User talk:Cinadon36/archive1

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Τζερόνυμο! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 05:15, Thursday, September 28, 2017 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Opinion polling graph

Hi, you were asking about the graph at Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election. I created this graph in numbers, setting the end date of the x-axis as the 1st of the next month so that it displays correctly. I chose the end of the polling period to be the date entered for the x-value. I also created an averages table, taking the average of the last ten results to create a new column and then plotted both of these. Let me know if you have any questions. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 09:44, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutelypuremilk Thank you for your anwser! Which program did you use to generate the graph? Τζερόνυμο (talk) 09:56, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I used Numbers, which is basically Excel but for MacBook users. I'm sure you could do the same in Excel if you prefer. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 10:59, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Absolutelypuremilk for your time. I 'll try it and see what I can do! Τζερόνυμο (talk) 12:36, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your help desk questions

You have a response to both.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:35, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Really impressed

Hi, I am really impressed with the christian persecution complex article, even moreso hearing that english is not you native language. I would be happy to work you on it! Great job, let's see how we can improve it! <3 Sethie (talk) 08:39, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Geia sas!

Hi! Just saw the message you left on my talk page as well as the note you added on Talk:Turkish Cypriots, and had a look at your contributions on Greek Wikipedia. I must say that I had come across some of your contributions when scanning different language editions for sources and marvelled at them. So I just wanted to say congratulations and thank you for your excellent work! I myself am trying to contribute on Cypriot topics both on English and Turkish Wikipedia, and I also observe with concern how common lack of information or misinformation on Cyprus is! I have, for instance, written a good part of the article on the 1974 coup here, expanded the Turkish-language article on Greek Cypriots and recently translated Grigoris Afxentiou to Turkish. As such, I am really pleased to see another user deeply interested in the same topics, and I must say that I am humbled by your prolific contributions :) I am looking forward to possibly collaborating in the future, and if you ever need to consult Turkish-language resources, feel free to drop a message. --GGT (talk) 15:53, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merhaba GGT! Thanks for your kind wording; I am sure you are overemphasizing on my work but thank you anyway. I have to admit, I took a sneak peek at your profile here in en.WP and I grinned when I read that you are being accused of anti-Turkism. Gee….Some people are really allergic to even hearing what the other side says! Well, of course I am walking the same walk in el.WP. Well, I was in need of having access to Turkish media or articles in the past, I am sure I will be in need again in the future! I will let you know and please, if you need anything about Greeks, Greece, in Greek, or whatever, don’t hesitate to ask! I 'd be happy on collaborating as well! But have in mind that my English might not that be that good! (too many spelling and grammar mistakes) It is so pleasant to find like minded people in the “other” community. Makes you think what "other" actually is.Τζερόνυμο (talk) 16:24, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your help desk question

You didn't get a response to "Legally recognized places & notability guideline." I don't know the answer. Would you like to try again?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:46, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Vchimpanzee thank you. Τζερόνυμο (talk) 07:19, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gjon Kastrioti move request

You previously participated in discussions of the title of the Gjon Kastrioti article. The issue is again under discussion here if you care to participate. — AjaxSmack 17:23, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you !

		The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar A new editor on the right path
		You have been a breath of fresh air to Balkan topics and may change my views on some things. Keep it up :) Resnjari (talk) 08:19, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Resnjari!Τζερόνυμο (talk) 09:04, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

If I remember well, you helped me to realize that there are more than Boutaris in WP.--Skylax30 (talk) 07:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and vice versa. Τζερόνυμο (talk) 08:01, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But I thought you were up to more important things than to support certain ethnicities in wp. Something like a non-ethnic revolution, for example. However, I understand that the latter can be postponed for after August, when meltemia start.--Skylax30 (talk) 08:58, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not supporting any ethnicities or other social constructs of the latest centuries, thanks for asking. 1821 was more like a class-struggle rather than a national uprisal as many fairytales suggest. But ended up in increasing the power of a bunch of oligarchs (who were against the revolution) Τζερόνυμο (talk) 09:44, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism

Hi Τζερόνυμο,

I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to watch our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!

And if you're looking for other juicy places to edit, consider adopting a cleanup category or participating in one of our current formal discussions.

Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar 17:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 12:02, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31h for edit-warring after previous warnings. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. User:Ymblanter (talk) 13:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Ymblanter:, I do not get it why I got blocked. Firstly, I have not reverted or undone anything, after a previous warning was issued at 12:02, 26 September 2018. My last edit was at a Talk Page at 10:09, 26 September 2018. My last edit in an article was yesterday. Secondly, I tried to follow the flowchart suggested at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and asked for third opinion. I was patiently waiting for third opinion so I do not understand why I got blocked for edit warring. Please note that the same series of event (edit by Skylax30, reverted by me, reverted by skylax30 and me asking for a third opinion) has happened before for another edit, and I thought it is the civilized and "wikipedian" way to solve disputes. I would appreciate an answer and letting me know what is the appriate flowchart to solve this kind of disputes. Thanks Τζερόνυμο (talk) 14:22, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What I see in the edit history of the article is only you and skylax30 reverting each other, for already quite some time. Whereas none of you overstepped three reverts within any given 24h, this is still edit-warring. I blocked skylax30 for two weeks, since they have been blocked before, but I also blocked you for a shorter period because you have already been warned but not yet blocked. You are welcome to post an unblock request as detailed in the above notice, it will be evaluated by an uninvolved administrator.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:25, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for answering Ymblanter. I will proceed with the unblock request. Τζερόνυμο (talk) 15:02, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Cinadon36 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was blocked edit-warring after previous warnings Ymblanter apparently for edits at Criticism of Christianity. Some counter arguments:

I did not proceed to any edits, after a warning was issued. Please see the time of warning issued at 12:02, 26 September 2018. My last edit was at a Talk Page at 10:09, 26 September 2018
The 3 reverts rule was not breached
I followed the dispute flowchart and after my edit was undone, I tried to resolve the issue on the Talk Page. Since no consensus was reached, I asked for third opinion. Please note the series of events
1. User:Skylax30, adds material [1] to the article. 10:22, 24 September 2018.
2. I undo his edit[2] 12:08, 24 September 2018
3. Skylax30 reverts me (re-inserts the material) [3]
4. I start a discussion in the Talk Page, trying to sort it out [4] at 12:35, 24 September 2018
5. Skylax30 answers at Talk Page [5] 18:11, 24 September 2018
6. I answer back at Talk Page [6] 18:54, 24 September 2018
7. 24hours later, since I did not get an answer, I reverted the specific edit [7] 18:51, 25 September 2018
8. Next day, Skylax30 re-inserted his material [8] at 06:22, 26 September 2018
9. Skylax30 answered at Talk Page [9]
10. I asked for third opinion and resisted from proceeding to another edit in the article.

So, I tried to solve the dispute without edit warring and I was not going to re-remove the material. So the block does not prevent an edit warring. I tried to follow the Dispute-flowchart.

Thank you Τζερόνυμο (talk) 15:02, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

The block duration ran out. That said, this does not look like "following the dispute flowchart" to me, but like edit-warring. Next time maybe start following the flowchart earlier in the process. Huon (talk) 08:30, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Please note that a couple of days earlier, there was another dispute over some other material. Then, I started a discusion in Talk Page, and after a consensus was not reached, I asked for a third opinion[10]. After User:François Robere's contribution [11] the matter was resolved without anyone getting banned.

NOTE: Please read further discussion at ANI. The block has been reverted

WP:ANI discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

NB: I am not an administrator, however I am an independent neutral party. William Harris • (talk) • 10:38, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

William Harris, thank you, but Τζερόνυμο started that discussion himself (and properly posted an ANI notice about it on Ymblanter). I don't think he needs to be told about it. Bishonen | talk 19:36, 28 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]

My apologies Bishonen, this is my first time at WP:ANI and when entering into the EDIT mode there it advised me to place the template, and later I realized how this works. Thanks for your very reasonable comments and actions in this matter - the outcome was what I had in mind for Τζερόνυμο from the beginning. Τζερόνυμο, Wikipedia can become an obsession leading to some behaviours that you might not exhibit in the outside world; please be aware of that. William Harris • (talk) • 21:43, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. "Begin with the End in Mind" - Stephen Covey William Harris • (talk) • 00:00, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

EOKA

Hi. Thanks for your contributions to EOKA. In one of your recent additions of content, you wrote that Grivas tried to impose the ideological character that fit his own worldview. His ideas found a fertile soil because they His ideas have found ground for being compatible with the ideas cultivated by Greek Cypriots through education, Church action, the press, and the political elites. The bolt text is not very clear. Can you check it and make any needed improvement when time permits? Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:56, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ktrimi991! I am so embarrassed! The quote should have been: "Grivas tried to impose the ideological character that fit his own worldview. His ideas found a fertile soil because they were compatible with the ideas cultivated by Greek Cypriots through education, Church action, the press, and the political elites". Thanks for noticing. Τζερόνυμο (talk) 19:07, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting the sentence and for finding great sources. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 19:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New additions to EOKA

Hi Cinadon36. After you finish your additions to EOKA, if you need some help with grammar etc, tell me. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:28, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ktrimi991, can you please have a look at Talk:EOKA#Operation Forward to Victory (phase II, March 1956 to March 1957) Version 2.Cinadon36 (talk) 05:45, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I will look at it later today or tomorrow. Ktrimi991 (talk) 08:24, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dropbox

Hi Cinadon. Can you please send me the link? Thanks. Dr. K. 02:59, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You 've got mail. Cinadon36 (talk) 07:21, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

sevgululudag.blogspot.com

You reverted my edit on the basis that sevgululudag.blogspot.com is not a WP:PRIMARY source. I never claimed that. I said that the edit contained the blog and primary sources. sevgululudag.blogspot.com is a wp:blog whose logo is an icon of cockroaches superimposed on a map of Cyprus. I wouldn't call that a reliable source. I thought you knew that blogs are not reliable sources, let alone blogs with logos featuring cockroaches on a map. I guess I was wrong, since you edit-warred to restore both the blogspot and the primary sources, as well as the WP:OR and POV of that edit. I expect this to stop. If you have something to propose, do it on the talkpage, instead of edit-warring to restore this stuff into the article. Dr. K. 13:59, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. Sevgul Uludag is an awarded journalist, she was awarded for her search on missing persons in Cy (both Tc and Gc). So she is reliable and not primary. At your edit summary, your wrote: "Http://sevgululudag.blogspot.com/2013/02/stories-from-agios-vasilios-shilloura.html not a reliable source. Use of WP:PRIMARY sources, WP:OR etc." I thought that the "WP Primary" was referring to Sevgul. Cheers, Cinadon36 (talk) 14:10, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. As far as the blogspot, I would use caution, even if the author is a journalist. I guess it depends on the claims advanced by that edit. That's why the safest way would be to propose it on talk first. Dr. K. 14:18, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you !

		The Purple Barnstar
		For your perseverance and poise to be cool, calm and collected against great odds. Keep up the good work! Resnjari (talk) 12:08, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Cinadon36 (talk) 12:24, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alexandros Schinas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:09, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry dear bot! :) I ll fix it. Cinadon36 (talk) 09:13, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Please indent your comments at AfD. It would also be better to collapse the list of references I think. It is rather cluttering the AfD at present, and it is usually common to discuss the most significant references in the form of a brief justification as editors can check the article for references themselves. This type of bludgeoning and otherwise making it difficult for editors to navigate the AfD can be considered disruptive. I am focused on some translating work today, so I won't have time to reply to individual arguments at the AfD, but I've seen editors lose their patience ~~pretty quickly~~ eventually with this type of thing at AfD when it is reoccuring so I thought you should be made aware.Seraphim System ^(talk) 18:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I had no idea it was considered rude. Thanks for letting me know! Cinadon36 (talk) 19:47, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

report of edit warring

[12]— Preceding unsigned comment added by Skylax30 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for letting me know! Cinadon36 (talk) 00:11, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I will have to report you again for disruptive editing. You repeatedly deleted well-sourced material without explanation on the point, but invoking some "consensus" and "stability". Consensus means you present your position, we discuss it, if we don't agree we call a mediator, we may modify somethning etc. Consensus does not mean "ask my permission to edit".--Skylax30 (talk) 11:15, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries my friend just ping me so I 'll know the venue.Cinadon36 (talk) 11:29, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, although I dought that a dedicated anarchist would waste his time to support some national myths.--Skylax30 (talk) 15:52, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Never did, never will. Thanks for the "dedicated anarchist" though. :) Cinadon36 (talk) 15:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Exaplanation for revert

I'm curious what trigerred you to perform this revert [[13]]. Just asking because this virtually proved to be a "no-disagreement". Have you read the text (both in article &talkpage)?Alexikoua (talk) 23:57, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alexikoua, Chronia Polla and thanks for asking. I have detected a problem with the first reference. The specific article was not discussing the history of the alb language, it was mentioning a fact/opinion in a sentence, and the rest of it was irrelevant to our discussion. Cinadon36 (talk) 13:02, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Calthinus & Resnjari's edits (which you reverted) had some merrit. No wonder any oppositon was easily conveinced by simply providing the difference. Waht's paradox is that your argument wasn't presented in any discussion however the revert was part of the revert-warring circus.Alexikoua (talk) 14:23, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think I mentioned it somewhere if not, my mistake.Cinadon36 (talk) 14:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok. Καλή Χρόνια! by the way.Alexikoua (talk) 17:03, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx, Χρονια πολλά to you too! Cinadon36 (talk) 11:39, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quote template

Hi Cinadon36. The quote template you used on the talk page of Albania–Greece relations had an error. I removed a link from there to fix it. Have a look and revert my modification if it damages your comment. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:21, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After some more thought I found a way to fix that error without removing the link. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:32, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ktrimi991, you are kind and helpful!Cinadon36 (talk) 17:30, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am sad

that you removed the picture I'd added at Christian persecution complex. It is (opinion) a good example of the sort of propaganda that over the years that has laid the groundwork for the complex. Carptrash (talk) 20:05, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for communicating and I am so sorry for making you feel sad. There was no caption if I recall correctly. Feel free to re-insert the picture with a proper caption.Cinadon36 (talk) 20:18, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it's okay, it's a cold & rainy, sort of a sad day. Since, unless I find a reference, any caption I added about the image and Christian persecution, (with or without the "complex") would just be my opinion. It is either obvious or . . ...too subtle? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 00:24, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year and Schinas peer review

Hi Cinadon, Happy New Year! Thanks again for nominating Alexandros Schinas to PR; it's been reviewed and I went through and did a first round of edits in response to the PR comments, though I didn't edit some of the more controversial stuff. Just wanted to make sure you saw that and of course solicit your input on the changes (especially the expanded lead, as I'm sure that can be "touchy" given it's the lead and I just added details to it, which not everyone may agree with). Thanks as always for your help and cheers! Levivich (talk) 01:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle

Please see and use it for making deletion nominations WP:TWINKLE it appears that you missed several steps while nominating an article for AfD. see WP:AFDHOWTO and do the needful. All this could have been done in 1 click through twinkle. regards.DBig Xrayᗙ 15:26, 9 January 2019 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by DBigXray (talk • contribs) 15:21, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I 'll have to do that. I do not like installing apps but this seems necessary. Thanks for letting me know.@DBigXray: 15:24, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. you can use twinkle for the next time, since you have already made this AfD manually, please complete the steps as listed on WP:AFDHOWTO manually. thanks. --DBig Xrayᗙ 15:26, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Cinadon36. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Cinadon36.
Message added 18:27, 5 February 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I think someone has a bone to pick with you (not me). DannyS712 (talk) 18:27, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh gee! user:Jazz1972 has been waging edit wars in many Cyprus related articles (ie EOKA, Cyprus and Cyprus crisis (1955–64)). He has been reverted by many users and he seems unwilling to make his case at the Talk Page. How does that page (Long term abuse) work anyway? Do I have to answer somewhere? Thanks for letting me know DannyS712. Cinadon36 (talk) 18:55, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Cinadon36: Well WP:LTA says out the requirements, including saying that Names should only be added for the most egregious and well-attested cases. Most users here will have been banned, some on multiple occasions. I'd see if WP:G10 applies, but I wasn't sure, so I thought I should just let you know. *Maybe* ANI if its recreated? --DannyS712 (talk) 19:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI is for certain if this kind of joke goes on, even though I hate going over there. Not a pleasant place. But maybe I should have gone earlier. Cinadon36 (talk) 20:09, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I raised the issue at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Deletion needed. Johnuniq (talk) 02:37, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Johnuniq:. Cinadon36 (talk) 05:52, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of anarchism, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bagdad and Barsa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Ernest Cœurderoy

Hello, Cinadon36,

Thanks for creating Ernest Cœurderoy! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

Please add your references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 21:17, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Nicely done with your edits of History of anarchism and Anarchism in Greece! Absolutely night and day differences from their former versions czar 01:48, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Czar:! Cinadon36 (talk) 05:44, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Cinadon36! You created a thread called What is the surname of Italian authors? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Recent RfC Closure

Archive bot

I added a bot template here that will automatically archive old posts, so it would have handled this automatically, just fyi czar 14:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh,@Czar: I did it manually, I hope that won't distort its actions. Thanks for letting me know.Cinadon36 (talk) 14:13, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

History of Anarchism

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article History of anarchism has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best of luck with the Peer Review.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:05, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Twofingered Typist:, you have done an amazing job! [14] Thanks for everything! Cinadon36 (talk) 21:09, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome. Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:19, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism dummy edit

I fixed it for you (the references there need a lot of cleanup). I'm going to move the long strings of text into "Notes", and coincidentally out of the running wikitext. It should make the article both more usable to anyone trying to fix a reference, and easier to edit. Jarnsax (talk) 08:40, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Jarnsax! The references are in a mess and I was thinking if we could footnote all sources (using {{sfn}}). As for your solution of moving text into notes, it surely will help as the article is now almost 200 KB and gets unreadable. Don't hesitate to delete some parts that are not that notable.Cinadon36 (talk) 08:50, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome.... it's a tricky kind of thing. I'd personally prefer it to use {{harvp}}, though, at least in articles where the references generated by Harvard citations are mixed in with ones created by the normal citation templates. It puts parentheses around the date in the reference list, so that the style matches.... otherwise it just looks 'off', somehow. Jarnsax (talk) 08:57, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not that it matters which way it is, just as long as it's one or the other. If we use Harvard references for everything, and just made it all ldr at the bottom (like, sections for journals, web sources) then it's easy to get all the citation templates out of the wikitext. I've done this before, lol. Jarnsax (talk) 09:01, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok {{ing|Jarnsax)), I 'll stick to the Harvard reference style in this article. Cinadon36 (talk) 09:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As far as nuking anything not that notable...meh. When messing with stuff like rearranging references, I try not to actually change the content at all.... makes it less likely that someone will revert a bunch of work over an oxford comma or crap like that. I meant less using Harvard, in particular (though it looks like what people have been using here) than mixing the default 'no parentheses' of Harvard and the default parentheses of the CS1 template in the same list.... harvp does the same thing as sfn, but adds the parentheses. Jarnsax (talk) 09:32, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]