Leave me a message!

Thanks for providing a very good reference link that helped us improve greatly on the Loon (rapper) page which was frankly a mess earlier. Keep up the good work. By the way, I really liked your motto on your user page "Editor, Improver and Adder!" What a nice motto to adopt! I also listened to what Loon personally had to say in his telephone message on the page you provided and was really impressed by his sincerity and his shedding light on the case werldwayd (talk) 22:52, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied: Much appreciated, not a problem! - Xenomm (Leave a message!) 16:14, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Taiwan/ROC

Polls have constantly showed that people in Taiwan consider themselves as Taiwanese and a country separate from China. ROC is an old name for Taiwan. Taiwan is the current name for the country.6it4pq (talk) 04:13, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied: The Taiwan Embassy does seem to use ROC as it's official name (with Taiwan in brackets), but yes your point is valid. --- Xenomm (Leave a message!) 04:18, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Recent Warning You Gave

Hi there, Just a friendly message to tell your recent warning on User talk:108.89.130.124 was not really needed. The user self-reverted, showing they knew it wasn't right, so we normally WP:AGF, and don't warn them. Please let me know if you have any questions! Mdann52 (talk) 12:16, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied: Hello Mdann52, that was a welcome template for an IP editor that has made test edits (which he/she did) not a warning. Aimed to help the user continue knowledgeably. Good faith was assumed and the notification provided the important welcome resources for the new user. If the editor knows he did wrong and self-reverted, that's an indication to me that he/she may need some guidance rather than warning, which I supported with. Therefore I disagree, I can't see logic in not guiding users who are evidently new and unwelcomed. --- Xenomm (Leave a message!) 12:32, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok - this was me misreading the template! Thanks, Mdann52 (talk) 12:41, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Abhay Shukla

Please don't remove that article it's about a indian actor and he is famous!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allee143 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied: The article needs better references. When a real person is subject in an article it's very important that their notability can be sourced. I've tried to find suitable references myself but I'm not finding anything relevant. Deletion isn't decided by me, however I can't ignore the fact that the article fills the criteria for deletion. 'Famous' as a word can mean different things to different people! --- Xenomm (Leave a message!) 01:12, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Actor Review (KK Goswami)

Please review this article: KK Goswami — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allee143 (talk • contribs) 00:34, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied: Page reviewed. For the future please grow this article with information. Also do add his year of birth if you know it, as I can't find it through searching. --- Xenomm (Leave a message!) 01:03, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will add more content to this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allee143 (talk • contribs) 02:06, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Actor Review (Bharti Kumar)

Please take a look at this page: Bharti Kumar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allee143 (talk • contribs) 20:58, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied: Page reviewed. Please add as much information as you can reliably source to improve the article. --- Xenomm (Leave a message!) 21:27, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No more bare URLs! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allee143 (talk • contribs) 22:08, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please check my article Bharti Kumar references once again and take the right action.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allee143 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article does not relies on references to primary sources anymore and all sources and references are based on reliable, published secondary sources ... and there are no redlinks in my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharti_Kumar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allee143 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied: I've checked the article and it satisfies me, although it definitely needs expanding and improvement I do not believe it should be deleted. Another editor has created a discussion for deletion here. I do not support a deletion, so I will promote keeping the article. If you wish to add to the discussion, make sure to use these guidelines. --- Xenomm (Leave a message!) 16:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Bharti Kumar

FYI, your intentions may be more clear if you tagged the article for speedy deletion instead of blanking it. Aborted AFD nominations probably should not be speedied though unless they are very old -- I didn't look closely at this one yet. Regards, causa sui (talk) 20:11, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied: Then I advise looking closer. I deleted a mistake made on the talk page. The AfD discussion is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bharti_Kumar. However the user found the talk page, where there's no discussion, so doesn't need to be there. I've directed the editor to the correct place. --- Xenomm (Leave a message!) 20:14, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. My point is that placing a CSD template or a redirect would be more clear for RCP or anyone else who is looking at the page content. I'll leave it there. Regards, causa sui (talk) 15:26, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

re yoshi hi im tortleturtle(potato) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.49.162.91 (talk) 20:16, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your Recent Revert

??? --JustBerry (talk) 23:31, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi browser issue from RC, was fixed and reverted to your most recent edit.--- Xenomm (Leave a message!) 23:37, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]