User talk:Zeupar

Welcome to my talk page. Here are some tips to help you communicate with me:

• Please continue any conversation on the page where it was started.
  • If I have left a message on your talk page please DO NOT post a reply here. I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
• Add or respond to an existing conversation under the existing heading.
  • Indent your comment when replying by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
  • Create a new heading if the original conversation is archived.
• To initiate a new conversation on this page, please click on this link.
• You should sign your comments. You can do this automatically by typing four tildes (~~~~).

Introductions

Regarding this - anything in an article's introduction must also be present in the main article, otherwise the introduction is not meeting policy - See WP:LEDE. It is NOT POSSIBLE to duplicate an introduction in the main article. TRIVIA has nothing to do with it, I don't know why you even mentioned it. Please do not revert this again, otherwise you will be blocked from editting to prevent you from doing so. If you don't understand the policy, please seek assistance at the help desks. MickMacNee (talk) 14:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't always agree with User:MickMacNee, but in this instance I have no choice. The lede in any article should contain material that introduces the subject. This information should be elaborated upon later in the article. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:45, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

We are talking about an item of a trivia section. As you can read in WP:TRIV, you are supposed to integrate these items into the article text if appropriate. While I agree that integrating said items in the introduction is not appropriate in most instances, I think that this is an exception. In fact, that information was already in the introduction before I added trivia section. Zeupar (talk) 18:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

It's not an exception. There are no exceptions to LEDE. It can be in the lede and the main article, or integrated just in the main article, but not the other way round. MickMacNee (talk) 18:58, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Dead links as references

Hi Zeupar. This is nothing heavy but I would like to ask you to be careful when dealing with references with dead links in them, such as the one on Time Cube. Firstly, there is no rule that says that references have to have links (although, obviously, it is very useful when they do). A reference to a printed publication that is not available on-line is still valid. Secondly, it is often possible to find an alternative links for a dead-linked reference by Googling for its title or looking on the publisher's restructured website. Rather than removing references with dead links it is normally better to tag them with {{deadlink}} so that somebody else can have a go at fixing them. Of course, that doesn't apply to references that appear to be irrelevant, superfluous or spurious for other reasons (e.g. newly created dead-links that probably never pointed at anything) but in the case of long standing valid references it is important not to remove them just because some site has restructured its web content. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:56, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

July 2014

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at 2014 FIFA World Cup, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:19, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Uh, are you sure you aren't mistaking me for someone else? Zeupar (talk) 22:37, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

You are correct. I was meaning to warn 7amozza. I have stricken the warning. Thanks for making the correction to the article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)