Jump to content

User talk:Me and/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Mistress

I am puzzled by your "correction" of the formatting of mistress. To me it seemed correct before your edit and incorrect afterward. Mistress is the feminine counterpart of master, and several of the bullet points are particular cases of that. "A woman who owns a slave" is not a separate concept of mistress from a female "master"; rather, that is one special instance of a female "master". Michael Hardy 21:08, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think you're right there. I didn't read the text properly, and assumed it to be a formatting error. My mistake --me_and 21:19, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Copyediting

Does this really belong in the copyediting category? (edit) I am sorry i did not sign. i do not think your user page belongs in the copyedit category. Bigbadbyte July 6, 2005 04:46 (UTC)

Does what really belong in the copyediting category? If you don't tell me, I won't know.
Also, can you please remember to sign your comments on other people's talk pages using --~~~~ (or the signature button at the top of the edit page), as it saves other users' time, is generally the accepted format for Wikipedia, and, if you notice, is mentioned in the template another Wikipedian has placed at the top of your talk page. --me_and 5 July 2005 21:44 (UTC)
What the original guy probably meant was that your User page is listed under Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (among others) because you included the templates for your own reference. That's a bit confusing. --Moritz 5 July 2005 23:25 (UTC)
Ahh. Sorry, I didn't realise it did that. I've removed them. --me_and 6 July 2005 08:28 (UTC)
No problem, thanks for fixing it. --Moritz 6 July 2005 08:57 (UTC)

MindPlay

Commentary added to MindPlay discussion page. Thanks for checking in, as I can see where you're coming from. SpikeJones 03:52, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Poppers article references

Hi Meand,

How does one go about editing the references section on the poppers article. It seems there is no way; very odd.

Many thanks. Straightshooter7 02:50, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Straightshooter,
The Poppers article uses inline citations, which makes the article much more researcher friendly, since it tells the reader where exactly ey can check the given claim. Thus the references are not all in one section, rather they are dotted about the article together with the text that they reference.
The simple explanation is that to create a citation, you place it within <ref></ref> tags after whatever text the citation verifies, and to edit a citation, you need to find the text that it first verifies (the ^ and letter page bookmarks in the references section are your friend here); the citation text will be after this text in the edit box.
For the more complex version, you might want to have a look around Wikipedia:Footnotes, or I've created a fairly brief, albeit not very well written summary at User:Meand/IC. me_and 15:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

More conversations re Poppers

… Thanks for the warning re proper way to handle vandal Hank Wilson. It's new to me how to deal with a vandal. He's so blatant. Scientistdoc 23:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


I appreciate the additional information about Wiki use. Like you I'm too busy to do much with his vandalism. Scientistdoc 09:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


Meand: I just realized I responded to your message on my talk page by posting my response there, instead of here. So here's my response. Sorry about that:

Hi Meand. Having never had experience with images on Wikipedia I took the "easy way out" and probably violated every rule there is (plus my eyes were glazed over just trying to read and make sense of the huge amount of what's written on Wikipedia about images). In my zeal to try to dress up the article, I just kept searching and searching and found an obscure site with the bottles. But I noticed that the same images of the individual bottles are all over the web on what seem to be dozens of sites. So I opted to grab one and use it. I may have screwed up.

I agree with you about Leonardo's "Sphincter Muscles". Though an amazing drawing (as were all his sketches of the human body), it probably didn't belong in the poppers article. I placed it there in an effort to try to dress up the section as well as because I thought it related to the sphincter aspect of the physiological effects of inhalation of nitrites. (Actually, the way you've re-arragned the page is much more visually appealing.)

You're also right about the chemical Properties image. I'd downloaded the book on nitrites and it's a graphic in that book. I cut it from the PDF. I thought about asking for permission, but just didn't do it. (I opted for the instant gratification of trying to beautify the article instead).

The Amyl advert is on at least two sites, one of them a site that Hank Wilson is related to. I thought it might appease him, and also since it was an old advert from 25 years ago, that it might be permissible to use it just because of that.

I understand the need to be strict re copyright. I should have approached this is in a more measured way. I just wanted to dress up the article (I may be exactly the kind of person for whom Wikipedia has created all the rules to keep from violating copyrights!). If you want to remove any of the other images I'd have no objection to that. Thanks for 'keeping us honest'! Munatobe7 16:40, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Meand: I just realized that the nitrite book says that " Limited portions may be reproduced by news media or scientific journals with attribution." Do you think that allows us to use it on Wikipedia? Munatobe7 16:47, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Meand, did you see Peter Cohen's call, on the talk page of the poppers article, for a vote on whether the poppers article has yet achieved NPOV? I notice that you have not yet voted. Munatobe7 17:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Reiss glasses detail.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Reiss glasses detail.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Children's Literature

I thought you might be interested to know that I've assessed and commented on the Fly by Night and Verdigris Deep articles. Aurum ore (talk) 11:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Reversion of Vandalism on Your User Page

I have reverted the unexplained blanking of your user page by an IP, 76.122.10.98 (talk). --Intelligentsium 14:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


Poppers

In light of the your removal of well cited content from the article on poppers without explanation, you appear to be engaged in, I'd like to remind you of the policy on edit warring. Here's a template version. Please keep in mind that article content should be based on substantial coverage in reliable independent sources.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Article. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Freakshownerd (talk) 14:30, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the reminder. However, I believe I provided explanation on your talk page and in the edit summaries of the reversions[1][2]. I'm happy to discuss my reasons for doing so (and indeed I have been discussing my reasons) on your talk page or the article talk page, but I don't think it's correct to claim I provided no explanation.
I have now backed off from making edits and reversions to Poppers, and I'll try and be more careful to avoid the situation in future. --me_and (talk) 22:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Adding tags

Conversation started at User talk:Rich Farmbrough, copying here so at least one place has a full copy of the discussion

I've just spotted an edit SmackBot made[3] which added {{Use dmy dates}} to an article. This doesn't appear to be on the bot's list of tasks, so while I'm not objecting, I'm concerned that it's impossible for another editor to know whether this is SmackBot behaving as desired, or if it's malfunctioning and needs to be shut off. me_and (talk) 11:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes SmackBot does add or remove a very few tags while doing other things - this being the latest. There is always the chance of someone objecting and stopping the bot, there is probably nothing that someone wouldn't object to, if they do I will negotiate with them and if necessary adjust the functionality. Rich Farmbrough, 17:31, 5 September 2010 (UTC).
Can I ask, then, how SmackBot decides to tag things? I'm dubious of the decision in that case, at the least—I find it difficult to see how a bot could determine "close national ties", and at the time of that tagging, yyyy-mm-dd dates considerably outnumbered d mmmm yyyy ones in that article. me_and (talk) 17:53, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I see your concern. Ymd dates are used widely on pages of both dmy and mdy flavour - for accessdates, citation dates and sometimes in tables and quoted text. Personally I don't see this as a conflict, although ymd seems to be more obscure that I would have thought. Do you live in Enfield? Rich Farmbrough, 18:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC).
Right, that makes sense. Thanks for clearing it up!
I am indeed Enfield-based; I moved here a little over a year ago. Why'd you ask?
--me_and (talk) 18:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I used to live in Old Park Avenue, DC was a neighbour. They were doing interesting stuff, I should probably have worked there. Rich Farmbrough, 19:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC).
Ah, cool! I'm just the other side of Enfield Town. Whereabouts are you based now? me_and 17:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm 80 miles up the A1 in Stamford. I guess 33 years in LBE and 15 up here. How time flies. Rich Farmbrough, 17:37, 6 September 2010 (UTC).

Wikipedia:Don't restore removed comments

Please stop harassing me. pschemp | talk 16:42, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Tchaikovsky's polish translations

This page contradicts the information sourced from the author's livejournal thread--Sodabottle (talk) 11:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I've updated the article accordingly. me_and 11:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Michael Spivak edits

hello. you recently removed my addition to michael spivak's article regarding his new book. in the physics notes linked to in the wikipedia article, he clearly states himself in the preface that the notes are part of a larger book being written. amazon.com's page on the book physics for mathematicians, mechanics I states that the book will be released on December 6, 2010. the publish or perish, spivak's publishing company, also lists it as well in its books available listing, although without a date. could you please add this information back to the wikipedia article? if needed, these references could be listed, but i am unfamiliar with the reference guidelines on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.30.27.150 (talk) 05:56, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for finding a source! I've added the information back into the article.
The general rule is that anything that could be challenged needs a source, which I generally interpret to mean anything that's not trivially obvious needs a source. There's a whole raft of guidelines at WP:CITE, but as a general rule just including a note of where you found the information in the article is sufficient. Don't worry too much about formatting; if you can make it look pretty, that's great, but it's more important to have the information there—other editors can come and pretty things up if needs be, but it's much harder for other editors to find sources for information.
Feel free to ask any other questions you have, and thanks again for your help!
—me_and 10:17, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

London Wikimedia Fundraiser

Good evening! This is a friendly message from Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry, inviting you to the London Wikimedia Fundraising party on 19th December 2010, in approximately one week. This party is being held at an artistic London venue with room for approximately 300 people, and is being funded by Ed Saperia, a non-Wikipedian who has a reputation for holding exclusive events all over London. This year, he wants to help Wikipedia, and is subsidising a charity event for us. We're keen to get as many Wikimedians coming as possible, and we already have approximately 200 guests, including members of the press, and some mystery guests! More details can be found at http://ten.wikipedia.org/wiki/London - expect an Eigenharp, a mulled wine hot tub, a free hog roast, a haybale amphitheatre and more. If you're interested in coming - and we'd love to have you - please go to the ten.wikipedia page and follow the link to the Facebook event. Signing up on Facebook will add you to the party guestlist. Entry fee is a heavily subsidised £5 and entry is restricted to over 18s. It promises to be a 10th birthday party to remember! If you have any questions, please email me at chasemewiki at gmail.com.

Hope we'll see you there, (and apologies for the talk page spam) - Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 23:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

The Contribution Team cordially invites you to Imperial College London

All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 16:08, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Internet media type, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IANA (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) 11:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

dcfldd article

Thanks for contributing to this article. I just started it with a snippet creative-commons paste and one of wikipedia's bots marked it as a potential copyright violation.. so it currently has that pending for evaluation/deletion notice. Do you know of any way I can speed up this evaluation process? Swestlake (talk) 19:09, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Content that's licensed under any Creative Commons licence still needs to have some attribution of who created the content; that's the "BY" part in "CC-BY". When you created the article, it didn't seem to have any attribution of where the content came from, so it being marked as a copyright violation is entirely correct.
That said, at my very quick glance, it looks like that has now been cleared up, and there is no current copyright violation there. That's reflected by there being no warning on the article page about a copyright violation.
That said, there are still outstanding questions which may result in the article being deleted (or, more likely, reduced to a brief mention in dd (Unix)). You can see the current discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dcfldd. You can see how the process works at Wikipedia:Guide to deletion. In any case, with a few exceptions (none of which apply here IMO), that discussion will go on for at least seven days (see WP:GD#Closure).
You may also want to read Wikipedia:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
Feel free to ask me any more questions you have about this or anything else, and I hope you continue contributing to Wikipedia, regardless of what happens with this article.
—me_and 19:57, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
I also made it less cleared up the jargon and there's a notice on the top of the page about the article too difficult to read. When the 7 days pass I guess I'll be able to know if the article meets the guidelines -- I would like to know if I'll be getting feedback if the article doesn't stay so I can learn something-- I see inaccuracies with other articles that are definitely far more complex of jargon than the one I posted :)
Swestlake (talk) 22:27, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
The article shouldn't be deleted because it's too difficult for non-technical readers to understand; it'll just be flagged as such until it's cleared up. If the article is deleted now, it will be because dcfldd isn't sufficiently notable to have its own article.
There's no feedback mechanism in the deletion process more than the deletion discussion—you can keep an eye on that to see what people think about the article on the discussion page. If the article is deleted, you'll be able to see why in that discussion.
I think the current problem with dcfldd (aside from whether it's sufficiently notable in its own right) is that it jumps straight into technical detail, without providing an easy-to-understand background. Compare with the dd article: that has more technical information, but also a lot more introductory and background information. In general, technical detail is fine, but it needs to be backed up by less technical background information.
—me_and 10:04, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
I have narrated the changes I made on dcfldd's talk page and made a 'Notable features of the program includes' in it's introductory that sets it aside and different than the dd article. Since it's based off dd but is very comparative to it, is the reason why I discuss a common usage of the tool as well as a comparison of it towards dd. It is very similar in operation but the notable features of it is what sets it very apart from dd which is why I think it deserves it's article. Also nobody is participating in the discussion on it's talk page which I was hoping, unless there's another discussion of this page that I should be heading to? Swestlake (talk) 13:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
For something to have an article, it needs to meet Wikipedia's notability guideline; simply being different to dd is not sufficient for something to be notable.
You're not likely to see much discussion on Talk:Dcfldd, as it's a small article receiving little attention. I've not engaged in the discussion there as there doesn't seem to be anything useful I can add, and I suspect the other editors looking at that talk page have come to the same conclusion.
—me_and 14:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
There are a number of other wikipedia pages that are inaccurate, and I will have to make a Dump (Computer science) article. I'm trying to open a discussion on talk page about the intricacies of using dump tools. (Dump) is jargon but it is an english word used in computer science. It can help to explain the operation of dcfldd and dd. Dd isn't a cloning tool but can be more accurately described as a dump tool. I would have to open a dialogue to emphasis this. There are differences in the use of this jargon. I'll also be adding more text to the dcfldd before the example heading for describing the program-- I cannot describe dcfldd without using the word dump (the word cloning is inaccurate) Swestlake (talk) 14:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
There are a lot of Wikipedia pages that are inaccurate! That's one of the things about an encyclopedia that anyone can edit: there's going to be a lot of vandalism, honest mistakes, minor errors, out-of-date content…
What do you think a Dump (computer science) article would add, that isn't covered by one article or another linked from Dump?
If you read through dd (Unix), you'll see that article gives an overview of how dd works without using the word "dump", which, as you note, is jargon. I'd recommend emulating dd (Unix)'s content and layout if you want to improve dcfldd, but I honestly wouldn't spend a great deal of effort on it until it's clear the article satisfies WP:N and so isn't going to be deleted.
—me_and 14:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately you do not understand. The dd article upholds the usage of the word 'cloning' in it's own right. If you look at the mistakes the other wikipedian made on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Comparison_of_disk_cloning_software#Inaccuracies_.26_Proposal -- You should understand why other pages are being edited with additional of assumptions which I wish to clear up-- dd and ddcfld are FILESYSTEM-AGNOSTIC. The word 'cloning' isn't technically accurate. You mention that the dd article was written without ever having to use the word 'dump' but at the same time admit that alot of wikipedia pages are inaccurate. The one I'm very strong about and that I tried to address Codename_Lisa was the mistakes she made on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Comparison_of_disk_cloning_software#Inaccuracies_.26_Proposal, pertaining to the 100% fact that dd and dcfldd are filesystem-agnostic tools. The edits she recently made on the 'dcfldd' entry that I added to that table-- she checkmarked 'Yes' as that tool being supportive of a filesystem (as for dd as well) -- I have no idea what made her think they're filesystem tools. They are not. You wikipedians make mistakes, and this is one of them. 'Dumping' is becoming more popular. I also have more than a strong sense because I'm in the field and pointed out to other intricacies related to Iso image and there are other articles that are inaccurate which I know about -- so if you can point me to a Wikipedian Computer group because I'm having problems finding Swestlake (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:37, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm a little confused here by the points you're trying to make. I'll attempt to disentangle; let me know if I've missed something.
  • dd (Unix) uses the technical term "clone". That's true, but some technical terms are necessary for such an article, and the first usage of the word links to Disk cloning, so someone not understanding what's meant by the term can look it up.
  • dd (Unix) uses the term "clone", when the correct term is "dump". I'm not sure I agree with you on that one, at least going by the definition of "clone" in Disk cloning. If you think the terminology is incorrect, I suspect you'll have trouble making the change unless you can back up the terminology as you use it with third-party sources. From WP:V: "Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it."
  • There are a lot of errors in other Wikipedia articles. That's blatantly true. Wikipedia ain't perfect. Not going to argue that one in the slightest.
—me_and 20:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

dd article

I need your help because I'd like to change the introductory to the dd article for clarity, I propose my changes.. How long should the question be left open before I can finally say, ok nobody is objecting to this, and then make the change? Sorry but the introductory to that article is quite inaccurate that I need to heavily modify.. ( proposal for change is over here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dd_(Unix)#Proposal_for_changes ). I'm also wondering how permissible it is to make a new article or rename the dd(Unix) to simply Dd (Computer science) so that this universal command can merely emphasize it's operation across all the operating systems, and then have a small number of examples dedicated to the most popular ones (one for unix-based, and one for mswindows)
(Sorry for saying you didn't understand, I felt like I was being overcrowded on my first article post..)
I've spoken to Codename_Lisa to explain technical points about how dd works on my talk page because she asked me
Swestlake (talk) 19:15, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

For changing the lead to dd (Unix), I reckon you've two options, and I'd shoot for the first:
  1. Be bold and just do it. If your change is reverted, that's likely to provoke discussion on the talk page, particularly if you mention in the edit summary that you already tried to start a discussion on the talk page but received no response. That, in fact, is a normal part of Wikipedia editing, and is called the "BOLD, revert, discuss cycle".
  2. Leave it for some time longer to see if anyone does engage in discussion. I'd have little hope for this, in honesty, because a lot of people only look at talk pages when there's a problem, and only comment when they disagree.
On renaming dd (Unix) as dd (Computer science), I'd expect that to be "potentially controversial", so you should follow the procedure at "Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves" in Wikipedia:Requested moves. In particular, I'd expect a name like dd (application) or dd (software) or similar to be suggested as an alternative; "computer science" implies theoretical computer science to me. I'd suggest against creating a new article, as I'd expect them to just be merged back together.
Does that help?
—me_and 20:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Having just had a look at your proposed change, I've picked up a few points where I disagree with it, and I've highlighted them on the talk page there. —me_and 20:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Protected Page Editor

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Protected Page Editor. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:22, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

St James

Just want to thank you for your edits to St James - I was having difficulties with this page and you've done a SUPERB job!! Adamm (talk) 00:03, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

No problem, and thank you! If you want to add something really useful, and you're able to, that article would massively benefit from having someone take a photo of the church and add it to the article. —me_and 09:58, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Infobox church

I'm not sure why you reordered the conversation. My post of 11:45 specifically referred to yours of 1 inst, not that of today. It seems to negate the point of indenting and forces a one-dimensional linear mode of thought. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:56, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I reordered because you'd put your post above JackLee's earlier comment of 1 May, which was also a reply to my initial comment. The indentation shows the threading without the need to put your reply to my original post before other such replies. WP:THREAD has more detail and examples. —me_and 09:50, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Fir enough, Ion reflection I think I agree. :-) I've reduced the indentation though. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:03, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Beauty and the Beast (musical), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West End (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) 11:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Your request for undeletion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is Profound Decisions Ltd. JohnCD (talk) 09:55, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Bright Ideas (Australian TV series)

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Bright Ideas (Australian TV series), which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Fbryce (talk) 19:56, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

It's a small world...

— Scott • talk 14:07, 22 August 2013 (UTC) (Hex!)

'Edit warring'

I suggest you post a formal apology for the malicious and clearly false accusation of 'edit warring' you posted. Should you fail to do so, I shall report the matter at WP:ANI. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:12, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the vast majority of your edits to Chelsea Manning, but WP:3RR is a "bright-line rule", and it seems to me that you breached it. I didn't think I could report IFreedom1212 for breaching that rule in good faith without also reporting yourself. I think I've been reasonable about my reporting, but I obviously can't stop you raising things at WP:ANI if you disagree. —me_and 18:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

ANI notification

Information icon Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:03, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Evidence phase open - Manning naming dispute

Dear Me and.

This is just a quick courtesy notice. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 19, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon talk 23:35, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Neve Shalom

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Neve Shalom. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Josh Willis

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Josh Willis. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

{{Uw-inline-el}}

How's about that then? — Scott • talk 14:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Beautiful, thank you! —me_and 15:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:R from move

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:R from move. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Liberty University

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Liberty University. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:22, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Audie Murphy

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Audie Murphy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Ways to improve CN Lester

Hi, I'm Sulfurboy. Me and, thanks for creating CN Lester!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. 1

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Sulfurboy (talk) 11:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm already aware the article needs more sources; I've listed a bunch on Talk:CN Lester that I've just not had time to integrate yet – it seemed more useful to get the initial stub down so other editors can more easily get involved. If you fancy helping out, please feel free to expand the article with the sources from the talk page. —me_and 12:52, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Guy Fawkes Night

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Guy Fawkes Night. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For great work improving the article on Paris Lees.
—Tom Morris (talk) 16:34, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Since private equity firms own businesses that are frequently renamed and resold it makes sense to post their links to the firms they say they own.

Should I just set this table up on another wiki?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.98.246.43 (talk) 03:13, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

This refers to the company URLs I removed from Francisco Partners.
There are two interacting things on Wikipedia here. The first is a policy: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, which is frequently interpreted to mean that a long list of things in an article (eg "companies FP have invested in") should be trimmed down to a list of notable things (eg "notable companies FP have invested in"), where "notable" is interpreted in the same way as Wikipedia's notability guideline. Currently Francisco Partners has a lot of companies that don't have Wikipedia articles, and therefore are presumably not notable according to that rule and are liable to get trimmed from the list.
The second is Wikipedia's external links guidelines, which forbid including links such as the ones I removed. You mention that you're concerned about companies being renamed and resold, and that having the external links will help. However, if the list only includes notable companies, that's just not an issue: if the company is renamed or resold, the Wikipedia article on the company will be updated, and the internal link to that article will still work. For example Data Connection was renamed to Metaswitch Networks, but both links will take you to the article on the company (which does have a link to the company website).
Is that all somewhat clearer? Please let me know if you have any more questions.
—me_and 18:58, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

To understand a private equity firm you need to be able to get a picture of what they are doing in total, not just how they present the information. You can't provide the same data as you would for a public firm, because their required disclosures are much less than a public firm's. I'll move the data elsewhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.98.246.43 (talk) 13:24, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kansas gubernatorial election, 2014

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kansas gubernatorial election, 2014. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 19:11, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Reward_board#As_we_are_going_to_keep_this.2C_do_we_need_to_tighten_the_criteria_a_bit.3F

Given it's been kept at MfD, I've reposted a proposal to tighten it. See header. Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:46, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.

Hello, User:Me and thank you for alerting me to the alternative accounts policy and advising me to make appropriate changes. I found the advice useful and have applied it where required. If you have anymore suggestions on how I can improve my homepage or anything else I am very open to suggestions. Please post them to my talk page for User:Wiki-Impartial and I will happily get back to you on how I have applied these suggestions to how i contribute to Wikipedia.--Olowe2011 (talk) 11:23, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:TheBus (Honolulu)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:TheBus (Honolulu). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:12, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Category heirarchisation

(This is a response to my note on this user's talk page —me_and 10:50, 18 November 2013 (UTC))

Thanks for your note, that's what I understood, but it's not working in practice: what was posted to NHS Hospitals in London was not displaying in NHS Hospitals in England. Others had already intermittently done the same, but you may need to go through the NHS London reverting the lot. Sorry, not my fault WP's got a bug. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.174.34 (talk) 01:24, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

That's correct; if you go to Category:NHS hospitals in England, St Mary's Hospital, London shouldn't be listed. However it does link to Category:NHS hospitals in London, from where you can see that article page. This isn't a bug, it's designed to keep category pages useful. If Category:Hospitals listed every hospital we have an article about, worldwide, including ones that have closed and ones that only exist in fiction, it would be so long as to be unusable. Thus we just link to the subcategories to help editors find the relevant page. —me_and 10:55, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Your question about my interpretation of the username policy

I explained it previously in depth to another user. Daniel Case (talk) 17:15, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Grand, thanks for the explanation! —me_and 17:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Unintentional removal of your edit

I am not sure why it removed your edit when I added my note. Normally it does tell me that a previous edit has been made and my edit could not be saved. Hopefully there is no bug in the system. Anyway, sorry about my edit that ended up removing yours. Msw1002 (talk) 16:11, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

No worries. I've certainly had conflict warnings earlier today, so hopefully it's just a brief glitch. —me_and 17:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Iran–Iraq War

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Iran–Iraq War. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:17, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Valle del Cauca department

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Valle del Cauca department. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sriracha sauce

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sriracha sauce. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:BP

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:BP. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Liberty University

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Liberty University. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:In a World...

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:In a World.... Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ahl al-Hadith

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ahl al-Hadith. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:23, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Psychedelic rock

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Psychedelic rock. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:14, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Brooklyn Bridge

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Brooklyn Bridge. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cārvāka

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Cārvāka. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Val

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Val. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:WW2InfoBox

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:WW2InfoBox. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

A page you started (Eisenfunk) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Eisenfunk, Me and!

Wikipedia editor NHCLS just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Hello. Could you please add some information and sources for the page? Thanks!

To reply, leave a comment on NHCLS's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by NHCLS (talk • contribs) 00:18, 1 March 2014‎ (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2014

Hi Me and. In case you are not aware, there is an upcoming campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related topics on Wikipedia, culminating with an international edit-a-thon on June 21. See Wiki Loves Pride 2014 for more information. If you are interested, you might consider creating a page for a major city (or cities!) near you, with a list of LGBT-related articles that need to be created or improved. This would be a tremendous help to Wikipedia and coverage of LGBT culture and history. Thanks for your consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions! --Another Believer (Talk) 18:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ross Montgomery - Conjectural Restoration of Church 3.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ross Montgomery - Conjectural Restoration of Church 3.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:57, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Adrian Tchaikovsky

If you are a personal friend of Adrian do you not have a photo of him you could put on his page?S.tollyfield (talk) 17:55, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Zoostorm logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Zoostorm logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Session Initiation Protocol, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jonathan Rosenberg. 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) 09:19, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

C C Lester

thanks for the correction! Actually I realised that I had misrembered it and your in fact correct - it was GNSA - Gender and Sexuality Alliance NOT gay and straight alliance. So thanks again for the correction X-mass (talk) 12:17, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Maui Jim logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Maui Jim logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 16:00, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rebecca Root, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. 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) 09:00, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Anthony Watson (executive)

Hello, Me and,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Anthony Watson (executive) should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Watson (executive) .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, TheMagikCow (talk) 09:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Just a suggestion, but I found using the {{under construction}} tag very helpful when fleshing out or revising articles. -- IamM1rv (talk) 12:04, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! —me_and 12:17, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Me_and/Archive_1&oldid=1148817985"