Jump to content

User talk:LinguistiCaralis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Retired
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --JYolkowski // talk 4 July 2005 20:24 (UTC)

Eighth Doctor Adventure plot synopses

[edit]

Hi, it's ok to make articles about these books, but please don't copy the plots from www.drwhoguide.com as it is a copyright violation. --TimPope 20:50, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nick. I just noticed that your summary at The Ancestor Cell appears to be taken from drwhoguide.com. Did you get permission from Dominique Boies and Cameron Dixon to republish their content on Wikipedia? If not, I'm afraid it's a copyright problem and the page may have to be deleted and re-created. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:01, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The End of the World (Doctor Who)

[edit]

The source for info on guests such as the University ones and the Rex Vok Jax bit comes from where? It's neither in the program nor in Monsters and Villains.--213.18.248.23 07:23, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is, and yes it is! Please check the section in the book marked "Platform One" and/or the Shooting Scripts. (I know it's been a year and a half, but a loose end's a loose end!!) ;) - NP Chilla 22:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Don't do this again. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 22:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be so patronising. - NP Chilla 02:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi Nick! I know that there are some issues with copying stuff from websites, but here's some advice: read Wikipedia:Copyrights, and when you see something interesting on an external website that should go in an article, just take the information, not the exact words. It's easier than it sounds, trust me :). If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me. Thanks.--Sean|Black 22:48, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Name origin"

[edit]

Please don't add in the "Name origin" header to Pokemon articles. Please see WP:PAC/S. --Celestianpower háblame 21:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Buffy eps

[edit]

Just wanted to say that's good work what you're doing with the Buffy episodes. Abaraibar 08:22, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Linking dates

[edit]

Hey, Nick. I noticed that you've been linking a lot of years in the Doctor Who articles. Although you see it all over the place in Wikipedia, I gather from this page that it's generally useful to link dates only when you have a month and date (so people can use date preferences). That's why I'm delinking the dates you've just linked — it's not a vendetta! :) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to be of service. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

[edit]

Hi Nick. Would you consider adding edit summaries to your edits please? It would to make a quick reference to the changes made in page histories and watchlists. Thanks. --Whouk (talk) 15:41, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It just involves placing a short summary of your edit in the "Edit summary" box beneath the main edit box. This description then appears in the page history and in users' watchlists. If you look at the history of this discussion page, you'll see "short summary of edit" next to the entry for my edit adding this message. That the edit summary. See Wikipedia:Edit summary for more detailed information. --Whouk (talk) 15:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject: Doctor Who and the "leave-a-message, continue-a-conversation" things

[edit]

Hey, Nick. I'm happy to try to explain any of Wikipedia's mysteries as far as I understand them, but I'm not entirely sure what specifically you're asking about. Are you asking how the WikiProject and its talk page is supposed to work? Well, I'm no more of an authority than the next guy, but my understanding is that it's all about building consensus and coordinating major changes or developments in the subject (in this case, Doctor Who articles). The project talk page is, I think, supposed to be for discussion of major changes (like the recategorization of episode pages that we did earlier this week, and that I'm going to expand into audios and novels if I ever get around to it), or for raising Wikipedia-related subjects that project members would be interested in or that might require assistance or input from other members. For example, the ever-vexing question of what the page about the 1996 TV movie should be called has been raised again at its talk page; since there are a jillion links to it, I think I'll put a post on the project talk page about it shortly, so other editors can discuss it before anybody makes a change. Similarly, if someone wanted to change something on all the episode pages, it would probably be a good idea to mention it on the project talk page to make sure there are no objections first.

Conversations on the project talk page should be just like conversations on any other Wikipedia talk page. If it concerns the project in general, we'll talk about it there; if it only concerns one page or one editor, it'll go on the talk page associated with that article or user. Don't worry if nobody replies to a post — it might mean that nobody cares strongly one way or the other about a subject, or that nobody's really figured out what to do about it. (In the case of your comment about the Vampire Science stub, it's almost certainly the latter. Personally, I'd like to have articles about the important Doctor Who novels, including VampSci, but I'd have to re-read the book before I felt qualified to expand the stub much beyond its current state. I'm guessing other editors are in the same situation.)

I hope this is some help to you, but if you've got another question (or if I've got the wrong end of the stick on this one) please don't hesitate to ask. And thanks for all your contributions to Doctor Who articles and Wikipedia in general! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Name Origin" again

[edit]

Please don't add in a "Name Origin" header to Pokemon articles. Please see the official style guide when making changes to Pokemon articles. --Celestianpower háblame 16:13, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, sections should be at least two paragraphs long. I've editted the style guide and removed the sebntence about separate headers, it's very confusing. --Celestianpower háblame 16:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russell T. Davies

[edit]

Look- a "T."! : http://www.drwhoguide.com/who_na55.htm  ;-) --TimPope 21:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Imposter

[edit]

Hi, Nick. You're welcome. It looks like the IP responsible (User:194.154.22.36) did some other vandalising at the same time and as a result has been temporarily banned from Wikipedia. --Whouk (talk) 19:26, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Buffy

[edit]

Welcome

[edit]

Hey there, welcome to to the 'WikProBuff'. The Project has been going well but has a long way to go. You can see the progress of the episode guide at Wikipedia:WikiProject Buffy/Episodes. Lataness -- Paxomen 14:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heya, don't kill yourself over synopses at moment because we have permission to use Buffy/Angel synopses from Angelic Slayer as long as we use her wikipedia account when doing so, User:AnGeL X (I can email you the user name and password if you want, my email is paxomen@yahoo.co.uk):
Her Buffy synopses are here:

]

I have already used the Angel synopses, and made both a summary and an extended synopsis for Angel series 1-4. And shall now turn to Buffy.

--Paxomen 18:30, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I'm not quite sure what you mean by "quoting her address". Do you mean that we can use the synopses in their entirity, so long as we cite Angelic Slayer as a source at the bottom of the article? NP Chilla 18:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well as long as we put some references to the Angelic slayer site, and make it clear at various places (e.g. discussion pages for key articles such as 'List of Buffy episodes..'). Also only using the account, User:AnGeL X.
I have now used those synopses to fill in Angel Season 1-4, and Buffy Seasons 1-3. I can complete Buffy Seasons 4-7 tomorrow, so don't worry too much about working on any synopses in Buffy Seasons 4-7 (though go ahead in refining any other Buffyverse Seasons).

Checklist

[edit]

Hiya, just letting some people who regularly work on Buffyverse articles know know there is now a checklist for non-episode articles in place to highlight articles needing work on, and articles coming into completion. It is available at the main project page, since this is where the 'WikiProject Buffy template' on the discussion page of all Buffyverse pages directs people:

It mainly discludes articles since they are dealt with at Wikipedia:WikiProject Buffy/Episodes

Thanks -- AnGeL X 16:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kate Orman

[edit]

I'm not sure whether you were referring to me when you asked why people make jokes at her expense. When I referred to her theory about the number of syllables in the Doctor's name, I didn't mean to be making fun of her — actually, I've got a lot of respect for Orman, who broke a lot of barriers in Doctor Who fandom. I was just riffing on the idea of the Doctor having a ridiculously long name — in case you didn't know, Orman's theory (expressed in a couple novels, usually as some alien culture's myth about the Doctor) is that the Doctor's name has as many syllables as he's had companions, and that when one of his companions leaves him, he adds a syllable to his name in their memory. Which is simultaneously sweet (if viewed as a metaphor) and rather silly (if taken literally).

If other fans make fun of Ms. Orman, I'm not sure why (unless it's common-or-garden sexism). —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:47, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, Nick — I wasn't offended. Just confused, 'cause I hadn't seen the jokes you were referring to, and thought you might have misinterpreted my earlier comment. But I wasn't sure, which is why I posted to your talk page instead of the article's. It wasn't a big deal in any way. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 13:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I actually did post a comment to the talk page there... Debated whether to put it here instead. I could be more specific about an incident I witnessed, but not on Wikipedia where it would stay forever. IMHO, it's sexism and insecurity over her talent. Some of the dudes making bad jokes at her expense would be eaten alive at a) WorldCon, b) Clarion or c) any Xena fan gathering, anywhere, but especially in Northampton, Massachusetts grin. Noirdame 11:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aspergian Wikipedians

[edit]

Category:Aspergian Wikipedians which you have included on your user page has been proposed for deletion you can comment at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#Category:Wikipedians by mental condition. The is also a proposal to create an association to meet the needs of users with mental health conditions. --Salix alba (talk) 18:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buffy the Vampire Slayer under peer review

[edit]

As a Wikipedian who contributes to Buffy-related articles, you maybe interested to know that Buffy the Vampire Slayer is currently under peer review at Peer review/Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Feedback about the article at the forum, on how it might be improved upon is hugely appreciated. After successful improvements to the article, in the near future it may be submitted as a candidate for a featured article. Thanks. -- Paxomen 00:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article candidate review: Buffy article

[edit]

Hi

Just letting WikiProject Buffyverse members know that the article 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' has recently been nominated as a candidate to become a featured article. Should it become a featured article, it will be possible for the article to appear on the Wikipedia main page on March 10th 2007, the 10th anniversary of Buffy (the premiere, "Welcome to the Hellmouth" aired March 10th 1997).

Any feedback you can offer to improve the article and/or to either object or support the nomination, would be wonderful. Thanks -- Paxomen 18:02, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AWB

[edit]

Hey, you should consider using WP:AWB for your edits to Pokémon page categories. It's a nice program for doing edits like you're doing! --Lord Deskana (swiftmend!) 20:51, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'd wish you'd stop and read this before you continue! I don't want all your edits to be reverted, but several of us at the Pokémon Collaborative Project have been looking for alternatives to sorting Pokémon by stage. --Brandon Dilbeck 22:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I responded to your question on my talk page in case you aren't watching it. --Brandon Dilbeck 23:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinking Pokémon species

[edit]

I don't think it's a bad idea to wikilink the species types in each of the Pokémon articles, but I wanted to make sure that you're disambiguating the links when necessary. For instance, Weedle is the Hairy Bug Pokémon, but in linking Bug, you linked to the Bug (disambiguation) page. I know it's ugly to have to check every time... --Brandon Dilbeck 16:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roll Call

[edit]

Could I please ask - why bother with a roll call? it's a boon to have many members on a Wikiproject, and what's the point of culling lots of members from a project if none of the members are on at a single point? That's what Wikipedia's all about!! The more the merrier, surely? ;) - NP Chilla 21:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All valid points. We all want to see as many people contributing as much help as possible. However I would like to see the WikiProject Buffyverse to be as effective as possible. Many people who have signed up as members have never made a single edit to a Buffy article. Even more have made less than 10 edits.
I will have to think carefully about how I message those who are not editing Buffy articles, but if done well, it may encourage them to return to the fold and make some improvements to our articles, or else to begin proper editing for the first time. However I'm sure many people who have signed up will no longer be interested.
Having a bulky list of many people who have little interest in doing any editing maybe preventing collaboration. I think that a smaller more accurate list which included people's special interests could be useful for people working together as a group to make improvements to Buffy articles.
IMO part of the job of the project should be to keep morale up so that the members are motivated, interested, and engaged with the Buffyverse articles. IMO it does not help build morale having a big list of members but most of which are unwilling to ever engage in any discussion or support of the Project and its goals. If the list contains fewer members one would expect a lower response if they try to engage in discussion or collaboration. For me personally I find it quite disappointing when I put in a lot of effort to get the Buffy article featured, but no one was willing to even take the time to write one sentence to 'Support' my nomination to have it on the front page on March 10 (10 years exactaly after Buffy first aired). If our project had had a smaller list then it wouldn't have been such a downer.
I suspect that having a smaller but more accuarate list may encourage a close-knit group that would support each other better. Therefore I would be pleased if the Roll Call resulted in a decreased number of members but actually increased the discussion, and collaboration regarding Buffyverse articles, and therfore went a small way to making our articles better than they otherwise would have been.
The WikiProject Star Wars (which uses Roll Calls every so often) is very well organised and has created many featured articles and even more good articles. I would hope that our project could do more to improve the quality of our articles. I know that Roll Calls are not necessarily the only reason that the Star Wars Project has made many good articles, but even so I believe it has helped.
--Paxomen 22:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I messed up your post to the Pax Man

[edit]

So sorry (i'm really new to Wiki and was not to mess any pages, the Buffy Chronology, especially).

Some how you're Roll Call and what I posted is in one post (I addendumed "Once More", that's when I saw it).

Grrr Arrgh (means: really, am sorry!)

Michael 12.72.60.45 21:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Michael - we were all beginners once. No harm done!! ;) - NP Chilla 22:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buffy article - Peer Review?

[edit]

I saw a request for comments, ideas, suggestions (rants?) about improving Btvs (entire) article? Wow.

Need a celebrity/captain/general that is god enough to make decisions. (Where's Dave Fury these days?) That Steve Z guy would be good idea to ask also, but he's really got Exec Producing Superboy/Smallville stories. Really good.

Wiki fascinates me, so much worry about copyrights (real evil say dam, er, darn those Kuzas, er, torpedoes and get the out the info for all).

I have no Wiki user name yet, email me if want: michaeljwaltrip@hotmail.com, shoot me, stake me, spam me gently...

Michael 12.72.60.45 21:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've had quite a lot of time to think about this, and I'm impressed by some of your ideas, certainly!
But I was thinking - the best place to put forward these ideas would probably be the Buffy WikiProject - they'd know exactly how to handle these various aspects. Thanks for bringing all of these ideas up, Michael! :) - NP Chilla 10:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Nintendo Page Redesign

[edit]

A new page design is being considered for the WikiProject Nintendo page. A rough draft can be viewed here. Please add all comments and thoughts to the discussion. From the automated, Anibot 22:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Doctor Who newsletter, March 2008

[edit]
The Space-Time Telegraph
The WikiProject Doctor Who newsletter
Issue 1 March 2008
Project News
We have five new participants: Sm9800, Seanor3, T saston, Type 40, Jammy0002.
One editor has left the project: StuartDD.
The Doctor Who portal has expanded to increase the number of selected stories to 33.
Articles of note
New featured articles
None
New featured article candidates
New good articles
Delisted articles
None
Proposals
A proposal for changing the layout of the episode pages is under way here.
A discussion about the formatting of the cast lists in episode pages is under way here.
A discussion to move United Nations Intelligence Taskforce to UNIT is under way here.
News
The Torchwood project has become a task-force under the project's scope.
The Torchwood series 2 finale airs on 4th April, and the 4th series of Doctor Who will start to air on 5th April.

For the Doctor Who project, Sceptre (talk) 19:09, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You have received this letter because you are on the newsletter recipients list. To opt-out, please remove your name.

Twin Dilemma explanation of regeneration

[edit]

"His convulated explanation of how the regenerative process works"? Could we get a quote for this point, please; it sounds hilarious.

I would quote the passage, except, obviously, it's copyrighted; but the gist of it is that, when a Time Lord's body is worn out, or old, or, in the case of one Councillor Verne, not up to the expected beauty standards, "he" can change bodies by releasing great quantities of the hormone lindos, which travels through the body very fast and causes the cells to change. Gallifreyan genetic engineers have worked on this process but it's still pretty uncontrollable: some Time Lords go through their regenerations accumulating age, wisdom, and handsomeness (no word on the female Time Lords, of course...), while others go from being wise old men to brash young idiots.

There follows a drawn-out example of the emotional distress regeneration can cause: a man named Councillor Verne rose in political power solely on the power of his astonishing good looks, but caused a fight in Council resulting in his near-death because of his political ineptitude. (He voted against his own faction on a delicate matter, either because he was asleep during the debate or, some say, because he couldn't read the voting buttons.) When he went to regenerate, he ended up with a body with a face that was merely ordinary and a voice an octave too high for a man, with a sing-song quality that caused everyone who heard him speak to "involuntarily snigger". He forced a regeneration, which resulted in a bent old man body; forced another, and ended up as an amorphous blob; forced another, and became a monster so horrible the Lord President had it killed. (pp 19-21. Saward, Eric. Doctor Who # 103: The Twin Dilemma. 1985: W. H. Allen & Co, London. ISBN 0426201558.)

And this is one of the shorter, less heavy-handed infodumps in the book; other choice bits include the entire history of a type of acid called Mosten acid, Professor Archie Silvest's psychiatric work and his tendency to envision ways to kill his twin sons (as part of a convoluted introduction which boils down to "twin sons, creepy, immature, and very smart"), why cats are in fact the smartest of all Earth creatures and what one particular ginger tom thinks of himself, how Archie Silvest managed to get the husband of the woman he was having an affair with placated, the entire history of Azmael, what differentiates political heroism from the praiseworthy kind, the entire history of civilisation on Titan Three (including the effects of an inorganic poison gas known as Titan Melancholia), a detailed description of Mestor the Magnificent, how a revitalising modulator works and how Ferrail rays were discovered, what space plague was and how it was eradicated, how the inventor of the revitalising modulator and eradicator of the space plague died--and that's just halfway through the book.

Re: Series 1/Series 5

[edit]

There was some discussion in the talk page about this. Basically, it is possible that just the production team will be using the series one designation, but that doesn't necessarily mean that is how it will be known to the public. It's a major change and something that needs some consensus first, and probably a better source (official BBC preferably). magnius (talk) 23:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited The New 52, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages World's Finest and Earth 2 (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) 11:06, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Worlds' Finest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin Maguire (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) 11:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Translation.

[edit]
  • Hi. I'm from Turkish Wikipedia. I want this article to be featured article. I'm going to add a few sentences to the article. But the sentences are in German. Could you translate them to English please?
    • Dieser Tempowechsel gibt ihm Raum, Lauries Charakter und ihre Situation einfühlsam einzuführen und die ein wenig melancholisch erscheinende Jugendliche zur Identifikationsfigur aufzubauen
    • Und leider ist die Exposition bis zum Grusel-Klimax so lang und belanglos, daß einen beim Gemetzel nicht mehr die dämonische Faszination des Bösen erschauern lässt, sondern nur die allzu durchsichtige Spekulation verärgert, das genüssliche Auskosten von Teenager-Sex und einer Blutorgie.
  • Thanks... Gökçe Yörük (talk) 23:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments in some recent Edit Summary lines

[edit]

Hi! I did the original cleanup of the The Big Bang Theory paragraph you edited and noticed some of the Edit Summary info you posted might be interpreted by some people as a personal attack:

  • don't put commas before "and"; anyone above the age of 6 should know that
  • just remove the word altogether if it stops people showing off

If you leave out the commentary ("anyone above the age of 6 should know that" and "if it stops people showing off"), you still make your point and it remains a discussion of the edit, not the person making the edit.

Your change was good, BTW (the "and" after the semicolon wasn't working), and I didn't change it. I just don't want you to have to waste your time with a bunch of grief that doesn't do anybody any good. — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 17:36, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Earth-Two, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Al Pratt (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) 11:15, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"that is 100% untrue"

[edit]

The sentence didn't belong there without appropriate sources, so deleting it is fine. Saying it "is 100% untrue," however, is inaccurate and just as unsourced as the sentence itself had been. I know this firsthand from some who were going to use the character. Doczilla STOMP! 10:41, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So why didn't you put a source up then? The sentence went against every official statement from DC editorial (see the Newsarama interview where Dan Didio says that if the right story came along, she'd be brought back). So unless there IS proof that several writers wanted to use her (which there clearly is NOT), then I'm afraid this just sounds like fan speculation. NP Chilla (talk) 12:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We can't use ourselves or personal communications to us as sources.
Last night, your username was nagging at me. It just occurred to me: Unless someone is using a surprisingly similar username, I know you from Twitter, don't I? - @Superherologist Doczilla STOMP! 19:15, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh that's YOU, is it? Fancy that. :) Sorry, I didn't recognise you.
I'll take what you've said on board. Thanks again! NP Chilla (talk) 23:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Modern Family characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dapper Dan (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) 09:05, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

[edit]

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) 13:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Doctor Manhattan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Metron. 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) 09:14, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto (Pokèmon) listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Ditto (Pokèmon). Since you had some involvement with the Ditto (Pokèmon) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:51, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, NP Chilla. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video game companies established in 1889 has been nominated for discussion

[edit]

Category:Video game companies established in 1889, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:39, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, NP Chilla. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, NP Chilla. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Kitzeln" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Kitzeln. Since you had some involvement with the Kitzeln redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 04:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Space Museum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Glyn Jones (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) 06:15, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Satoshi Tajiri

[edit]

Hi! Way back in 2005, you became the first person to add the widely believed but unverified claim that Satoshi Tajiri has Asperger's to his article. Since you didn't cite any sources and I am unable to find a single earlier source for this claim, (closest I can find is a 2001 Wired article in which a woman named Michelle Garcia Winner is quoted as speculating that "Pokémon must have been invented by a team of Japanese engineers with Asperger") I would like to know where you got your information from. Thanks in advance!--2A02:C7F:7094:E800:10FE:30C3:3E35:E010 (talk) 13:10, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I honestly don't recall exactly where - I read it in a British gaming magazine somewhere (admittedly, an unofficial Nintendo magazine) and just put it in without sourcing it. I was brand new to Wikipedia at the time. Sorry I can't be more helpful, you're quite right to remove it for not being verifiable. NP Chilla (talk) 00:51, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Celestial Toymaker for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Celestial Toymaker 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/Celestial Toymaker 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 until the discussion has finished.

Pokelego999 (talk) 20:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LinguistiCaralis&oldid=1172712809"