User talk:Pierspaterson
Welcome
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
|
September 2013
[edit]
Hello, I'm Elvey. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to IPhone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! I don't see any way to differentiate your edit, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=IPhone&diff=573992375&oldid=573992232 which has no edit summary, from vandalism or edit warring. It appears that you don't normally provide edit summaries. That may be a problem for you if it continues. Please explain yourself. OK? I don't know if it violates policy, but it sure seems rude and feels insulting to have my edit reverted with no explanation. Elvey (talk) 07:55, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]
Hello, Pierspaterson. 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)
December 2018
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved without good reason. They should have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. JarrahTree 10:24, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Mozart
[edit]I saw you performing page moves of Mozart works. While I can follow Versperae de confessore, as probably a primary topic, "de Dominica" only means "of a Sunday" which could be anybody's Sunday Vespers. "Piano concertos 1 to 4" - how is that any primary topic? They could be the first four piano concertos by you name it. Mozart's piano concertos are a series, and just because authors summarized the first in one article shouldn't prevent them from looking like Piano Concerto No. 5 (Mozart) and the others. Please revert at least that move. Generic name + number(s) should never be an article name. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:52, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- + everything JarrahTree said above: especially: move only if a title violates guidelines. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:54, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Following sock?
[edit]Can you please explain this? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piano_Concertos_Nos._1%E2%80%934_%28Mozart%29&type=revision&diff=897937872&oldid=897937792 In ictu oculi (talk) 20:34, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- Any idea why this Perth-based IP is apparently following your moves and locking them? In ictu oculi (talk) 20:35, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- And another one https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adagio_in_B_minor_(Mozart)&action=history In ictu oculi (talk) 20:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- And another https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Safe_Harbour_(Australian_TV_series)&action=history In ictu oculi (talk) 20:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- And another https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Train_stations_in_Zhejiang&type=revision&diff=897979248&oldid=305947838 In ictu oculi (talk) 20:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- We had a hockey editor who was community banned for locking his moves like this a few years ago, and he was signed in when he did it. Trying to assume good faith. Perhaps you don't realize that you are signed out (which counts as socking if deliberate) and locking your own moves. Please explain. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- This needs wider attention, and I wonder if project classical music or administrators. The moves are ill-advised, and the best remedy would be self-revert. Calling a new admin for advice, about this connected to the two threads above. Needless to says: Adagio in B minor is no specific title, just a tempo marking and a key, could be anybody's work, we need "(Mozart)". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:51, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- He won't be able to self-revert as he was signed out when he locked them. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt and In ictu oculi:I think it's best to assume good faith for now. It's possible the IP is unconnected and simply likes adding {{R from move}} to redirects that occurred as a result of a move, which in itself is fair enough. If you look at Train stations in Zhejiang, the move was in 2009 and the IP's lock was in 2019, so at least that one fits better with the theory that the IP is just gnoming. However, I'm more than happy to restore the status quo and encourage Pierspaterson to discuss moves before doing them, except DannyS712 has helpfully already reverted the moves that seem to be problematic. Please ping me again if you need me to do anything. I assume the remaining redirects like Adagio in B minor should remain, as they are likely search terms for Mozart's work (although I'm aware of other composers with works sharing that title, not least J.S. Bach). Perhaps Adagio in B minor ought to be a dab page eventually, if we ever get articles on the other composers' works of that title. Incidentally, you might want to check the page User:Theo's Little Bot/unnecessary dab. That lists pages that contain parenthetical disambiguators that a robot would consider unnecessary (e.g. there is currently only one article on Wikipedia with the title 'Adagio in B minor', missing the point that others could exist in the future). It may possibly become a source of more problems for you if the gnomes start using it without checking first. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 00:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- The gnoming coincidence is too high. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:18, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt and In ictu oculi:I think it's best to assume good faith for now. It's possible the IP is unconnected and simply likes adding {{R from move}} to redirects that occurred as a result of a move, which in itself is fair enough. If you look at Train stations in Zhejiang, the move was in 2009 and the IP's lock was in 2019, so at least that one fits better with the theory that the IP is just gnoming. However, I'm more than happy to restore the status quo and encourage Pierspaterson to discuss moves before doing them, except DannyS712 has helpfully already reverted the moves that seem to be problematic. Please ping me again if you need me to do anything. I assume the remaining redirects like Adagio in B minor should remain, as they are likely search terms for Mozart's work (although I'm aware of other composers with works sharing that title, not least J.S. Bach). Perhaps Adagio in B minor ought to be a dab page eventually, if we ever get articles on the other composers' works of that title. Incidentally, you might want to check the page User:Theo's Little Bot/unnecessary dab. That lists pages that contain parenthetical disambiguators that a robot would consider unnecessary (e.g. there is currently only one article on Wikipedia with the title 'Adagio in B minor', missing the point that others could exist in the future). It may possibly become a source of more problems for you if the gnomes start using it without checking first. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 00:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- He won't be able to self-revert as he was signed out when he locked them. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- This needs wider attention, and I wonder if project classical music or administrators. The moves are ill-advised, and the best remedy would be self-revert. Calling a new admin for advice, about this connected to the two threads above. Needless to says: Adagio in B minor is no specific title, just a tempo marking and a key, could be anybody's work, we need "(Mozart)". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:51, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- We had a hockey editor who was community banned for locking his moves like this a few years ago, and he was signed in when he did it. Trying to assume good faith. Perhaps you don't realize that you are signed out (which counts as socking if deliberate) and locking your own moves. Please explain. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- And another https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Train_stations_in_Zhejiang&type=revision&diff=897979248&oldid=305947838 In ictu oculi (talk) 20:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- And another https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Safe_Harbour_(Australian_TV_series)&action=history In ictu oculi (talk) 20:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- And another one https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adagio_in_B_minor_(Mozart)&action=history In ictu oculi (talk) 20:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
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 |
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |