User talk:Simon171717

Welcome...

Hello, Simon171717, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Paxse 18:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hash signs

Please don't replace these; they go against the WikiProject standard for infoboxes, discographies, etc. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 21:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're on other artciles because the WikiProject used to include them; now it doesn't, and they need to be removed. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 07:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not urgent (I remove them when I see them, but I don't go looking) — but if you remove them when you see them that would be helpful, thanks. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 07:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, if hash signs are not required that doesn't necessarily mean you have to remove them. But this is news to me, I didn't know the WikiProject "used" to include them. Bull Borgnine 00:30, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bolding is not unecessary

Hi Simon171717 and thank you for your contributions in Wikipidia! In most articles the bolded song highlights the current single you are looking at. Please, do not remove these from the articles as you have been doing with Umbrella and Shut Up and Drive. Thank you. Bull Borgnine 05:46, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freshee!! Get liz out of ye!! Andrew161616 16:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 2007

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Call the Shots worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 11:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moves

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently copied the contents of a page and pasted it into another with a different name. Specifically, you copied the contents of Template:The Pussycat Dolls This is what we call a "cut and paste move", and it is very undesirable because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. The mechanism we use for renaming articles is to move it to a new name which both preserves the page's history and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. In most cases, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself by this process, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves to request the move by another. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Acalamari 17:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pussycat Dolls' second studio album

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Pussycat Dolls' second studio album, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 18:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Pussycat Dolls' second studio album

An editor has nominated Pussycat Dolls' second studio album, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pussycat Dolls' second studio album and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 08:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Cassie's second studio album, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 13:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Britain's Got Talent - Phil Blackmore

Did they mention on TV that Phil was not the first to not complete his act? I'm aware it was touch and go and it was only several seconds before the end of his act, but still... TheChrisD, ^{Rant with me!} 21:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing numerals

As per Simon & Schuster Handbook for Writers - Third Edition, Using Numbers: "Spell out numbers from one to nine, and use figures for numbers 10 and above. For scores and statistics, use specific numbers: 6th place, a 5 to 3 ratio, 29 percent, #19 of 50.

Even WP: Manual of style (dates and numbers) says essentially the same thing: "In the body of an article, single-digit whole numbers from zero to nine are spelled out in words; numbers greater than nine may be rendered in numerals or may be rendered in words if they are expressed in one or two words (sixteen, eighty-four, two hundred, but 3.75, 544, 21 million)."

It is inconsistent to write that something was "number nineteen" on the "Hot 100," or that something was "thirty-second" on a "Top 50" list. If one is to use numerals with charts that use numerals, as opposed to spelling them out, the specific numeral should be used.

As such, please do not "fix numerals" when they have been used correctly. Thank you.

Being an idiot

Perhaps you should start your own blog, so you can do idiotic things without someone trying to correct them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.141.114.187 (talk) 20:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should stop correcting something which is already right. Numerals can be either way, and fully written looks much better in an article, so please stop changing it. Also, it's Break the Ice", not "Break The Ice". Simon171717 20:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

June 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Blackout (Britney Spears album). 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 a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I wasn't aware of that rule, although that is no excuse. Thanks for letting me know. Simon171717 23:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

My apologies for the comments made on User talk:Simon171717. This was juvenile, and I will not do so again.

With regard to the edit war between Simon171717 and myself: Simon171717 prefers to write out numbers wherever they appear, regardless of the number, or the context in which it is used. Simon171717 has changed numerals to spelled-out numbers to suit Simon171717. When I pointed out the correct way to use numbers, Simon171717 reverted my edits and directed me to the Wikipedia entry for the usage of numbers, which was nearly verbatim to what I had pointed out to Simon171717. I then reverted the edits made by Simon171717, who then reverted my edits, etc.

Simon171717 commented that the way Simon171717 prefers numbers (spelled out) is as correct as using numerals, and that changing to numerals the numbers that Simon171717 has spelled out is incorrect. However, after this happening back and forth, I reviewed all of the previous edits by Simon171717, and found that Simon171717 has done EXACTLY what Simon171717 is reverting my edits for: Simon171717's own preference.

For example: Don't Stop the Music (Rihanna song) - Revision as of 16:49, 21 January 2008, by Simon171717 - (Fixing up. Fully written numbers make an article look much better than using hashes and digits).

As such, I hardly think that Simon171717 is in any position to decide whether or not numerals should be replaced by spelling out numbers, and Simon171717 should leave well enough alone, just because Simon171717 prefers that "65" be written as "sixty-five."

71.141.114.187 (talk) 01:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. You're right. It's not my place to decide which layout is used. I just got caught up in the whole thing. I was going by the fact that articles that have had a lot of effort put into them seem to be using the fully written method that I was using, so I assumed that was the way to go, and I started doing the same thing to other articles that were just using the numbers. We should have came to some sort of agreement about it here, instead of starting an edit war. Simon171717 10:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]