historysubmit&diff=450606818&oldid=450606586

Back to 1981 in December 2011: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natalie_Mendoza&action=historysubmit&diff=465080081&oldid=459674068

TV.com puts her DOB at 1978: http://www.tv.com/people/natalie-mendoza/

This article from the Sun-Herald from August 2001 states: "In the meantime, Mendoza, who turned 23 on the weekend ...", putting her DOB at 1978: http://www.angelfire.com/biz5/beeswing/articles/mendoza1.html

While none of these are absolute, it is clear something weird is going on - the best explanation being either the actress or her people are using wikipedia as her own personal PR page. In light of this, I suggest leaving her DOB as 1978 as per the original page which ran unchanged for four years. So, either that one was correct and the date was changed when she began getting more recognition, or it was wrong and the actress did not wikipedia herself for four years (unlikely at best).

Rgds.

MMBS — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrMrBlueSky (talk • contribs) 13:29, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

The real issue was a date change in an article with no references and, more significantly, no edit summary. I have no idea who Natalie Mendoza is and have no interest in her age, only in trying to keep Wikipedia on the straight and narrow ! Please use edit summaries to avoid future problems  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:56, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok got it! Let me know if that's OK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrMrBlueSky (talk • contribs) 14:38, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

That looks fine by me. Regards.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:49, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

kerry katona article

Hi, sorry if that edit has caused any trouble, but I'm afraid this is a shared IP for an entire college... we did have some kind of user page set up, but we had an internet link upgrade recently that I guess must have changed our IP? random techie 193.63.174.211 (talk) 11:46, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I will keep an occasional eye on things. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Yosri Derma Raju

Hello Velella. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Yosri Derma Raju, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

This one isn't mine. I merely reverted an unexplained deletion of an AFD tag. Regards.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   17:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Ekstraklasa

Hi, I'm writing in response to Your massage abou editing the article http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ekstraklasa&oldid=478490871 The problem is about a number of league championschips - It's doubtless that Górnik Zabrze and Ruch Chorzów won the titles 14th times. In 1951 Ruch won the league championschip because of winning "Poland's Cup", and in the same year Wisła Kraków won the league without winning the championschip. The edition that I've linked in this message is - in my opinion - consensually, but another user is still "undoing" it, to make a impression that Wisła Kraków was polish champion 14th time, which is no true. Remarkable is fact, that in the text in the infobox says about "Most championschips", not "Most league winners". In my opinion this edition (in version that I've linked in this message) is necessary. Thank You for Your letter. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 601B (talk • contribs) 21:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. My problem when monitoring the page was that your edit at 21.11 contained no edit summary and looked as if you were simply inserting unreferenced facts. Using edit summaries does help monitoring editors greatly in understanding what is intended by an edit and thus avoiding instances such as this. In addition your edit inserted or moved <br/> , a formatting command that is now deprecated in Wikipedia because it interferes with a number of automated tools. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

POV tag

Hello I noticed you removed the POV tag in the Potato thinking it was about the Tomato genetics, but the debate was about the the phrase that is repeated 3 times in the article saying that the cultivated potato was originated in Peru, while I think it should say Western Bolivia and Peru, the debate is here and here but I think it's about to be finished. I just had to clarify that. Cheers Teberald (talk) 22:44, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Velella. You have new messages at RA0808's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

New Page Triage engagement strategy released

Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyeswikimedia.org.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:05, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Solihull

Re recent edits about pronunciation 1) I don't understand phonetic notation, but 2) as a child I was brought up in Solihull from 1939 to 1956 during which I encountered dozens or hundreds of local residents at all social levels. Like the other editor my grandparents lived locally from the mid-Victorian period. I have never ever then or since heard any pronunciation other than 'sole' i-hull, (nor have I ever encountered the spelling with the double 'l'). I don't dispute that you have heard both pronunciations, but my feeling is that the short 'o' version has been introduced in relatively recent years. Where this leaves a Wikipedia entry, I'm not quite sure! Flying Stag (talk) 22:51, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Always a difficult subject, as incomers (which was almost all of Solihull in the 1950s) had a variety of pronunciations. My own experience as a school-child in Solihull in the 1950s (which, as always, counts for nothing on Wikipedia - and quite rightly), that school friends from Knowle and Dorridge and Barston Green and Monkspath used the long O whilst those from Shirley, Acocks Green and Olton used the short O. I guess nether is right or wrong. Some might say posh versus local, but since both are in common use, I guess we should reflect that fact. Regards.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:59, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Fascinating! Because I was on the Shirley 'side of the fence'. The posh versus local explanation is tempting but I think not borne out by our joint experiences. Regards. Flying Stag (talk) 11:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

SocialFire AFD

All of the previous Deletion requests for my Article have been declined. The editor has been persistently putting the deletion requests on my Article even if the previous ones have been declined. Each deletion that was declined was done so by different Admins. I also hate the idea that i will be blocked because of the idiotic editor. OwenReeceBaines (talk) 22:45, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The fact that previous deletion proposals have been declined, doesn't mean a thing. If the article topic is not notable as set out in WP guidelines then it will always be at risk of deletion. For what it is worth,having looked at the article, I personally would not vote to keep it. But hey, that's just my personal opinion. Sorry.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:50, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Joshua Topolsky

HG recently reverted [1] on this article. The birth name given, however, is attested by Ref. 1 in the article; this reference appears to be a reliable source... are you happy for me to reinstate the birth name? DWeir (talk) 22:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I am happy with that. It is a pity that the IP edit provided no edit summary or any indication that the change was referenced ! Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:33, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

My Relationship with A2Z Group

I understand and am sorry for the confusion, I stay in the same city as the headquarters of A2Z Group and therefore know this organization very well. I started writing this article about this organization a few months back but lacked online references to major events/landmarks in the companies history. This is when user A2Z Group helped me with links and information. If my contribution continues to be suspect I can place all the information I have in the talk pages for the article and others can verify the information before they add it to the article. I know this would delay the updation of the article a lot but it would ensure only verifiable, unprejudiced information reach the final LIVE version of the article. Please do let me know in case I should provide any information. Willonthemove (talk) 06:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. When somebody sends me a link that tells me that he wants to be wealthy, has a career in Content Management and Web Marketing, it gives me no confidence whatsoever. I strongly suspect a serious conflict of interest here.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Velella. If the question is regarding the notability of the company, give me a day or two and I will collect all possible references about the company that proves its notability. This will also help me collect more material for the Article. And if you have questions about my relationship with the organization I can guarantee I will not directly contribute to the Article but only post all my data on the talk pages. About the content that is already there, each of those references/links will show you its 100% accurate. Do tell me if any particular section needs more corroborative references. Thanks again for your help Velella.Willonthemove (talk) 02:25, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Please review my research on one of A2Z's Business Units - A2Z Infrastructure at the A2Z Group's talk page. I will compile more data around the rest of the Business Units soon. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willonthemove (talk • contribs) 10:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Levanataphobia

Might want to check on Levanataphobia, I think the page creator was allowed to blank that page. You can not blank a page that you created if significant content was added, but I don't think a bot adding reflist would count. Sometimes huggle does not make the distinction. (been there, done that) Cheers! Jim1138 (talk) 22:10, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - but it was actually more complicated than that with a simultaneous creating of Levantaphobia and the potential copyvio from the original page (?) It all makes my brain hurt !. But thanks for the heads up anyway. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:14, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Lawrence v. Texas

I think you were a tad unkind to the person (amateur is my guess) who added that bit about the new book about Lawrence v. Texas. I added a note to the person's talk page under yours. That canned note is rather harsh for what this person did, IMHO. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 23:40, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

You may be right. Huggle is an unforgiving master - and when you have been trawling through a ton of racist garbage added to footballer articles (it is Saturday after all), the reflexes get a little jaundiced. But that is no real excuse - thanks for mollifying the message.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:44, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Cenima

I've acted on your WP:AIV report and have indefinitely blocked User:Cenima. I've also done my best to undo the ridiculous page move vandalism and whatnot. Thanks for reporting them. If there's anything I've missed that requires admin tools to fix, feel free to let me know. --Kinu ^t/_c 00:19, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

That looks good. Thanks for taking the necessary action - it defied my capability to unpick what he had created !  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

tb

Hello, Velella. You have new messages at PamD's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

An award for you

Golden Wiki Award Thanks for your recent contributions! 66.87.2.193 (talk) 16:35, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

April Fools day is always a good day for unearned rewards!  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   15:06, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello Velella well I ask you truly Libya maintains Azawad 188.254.230.210 (talk) 16:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry - but that makes no sense to me. Can you explain please ?  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   16:44, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Pea bean

Further to your request at WP:EAR, in case you are having trouble locating the discussion referred to in the deletion summary, it is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants/Archive54#Pea bean. Also, see WP:UNDELETE. SpinningSpark 01:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I will pursue it there. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   08:07, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

ANonymous carl

Why did you deleted my message. Does this mean that you don't want to engage in a polite debate and impose your opinion. I hope not. Please do not consider this as an attack, and come discuss about the article on the discussion page. My name is Oliver, and believe me I was motivated when I gave my contribution. So please, I don't think anyone on wikipedia should have and have to power to automatically and arbitrarily dismiss someones contribution, without even proving that it was wrong, without debating it, without even reading the sources. Thanks, again this is not an attack but an invitation to a polite discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.204.239.254 (talk) 20:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Please read the general Wikipedia guidelines before editing further, especially those about providing meaningful edit summaries - your total of such summaries to date is one in September 2011. All your other edits have no edit summary. Regrettably I did read the references supplied with your edits which was a major factor in my decision to remove the text. Whether on my dying day I will regret wasting the 10 minutes it took to download the Assyrian discretionary only to discover that it helped not one jot, I can only conjecture. And, for the record, what I did any editor could do; this was not abuse of privilege but commonplace common sense - it is a commodity that can be in short supply in the modern world.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:03, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

You see you dismissed the whole assyrian in just 5 seconds. You haven't red it, yet you say it's not relevant. This is unscientific. If you really want to undo everything I did, you should first begin prove I'm wrong, which will be difficult since I am right (I know this is not a good ppoint, but I really think I am right). Common sense is not an excuse, and is a vague concept, not not a very scientifically good point. Wikipedia is not about common sense, because this common sense vary too much from one person to another. Wikipedia is about fact, demonstration, and scientific method. It's in the rules. So before you undo a 5 days long contribution, you should prove how the source are wrong and/or not relevant, which will be hard since those are from institution like the MIT and other prestigious universities : I don't think you can dismiss sources from those institutions. We should all go on the talk page to discuss about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.204.239.254 (talk) 21:12, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I see Anonymous carl message and Velalla one and I think Carl has a point. He is probably new to wikipedia and all he is trying to do is help. There's nothing wrong with bringing a meaningful contribution based on cold hard fact. I actually am an expert of the Assyrian bible and there is actual references to the Oliver's dynasty. I am actually surprised that he Carl knows about it. Best Regard,

 Anthony Scala, LLB, Junioris Calandus University, Michigan  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.204.238.33 (talk) 21:20, 10 April 2012 (UTC) 

(talk page stalker) How curious that your IP is registered to University of Montreal as is the intrepid research of Assyrian lore. Favonian (talk) 21:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Velella. You have new messages at WP:REFUND.
Message added 13:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kierra

Please refer to the edit comment Op47 (talk) 21:36, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

That is not exactly possible as the article has now been deleted. The comment said something along the lines of "lets give it 3 months". Three months to do what? It was patently an invention which a quick glance at the edit history would make clear. I was very unclear why you did not let it die a natural death ?  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:12, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

At the time when you deleted this as a hoax, the text was "Kierra (kee-er-rah) is a given name meaning "powerful young lady". While there was no source for the meaning, it was undoubtedly correct that "Kierra is a given name", given that there is a WP article for Kierra Sheard. You had said on 4 April "(unreferenced stub - a target for speedy deletion unless expanded soon)", I prodded it to allow a week for someone to reference or expand it, it was deprodded by another editor, and then you labelled it a "hoax". Strange. PamD 13:16, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Raw Water

Back in 2004, you added a page about raw water. That article has been expanded a little in the years since, but it is now in rather sorry shape. Do you have any sources on the term that might help me improve the article? As Wikipedia already has articles about water quality, it seems that the raw water page is superfluous.

0xEB36C0 (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree . It seems to have outlived its usefulness. If you want to PROD it, I doubt whether anyone will come to the rescue.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   20:35, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Raw water

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

No references, questionable notability, and advertising

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 0xEB36C0 (talk) 23:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Distance of Newport from London

Hi there. There is a debate running at Talk:Newport in which you might have an interest. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Highest road pass in Wales

Forgive my inexperience in Things Wikipedia.

I refer you to points I have raised in my talk page about the issue of which road is the highest in Wales.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wowbagger1954

I'd be interested in your comments.

Thanks.

--Wowbagger1954 (talk) 20:37, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Water Purification

Hmmm! You are right. Those were USA centric comments. Lowland and upland designations seem to be more world-wide based on early usage in England that spread to the continent and other countries. The terminology is not understood in the U.S. I think that your edit captures the differences and informs the reader. As you can tell, I am a new participant and I am willing to learn. Thank you. Drinkingwaterdoc (talk) 17:31, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Tonga National Tag Team

Sorry Velella I couldnt find anything on these pages how to talk or reply to you.

Just wanted to say thanks for your help and suggestions!!! Im grateful cos Im finding it abit fustrating at the moment trying to do the right thing but the pages are not so friendly sometimes. thanks again Sipooti 22:19, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

You revert it so fast i doubt you even read the changes, I removed one reference per talk page. Do not be so hasty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.178.240.206 (talk) 10:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Exactly how is editing grammar mistakes vandalism?

Editing mistakes wouldn't be. Please see response posted on your talk page before your comment here.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

What is going on with C1793Sc006y? Am I loosing my marbles? :) Jim1138 (talk) 23:03, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I suspect that he/she thought they were doing the right thing but had been let down by their education - it all seems to have stopped now. Let's hope that's how it stays.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Just passing by... Do you realize that different style guides have different rules about possessive constructions? [2] (Although even following Strunk and White, he'd still be wrong with regards to Achilles.) Zagalejo^^^ 01:41, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Found it on MOS:POSS either is OK. It is not, however, a grammatical error as was indicated on C1793Sc006y's edit summaries. Do we need a different version of wp:engvar? Jim1138 (talk) 03:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes you are right. It was the improper use at Achilles that set off my concerns especially as that occurred in the midst of other apostrophe changes. It indicated to me that the changes were being made without consideration and that he/she needed to read the relevant guidance. I will remove some of my warnings to reflect that some at least may have been correct. Having re-read the guidance, I am content that it is more or less OK. I guess part of the issue is the evolution of the language - I still differentiate between "while" and "whilst" but I understand that even the Oxford scholars have abandoned that distinction. One of the penalties of an education in the 1950s!. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   08:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Hythe Town F.C.

I see what you mean about WP:NLIST, but it seems a bit strange to have an article on a football (or any other sport) club which doesn't list the players............? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:50, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Wannarot Sonthichai

Hello Velella, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Wannarot Sonthichai, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Sent to AfD instead. I am not convinced that there is any credible assertion of significance here - it looks just like a promotional advertisment and the fact that almost identical articles have been posted in three other language versions seems to support that view.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   15:03, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Bangor FC

Haven't a clue about how to reply to your message about referencing the players names of Bangor FC other than to say I am a Director of the Club. Pcits (talk) 14:03, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey!

Hello, Velella. You have new messages at Anir1uph's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

revert of my edit to page Llanfairpwllgwyngyll

Hello, could you please provide a more specific reason for reverting my inclusion of a new sound file? To my ear it includes all syllables of the word that was covered by the previous file. All the best. RWyn (talk) 18:37, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

If I did then it was a mistake - it was the original one I thought was wrong as it missed out a syllable. Incidentally there are two occasions where the pronunciation is used in the article. One in the lead sentence and one at about line 52 - I suspect that some comments may be confusing the two , both of which should, of course, be identical.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   18:51, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

No worries. I believe I've now edited the article to contain two instances of the new file. Cheers. RWyn (talk) 22:13, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Diatom algae

Even large Diatom bloom do not cause low DO conditions.

The large Diatom bloom off Peru do not seem to have been photographed ( I searched Google Images) not is there any report of any toxicity or other problem caused by this bloom.

This report http://spg.ucsd.edu/satellite_projects/various_habs/satellite_detection_of_habs.htm says "A harmful phytoplankton bloom dominated by a dinoflagellate Gymnodinium sanguineum in Paracas Bay, Peru in April, 2004 caused estimated economic damage of $28.5 million."

Thus even off Peru, it is Dinoflagellates that are the problem and not Diatoms.

Some Diatom blooms do produce Domoic Acid, but I could find reports of only a few locations where these occur - Coasts of California, Texas, Maine in USA and a few locations off European coasts. This is most likely due to very high bloom resulting in exhaustion of a few of the micro nutrients required. It may be noted that even in the locations the Diatom bloom is not causing other problems - Low DO / Hypoxia, foul odor, etc.

--Bhaskarmv (talk) 06:13, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gatari Air Service

Could you please comment on the new version of the article (here)? It has been completely rewritten, and I believe notability has been shown. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:56, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

User talk:24.4.67.101

An anonymous editor using the 24.4.67.101 IP address has once again blanked out the corresponding user talk page. I noticed in the page's edit history that you undid a prior instance of page blanking, with the explanation "rvt IP talk page contents - pls get a username if you wish to control the contents of your user-page". Following your example, I reverted the most recent instance of page blanking.

However, I'd like clarification on whether or not this is the appropriate action. According to WP:BLANKING, unregistered users are free to delete the contents of their talk pages after having read any and all discussions on the page. Rather than simply restoring the entire page, should the page simply be archived?

There was another instance when the user blanked out the page and another editor restored the old warnings to retain history. Since you and User:Bakkster_Man prioritize the preservation of the page's content, I followed suit. Is this the correct course of action? — 173.60.134.88 (talk) 01:32, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Per WP:BLANKING I think it's probably best to allow the user to blank old warnings. Perhaps keeping the current and possibly last month's warnings is beneficial, but no older than that. I was being bold previously, and hadn't checked policy. As the blanking policy mentions, if the user blanks it is taken as acknowledgment of the warning, to me that says warnings and admin reports can be more stern in the future if the user has read the warnings and dismissed them. Bakkster Man (talk) 13:56, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the response. The policy regarding unregistered users is a little murky because the IP address might be shared with others. If an anonymous user blanks out the page, there's no way to be sure that the warnings reached the intended user(s).

I find it difficult to report this user(s) to admins because the destructive edits tend to stop just shy of a ban. This IP address also includes a number of constructive edits interspersed among the destructive edits. Furthermore, due to the minor nature of many of the destructive edits, this IP doesn't get warned for the majority of them (editors simply revert and move on). — 173.60.134.88 (talk) 23:34, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I have been away for a couple of weeks so apologies for not responding earlier. I occasionally restore blanked messages, especially for unregistered editors, where vandalism is unambiguous and in cases where some of this vandalism is being undone by other editors who are clearly not aware of the history. In general BOTs and automated scripts such as Huggle, read the history and are not so easily fooled. Taking WP guidelines in their most general sense, I take the view that almost any reasonable action is acceptable if it helps to improve or maintain the quality of Wikipedia. Identifying persistent vandalism is one such opportunity and if by restoring recent warnings I am helping to alert other editors , then I am content. I also agree with Bakkster Man that in general this should be applied to recent warnings only unless there is a very strong overriding reason for restoring older warnings.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:38, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

As a postscript to all this, I didn't realize before today that there is a policy against exactly this kind of long term pattern of unconstructive edits. WP:DISRUPT explicitly addresses the kind of borderline behavior that I didn't think was actionable. That policy was invoked by Acroterion when applying a ban to that IP yesterday. — 173.60.134.88 (talk) 19:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

User:Bearian/Standards#Notability_of_Rivers

Thank you for the suggesetion. Bearian (talk) 00:30, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Freedom socialist party edit

Hello, Velella! I have recieved your message about my edit. No, I do not have a specifc source saying that the Freedom Socialist Party is far-left, but think about it; do you have a source saying that they are 'left-wing"? The fact that they are a communist party should b enough to categorize their views as far-left. Please respond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.205.160.145 (talk) 13:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

It is not for me to think about it. All Wikipedia asks is for a reliable source for all potentially contentious edits. You didn't provide one. Edit reverted. Simple.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   13:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

.

here source page 80
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:z9f98LGZAzgJ:www.hebron-city.ps/pdfs/achievements%2Bbook2009.pdf+Hebron+population+site:hebron-city.ps/&hl=ar&gl=sa&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiGg1Z_tKDWG8k47e2GDqzDl7gUqB3uwKHIowKkWCEufgt7LJknFYkvKe-6kenBAqQ8T5Dwog7EQ-E3hCWQXrT2we1IxrGJtW1lHsW2ooKuXXF71_gia9drQY-DVa0ZeyQkq7g7&sig=AHIEtbQdWBXl_Yl7FSbJFGQBxPMHYW6dew
the page 80
https://docs.google.com/viewer?pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiGg1Z_tKDWG8k47e2GDqzDl7gUqB3uwKHIowKkWCEufgt7LJknFYkvKe-6kenBAqQ8T5Dwog7EQ-E3hCWQXrT2we1IxrGJtW1lHsW2ooKuXXF71_gia9drQY-DVa0ZeyQkq7g7&q=cache%3Az9f98LGZAzgJ%3Awww.hebron-city.ps%2Fpdfs%2Fachievements%2Bbook2009.pdf%20population%20of%20250%2C000%20site%3Ahebron-city.ps%2F&docid=2a3dfabac239ffc31ae4eefe2485ec68&a=bi&pagenumber=80&w=2000

"Hebron is 45 square kilometers in area and has a population of 250,000, according to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics for the year 2007"

Please feel free to provide the reference in the article. I will however continue to revert unreferenced changes when I see them .  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:33, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

fluorine

I got logged out. TCO and ip are same (see edits a few minutes apart).

Moving the image to a subordinate article. Quite nice image, but just thing is over-stuffed with nice stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.27.249 (talk) 19:32, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Fine. It just looked like a random deletion - so I restored it !  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:34, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

CSD A5

If you're going to tag something for speedy deletion under A5, you really need to include a link to where it's been transwiki'd to. Or at the very least, a sufficient description such that I can find it. WilyD 07:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

it was in Norwegian and another admin did the deed.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:56, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Thunderbird wine

That wasn't a test. What are you talking about? 71.119.193.188 (talk) 18:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Please check out the history - all text re Thunderbird wine was incorporated into Bum wine back in 2007. I see nothing to justify the re-introduction of an article.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Eau

As I said on his page, I didn't track what he was concerned about, so take it as a general comment aimed at no one. I note from your comments that he may be unnecessarily abrasive, and I'll bear that in mind. It doesn't sound as if you are asking me to take this further but let me know if there is an ongoing problem Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:33, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

thanks for the revert

The reuters report confused me. Not Gene Cretz but Chris Stevens was killed in a rocket attack in Benghazi today along with three other US embassy staff members. -- 93.220.113.154 (talk) 09:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Link spamming conspiracy theory books

the link was shared in protocols of zion(film) was completely related, because it has the audiobook and some issues regarding the book and movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.178.164.19 (talk) 09:14, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I have reverted all your edits . They were all promoting publications supporting extreme conspiracy theory views. This is spamming and is likely to end in a ban if continued.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   09:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

VFS as Visa Facilitation Service as full form is not in use anymore

Dear Velella,

One of the full forms provided for "VFS" on the VFS Wikipedia page is "Visa Facilitation Services" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VFS), which is no longer in use. The Company's full name is VFS Global, and there is not full form for the word VFS in it. You may verify the same by visiting the company's present website www.vfsglobal.com

Request you to remove the description of VFS as Visa Facilitation Services, from the VFS wikipedia page(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VFS), as it is not valid any more 220.226.190.98 (talk) 09:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

It links to a properly referenced Wikipedia article so the link remains valid. If the company has closed then the article needs to be updated with referenced information but the link on the disambiguation page would still remain valid. Even if the company itself does not use VFS in its corporate branding, It is not unreasonable that people would search on VFS when looking for VFS.Global. Sorry.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   09:29, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

ICOC

Yes, I was in the process of making an edit and didnt realise another editor was undoing my edits right behind me. He insists on putting up edits with no links to WP:V links. I have asked him to provide them on the Talk page and he claims he does not need to. They are extreme in nature claims of "brainwashing" etc... and therefore I would think the burden of evidence rests with him proving their verifiability. What would you suggest?JamieBrown2011 (talk) 11:43, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

You may very well be correct, I have neither knowledge nor experience of the organisation. My reversion of your edit was because you appeared to be excising a large amount of material which appeared to be referenced and providing no edit summary to explain your action. Please use edit summaries for all edits and continue the good work.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:49, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks. JamieBrown2011 (talk) 12:02, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Trend Following

Velella. I added a link on the Trend Following page which I believe highly relevant. If you take a look at the current links on that page, almost all of them are to sites which add no real information. The current links are mostly to people who want to sell you things. They sell trading systems, courses etc, but provide little to no real information. Clearly they are spam. The site I linked to is, in my opinion, a more professional site of higher standards. It has informative articles about detailed trend following strategies and it has regular updates of the industry as such. It adds informative value without trying to sell nonsense. Deleting this link and keeping the obvious spam makes no sense to me. I'm happy to hear your thoughts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.105.202.41 (talk) 11:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree that few if any add any value; which includes the link you added - and yes, I did look at the site. I have already removed several of the links and if I have time I will probably remove the rest. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:23, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Not a test

My edit on Battlefield Earth (film) was not a test. If you had looked at the change, you would have seen that it was a valid edit, correcting a dead link. Please do not revert edits without checking them thoroughly first. If you are new or confused, it is best not to perform an unjustifiable revert - ask a grownup for assistance first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.209.13.110 (talk) 14:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

No. You relaced a more or less acceptable reference (albeit dead) with a blog references which is deprecated in Wikipedia. Had you replaced it with this I would have been happy to accept it. Yes I confess that I am new; after only 7 years and some 32000 edits I am hardly getting to know the place.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   15:04, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Mainly because of people like you, which thoughtless delete ALL new informations, I prefer not to use my well credited offical account here, and work far less seriously and rarer on wikipedia. And what is more: the number of authors and experts working on wikipedia is also decreasing continously -- responsibility for editing is too unbalanced in the wikipedia work-model. :-( You just have proved it again. 78.94.38.112 (talk) 10:03, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I do delete personal essays and personal opinions that add no value to Wikipedia. To save others the time searching out your edit to Prime number , I reproduce it here in full

Today the idea that 1 is a prime is suggested only by mathematically uneducated people. They make mostly the wrong conclusion: "1 is surely not composite, thus it must be a prime". Even if mathematicians would define 1 as a prime, no gain (deeper insights) can be gotten only many disadvantages arise (force explicit case decision for 1 in very many prime-number related statements). Thus this would be of no help and is discouraged. If mathematicians take a more global view and consider the ring of all integers, then they are pressed to divide these integers into 4 different sets: composite numbers, prime numbers, units and the "annihilator" 0.

. ..and you really think that that was encyclopaedic ?  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   10:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Microscopy

Dear Velella, I added the reference as a help to those interested in microscopy and not as a promotion. All the royalties from Light an dVideo Microscopy go directly to Habitat for Humanity, who is written directly into the contract. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BinaryPhoton (talk • contribs) 14:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

That is neither relevant to Wikipedia nor the point. There are thousands of books, periodicals, DVDs etc. on Microscopy and quoting one in particular smacks very very much of promotion and even conceivably self promotion - especially when it occurs in several articles. Please stop this promotional activity.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:36, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Joel Sparks

I'm not entirely sure what your doing at Wikipedia:Joel Sparks and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Joel Sparks, but you have not successfully listed the article for a deletion discussion. You tag the article, and then explain why it should be deleted at the deletion nomination, it appears you instead copied the nominated article there... Monty₈₄₅ 14:57, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the alert. I have now tagged my inadvertent creation it as an administrative speedy and will go back and see if I can reset the AfD that was intended. It is more difficult than might seem since it is a non-notable article created in the wrong namespace.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   17:06, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I would just MFD it, as that is the catchall venue. Monty₈₄₅ 17:17, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Now fully resolved  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   09:36, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

82.33.215.26

I think it would just be better if it was blocked. Look through the log, it's all been vandalism vandalism vandalism since I created an account at the start of October. CHCSPrefect (talk) 11:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Timon of Athens

I am PhD student in English Literature, and the article for the early 17th century play Timon of Athens is incorrect. The play was written collaboratively by William Shakespeare and Thomas Middleton--not by Shakespeare alone. The source for this is Gary Taylor and John Lavignino's Thomas Middleton: The Collected Works. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.186.145.131 (talk) 19:15, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Provide a reputable source and I will re-examine. My understanding is that some scholarship believes that Middleton "had a hand" in writing three of plays credited to Shakespeare, not that the plays were written collaboratively. It is lso worth bearing in mind that this one scholar's view. Wikipedia tries to be neutral and provide both sides to any argument  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:20, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

New sources for sewage treatment article

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sewage_treatment&oldid=519259003

Please verify: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sewage_treatment&oldid=519259003#cite_note-17 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sewage_treatment&oldid=519259003#cite_note-18

Bluthng (talk) 21:20, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I note that the edit is already reverted. However, I will reply to try and help. The two excellent references both relate to surface water intended for drinking water supply. The use of UV in such circumstances, especially for reducing concentration of Cryptosporidium is well documented. However, neither reference refers to treating sewage effluent and hence neither are appropriate in the article on Sewage Treatment. It would be great if you were a frequent and knowledgeable contributor to Wikipedia but you must put aside your day-job and your employers interests and contribute as part of the Wikipedia community. If your employer's company is a good one and is contributing to the development of Canadian infrastructure, then other uninvolved editors will pick up on that in time and provide a balanced and unbiased input. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:48, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cors Bodeilio National Nature Reserve, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:40, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

"poor-quality"

What exactly do you mean by this? -- Another n00b (talk) 19:37, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

BLP violations

Just a tiny suggestion - when there's an IP user repeatedly adding such claims on the basis of blogs, don't give them a friendly level 1 warning with an invitation to find sources for their claims, because there aren't any sources to be found for such sick allegations. Blogs etc are utterly unreliable for such purposes. Remove any such claims on sight (including from your own talk page) and find an admin to delete them from the page history using Wikipedia:Requests for revision deletion#How to request Revision Deletion. Thanks, Bencherlite^Talk 17:56, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note and I share your antipathy towards the material being posted. However, simply being salacious is not (perhaps regrettably) an offence on Wikipedia - only being salacious without a robust source is deprecated. Not being familiar with any of the history of this particular scandal but seeing the need to urgently revert the edit, I challenged the IP to produce a source. I didn't see the edit on my talk page as I was only using Huggle for a couple of minutes between jobs, but thanks for removing it in my absence.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:27, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Poorly Cited Information

this issue has been resolved ...thank you anyway — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajaleone (talk • contribs) 21:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

"Snowed on" thanks from HopsonRoad

Ah, blissful ignorance on my part! No offense taken. Thanks for the clarifying note! Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 03:28, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Please don't warn if you didn't revert

You warned 94.224.139.175 about his edit to Hip flask, but you didn't revert it - I did. Now he has two warnings. Philip Trueman (talk) 13:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I suspect an edit conflict. In Huggle I always revert first and then warn, never the reverse. I suspect that your reversion got in ahead of mine but my warning got in ahead of yours - it does happen, more often than it ought. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   13:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

My change to Raymond Arrieta

The changes I made are not based on personal opinions, but on what the characters are meant to be. If you actually watch any of his shows, you will notice that the character "Trompetilla" is actually INTENDED to be a mediocre clown, and rarely does his tricks the right way, because it is intended to poke fun at clowns, and not act as an actual clown wound.

"El Primo" serves the same purpose, as he makes poor comedy ON PURPOSE.

Also "Florencio" is an openly gay character — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.45.65.171 (talk) 21:27, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

No. That is your opinion. Unless you have a reputable source which substantiates your comments, then it remains a personal opinion and has no place in Wikipedia. However, it would have helped me and other editors gauge the worth of your edits if you had provided an edit summary. To date none of your edits have an edit summary.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

My change to Petrit Selimi

I work for the aforementioned person and just wanted to add more bio info. What kind of source one needs? His Twitter feed? Facebook? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.99.20.138 (talk) 22:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

You raise a number of issues. Firstly with regard to sources. Wikipedia requires that any potentially contentious information , especially about people, is well sourced from secondary independent sources. Regrettably neither Twitter nor Facebook are considered reliable sources. Please do read up the Wikipedia guidelines which should help. The second issue is your self declared involvement with the person as an employee. This is regarded as as conflict of interest in Wikipedia. It would probably be best for all concerned if you were to register a user name and make a clear statement on your user page that you are an employee of Petrit Semi. In these circumstances, it is prudent to place suggested content on the discussion page and leave it to other editors to evaluate the material and either add it to the article or not. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   10:58, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

page up for deletion - what to do next?

Hello, Velella,

Thank you for the very kind greeting. I wanted to inquire. Now I will try to rewrite the article about the company Synergium, according to all the rules and recommendations I find. Now the question is, whether I should rewrite it in the same page and what happens with it now, since it is held for consideration to delete?

Thank you very much for your patience and answers,

You are so kind for contributing to wiki!

Emilija. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emilija Ku (talk • contribs) 11:07, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

I am replying here to keep the conversation in one place. The current version of Synergium has been marked for deletion for several reasons. Most importantly it does not seem to meet the test for notability - it is worth reading these guidelines to see what that means. To demonstrate notability it needs supporting references from reliable third party sources which demonstrate that it is indeed notable and not that it simply exists of sends out press releases. If notability cannot be demonstrated, then I regret that no amount of re-writing will necessarily rescue it from deletion. Secondly, most of the article reads like and an advertisement. Statements such as Translation is done by native speakers that are qualified in a specific field and tested to meet all language quality requirements are not supported by in-line references; probaly cannot be supported by references and should not therefore be included.

A third and more general point is that there are no in-line citations at all. In line citations allows a reader to verify the point being made and provide additional background information. I hope that this helps.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   12:10, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Last edit Perry Mason (TV series)

Hello, Velella. This should provide proof that my edit was correct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Wilcox http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0928207/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.222.210.199 (talk) 23:21, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm..... I believe that my notice invited you to add references; not a suggestion that you provided me with references that I could add. For what it is worth , other Wikipedia articles are not considered to be appropriate references although the other one would probably do. If it helps, the syntax for including a reference is <ref>[ttp://www.imdb.com/name/nm0928207/ Frank Wilcox on Movie Database]</ref>. Please feel free to add it. It would also help enormously if you signed your posts and provided edit summaries. Edit summaries are added to the text box under the main edit box and posts are signed by adding four tildes at the end of a message. Thanks  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   12:53, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Vellella - I see that you removed my link to Oceana Group (the finshing comapny)... I do not see what is wrong with such a link. We are creating a perfectly legitimate page about a company, and we want a link to it.

Don't you have anything better to do?\ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.30.79.194 (talk) 14:29, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to jump in, but a "legitimate" page wouldn't contain personal attacks on a user who was quite rightly reverting it. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:32, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Skamecrazy123. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   15:02, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

AfD

I closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aerobic granulation as part of a WP:NAC under WP:WITHDRAWN. Mkdw^talk 00:28, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: EAT! Vancouver

Hello Velella. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of EAT! Vancouver, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 21:11, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Gone to AfD to see how it fares there.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:33, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Madam, I'm an ex-student of Heritage Institute of Technology and I take responsibilities of all changes made by me. Because these are the updated informations - the list of companies who came for campussing. Kindly grant the modification as all the changes made are true and up to date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.50.66.30 (talk) 11:38, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

My deletion was for several reasons. The most compelling was the lack of references to support the information, but almost equally important was that such lists of companies is wholly un-encyclopaedic. I am sure that you can imagine that were such lists to be included, for Universities such at Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford, Aukland, Sydney etc. etc the list would number many thousands of companies, would be several pages long but would add nothing to the article.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   12:52, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Reply

I explained, I put down that I was removing vandalism(Maybe not the best word for it but considering the storm going on the Lostprophets and Ian Watkins pages I can't be too sure). Various people have edited the page, I undid some but found that there was plenty more that had been missed. For example: One edit names Ian as a former memeber, which hasn't been confirmed. And someone has gone through and added the BBC article as a ref various times with is uneeded

If I've done this wrong, do tell me, I'm still very new to Wikipedia.(Myusernamewaseaten (talk) 11:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC))

Whether by design or accident you actually removed valuable references sourced from the BBC - that is why I reverted your edit. References are very important in Wikipedia as they provide verification. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:07, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Velella, could you offer some advice? The information on the BBC's site from 2007 is now factually incorrect. By removing it and replacing with a more up-to-date source (Yorkshire Post) the new edits are factually correct. However, you've undone them. Your 'approved' wiki page of East Street Arts contains many out-of-date references and pieces of information. The article needs new references and the deletion of old material. Do the old references have to be archived in some way? This is extremely confusing! Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.25.239 (talk) 11:31, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Firstly I have to confess I know nothing about the Lost Prophets - however that is often a good thing in Wikipedia because it avoids intentional bias. Secondly I do agree that the two identical references do seem to have been inserted in a way designed to cause offence . However, the reference is genuine and does seem appropriate to be mentioned somewhere in this article or the article on Ian Watkins. I note that it is covered there and so I am content that it needs not be mentioned again here. What confused me was the edit summary which said 'I've gone through the article and attempted to remove all the vandalism. If I've missed any, let me know whilst to an uninvolved editor it looked as though you were removing valid material. Apologies if my edits caused confusion. The later edit by Bencherlie, when he said in his edit summary remove Watkins charges, inappropriate for the lead of the article and gives the allegations undue weight - was much clearer in the reason for the edit. As for East Street Arts - I certainly haven't approved it. I certainly reverted a whole swarm of unreferenced changes with no edit summaries but the article is still in a poor state. Again I know nothing about East Street Arts I was just trying to maintain quality standards applying Wikipedia rules and guidelines.Sorry to have made your intro in Wikipedia more difficult than it might have been - it wasn't my intention ! Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:49, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Superstar

I am the one who tried to edit the Superstar page. I don't know what you found less than neutral but I was trying to change the page as it was like a month ago. Some things were removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Westernassisin (talk • contribs) 15:16, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

I reverted an IP edit which read Britney Spears - is regarded as one of the hottest and most talented superstars.. I don't know whether you are indeed that IP or what the history of that edit was, but it is undoubtedly WP:POV and doesn't belong in Wikipedia unless you can find reliable sources to verify that statement.

RE: Highdown Hill Ferring Sussex I did reference the addition to the family history, perhaps it did not compute. I am not very geeky in this respect. The addition I made came from family oral history. As an Archaeologist I see oral history to be an important source, but also understand it must be backed up where possible. Henry James Hoare's participation in the history of the Saxon grave site is known among the family members, and I got this version from his youngest son, Christian Maurice, my late father. Of course, the landowner Mr. Henty took the kudos. An undergardener like Grandpa Henry James would be a nonentity in those days, and would have have had as a reward , at the most, a free pint at the Henty Arms in the village! 86.19.248.236 (talk) 23:15, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

I understand the reason for your addition. However Wikipedia is unable to publish material based solely on oral traditions and information passed down through families. Only that which is verifiable by reputable published sources is acceptable. Whilst I have sympathy with your view, regrettably what you know to be true cannot be sustained in Wikipedia unless or until it is published by a reputable source. In this context a self-published family history also would not be adequate as a source  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:23, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Matore

Waow, this is so weird. I was just reading the article Lajja and then saw your message about "my edit" to Matore, but actually I've never heard of it before you pointed. I use a shared-Internet, may that cause an IP-conflict or something like that? 91.52.196.91 (talk) 00:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

That is one of the benefits of registering with a user name - you don't get warnings intended for others!.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:19, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Stars in fiction

The phrases (meta) and (myth) in brackets looked as if they were introduced by an editor who does not understand wikilinks, so I decided to fix them. Later I've understood their function and started reverting my edits deleting them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.184.79.193 (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

san paolo edit

I was simply correcting the information on San Paolo's size ranking. It links to a page that confirms that it is the 8th largest city, not the 7th. See for yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.204.139.243 (talk) 17:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

What exactly should I see for myself? You changed a number from 8 to 7. You provided no reference or source to justify the change. You provided no edit summary to explain the change. That looks more like vandalism than responsible editing to me.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:26, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Homonym

User talk pages are not intended for long explanations of the particular merit of one argument verus another - the article talk pages are there for that purpose. In this case your change was without any edit summary or any reference. Hence the revert.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   00:00, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Llanelli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Jacobs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:04, 21 December 2012 (UTC)