User talk:Therablueray

Please explain

this edit. Materialscientist (talk) 00:33, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry accident... tried to make a new header. TBlueray 00:34, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Can't help with editors. Some are built in and can be activated by changing wikipedia editing options. I use Wordpad, as it supports fonts and macro-replacements and has no long line glitches of the Notepad, but you have to type in all formatting. Materialscientist (talk) 01:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. A WYSIWYG Editor for wiki would be awesome, but I'll stick with the built in one for now. Anything to share about the IP-adress? TBlueray 01:23, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Switching on WP:WIKIED in Special:Preferences > Gadgets > Editing gadgets might help. SmartSE (talk) 00:59, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It did! Cheers TBlueray 22:44, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer be able to have them marked as minor by default. For more information on what a minor edit is, see WP:MINOR or feel to get in touch.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 23:40, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Tailscale

Hello, Therablueray. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Tailscale, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:03, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tailscale (August 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bilorv was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tailscale and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Tailscale, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— Bilorv (talk) 01:38, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Therablueray! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! — Bilorv (talk) 01:38, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Tailscale

Hello, Therablueray. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Tailscale".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (talk) 16:20, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't mass-add IA links for live sites

Hello, Therablueray. As you may have already seen, I have reverted your edit at the Suisse Secrets article. The reason (as I tried to explain in my ES), is that your edit adds 9,462 bytes needlessly to the article, while not improving the verifiability. The thing is (and I am convinced far too few editors know this, and I was just telling another editor about this yesterday) the Internet Archive automatically crawls the Web and archives sources for us. When the cite web link points to a live URL, we don't need to add anything. When the link is dead, then we can get the archived URL from IA and add it to the article. This saves a lot of extra "junk" in the wikitext which helps reduce the confusion for human editors and a little of the server load.

The similar edit to Swiss Leaks showed up on my watchlist, too, but I'm not going to undo it; it was only two live links so only 440 extra bytes; not worth "cleansing" via reversion. ;-) Anyway, I think it'd be good if you refrained from making such edits (esp. the big ones) in the future. Thanks and happy editing. — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 09:59, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]