User talk:Ando228/Archive 2

RE: admin intervention

Thank you for your message on my talk page [1]. You can find the full list of warnings at Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace, with the proper syntax viewable by clicking on the appropriate link. For example, if you click on the link for {{uw-vandalism1}}, the template documentation explains how to use this warning message. If you were to add this to the IP's talk page: {{subst:uw-vandalism1|Camden, New Jersey}} --~~~~, it would look like:

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Camden, New Jersey, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Kralizec! (talk) 12:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Warnings should be issued one at a time, with an escalating level of warning issued if the vandal ignores the previous warning. (So if 64.199.200.2 (talk · contribs) ignores this level one warning from Closedmouth and vandalizes another page, you or anyone else could issue a level two warning such as {{uw-vandalism2}}; if that warning is ignored, a level three warning could be issued, etc.) If an editor continues to vandalize after receiving four properly escalated levels of warnings, you may report them to WP:AIV for blocking.

Please feel free to let me know if you have any other questions or issues. --Kralizec! (talk) 12:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Flawed reasoning

Ando -- The reasoning which informed your recent edit of 1923 Great Kanto earthquake seems flawed in a pretty straightforward way. To me, it appears that the logic in your edit summary doesn't withstand closer scrutiny; and I'm writing here to explain a bit more fully. The edit history follows:

4. (cur) (last) 12:47, 27 June 2008 User:Tenmei (Talk | contribs) (16,820 bytes) (Undid revision 221883184 by Ando228 (talk)insupportable logic in removing legitimate source) (undo)

3. (cur) (last) 14:49, 26 June 2008 User:Ando228 (Talk | contribs) (16,569 bytes) (Pls add some citations from the book in the article before adding to references. Otherwise seems promotional.) (undo)

2. (cur) (last) 13:18, 26 June 2008 User:Tenmei (Talk | contribs) (16,820 bytes) (→References: add ISBNs to Clancey's "Earthquake Nation") (undo)

1. (cur) (last) 06:28, 26 June 2008 User:Buskahegian (Talk | contribs) (16,761 bytes) (→References: added book) (undo)

As you can see above, User:Buskahegian added a citation, then I polished the format, and then you deleted the work of two independent contributors.

I'm taking the time to suggest that you re-think the edit decision you made here; and more broadly, I'd hope to persuade you to re-consider applying a congruent evaluation standard in other instances involving other subjects.

In my view, little enough information is added to Wikipedia with verifiable sources. In that context, there needs to be a higher threshold for removing an accurate, relevant, verifiable reference citation. Of course it would have been better if any sentence whatsoever had been added to the article's text -- no disagreement there; but that shouldn't be enough to encourage you or any other editor to believe that deleting someone else's contribution is somehow better or best.

I myself have often done the same as Buskageian seems to have done -- adding only a slim reference citation without adding anything more. Do you see my point?

With regret, I have to admit that I'm not confident that I've explained myself well enough; but at least this represents what I hope you'll construe as a good first step in a constructive direction.--Tenmei (talk) 13:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Vandal Fitzgerd

Thanks for cleaning up my user and talk pages - I was working my way up through the warnings on his talk page, but Iridescent sensibly didn't wait and blocked him at once. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The New York Times Building‎

Hi, Ando228. I have responded to you on the talk page of The New York Times Building‎. I am sorry that it took so long. I have been sick recently. I just wanted to make sure that you are aware of my response. You do not have to wait for my opinion before taking further action. Feel free to do whatever you believe to be reasonable within Wikipedia guidelines and practices. You may find the Wikipedia:Manual of Style and its subpages useful, especially Wikipedia:Naming conventions, for this and other situations (the subpages are located on the left of the page). Some of the information is of limited use. I think that you are bright enough to figure out what subsections and subpages those are. You can just skip the esoteric stuff, like Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Style guide, unless it is a subject that you have an interest in. Most of the stuff on Wikipedia:Manual of Style and Wikipedia:Naming conventions is good to know, though.

Please do not take the reading suggestions as an insult. You have a fairly high number of edits, and I do not know if you are familiar with this information or not. I am not implying that you lack knowledge. Actually, you seem to be knowledgeable, reasonable and resourceful, which is more than can be said for a lot of people. I am just trying to help. Since I am here sporadically and cannot be counted on at this time to be around to provide assistance or even a second opinion, I thought that pointing out some useful resources on the topic in question would be a good idea.

By the way, it is recommended that you archive your talk page instead of clearing it. However, if there are personal attacks on your own talk page, it is generally considered okay to delete them. Here is some information about archiving the talk pages of both users and articles. I do not know why they chose to combine the subjects. It was probably just to save a little redundancy, but it makes it a bit more confusing, as they switch back and forth between articles and user talk pages. Thanks, Kjkolb (talk) 11:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Owe you a reply (Pajamas)

Hi there, I just realized I owe you a reply to your last two questions on Talk:Pajamas. Yes, by "original," I meant "historically first," and was referring to the loose trousers first worn (and still worn) in South Asia. However, by "traditional," I meant the standard two piece sleeping garment seen, for example, on Dennis the Menace's dad. I realize that in the lead this needs to be clarified. I'm in a bit of a rush right now, but perhaps you can suggest some resolution both for this particular ambiguity and for the larger semantic one that might arise from the use of these terms. Thanks. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

PS Please see the Life magazine images in the footnotes. They are sort of funny in a corny way. The traditional is the one worn by the Brazilian millionaire. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned page

Thanks for the info on the orphaned page, chin chin, I will see if I can link it to other pages.Firio (talk) 19:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

"Maritime Yungas"

If you feel you have anything to add, comments on this matter would be appreciated. • Rabo³ • 20:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Margaret Sanger/GA1

A GAN on Margaret Sanger is on hold to allow time for editors to improve prose, inline citations and presentation and formatting before the review looks at accuracy, POV and coverage. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 22:17, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 8 November 2016 (UTC)