See below and history for previous episodes (including notices of potential spam, conflict of interest, and third degree clumsiness).
Stephane mot (talk) 11:26, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
PS: if you're hungry, there are a few delicious cookies below - and don't worry, they're not tracking! Stephane mot (talk) 09:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I linked to my blog to avoid paraphrases, and now I know I shouldn't (Uw-spam4im notice from Ukexpat for disruptive editing):
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Korean cuisine, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Addendum regarding point 3): as I mentioned in the WP:INTDABLINKS discussion page, I don't think we should consider that "There is nothing wrong with linking to a redirect instead of linking directly to the disambiguation page; redirects are cheap and are basically transparent to the reader" (section "How to link to a disambiguation page"). When you consider mobile access, it may not be always neutral (time, money). Stephane mot (talk) 07:57, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, an intentional link to a disambiguation page should always use the form with "(disambiguation)" in the title (and not a piped link as you did here. It may be necessary to create the redirect if it does not already exist. It is recommended to add this template to the redirect to help identify it: {{R to disambiguation}}. older ≠ wiser12:53, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Three things to note: 1) Please don't add extra links to words like "United States" or the state name as these are not ambiguous; see WP:MOSDAB for more information. Some older or less noticed disambiguation pages may already have such extra links which should be removed if you happen to edit such pages. 2) In some cases, for example Casco Township, the generic township redirects to a disambiguation page for a specific state. In such cases, there is no point to adding a see also that contains a generic page that redirects back to the same specific disambiguation page. 3) When intentionally linking from one disambiguation page to another disambiguation page, the link should always use the form with "(disambiguation)" in the title, even if that is a redirect. See WP:INTDABLINKS for more information. older ≠ wiser12:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your remarks. Disambiguation should include all occurences, but I'll systematize blue links and avoid all redlink pages. To spare the reader, I suggest to shrink the red to the twp name and to keep the county in blue, like this. Stephane mot (talk) 09:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
NB: MOSDAB also states "A disambiguation page should not be made up completely of red links or have only one blue link on the entire page, because the basic purpose of disambiguation is to refer users to other Wikipedia pages".[reply]
I've noticed you've created a few Township/Town disambiguation pages lately, although many of these have few, if any, bluelinks in them. The style page for disambiguation pages doesn't typically allow redlinks in dab pages unless they'll be created soon, and while I think redlink articles for inherently notable subjects is fine, I think maybe you need to review whether that's realistic before you create more. Of what I've seen some of yours have blue links (although they're overwhelmed by redlinks), but some are pure redlink articles, which clearly do not satisfy the MOSDAB criteria. Please review that policy, and ask me if you have any questions. Shadowjams (talk) 09:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I stopped creating pages and only intended to test reedits on my latest contributions: I'd like to settle for a policy regarding the existing township disambiguation pages, before starting to cleanup those I contributed to.
=> Status: if you consider all township disambiguation pages, redlinks are present in hundreds of them, mostly as 'full redlinks' (township name, county name, state name), and sometimes mixed (generally the full redlink followed by bluelink to county/state, which can result in double bluelinks)
=> Target: disambiguation pages must be accurate (the reader doesn't have an inexact or partial view of existing occurences), but also limit redlinks to the minimum.
=> That's why I first tried a redlink limited to the township name, followed by a bluelink to county/state (a blue link for every occurence, that's already an improvement for existing pages). But States being unequal in the speed of development of township pages, I think that for some of them (eg AR, OK, SD...), when the page hasn't been created yet, I should abandon the link to the township name and keep only the link to the county name. The question is sould I do the same for all occurences for which the page is not available yet, and get rid of all redlinks? I think the decision should depend on the page context, for instance it's OK to have 10% of occurences with partial redlinks, but not if it means 75% for one particular state. I'll start with the few all redlinks pages.
Hi. When you recently edited Serere District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bantu (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.
Hello. I've just changed a few of your edits on geographical disambig pages; i don't want you to think i'm harassing or stalking you, so i'm just dropping a note here. If you take a look at what i've done here, you'll see that essentially i've changed some section headings so they have two equals signs instead of the three you gave them, and so that See also sections are given a heading, rather than the format you gave them. If you're interested, the setup is given here. Cheers, LindsayHello17:31, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I've used all 3 systems (";", "- -", "- - -") depending on what I came across. Thank you for helping me opt for one. From now on I'll stick to "- -". --Stephane mot (talk) 05:02, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the belated welcome, but the cookies are still warm! Here's wishing you a belatedwelcome to Wikipedia, Stephane mot. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.
I saw your ID on WikiProject and so I thought you might be interested in a debate at Template Talk on the topic of merging Infobox Korean Film into the generic Infobox Film category, deleting the Hangul/hanja/RR/MR information, or keeping it separate (as it currently is). I would appreciate it if you to contribute your thoughts or at least glance over it. The more people looking/thinking about it will give us better ideas as to what should be decided. Thank you. ₪RicknAsia₪ 09:53, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the invitation. I just added my two cents. --Stephane mot (talk) 09:41, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!
Hi Stephane mot! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editing encouraged!!! But being multilingual is not a necessity to make this project a success. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! 20:15, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Expand Wikipedia's free knowledge with WDL resources!
Hi Stephane mot! Thanks for participating in the World Digital Library-Wikimedia Partnership. Your contributions are important to improving Wikipedia! I wanted to share a few updates with you:
We have an easy way to now cite WDL resources. You can learn more about it on our news page, here.
Our to-do list is being expanded and features newly digitized and created resources from libraries and archives around the world, including content from Sweden, Qatar, the Library of Congress, and more! You can discover new content for dissemination here.
WDL project has new userbox for you to post on your userpage and celebrate your involvement. Soffredo created it, so please be sure to thank them on their talk page. You can find the userbox and add it to your page here.
Greetings:
My name is Ivan Robaina Bychko, I am a 19 years old Cuban wikipedian who is very interested in Korean history and culture. Currently I am working in several articles about South Korea in Spanish wikipedia, also I am writing an article about your country for Santiago University (Universidad de Oriente). I kindly would like to have your help to make clear certain points about current South Korea that are not very easy to find at another wikipedias. As my internet connectivity is very limited, you should write to me at my e-mail account if you are interested in helping me. I would be very grateful if you could help me.
My e-mail: nayesda.daria@medired.scu.sld.cu
As one of the previous contributors to {{Infobox film}} or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing!
I understand that you are not comfortable with certain parts of history, but blind censorship is not the answer. If you read the references, they clearly support the edition.--Stephane mot (talk) 07:49, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And Oda Mari, please stop censoring documented facts that don't fit your points of view. This is the second time that you delete blocks on the Prostitutes in South Korea for the U.S. military that are supported by quotes (latest: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prostitutes_in_South_Korea_for_the_U.S._military&oldid=612333753&diff=prev, and the first time, you had the gall to write on my user page and negate the existence of quotes that already existed before and still stand now). I understand that we don't share the same appreciation of a dark moment of history, and that - judging by your edits - you stand on the side of revisionism, but deleting documented facts is contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia. Stephane mot (talk) 03:06, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Stephane mot. 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.
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.
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 have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Korean cuisine, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. 
Please do not add or change content, as you did to Prostitutes in South Korea for the U.S. military, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 08:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
