User talk:Vega84

Welcome!

Hello, Vega84, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! 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 someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Mushroom (Talk) 18:30, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linkin Park- Unsourced

In reply to your question on your talk page; The reason the article is classed as unsourced is beacuse some of the facts that are presented in the article need to be verified by an referencing an external source. See Wikipedia:Citing sources and for an example of a well referenced article see Names of the Greeks. Also if nobody answers you on a talk page do not remove your question, somebody will eventually get back to you. If have any futher questions just ask me on my talk page. Childzy ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 13:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. For me, there is a much more simple solution - not canceling talks, and thinking before writing. Bye. Egr, 13/7/2006

inflammatory edit summaries

Refrain from using inflammatory edit summaries. See Wikipedia:Civility. --Ezeu 08:28, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your messages at User talk:Leyasu

The edit you were asking Leyasu about was from over two months ago, and he's been blocked since June 13 (indefinitely blocked since earlier this month; see recent archives of the administrators' notice board). Please don't ask him about edits he's been making; he's been using sockpuppets that we've been trying to contain since he's been blocked, and we should not encourage him to keep doing that. Please don't make personal attacks against him, as that may just encourage him toward further misbehavior. He is under parole for personal attacks per Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Leyasu and for excessive reverts per Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Deathrocker. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 17:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. Leyasu identifies as female but has also said that s/he is a transvestite. I usually refer to Leyasu as "he" mainly because most editors here are male, so I have a habit of saying "he" and only use "she" for editors that I know (or at least have a good guess) are female. Some female candidates at requests for adminship actually have had to correct voters for calling them "he". --Idont Havaname (Talk) 16:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your question on my talk page

One of my first concerts was Metallica back in 1983 so I certainly do consider them to be a Thrash/Speed metal band. Those sub-senres are mentioned, with more detail, throughout the article. However it is a general practice for Wikipedia music articles to not use sub-genres in the lead-in sections...especially for artists who span multiple sub-G's. In a case like Slayer where they do not deviate too far from their Thrash label...the introduction is acceptable. Eventually (and I have observed many Admins making these changes already) even that article will get altered to the standard lead-in. Hope that helps. Fair Deal 14:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS, your edit to Kirk Hammett was in line with Wikipedia Manual of Style. If you see more bios that use the "Stage Name (born "Full Name") type of format go ahead and correct them the same way you did to that article. There's thousands of them. Have fun! Fair Deal 14:29, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WP:Vandalism (on my talk page)

I regret offending you. However, the sentence I removed was "Sometimes, who commits a vandalism, hates the subject of the damaged article, but doesn't want to talk seriously about it." I believe this sentence to be grammatically incorrect. For one, the sentence doesn't even have a subject (grammar). JianLi 17:27, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to mark your edits as minor only when they genuinely are (see Wikipedia:Minor edit). "The rule of thumb is that an edit of a page that is spelling corrections, formatting, and minor rearranging of text should be flagged as a 'minor edit'." JianLi 19:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last caution

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. This is last caution. Hans Schwarc 18:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rapcore edit war

Please see my comments on talk:rapcore, and also WP:3RR. You may be being provoked by uncivil comments, and probable sock/meat-puppetry, but making what appears to be about 7 reverts is extremely excessive, and is blockable regardless. Please try and deal reasonably with other editors on this article, and if their own conduct is seen to be unreasonable, that will be dealt with. But it's time to step back from the continuous reversion. Alai 21:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I gave you fair warning, and you've continued to revert, with no talk page contribution of any substance as regards the article. I'm blocking you, as well as Lucpol, for an hour (which frankly, is a bargain, but will be increased if you return to do the same thing) for unproductive revert-warring. Alai 22:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've disambiguated the link you mentioned. In general, though, you should use the article's talk page for that, too (using {{editprotected}} if you wish to make that a formal request, and make sure it gets attention as such). Alai 22:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I say, it would be highly preferable to take such points to the article talk page. It's not desirable for the article to be protected long-term, and certainly not for edits of any significance to be made while it's under protection. See if you and the other editors on that page can't work together in a sensible fashion. Alai 18:57, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't appear that way to me: nothing leaps out at me as being grammaratically incorrect in the original, and your suggested rewording doesn't seem to be saying quite the same thing. In any event, the above would still apply. Alai 19:09, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 24 hours. Here are the reverts in question. alphaChimp^(talk) 13:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please Alphachimp, unblock me. I'm not committing any vandalism on the article in question, and I wanna respect the opinion of most users. I'm trying to simplify the intro for the Rapcore article, but Lucpol and his sockpuppets (Szpaner, Hans Schwarc, John Amber), just only because he can't stand rock/metal and wants to defend (erroneously) hip hop, continue to revert my contribs. I don't have any negative opinion about the three genres, but the FACTS, not opinions, say that rapcore jump into rock/metal rather than in hip hop. Furthermore, the intro should be quite readable, according to WP:MOS, as far as I know. -- Egr, 9/7/2006

I'll stump for him. He's made valid contributions which have been overshadowed by Lucpol and his accusatory nature, which have damaged a number of Wikipedia articles related to rapcore and nu metal. People like Egr are just trying to do good editing work here, and they're getting slandered in the process. I ended up removing the genre entirely from Fred Durst because the fight was getting too over-the-top, and I hope that users like Egr aren't turned into victims in the midst of an edit war. - Stick Fig 20:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From user talk

"One chose, I'm and you accede for... Linkin Park is nu metal (first) and rapcore (secondary) however Limp Bizkit is not Linkin Park. Limp Bizkit is more rapping, scratching and hip-hop climate. Limp Bizkit (yet) have more songs rapcore than nu metal songs! Limp Bizkit is rapcore (first) and nu metal (secondary). Or what? Please comprehend."
"Name "Rapcore" is definition for Rap/Hip-hop and hardcore (rock/metal). This is Rapcore (Rap-rock/Rap-metal). Is not Metal-rap or Rock-rap. This is Rapcore, not Metal-rap or Rock-rap. Rapcore is rapping for rock/metal music. Rapping in rapcore is main. Rapping in rapcore creates name Rapcore". This is citations from User talk:LUCPOL. John Amber 20:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Egr/Malfunction/Maxcap/BabuBhatt, rap-core is rap with hardcore guitars. John Amber 22:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RCU

I submitted a request for CheckUser on LUCPOL and his possible socks. Hopefully this will solve this rather annoying occurance. --Wildnox 22:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RCU(again)

I thought you might like to know that LUCPOL submitted your name with a list of what he believes to be sockpuppets to WP:RCU, here. --Wildnox 00:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had figured that this was false, I just wanted to inform you. --Wildnox 10:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RHCP

You have miscalculated and misinterpreted the Chili Peppers' style. While it may appear to the casual listener that their material is, in fact, rap, it is not. If you were to incorporate these styles more blindingly and suitably into the text, I may not have to remove your mistakes.

Whatever the case may be, the Chili Peppers are not rapcore. Never were, never will be and never can be. They don't rely on heavy metal riffs, which is what rapcore essentially is. Continue adding "Rapcore" and I will be forced to contact Wikipedia.

"Continue adding "Rapcore" and I will be forced to contact Wikipedia."

My words are in no way menacing or malicious.

I, thus, altered your 'rap' and 'pop' additions by more appropriately describing them. NSR77 20:56, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of RHCP, there is, in fact, a reason for the brackets included in the artist template. It's so you don't have to add the URL syntax manually and have to morph the real URL to make the link text instead of a number. After all, it IS a "URL" variable, not a "Link to site" variable.

I changed it back, so please don't revert it again. --Machchunk | make some noise at me 04:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just because another user did it wrong with another band doesn't mean every band article should be the same.

Again, I reverted it. DON'T CHANGE IT BACK AGAIN. --Machchunk | make some noise at me 19:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you not get it the first time?!? IT SHOULD NOT BE JUST A LINK, IT'S A URL.

No thank you. --Machchunk | make some noise at me 17:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linkin Park - genres

I do not appreciate you calling me a 'nigga hater' just because we disagree on a certain subject, especially something as trivial as musical genres. I am in no way a racist and if you happen to disagree over something, it is childish to resort to name calling. If you conduct yourself in such a way again I will report you to Wikipedia. --SayCheese 15:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When did I ever say that you were a racist? --SayCheese

If there is a dispute in the future over edits on the Linkin Park article, please look at the discussion page and see what other users are saying instead of making edits that are only in your interest. There was no reason for your name calling. --SayCheese 18:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never said that they were solely alternative rock, but I do think that it is part of their sound. The reason why I am against them being labeled only as nu metal and rapcore (other than what the band has said themselves) is because while Linkin Park's sound is similar, when placed next to other bands in both of the aforementioned genres there are few similarities, the biggest one being that they have an emcee.

Each song doesn't need to be categorized to determine what a band's sound is. --SayCheese 20:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's the fact that when placed next to other mainstream rock bands, they do not sound the same. Usually such bands are called alternative rock even if they don't fit the formal definition of the term. 'What is alt rock in their music' is that they don't sound like other nu metal bands, and they have that level of experimentalism that makes it wrong to just pigeon hole them with that term.

Yes, and I realize that I used the wrong term. Sometimes I forget that emcee and rapper are not interchangeable. --SayCheese 14:39, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't mean that they should immediately be classified as such.

However, the labels nu metal and rapcore are very redundant and are just pigeon holing the band because not every single song sounds like nu metal. If you disagree with me, fine but this whole battle of semantics is getting annoying. --SayCheese 15:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I haven't. I do think it is big of you to assume that you 'know much better than me' just because you think that your opinion is fact. Just because a song has rapping in it DOES NOT make it nu metal. Calling something both rapcore AND nu metal is redundant because in simple terms, their definitions are almost exactly the same. --SayCheese 19:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Content and POV

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from an article. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Yankees76 20:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summaries

Please avoid using abusive edit summaries as per Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Thanks and happy editing.[1]Yankees76 21:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User:Leyasu's ban

Leyasu was essentially rewriting articles related to gothic metal and heavy metal music, reverting those pages back to his version whether or not consensus agreed with him, and persistently edit-warring on those pages. He also went to a bunch of band articles and changed the genre of the band from gothic metal to "gothic-doom metal", whether or not anyone agreed with him.

He went to two arbitration cases (Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Leyasu and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Deathrocker) for this behavior. The arbcom initially gave him revert parole (once per 24 hours), personal attack parole, and probation; their rulings in the second case extended the revert parole (once per 24 hours, twice per 7 days, and 3 times per 30 days). He was consistently breaking both revert paroles through his main account and through sockpuppets and IPs; he continues to edit under British Telecom IPs (most start with 81.*.*.* or 86.*.*.*). Eventually, after breaking the second revert parole several times and exhausting the community's patience, he was indefinitely blocked by Circeus; a motion to ban him was then posted on WP:AN/I. I endorsed the ban, as did several other users; no one opposed it. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 15:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how LUCPOL ties into this particular case. They're in different countries (Leyasu is in the UK, LUCPOL in Poland), and their styles of language are completely different... Leyasu often says "yew", "arbirrition" (for arbitration), and "policys", but in general he does seem to be a native English speaker. As for edit warring over genres and the personal information on one of his user subpages (I noticed that when looking at User talk:LUCPOL), what sort of dispute resolution procedures have you tried? I don't think that the arbitration committee will be hearing many new cases until the new arbitrators are chosen and begin their terms, but you could try mediation or something like that for now. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 22:06, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the Nu Metal

About the nu metal reference, earlier in talk, there was a discussion leading to labelling rock detector as not being a reliable source, thats why the reference was removed and therefore the genre. I had been the one that included it in the first place, so the "thug fan" crap is un-called for. --Wildnox (talk) 20:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linkin Park edits

Please stop using abusive edit summeraries as per edit summaries , Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks such as you did on the Linkin Park article. Dark j e di requiem 18:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson

"Pop" encompasses many different genres. see the article on it.--Ashadeofgrey^Talk 13:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

Please add sources with information you add to articles. Unsourced information creates a burden on other editors if it were to be kept, and is likely to be removed. Any controversial or disputed statements must be cited. —Centrx→talk • 11:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linkin Park - Trivia

Close5218 14:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC) Dude, you're really getting on my nerves.You're not responsible for the entire Wikipedia.You're not running the show.If you don't agree with me, change it back, and stop fucking with me.I didn't touch the logo and I shortened the trivia section because it was too long and full of unnecessary stuff.[reply]

Close5218 08:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC) As I said before, I didn't even touch the logo.I agree that it should be added, but I don't have a picture so I can't upload it. I haven't seen the logo since someone put the new picture in.[reply]

Editing User Talk Pages

Please do not edit the user pages of other contributors without their approval or consent. It may be seen as vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please visit the sandbox. Yankees76 15:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summaries - Warning

[2]

This is your last warning.

The next time you disrupt Wikipedia by using an inappropiate or abusive edit summary, you will be blocked from editing.

Yankees76 14:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE:LinkinPark Copy-Vio

The Website doesn't even permission to redistribute those pictures in the first place. Just because someone found those pictures on the internet, and decided to upload them onto their website, does not mean they magically gain all the rights to it. Additionally, none of those images have any fair use rationale whatsoever. PS: I only liked the Californication album --ShadowJester07 19:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I Saw the message before. If you still want to use an Image of Bennington or LP, you can either claim it under fair use, given you provide proper and true rationale. Or, although more difficult, you can send an email to LP's main site and request an image. --ShadowJester07 09:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Alternative metal

I did it for a variety of reasons. One, rapcore/hip hop is a staple influence of nu metal, so much so that it's not worth mentioning there. Two, many alternative metal bands were rapcore too: Red Hot Chili Peppers, Rage Against the Machine, and even Corrosion of Conformity and Alice in Chains had rapping in them at some point, and the first two were heavily influenced by hip hop. The addition in parentheses made it look as if rapcore and alternative metal are entirely different things, which is untrue. Three, it was just wrong; all the bands mentioned had not just a rapcore influence, but a straight-up hip hop influence, especially Korn, who were for some reason not included in the "influenced by rapcore" boat. Four, it just looked bad. Parentheses should be avoided if possible. That's all. ~Switch ^t 14:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for hip hop, I'm not especially enamoured of most mainstream hip hop, but I do really like The Roots, Everlast and Talib Kweli. The Clash and Rage Against the Machine, my two favourite bands, both liked hip hop and adopted it into their style. I have nothing against hip hop, so please don't think that's clouding my judgement. ~Switch ^t 15:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Michael Jackson on 6 January 2007

Your edit was completely unjustified. Please read the source before make an edit to a sourced statement.

Genres

I know you're probably tired of me but I just have a few inquiries behind your editing for the genre list on the Linkin Park article. How exactly is AMG considered the tell all for what Linkin Park should be defined as? I would like to point out that Linkin Park is on the list of alternative rock artists on Wikipedia [3] and that there are other music websites that say that Linkin Park is alternative rock [4]. They have also won an award for Best Alternative Rock Song[5]. Also, if every genre seemingly needs a source, then why is nu metal and hip-hop without sources? I would also like to point out that listing Linkin Park as both alternative metal and nu metal is redundant and it would make more sense to only list one of them. --SayCheese 01:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RHCP

I see absolutely no 'Rapcore' on the Allmusic page. It says Rap-rock, but no Rapcore. Sorry. I feel this is merely your opinion, considering they are not a Rapcore band; AMG clearly does not affiliate them with that genre. NSR77 23:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And apparently you've had issues with this topic in the past. I agree with SayCheese in questioning AMG's significance. I'm willing to work something out with you in an adult and attentive manner, considering this matter needs it. NSR77 23:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slipknot Intro

I'm curious. Why do you keep breaking the intro of Slipknot (band) into two paragraphs, one of which is only one sentence. I keep reuniting the paragraphs because it is usually considered bad form to use one sentence paragraphs.(at least for English, I'm unsure about any other languages) It's not a set in stone rule, but a convention of sorts; so if you have any justification for why you want to break the paragraph, please explain. --Wildnox (talk) 23:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do see you're point there. I'll undo it myself then. --Wildnox (talk) 23:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rapcore - Influences

I removed metal, punk and funk for a reason. Rapcore is a pretty vague term and the only really guarenteed influences in the music are rap and rock. Plain and simple. Basically, every edit I made was for the better. If anyone should be reported for disrupting the article, it's you. Now leave me the hell alone. _xcryoftheafflicted_x 04:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Egr:

Several editors of the RHCP page have agreed that an intro is necessary. Do NOT delete this, as it is already in agreement. Please, also, stop causing controversy. NSR77 21:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason there is always controversy when you roll your head around. This is also evident by similar responses on your talk page.NSR77 21:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It may be due to the far larger size of the English Wikipedia, in contrast to her Italian counterpart. NSR77 21:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I won't do that. You're simply trying to help. NSR77 21:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just keep a cool head and try to remain calm. You've made some great edits in the past. NSR77 21:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry. All you need to do is maintain a calm, cool, and collected personality while on Wikipedia and everything will be okay. Try not to be so drastic with your edits, such as deleting an entire introduction before consulting the Talk page. NSR77 21:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Using copyrighted images

Hello. I'd appreciate if you'd avoid encouraging the use of copyrighted images to depict Eminem. Although this one can certainly illustrate him well, the fair use criteria disallows the use of a copyrighted image when a free alternative is available. As Eminem is still alive and performing, it's very likely that someone already took or will take a picture of him and release it under a free license (actually there already was one from Flickr, until the author decided to copyright it). Please upload if you can find one. Thanks. Michaelas10 ^{Respect my authoritah} 17:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Linkin Park

Linkin Park has received some recent heavy editing. If you have the time, would you please read through the article to make sure everything is OK. Thanks. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 16:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Korn. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. 猛禽22 ^•• 18:52, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Egr! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 98 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Corinne Bohrer - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 11:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Polar Claw

The article Polar Claw has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Minor Transformers character. No real world notability, no reliable sources cited.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Milburn (talk) 13:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Education in Italy edits

Hi. I noticed that on June 4th 2012 you made some edits, claiming that there was too much information. Can you please explain why? I don't see the point in removing the information regarding the subjects studied in every type of liceo, especially when you compare the aforementioned article with the Education in Germany one, which is far more detailed; compared to it Education in Italy is basically a stub, and your stripping it down of what little content it had hasn't contributed to its growth - especially because you didn't provide a valid reason why that content should have been removed.

For this reason I'm reverting the article back to what it was before your edits. --Angelikfire (talk) 10:09, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Education in Italy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Decoration (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) 15:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Consumer electronics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Video recorder (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) 11:34, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:44, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Immortals (1995 film) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Immortals (1995 film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Immortals (1995 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

The Film Creator (talk) 16:56, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Why Wikipedia Sucks" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Why Wikipedia Sucks and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 16#Why Wikipedia Sucks until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:33, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]