User talk:Lizia7

Hi Lizia7,

Welcome to Wikipedia.

I've had a look at a number of edits you made earlier today, especially those where you replaced one word by another. In some cases the replacement word was not really a synonym or had a different shade of meaning, so I've changed those back to the original. I'm happy to discuss individual cases here if you wish. Murray Langton (talk) 14:18, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Like Murray, I've also taken a look at some of your recent edits. Some of your edits de-linked some phrases which appeared as red links. While redlinks seem to have little purpose and can sometimes be annoying, they can also be a useful means to stimulate article creation. This is discussed in the guideline: Wikipedia:Red link. I also noticed you modified the punctuation in a few articles. In English, most common punctuation such as full-stops (periods), commas, question marks, etc, are followed by a space. It is only in SMS messages and Twitter posts that some spaces can be left out to keep the number of characters below the limit. And finally, please take care when adding or removing commas. Doing so can affect the meaning of what is written. For example: removing the comma before the second "and" changed the meaning of "the distinct ways that people living differently classified and represented their experiences, and acted creatively". Astronaut (talk) 20:00, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Ernakulam district (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to English

Executor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Compensation

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Overlinking and italics

Hi Lizia7,

I have reverted your good faith edits on the Willoughby, Lincolnshire page.

Major geographical features that most readers can be expected to understand need not be linked. Also, although wikilinks are in principle good, too many can disturb the visual flow of the text, and if they link to something obvious they can be annoying to readers - please see: WP:OVERLINK. Italics are reserved for specific things - publications, ships, creative works. Italics can also be used for emphasis in specific cases - road names do not fall under these - please see: WP:ITALICS.

One of the best ways to understand how WP articles are structured and get tips in editing is within the Guild of Copy editors, which runs regular copy editing drives. There are project tips pages on "how it's done", and and involvement in the drives will give you access to experienced WP copy editors who can offer advice. Thanks for your interest in editing Wikipedia and I hope you enjoy the experience. Acabashi (talk) 12:08, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Lizia7, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Lizia7! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Doctree (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:17, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Commas and the Manual of Style

Hi, I notice that you have added a number of commas into text. Many of these are fine; but two uses need care. One is in dates: if the date is formatted with the day first, a comma is not used before the year (see MOS:DATEFORMAT). The other is in serial lists, where the Oxford comma is not always appropriate (see MOS:OXFORD). Thanks. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Editing of code snippets; multiple micro-edits

Please do not remove the indentation from computer code fragments, like you recently did at Set domain. That disrupts the formatting and may even change the meaning of the code.

Also, if you make a series of related simple changes to a single article (like at Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities), there is no need to save the article after every single edit (such as wikilinking a word); that puts unnecessary strain on the Wikipedia servers and makes the revision history hard to read for other editors. Normally, you'll want to make all your minor edits in one go, preview the article to check that it looks ok, and then save it. Thanks, Hqb (talk) 20:13, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

British School of Washington (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Dutch and Irish

Fiber optic patch cord (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Receiver

Finnish Coastal Jaegers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to NCO

Homeaid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ventura

Tirana International School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Swimming

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Catholic Sangji College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Administration

Daegu Cyber University (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rehabilitation

Heilbronn University (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Informatics

Kaiserslautern University of Technology (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Computer Sciences

Laval University (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Administrative Science

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:25, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Notes

Would you please stop renaming sections which contain additional references as "Notes". They are not notes. They could perhaps be renamed something like "Further references" or "Further reading". Better might be letting the editors who wrote the articles decide what is the appropriate name. --Epipelagic (talk) 06:05, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

This is becoming quite disruptive. Please stop renaming sections which contain additional references as "Foot notes". They are not foot notes. --Epipelagic (talk) 10:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

BA School of Business and Finance (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Financial Management

Riga Stradiņš University (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rehabilitation

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Biomass to liquid, you may be blocked from editing. Numerous instances of changing section headings, even after clear warnings; in some cases, changes are self-reverted; strange... E8 (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Bottom fishing, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Epipelagic (talk) 02:50, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Mentoring

Hi Lizia. If you are keen on being a long-term contributor and would like some guidance then I suggest you read about the Adopt-a-user program and get a mentor to adopt you for a while. You can also get help from the teahouse. Regards. --Epipelagic (talk) 08:32, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yacharam, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hyderabad (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) 10:36, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Recreation management

The article Recreation management has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is a description of the curriculum for one major at Lock Haven University. Not a notable topic.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:11, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Breath therapy

The article Breath therapy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Some sort of WP:OR essay. Great for a blog, lacks WP:N for Wikipedia

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fiddle Faddle 10:55, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Arctic moss

Hello, Lizia7, and thank you for your contributions!

An article you worked on Arctic moss, appears to be directly copied from http://ephsfoleybiomes.pbworks.com/w/page/9552180/Tundra%20-%201?revision=29002269. Please take a minute to make sure that the text is freely licensed and properly attributed as a reference, otherwise the article may be deleted.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on Arctic moss if necessary. MadmanBot (talk) 13:06, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Breath therapy

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Breath therapy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Fiddle Faddle 09:15, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm McGeddon. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page Metabolic cart, because it seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. McGeddon (talk) 13:08, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Bat noses

I have speedily deleted the article you created on the noseleaf. This is not because of any inherent lack of notability (any type of bodily organ is notable by default); rather, it is because your content was copied almost verbatim from external sources. That's not allowed even when you do cite your sources. You must rewrite the sentences in your own words.

I look forward to reading a better version of an article on the noseleaf; perhaps I'll write one myself if you don't get around to it. DS (talk) 13:00, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Gachon University

Hi, I saw you did some edits to Gachon University this year. I've rewritten the introduction and added some sources. I didn't spend a lot of time as I am a retired editor and doctoral student(I show up now and then). If you and a few others could take a look at it and the issue tags that were added maybe see whether some of the problems have been resolved. I'll leave a message for a few others as well to get a couple sets of eyes on it. It would be nice if the article can be salvaged (I see it was up for deletion at least once). Thanks! Davidpdx (talk) 01:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited OMICS Group, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Conferences and Journals (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) 09:01, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Alzeimer's society o' Alberta & the North West Territories

The usual criterion for inclusion in Wikipedia is explained here. Very basically, we only summarise information that's already published in reliable sources that're independent of the subject. We do this to ensure both that our information is verifiable, and that it can be written neutrally. If you have any questions, please ask. Cheers, WilyD 10:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Redlinks

Hi, I noticed that you removed red wikilinks from several articles stating in the edit summary that they were "dead". These links a not dead, nor should they be removed. The ones I saw concerned the names of editors-in-chief of notable academic journals, who are notable themselves according to WP:ACADEMIC. See WP:REDLINKS for an explanation why such links are necessary and should not be removed. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 13:07, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Journal articles

I notice you've been marking articles on academic journals as unreferenced. Please note that the infobox linkages in many cases implicitly serve as such, though in some cases they will ultimately be replaced with explicit referencing. Most journals are not themselves the subject of extensive writings, but there are various bibliographic and bibliometric records which are useful. WP:WikiProject Academic journals may be of interest. Cheers, LeadSongDog come howl! 20:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Medical Council of Jamaica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Doctors (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, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

DRN request

Your request at the dispute resolution noticeboard has been removed because it was not filed through our listing form accessible via the "Request dispute resolution" button at the top of the DRN page. We require the form to be used so that the listing will be formatted in a particular way so our maintenance bot can handle it and also so that the other participants in the dispute will be notified. Having said that, however, even if you had listed it properly, the request would have been closed immediately because it is also pending at the Neutral Point of View Noticeboard and DRN will not accept requests which are also pending in other forums. If that discussion and the discussion at the article talk page prove fruitless after a week or so, you may consider refiling at DRN or seeking other forms of dispute resolution. Please be sure to carefully read the instructions for any form of dispute resolution (or other noticeboard) you wish to utilize. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:38, 21 February 2014 (UTC) (DRN volunteer and current coordinator)

Talk page edits

Hi, it looks like when you are editing talk pages that you edit old versions or such, because your edits restore archived material from other editors and undo other changes. Please just edit the section where you want to comment and make sure that your edits don't screw up the talk page. --Randykitty (talk) 14:47, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I see you tried to add a comment to Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics twice, here and here. Both times it messed up previous discussions. The first time, another editor undid your edit. The second time, I did. The best way to start a new discussion is to click on the "+" or "Add topic" link at the top of the page. If you wish to add to an existing discussion, the best way is to click on the "edit" link next to the title of the section you want to change.

In any case, please do start- or add to the discussion(s) at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:40, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

These edits to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Open were also undone for similar reasons: [1] and [2]. You are welcome to redo the edits correctly. Your two recent edits to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Academic Journals have been repaired, there is no need to re-post your comment to that page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:59, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

By the way, this munging of talk pages is a bit surprising, as most of your other non-article edits were done correctly. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:07, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Unblock Request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lizia7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

The reason for which I am blocked is simply vague and neglecting my contribution to WP. I considered to clean the OMICS Group page and behind that lies no other minute reason to do my edits there. However, considering my usual and genuine contributions to WP can my user be unblocked? I am sorry but that would ruin my contributions of past 6 months. Please Assume Good Faith and I am simply unaware of other users. Lizia7 (talk) 13:11, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

The reason is not vague at all; you are blocked for abusing multiple accounts, and you will have to address this in any unblock request. I suggest you peruse Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Scholarscentral/Archive first. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:29, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Proposed deletion of Cubelets

The article Cubelets has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Promotional article for a non-notable product. It seems cool, and it's mentioned in a couple of directories of cool stuff to buy, but there's no significant independent coverage.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:51, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Your Message on Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard

CorporateM: You wrote for me on Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. I appreciate your concern and in turn I would like to tell you that both the articles are in fact on the same company. However, and the only point I was putting forward was that I created an article on the Group as a whole (keeping in mind the neutral point of view policy of WP); but there already existed a page on a subsidiary of the Group. So is it fair on WP's part that the Group's page has been redirected to the subsidiary and not vice-versa? Only for making a valid and fair point stand, I am blocked that too for abusing multiple accounts, which I am not even aware of! Well I am not sure WP appreciates my contributions or efforts; this has wasted my contributions of last 7 months! Lizia7 (talk) 08:37, 10 March 2014 (UTC)