User talk:Dwiakigle

Welcome!

Hello, Dwiakigle, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Prolog 20:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bride

Awesome research on the Bride topic. Thanks for the rewrite and additions. I'm more of a photo guy. The subject needed the research. --Mactographer 19:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes

I note that you have spent some time tagging a series of featured articles, suggesting that they should have infoboxes. Could you please explain? It strikes me that if an article has already passed the highest level of peer review at Wikipedia without an infobox, any request for one should be explained in detail rather than simply by adding a drive-by template. You may be correct that infoboxes might improve one or more of those articles; however, any significant changes to the style or format of a featured article need to be discussed properly. Could you please review your actions? Risker (talk) 21:46, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile, I notice that you have spent some time actually adding "infoboxes" to featured articles, occasionally with some attempt at reasoning (example) but usually without. Please get agreement before adding these widely disliked affairs, especially when the addition is to an article that has demonstrably succeeded without. -- Hoary (talk) 00:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, I removed the infobox you added at Fanny Imlay. As noted above, there's no general agreement that they should be used, and I think it would be productive if you were to post a note on the talk page of these articles first to see if any of the article's editors would prefer to avoid an infobox. In the case of Fanny Imlay, at least two of the article's editors don't feel an infobox adds value, so I reverted your addition. Mike Christie (talk) 01:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same here with Nella Larsen. Please discuss your edits first and use a clearer edit summary. There has been an ANI thread started on you that you may wish to make a statement at. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:55, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why add the "junky"?

In this edit, you add what you choose to call a "junky infobox". Why? If you think it's junk, why add it? If you don't think it's junk, why call it junk? -- Hoary (talk) 02:24, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

You have had several editors now question your addition of infoboxes to articles that are already featured articles. Please stop immediately. A major format change to our top articles should always be discussed on the talk page of the article prior to insertion. Your refusal to stop could be considered disruptive or even tendentious editing. A discussion has been started here. Risker (talk) 02:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also would like you to stop. For a while you were adding 'infobox-needed=yes' parameters; I think that's less than ideal too, as it is subject to debate, but at least it would have the benefit of signalling the debate and allowing others to chip in before the infobox is added. Much of what you've done has been reverted and so is a waste of your time. Please make these changes via discussion. Mike Christie (talk) 02:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add info boxes (at least without discussion) to architectural pages and biographies of which I am one of the primary/principal authors (the 3 you have added so far have been reverted). If the page does not already have one, there is usually a very good reason. Thankyou. Giano (talk) 10:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Books

Well done on creating all those books! Very useful - rst20xx (talk) 20:12, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For adding all these book covers! Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 02:23, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Merrick infobox

Hello, I've undone your edit at Joseph Merrick. If you're desperate to have an infobox on that article, please start a discussion at the talkpage and get consensus first. That the article doesn't have an infobox isn't an oversight. Infoboxes can be very useful, but I'm not sure that this is one of those cases. Thanks, --Beloved Freak 19:41, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the "df=yes" parameter in the death date and birth date templates on articles with European-style dates. Thanks. DrKiernan (talk) 14:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, please use the correct date format. You just added an infobox to Daniel Lambert with the incorrect date format again. DrKiernan (talk) 17:45, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Crean (explorer)

I've taken that infobox off again. Last time it was there it generated more heat than light. See Talk:Tom Crean (explorer). Cheers. William Avery (talk) 15:19, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop adding infoboxes

I've just removed another infobox you've added. Per the posters above, please stop adding these without consensus; infoboxes are useful for articles which are part of a series which has a lot of data fields in common (members of a team, and so on) but there's no policy that "articles need an infobox", nor are they appropriate on most articles. – iridescent 17:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this sentiment, and have just removed the infoboxes (or "sideboxes" as you apparently call them) from three of the FAs I have written. Infoboxes are not mandatory, and many people prefer not to see them in biographical articles. Please cease and desist. María (habla conmigo) 18:00, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding "needs infobox" to the talk page is not really any more helpful. You can discuss at the talk page if you choose, but not do a drive-by add to the talk header. note also that certain types of articles do not use infoboxes. For example, you added "needs infobox" to Talk:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, but per WP:Composers composers don't use them. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for See below. Adding the template because it explains how to appeal.. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Courcelles 10:37, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked you indefinitely for the massive spree you went on this morning adding this needs infobox tag to around 75 talk pages after the warning above from Nikkimaria. This is a fairly massive violation of not hearing what you've been told. Any admin may lift this block if you acknowledge that your actions have been disruptive, and promise that you will not go on such sprees again. Courcelles 10:36, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you're crystal clear; this block is indefinite, as in "of no fixed duration", not infinite. It could very well be over with one reply from you. Courcelles 10:47, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Book:Numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York

Book:Numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Book:Numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Book:Numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Admrboltz (talk) 21:29, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Book:Naruto manga chapters

Book:Naruto manga chapters, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Book:Naruto manga chapters and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Book:Naruto manga chapters during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. JJ98 (Talk) 00:49, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

🐇 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 🐇. Since you had some involvement with the 🐇 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. The ChampionMan 1234 09:48, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

👾 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 👾. Since you had some involvement with the 👾 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Adam9007 (talk) 00:38, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

🏯 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 🏯. Since you had some involvement with the 🏯 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 16:31, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

🏣 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 🏣. Since you had some involvement with the 🏣 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Adam9007 (talk) 02:54, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

🎱 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 🎱. Since you had some involvement with the 🎱 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Adam9007 (talk) 03:53, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

💊 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 💊. Since you had some involvement with the 💊 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Adam9007 (talk) 00:27, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

🎮 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 🎮. Since you had some involvement with the 🎮 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Adam9007 (talk) 00:57, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

🎤 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 🎤. Since you had some involvement with the 🎤 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Adam9007 (talk) 01:27, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

💇 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 💇. Since you had some involvement with the 💇 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Adam9007 (talk) 01:51, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

🍲 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 🍲. Since you had some involvement with the 🍲 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Adam9007 (talk) 02:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

🚢 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 🚢. Since you had some involvement with the 🚢 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 18:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

🏁 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 🏁. Since you had some involvement with the 🏁 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 16:20, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

💻 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 💻. Since you had some involvement with the 💻 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:04, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

💡 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 💡. Since you had some involvement with the 💡 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:38, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

💫 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 💫. Since you had some involvement with the 💫 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Carl Fredrik^talk 11:21, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Chimpabwe

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Chimpabwe, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Thegreatluigi (talk) 15:55, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Book:A Rush of Blood to the Head

The book Book:A Rush of Blood to the Head has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnecessary fork of Book:Coldplay.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, books may be deleted for several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the book to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated book prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes still exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and the miscellany for deletion process allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 01:25, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

🐛 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 🐛. Since you had some involvement with the 🐛 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Plantdrew (talk) 03:27, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"🍜" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 🍜. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 9#🍜 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:46, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"🚇" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 🚇. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 3#🚇 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. TheAwesome Hwyh 15:43, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 🍜

Hello, Dwiakigle,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Hughesdarren, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged an article that you started, 🍜, for deletion, because it is a very short article that doesn't provide readers with enough context to determine who or what the subject is.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hughesdarren}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Hughesdarren (talk) 04:03, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"💨" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect 💨 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 27 § 💨 until a consensus is reached. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 12:11, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"👏" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect 👏 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 13 § 👏 until a consensus is reached. Edward-Woodrow • talk 21:24, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"🔥" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect 🔥 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 17 § 🔥 until a consensus is reached. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:36, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]