User talk:bender235/2018 archive

Disambiguation link notification for January 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Clarence Esser, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Madison Central High School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Tom Brady and WP:PEACOCK

I will comment that your summary "Less WP:PEACOCK" on Brady's article, cracked me up. Thanks for the irony. I currently reside in Massachusetts, so that subject, this week, has shades of Canute and the Sea.

However, I will bring to your attention Supermodel, and the canonical 1st picture in that article. Regards, Tarl N. (discuss) 00:35, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Hm, I see that now. But still, I find terms like "supermodel" or "star quarterback" a bit too much puffery. --bender235 (talk) 16:50, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Bender the Bot breaking some FindAGrave links

Bender the Bot is breaking some Find-a-Grave links. For example, here. It seems that if the original link had a "&ref=acom" at the end, the bot leaves it but this breaks the link and yields a "404" error. Tewapack (talk) 20:41, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I'll see what I can do. Thanks for letting me know. --bender235 (talk) 00:12, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Paramus Catholic

hey man, I see you keep changing the high school name for Jabrill Peppers. Where do you see the official name of the school being "Catholic High School" as opposed to "Paramus Catholic?" Edday1051 (talk) 22:01, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

This case is no different than Miami (FL) Central, or Midland (TX) Lee, or thousands of others. The school bears the name of the city its located in its name, but we still separate by our common naming scheme. --bender235 (talk) 22:22, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

you think those are the same thing? Is there another "Central" high school in Miami? They are commonly referred to as the "Central Rockets" according to the page, so it is appropriate to just use "Central", although I think "Miami Central" is even more appropriate. As for Midland Lee, it's commonly known as "Midland Lee," but it's official name is Robert E. Lee High School, so it makes sense to use "Lee" as the high school name, although using "Midland Lee" would be appropriate as well. Using "Paramus (NJ) Catholic" makes it sound like the school name is "Catholic High School," which is not at all what the name of the school is. The official name of the school is "Paramus Catholic High School" and should be noted as such. I had this same discussion with another user and I explained that "Paramus (NJ) Paramus Catholic" is the correct version under the standard naming scheme, but putting "Paramus" twice is superfluous, so using "Paramus Catholic (NJ)" makes the most sense. Edday1051 (talk) 00:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

No, it does not because given our naming scheme "Paramus Catholic (NJ)" makes it look like either "Paramus Catholic" is the name of the city, or the city name where the school is located is missing. As for additional examples of our naming scheme, how about Miami (FL) Northwestern or Louisville (KY) Male. As you can see from each school building's front, the city name is included in the school name, yet by our naming scheme at separate them by the state indicator. --bender235 (talk) 02:52, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

who thinks a city is named "Paramus Catholic?" LOL. Again, your examples make no sense since Northwestern and Male are the actual names of the school. "Catholic" just means it's a Roman Catholic school. In America, no school is named "Catholic." Some Roman Catholic schools are named after saints like St. Mary's or St. Josephs, but no Catholic school would ever be just called "Catholic" High School. That makes no sense. When a school has "Catholic" as part of the name, it is always an extension of the official name like "Bergen Catholic" or in this case "Paramus Catholic." Again under the standard template, the correct version would be "Paramus (NJ) Paramus Catholic," but as I've already said, using Paramus twice is superfluous. I personally don't like the three name template as it just creates confusion for those that aren't aware the way the template is presented(city/state/school name). It really should just be (official high school name/(state)). Edday1051 (talk) 04:14, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

"Paramus Catholic" is their actual name. The same way "Miami Northwestern" is official "Miami Northwestern", and are the other schools I named. End of story. --bender235 (talk) 04:41, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

um yeah thanks for proving my point. The official name is "Paramus Catholic," not "Catholic high school." Miami Northwestern is commonly called "Northwestern," while nobody refers to Bergen Catholic as "Catholic." I see where the confusion is. You seemed to have this idea that "Catholic" is comparable to "Northwestern" or "Male." And I can assure you they are not comparable. Edday1051 (talk) 05:57, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Miami Northwestern

Louisville Male

I don't know where you have that "commonly called" nonsense from, but as you can see (and as I mentioned earlier) it is written on each school's main entrace, "Miami Northwestern" is officially "Miami Northwestern", and "Louisville Male" is officially "Louisville Male". Exactly the same way "Paramus Catholic" is "Paramus Catholic." Still we don't write "Miami Northwestern (FL)", or "Louisville Male (KY)", and we won't write "Paramus Catholic (NJ)". --bender235 (talk) 14:07, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Miami Northwestern is a big time high school football program and it is commonly known as "Northwestern." You think the students there go around telling people they go to Miami Northwestern? No they call it "Northwestern." As a matter of fact, we should change it to "Miami Northwestern" and "Louisville Male" since that is the official name. Again, you must not be from America if you think "Catholic" is comparable to "Northwestern" or "Male." You arguing this with me is comical. Edday1051 (talk) 16:20, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

You are from Germany? No wonder you don't understand this. "Northwestern" is the actual name to describe the area of Miami that the school is located, so it makes sense that it is commonly referred to as "Northwestern." Calling it by the full name of "Miami Northwestern" is like German people referring to Germany as the "Federal Republic of Germany." Germans simply refer to Germany as "Germany" or "Deutschland." Oppositely, as I've already explained, nobody refers to "Bergen Catholic" or "Paramus Catholic" as "Catholic High School." Catholic just means it is a Roman Catholic school and "Catholic" would never be used by itself to describe the school. If you simply said you are a student at "Catholic," people would be like do you go to Bergen Catholic, Hudson Catholic, Paramus Catholic? Edday1051 (talk) 16:32, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Again, and this is my final comment on this: we stick with our naming scheme. Miami University is "Miami (OH)" in our scheme, not "Miami (OH) Miami", even though the complete and official school name is "Miami University," and no one just refers to it as just "University". In that same vein, "Long Beach Poly" is "Long Beach (CA) Poly" in our scheme, not "Long Beach (CA) Long Beach Poly" or "Long Beach Poly (CA)". Also, if you are in Miami then say "I'm at Northwestern" makes sense, but anywhere else it does not. When Miami Northwestern plays on the road, they are introduced as "Miami Northwestern", not just "Northwestern." --bender235 (talk) 18:17, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

What? So you are on my side then? You just proved all of my points. As I've already stated, I'm totally fine with "Northwestern" or "Poly" and the other examples using the shortened unofficial form in the standard naming scheme, becasue that is what those schools are commonly or colloquially referred to as by students, the general public, or media sources. But it is wholly inappropriate to do so with "Paramus Catholic" or any other school with "Catholic" in the name because nobody refers to "Paramus Catholic" as "Catholic" and it makes no sense to put "Catholic" in the school name of the standard naming scheme. Edday1051 (talk) 19:06, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

there are two options here. You either have it my version which is "Paramus Catholic (NJ)" because that gets rid of the superflous use of Paramus or if you want it your way, then you have to use "Paramus (NJ) Paramus Catholic." Otherwise it looks like the school name is "Catholic High School," which is just plain wrong. Edday1051 (talk) 19:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea how you can interpret my answer as "proving your points." I wrote Long Beach Poly is has it's city name in the school title, yet we write "Long Beach (CA) Poly" instead of "Long Beach Poly (CA)." Same for Paramus Catholic: it's "Paramus (NJ) Catholic", not "Paramus Catholic (NJ)". Anyhow, I'm tired of this discussion, started a thread over at WikiProject National Football League. --bender235 (talk) 20:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

becasue you are arguing about "Poly" and "Northwestern" and other names when I've already made the point that those are fine because those are the colloquial names that are well known to describe those schools. We are in agreement with those names, but that is not what this argument is about. The argument here is about Paramus Catholic and the usage of "Catholic" as the school name, which is just plain wrong and I've explained why it's wrong numerous times already and you have not addressed that. Instead you keep talking about "Northwestern" and "Poly," which I've already explained the distinct different between those and "Catholic." Edday1051 (talk) 20:37, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Bender

Are you Richard Bender, Iowa politics? Rod Halvorson halvorrod@yahoo.com Halvorrod (talk) 07:06, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

LOL, no. --bender235 (talk) 14:32, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Edits with References

Dear Bender235,

I noticed you are a reviewer of different topics and you already approved several edits on many pages on Wikipedia.

Please I need your help as I have edits with references, I want these edits to be reflected on my company's page on Wikipedia, how can I guarantee the edits will be approved by you or other reviewers?

Please feel free to contact me on sfseed3@gmail.com or to write on my Talk Page on Wikipedia.

Thanks in advance

--SFlowerSeed (talk) 13:44, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Which article are we talking about? --bender235 (talk) 14:22, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Frederick A. Douglass High School (Oklahoma) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Frederick A. Douglass High School (Oklahoma). Since you had some involvement with the Frederick A. Douglass High School (Oklahoma) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:45, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Archive URLs

Hi Bender, I can't recall if this was discussed before, when converting to https it shouldn't change the path portion of the URL in an archive URL ie. https://archive.is/20180401/http://example.com

This can break archive URLs if the http://example.com is converted to https because the webarchive has it archived as http. -- GreenC 04:39, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Oh yes, that's true. Did my bot do that somewhere accidentally? --bender235 (talk) 15:00, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Nope! Glad it's ok. Thanks for confirming. -- GreenC 00:13, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Trump–Russia dossier

Hello! Thank you for wanting to improve this article. However, I had to undo your changing of CAPITAL LETTERS to small-caps. Maybe it would look better in small-caps, but the material is inside of quotes - directly quoted from a source - and so we can't edit or change it, it has to stay as it was in the source. Apparently putting the last name in all-caps is the way intelligence documents are written. I'll watch this page, if you want to respond. Thanks, and see you around Wikipedia! --MelanieN (talk) 00:10, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

We had this problem at Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster and settled on {{smallcaps}} (eg. Don't Panic! vs. DON'T PANIC), a stylistic alternative that looks good in a quote. -- GreenC 00:17, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Well, you could propose that at the article talk page if you like. --MelanieN (talk) 00:26, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

BTW it's not correct one can't change material inside direct quotes, particularly something like font style.. see the MOS on direct quotes which allows quite a lot of leeway to make changes such as spelling, clarity, etc.. -- GreenC 02:05, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Really? WP:MOS says "In direct quotations, retain dialectal and archaic spellings, including capitalization (but not archaic glyphs and ligatures, as detailed below)." Anyhow, this kind of change would have to be discussed on the article talk page - rather than here. --MelanieN (talk) 02:36, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

The MOS says nothing that would apply to the use of {{smallcaps}}, contrary to your quote, capitalization is retained. It's purely a matter of style, there is more than one way to display capitalized letters. -- GreenC 06:16, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree with GreenC on this. Small caps, by definition, is still capitalization. It is just written in a way that is friendlier to the eye. --bender235 (talk) 21:31, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

I have never encountered this topic before, so bear with me. What is the purpose of changing the intelligence agency style quotes? That's how they do it, and we're just quoting exactly. Their intention is not to be "friendlier to the eye", which is not a universal Wikipedia or journalistic requirement. On the contrary, it's designed to catch the eye.

Is there some requirement that this be done? If it's not broken, why fix it? It can safely be ignored. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 22:43, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

The purpose is simply readability. You tell me, which one is easier on the eye: THE QUICK BROWN FOX JUMPS OVER THE LAZY DOG or The Quick Brown Fox Jumps Over The Lazy Dog? By our guidelines, caps and smallcaps should be avoided all together, but if I had to decide between the two in terms of readability, I'd clearly choose the latter.

As a general comment, I question the premise that we have to quote from the Steele dossier (or any source) with the absolute identical typesetting. I mean, why stop at capitalization? Why not also mirror the type face? At some point, this is absurd. The point of a quotation is the content, not the image. --bender235 (talk) 23:00, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Using your example, I agree, but this situation is different. It only uses single words (just last names), often in the middle of sentences. Here's an example of one of the allegations:

• "Russians apparently have promised not to use 'kompromat' they hold on TRUMP as leverage, given high levels of voluntary co-operation forthcoming from his team."

That's quite readable, and the capitalization serves its purpose well. It makes it easier for the reader of the dossier to scan the page for relevant names. I don't see how single words are problematic, at least in this instance. This isn't an example of shouting. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 23:31, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Again, repeating my second point: why do we have to have absolutely identical typesetting? The capitalization in the Steele dossier is the author's way of emphasizing names. If we wanted to convey this emphasis (which, to be honest, I don't even know why we would), we could do that just as well with italics. --bender235 (talk) 16:36, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with what we want to accomplish. We don't need to draw attention to the last names, as in the dossier. It's a matter of quoting, without dickering with the quote. One gets the real flavor of the original when it really looks like the original. The MoS doesn't cover this type of situation. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 21:10, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

The button on the user page

That is a very tempting button. Can anyone shut it down just like that? Just wondering Rᴀɴɢᴇᴅ Rᴀɴɢᴇʀ 📧 01:26, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Admins only. --bender235 (talk) 03:11, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Upcoming changes to wikitext parsing

Hello,

There will be some changes to the way wikitext is parsed during the next few weeks. It will affect all namespaces. You can see a list of pages that may display incorrectly at Special:LintErrors. Since most of the easy problems have already been solved at the English Wikipedia, I am specifically contacting tech-savvy editors such as yourself with this one-time message, in the hope that you will be able to investigate the remaining high-priority pages during the next month.

There are approximately 10,000 articles (and many more non-article pages) with high-priority errors. The most important ones are the articles with misnested tags and table problems. Some of these involve templates, such as infoboxes, or the way the template is used in the article. In some cases, the "error" is a minor, unimportant difference in the visual appearance. In other cases, the results are undesirable. You can see a before-and-after comparison of any article by adding ?action=parsermigration-edit to the end of a link, like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Foss?action=parsermigration-edit (which shows a difference in how {{infobox ship}} is parsed).

If you are interested in helping with this project, please see Wikipedia:Linter. There are also some basic instructions (and links to even more information) at https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2018-April/001836.html You can also leave a note at WT:Linter if you have questions.

Thank you for all the good things you do for the English Wikipedia. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Ancestral Puebloans--> Anasazi :-)

Hi there,

I'm very much, shall we say, on the liberal left and of a scientific nature. And I very strongly object to the politicization and political correct-ification of Wikipedia articles, particularly regarding names of Native American peoples (among whom I also identify, actually). In any case, we need to re-hash the issue, and I will bring it up, but I'm not going to spend a lot of time defending it. Your arguments were clearly correct, your opponents' arguments extremely petty and haphazard, and the article is (still) in clear violation of, like, a lot of different things. I suggest we get our ducks in a row on this and deal it a hammer blow. For one thing, there is an excellent case for two different articles. The Anasazi are NOT the only anecestral puebloans, so whether or not the Hopi refer to them as Ancestral Puebloans or not is entirely immaterial. Check out this article, for example: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27859122?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents I did notice that you had at least two people agreeing with your well-reasoned arguments, so we should get together with them and take this as an official complaint to whoever the hell deals with this stuff. Some of your detractors have rather bad track records (Uyvsdi, in particular) and I have had to deal with them before, and I have won. So, basically, we should be able to do this. I'm not very good at the Wiki appeals process though, so help me out here. They also managed to bury your objections by archiving them, which is another obvious censorship move. Thanks for your time.

Cheers, Tran Smyth — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.213.86 (talk) 08:37, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

update: Ah, here we are, taken right from the Wikipedia article on (modern) Pueblo peoples...

"The Pueblo peoples are believed to descend from an admixture of three major cultures that dominated the US Southwest region before European contact:[6] Mogollon Culture, who occupied an area near the Gila Wilderness. Hohokam Culture, the archaeological term for a settlement in the Southwest. Ancestral Puebloans who occupied the Mesa Verde region of the Four Corners area.[7]"

Yeah, so basically, their whole argument was garbage all along. Calling "Ancestral Puebloans" something different from "ancestral Puebloans" is clear WP:B#LLS&H%I#T — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.213.86 (talk) 08:50, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

My opinion on this issue hasn't changed, but I've given up fighting windmills. --bender235 (talk) 15:36, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Look, I understand that. But this isn't windmill fighting. Labels matter, just as the PC holy warriors say they do. There has to be a way to build a consensus on this issue. How many people do we need before you are willing to help press the point again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.216.158.56 (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:23, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Marvin Bagley

You probably shouldn’t have moved his page, his WP:COMMONNAME is “Marvin Bagley III,” with Duke and with the Kings. Rikster2 (talk) 19:10, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Sequential proportional approval voting

An article that you have been involved in editing—Sequential proportional approval voting—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Dhalsim2 (talk) 00:00, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

bell hooks

I reverted your edit to Ain't I a Woman citing WP:LCITEMS. I meant MOS:LCITEMS. --ChiveFungi (talk) 22:51, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Did you read the rule that you're citing? "When such a name is the first word in a sentence, the rule for initial letters in sentences and list items should take precedence, and the first letter of the personal name should be capitalized regardless of personal preference." --bender235 (talk) 23:00, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

The name doesn't appear in a sentence as such. Is a reference a sentence? You could argue that "hooks" should be capitalized, but "bell" unambiguously should not be. --ChiveFungi (talk) 17:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I confused the incident which you were referring to. But in any case, I find it disturbing that we allow people to bend the rules of orthography at their whim. It's one thing to pick your pen name, but a whole different thing dictating people how to capitalize it. What's next? Somebody insists on having his name spelled upside down, and we comply? --bender235 (talk) 18:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Eh, I dunno, it doesn't seem like a big deal to me. Nobody complains about "iPhone" and "eBay". If we can be flexible with brand names, why not with people's names? --ChiveFungi (talk) 22:46, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

July 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Toni Kroos. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:49, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:DTR. You're ridiculous. --bender235 (talk) 17:51, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Falcons Fury Drop Tower @BGT

Hello, I noticed this page was slightly outdated, but have no real inkling on how to update it with history or a closed status. If it's not a big deal, that's fine. Just figured I would toss it out there - The ride suffered some issues back in June, and shut down, it will be closed until further notice according to the website. Currently, no re-launch date of the ride has been provided by the park, just a memo that they will push an official reopening date once it's fixed if you message them about it. Again, no big deal if this is just a minor update, or an unnecessary one, I just don't know how to actually update the page properly, or I'd have done it. SoulPride21 (talk) 19:04, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Rick Gates (political consultant) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rick Gates (political consultant) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Gates (political consultant) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. wumbolo ^^^ 15:09, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Channelview High School for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Channelview High School is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Channelview High School until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Kirbanzo (talk) 01:32, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Tyreek Hill

So I think I confused discussions, I found a similar discussion but it wasn't about exactly this. You are right. I had used that exact argument in the past and I could have sworn it lead to a debate where we decided it was ok to use both. However, there are some examples of players who have both listed (most notably Troy Aikman) but I'm fixing to remove it there so it won't be a problem anymore.--Rockchalk717 23:34, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

I think in general we should follow NFL.com, with player height, weight, position, etc. --bender235 (talk) 23:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Oh I agree 100% on that. I was just trying to stick to what I thought was the consensus lol.--Rockchalk717 23:54, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Gervais School District listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Gervais School District. Since you had some involvement with the Gervais School District redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. dross (c · @) 22:05, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Bender235. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Creating article title "CB Edit"

Hi, i got your ref. from Article Thomas Frey. I`m trying to creat a new article title "CB Edit". i have just one source https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-CB-edit-and-tell-us-how-we-edit-photo-in-picart. I have tried to creat article but it removed. i can`t understand how to creat this one so will you please help me to creat this article ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mayur Bhatt Shiv (talk • contribs) 11:43, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Xmas

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:46, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Merry Christmas to you, too. --bender235 (talk) 16:14, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018

Hello, I'm I love rpgs. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. I love rpgs [please ping me! ] 16:11, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@I love rpgs: First of all, don't template the regulars. And second, what exactly made my contribution "not constructive"? I was adding an external link template that is used in thousands of articles on Wikipedia. --bender235 (talk) 16:14, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

5.9 kiloyear event article

Greetings, I have a question about the article 5.9 kiloyear event and saw that you created it.

Is there really paleoclimatological evidence for a significant climate event 5,900 years ago? While 8.2 kiloyear event and 4.2 kiloyear event are well established, I have some difficulty finding much substantial about a "5.9 kiloyear event" and a number of sources used in the article don't actually refer to 5,900 years ago. As I found out when writing African humid period and noted so in the article, the big dry transition is usually dated to 5,500 years ago if it's given a specific date at all. And when it's linked to a larger event it's the Piora Oscillation. I was just wondering if that little material specific about 5,900 years ago actually meets WP:N. Thanks! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:35, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, the article title was more or less temporary and derived from the time line in Bond event. Feel free to change it, or merge with Piora Oscillation. --bender235 (talk) 17:42, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of 5.9 kiloyear event for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 5.9 kiloyear event is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/5.9 kiloyear event until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:34, 30 December 2018 (UTC)