User talk:Eugene-elgato

Welcome!

Hello, Eugene-elgato, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

How about now? Is that what you are looking for? LoveMonkey (talk) 16:02, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thats excellent! Thank you so much :) Eugene-elgato (talk) 16:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey ah what's up with the comments of Dave? [1] What's that all about? LoveMonkey (talk) 17:35, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, LoveMonkey please don't get angry. I have to come clean. 'Dave' doesn't exist, it was a device for me to facilitate support, but if you want to delete all that, that would be fine. From now on I shall do things legitimately. Hope you forgive me ? Eugene-elgato (talk) 17:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No harm no fowl. You should post a confession there on the talkpage to avoid any confusion. Sock puppeting can get you in serious trouble. But then you have to be reported to a board and other stuff so just try and clear up that I am not a devil worshipper on the talkpage and we'll be OK. OK. LoveMonkey (talk)

Check it out. I think it makes a lot of sense.--Draco ignoramus sophomoricus (talk) 10:47, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Parakalo. Glad I could help.--Draco ignoramus sophomoricus (talk) 16:50, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. I never noticed.[2] LoveMonkey (talk) 02:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS I hope your acclimating OK. I apologize for not helping you more around here. It's just that everything is on a contast conflict kick. The damn petty bickering and validity avoidance gets shameful around here. LoveMonkey (talk) 16:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I realize it is not really necessary to post these things here and I'm convinced you already know most of these things, but since "Catholic" is one of the Church's traditional titles (in fact in the past, the Orthodox Church was usually called as the "Catholic Church", the term "Orthodox" was mainly applied to the "Orthodox faith", to "Orthodoxy", to the "Orthodox theology", or to the "Orthodox" members of the Church, it was rarely applied to the Church, the term "Orthodox Church" is somewhat more recent), I believe it should not be omitted from the title. Many of the Holy Fathers have referred many times to the Orthodox Church as the Catholic Church (you can check a few of their statements in the following articles [3],[4],[5]), and it is used nonetheless in canonical contexts. An important document the "Confession of the Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem Dositheus" (which was made after the important Synod of Jerusalem in 1672), also refers to the Orthodox Church as the Catholic Church (the title "Orthodox Church" does not even appear in the confession, instead the term "Orthodox" is used when referring to the "Orthodox Religion", the "Orthodox Faith" or the "Orthodox worshipers"), it can also be found here. The "The Longer Catechism of The Orthodox, Catholic, Eastern Church" of Saint Philaret of Moscow also uses the title "Catholic Church" for the Orthodox Church more times than the title "Orthodox Church". This encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs does the same. An article on the website of an Orthodox Research Institute states According to Archbishop Basil, “until quite a recent period, the (Orthodox) Church was never characterized by the attribute ‘orthodox’, but always as ‘catholic’". Aleksey Khomyakov even stated "The Orthodox Eastern Church is the whole of the Catholic Church now living upon earth—The titles "Orthodox" and "Eastern" merely temporary" (a more complete text can be found here, his words may seem a bit shocking, but he underlines nonetheless, the importance of this title and concept for Orthodoxy). In my opinion, there are no serious problems of confusion, "Eastern Orthodox Church" would still redirect there, the lead will contain clear explanations about what this article is (and I doubt anyway that the readers of wikipedia, will just stop when reading the article title), in fact it could even help people understand the importance, of this title and concept for Orthodoxy better (and as far as I know, people usually read encyclopedias to learn). As far as I see, the wiki naming rules, would support this move (and it seems that the non-Chalcedonians are not called in english exactly this way ("(Eastern) Orthodox Catholic Church") "Eastern" and "Oriental" are synonyms, however, of course, it is your choice whatever you support this or not, I still wish to thank you for not opposing too much about it (I'm sorry, if I misunderstood you). Also, as you probably noticed, (although it should not matter too much in that discussion), the article "Roman Catholic Church" has been recently renamed as simply "Catholic Church", although they are obviously not the only ones to claim this title. (And regarding the term "Roman Catholic" and the Eastern Roman ("Byzantine") Empire, from an orthodox and east Roman point of view, you are of course correct about that.) Cody7777777 (talk) 07:07, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the proposal was "Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church" or "Orthodox Catholic Church (Eastern)" to avoid any possible confusion with fake groups calling themselves as "Orhodox Catholic Churches" (although as far as I see, in english "Orthodox Catholic Church" refers usually to the "Eastern Orthodox Church"). Nonetheless, I believe the rename to simply "Orthodox Church" should rather be avoided, it is of course a correct name of the Church, but this renaming would just imitate what happened at "Roman Catholic Church" to "Catholic Church" (which at least in my opinion was done by ignoring the disambiguation policy), and it might indirectly encourage other articles to ignore wiki naming policy. Cody7777777 (talk) 16:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In case you're interested, a new debate has started about renaming the current wiki article "Catholic Church" back to "Roman Catholic Church", you can find the debate at Talk:Catholic Church#Requested Move. ("Roman Catholic" is probably still be more neutral than simply "Catholic Church", but you don't need to participate in that debate if you don't wish, or if you don't have time). Cody7777777 (talk) 09:06, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look, before you go off and cop an attitude, please review the guidelines for a first article. Two sentences with no references do not make an article. You'll find the help you need at WP:YFA. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:46, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will say this to you once and once only: Part of my job as an administrator is to delete unsuitable content. Period. If you ever come back ono my talk page with that chip on your shoulder, I will knock it off, i.e., you're going to take a timeout from editing. Am I clear? --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:53, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What you should do is to take it up with me. I was coming by to restore your article; you caught me at a really bad time and I felt bad for biting you. In the future, please don't attack other editors or admins if something you create is deleted; nothing here is ever lost. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:01, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Deal. I was in a foul mood due to some vandalism to my talk page and I really did jump down your throat; I shouldn't have been doing new page patrolling in a mood like that. I've restored the article for you with my apologies. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:03, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You got it. That's the trouble with not being able to communicate in real time and I feel awful taking my frustrations out on you. You did nothing to deserve that. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I am genuinely sorry for biting your head off. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would be a pleasure, I assure you. Gonna sign off myself...take care and thanks. I'm glad we worked this out. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Snapshot of me 7.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 21:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 21:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Snapshot of me 7.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Andrew c ^[talk] 22:39, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still having image issues for File:Snapshot of me 7.png. I'm curious what your claim to being the copyright holder is? What is your relation to the Agrotissa corporation? Why is this image so low-resolution and it looks like a TV screenshot? If you are associated with Agrotissa, don't you have a better quality publicity image? Do you know that taking a photograph or screenshot of a logo or product does not transfer the copyright to you? Are you really the copyright holder of this image? Thanks! -Andrew c ^[talk] 17:16, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me, and thanks for your honesty. Regarding the image copyright, unfortunately, since the entire focus/subject of the image is a copyrighted package/logo, simply taking a slavish reproduction of such an image does not transfer the copyright to you, thus you cannot release this image under a free license. However, we do, on the English Wikipedia, allow some non-free content under the claim of "fair use". A logo/product image such as this most likely will meet WP:NFCC, and thus can stay in the article (as long as the image is retagged to note the copyright, and fair use rationale). Though, I must add, it would be better if we could get a slightly better quality image. Do you have any friends with digital cameras that wouldn't mind taking a snapshot? Anyway, thanks! -Andrew c ^[talk] 21:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've retagged the image as being non-free/copyrighted, but under a fair use. I've also renamed it to something a bit more descriptive, hope you done mind. Thanks for your patience. Hope this helps. -Andrew c ^[talk] 22:00, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Some of your recent edits to date articles, such as those you added to December 13, have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. The article that you edited has verifiability guidelines for the addition of events to the list. Each entry must link to an article that supports the entry in full. Refer to WP:DAYS for details on what are acceptable entries in Wikicalendar articles. Thanks. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 23:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for letting me know! I'll read those guidelinesEugene-elgato (talk) 18:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} Please could you tell me how to go about getting a committed identity; I had difficulty following the instructions on the template? Thank youEugene-elgato (talk) 19:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. See WP:Committed_identity. It seems to have good instructions.  Ilyushka88 Talk to me 19:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is excellent; it is much easier to follow. Thank youEugene-elgato (talk) 19:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have no clue about the etymology of etymon (ain't that ironic?), but I doubt it has anything to do with ready, which is the meaning of "etoimon" or "etoemon" (έτοιμον) except that they sound exactly the same (e'-ti-mon) in oral speech.--Draco ignoramus sophomoricus (talk) 09:01, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Wikipedia has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia, as you did in Us Tareyton smokers would rather fight than switch!, makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Amerias (talk) 18:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent; I will certainly look at itEugene-elgato (talk) 19:25, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good work at the critical reception section. However, we try to avoid in-line external links, even if no article exists. ~ ς ح д r خ є ~ 18:26, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, Scarce; perhaps the strength of authority of my sources was rather lacking (as you said you'd presume a pure horror unless the producers or someone directly involved stated it to be comedy-horror) however my intention was to convey that lots of people seemed to find the movie funny as well as scary. Will bear in mind not to hyperlink the sites.Eugene-elgato (talk) 18:29, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The WORCESTERSHIRE Project Newsletter - March 2010

The WikiProject WORCESTERSHIRE Newsletter No. 2 - March 2010 (Archived here.) Welcome to the second WikiProject Worcestershire newsletter You are probably receiving this because you have significantly contributed to one of our pages. If you are not yet a participant in the Worcestershire project, now is the time to consider joining - it might help you get some assistance on a page you feel particularly attached to. Here goes for the second irregular news bulletin... First GA in 2010 We finally got over our euphoria over the Malvern, Worcestershire promotion to Good Article status. The GA sets a benchmark for the quality to be targeted for other articles in the project, and clearly demonstrated how important teamwork is. Recently founded A lot of work has already been done since the Worcs project was started, including the recent tagging of the talk pages of all the articles about people connected with Worcestershire, keeping spam and vandalism at bay, and welcoming new editors on their talk pages. Experts needed! The Worcestershire project mainly concerns settlements. It's generally agreed that the immediate priority now is to improve the articles that shiould be the flagships of the project, namely Worcester, and Worcestershire which are some of the articles in the worst state. Meet up Kudpung has booked his flight from Asia and will be back in Malvern from 1 April for a month, and looks forward to meeting up with as many Wikipedians as possible, especially those who work on the Worcs project. NEWS Two major debates are raging on the 'pedia and we have been cautiously taking part. WP:BLP (Biography of Living Persons) In for a shake up is an accumulation of nearly 50,000 totally unsourced articles that may end up on the cutting room floor after a period of grace. As a project, we can help by taking a look at those BLP in the county and doing what we can before the axe falls. citations A war almost broke out over citation formats, but a mature approach from Worcs project members prevented any physical injury. There, are only three basic rules for citations: 1. All articles must have them. 2. Consitency of format throughout an articles. 3. Changes to the format require a consensus. We are not obliged to use citation templates, and WP:LDR might not be such a good idea while chunks of text and/or their references are being copied and pasted around related articles in the county. In any case, let's always discuss what we have in mind HERE. new project pages The project main page has been pruned to be cleaner, and much of the support material has been transferred to dedicated pages. New usefull banners and templates have been created, and shortcuts to the new pages that also include a side bar navigator and a brand new easily edited To Do list. new participant After all the hints getting him to join, we now welcome User:wotnow ! sysop (admin) Our only admin has resigned his tools. It would be great to have an active admin as a member of the project. If you think you would be able to cope with all the responsibility adminship involves, checkout WP:RfA and nominate yourself. Nobody needs to have a high edit count or to be an expert in all areas, but being active, having a reasonable overview of the workings of the Wikipedia, and a decent level of maturity, are expected minima. The process is not painless, and is worse than a British army promotion board! Alternatively you can always nominate another user. Would you like to join the WP:WORCS?? Please enter yourself at WP:WORCS! - new editors are always welcome! Happy Wikying, and thanks to everyone else who has contributed to our articles. New project resources Before making any major edits to articles or stubs, please be sure to read the new WP:WORCS/HowTo. Urgent tasks are now listed at: WP:WORCS/ToDo. It should be referred to often, and will be your main stop for most maintenance tasks. We recommend keeping the page on your watchlist. Most project pages now have brand new side bar for easy navigation. (Thanks, GyroMagician). Priority Articles== The top priority articles have been identified as probably being: Worcester • Worcestershire • Bromsgrove • Redditch • Kidderminster • Pershore • Malvern St James • Droitwich • tenbury Wells and the suite of former QinetiQ establlishments: * TRE • RSRE • DERA The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, so we can concentrate our efforts on these first. Priorities are not set in stone and if you would like to discuss changes, please join in at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Worcestershire. Other priorities: The recommended priority by kind is for creation/improvement of complete articles is: Places in the county Schools in the county (Particularly susceptible to vandalism - please keep them on your watch lists if possible). Transport in the county Notable buildings/objects/geo features/AONB/Heritage sites, etc. in the county History in the county Industry & Commerce in the county. People in the county - NOTE: These all need the Worcs project banner adding to their talk pages, and assessing. County related articles about things not actually in the county, and/or other related projects. These lists will help: All Worcs related articles by ABC Worcs related articles by type. All Worcs related articles about people by ABC List of all Schools in Worcestershire List by Class & Importance: Page 1 All categories except people (not yet tagged with WP banner) List by Class & Importance: Page 2 All categories except people (not yet tagged with WP banner). New Aims Specific aims for the project are:- Monitor The watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible. Infoboxes Some of our articles need their infoboxes completing infobox. References Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is always in need of attention. Please take a look and see if you can help. One small edit, such as adding a reference section and reference, to an article each session would make a big difference. If you are uploadiing an image, be sure it has a correct FUR, and that you have preferably already created a link on the page where you want it to be. Moves, merges, and multiple edits Please be careful when performing articles moves and check if anyone seems to be in the middle of doing the same thing. If he; she, or they are, stop and have a chat about it. Otherwise you may be unintentionally duplicating or reverting each other's work. This is particularly important if an article is currently under a GA review. image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR. Guidelines How to write about settlements How to write about counties How to write about rivers How to write about people Get your article referenced now! Imprint Written by User:Kudpung • All comments to WT:WORCS Based on an original concept by WP:YORKS

Hello again! You need not worry; your new article looks absolutely wonderful and neither I nor any other administrator would even remotely consider deleting it. It's a marvelous, well-researched short article which is more than worthy of being here. You did a fantastic job and I thank you for your thoughtfulness in alerting me to it. Regards, --PMDrive1061 (talk) 06:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} Does anyone know how to help me make a user box for my profile page saying: "this user has made over 1,000 contributions on Wikipedia" ? Thank youEugene-elgato (talk) 22:21, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. You would want {{User contrib|1000}}. You can change the number when you get more edits. It will show like this:

Hope that helps! ^Avicenna_sis @ 22:30, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} Please does anyone know how to cross a line through words I have written; I especially would like to draw a line through something I wrote on the errors page for the main page, where I'd added my section in the wrong area as there was already a section on that topic on the errors forOn this Day bitEugene-elgato (talk) 01:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like this. - You add <s> </s> tags around the text you want to strike out. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Add <s> and </s> around the text to cross a line through it. For example, <s>text</s> becomes text. You can also press on the toolbar above the edit window. For more help with this, please see Help:Wiki markup#Text formatting, and let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 01:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

== Miss America edits ==

After reading the edit that was reverted in this article I strongly recommend that you review the section that describes what Wikipedia is not. Good luck! Rapier (talk) 02:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		The Minor Barnstar
		For cleanup of several articles' typos. Bearian (talk) 19:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like BozMo has the issue for now. But I will kinda keep an eye out. Hope all is well. God is with Us! LoveMonkey (talk) 15:33, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey could you come and help out on the filioque article I am looking to recruit some more editors to the article to get better collaboration. LoveMonkey (talk) 02:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm ready to do mediation, or whatever we're going to do. What can I do to help? - Lisa (talk - contribs) 00:17, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Eugene! And a happy, leaky new year to you and yours.

Were you going to assist in mediation for the Seven Laws of Noah? Or was there a different page that specifically addressees Noahide that you were going to address?

If it was the Seven Laws of Noah, I asked Lisa and Alexeya both if they wouldn't mind if I contacted my local Jewish Synagogue and merely ask the Rabbi there for an answer, then present the two with the emailed question and response, then allow them both to accept what the Rabbi had to offer.

As you may have seen, the "Seven Laws of Noah" on websites show different things which support both contenders' views of the actual 4th Law, so it's reasonable why there's a dispute. A third party simply asking a random Rabbi should resolve the conflict even if one or both contributors are not entirely satisfied.

Update my talk page if you would, sir, and if you're already handling the Seven Laws of Noag conflict, let me know and I'll go back to reading Archie comic books. Damotclese (talk) 04:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, thanks for getting back to me. Neither partioes seem willing to discuss the issue and as you noted, it's so trivial that I believe the dispute could just be closed. Damotclese (talk) 18:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has replied to your request for help. Please see below for the reply. If you need more help or have additional questions, please replace the code {{help me-helped}} on this page with {{help me}}, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

Hi, I have a problem with an article which I do not believe to meet Wikipedia's guidelines (the above-named). It concerns a student whose claim to fame is simply to have published academic papers. Wikipedia does not, as far as I understand, include articles on academics unless they have done something special, e.g. of international acclaim, or won something like the Nobel Prize and not some minor award.

However, the author, whom I strongly suspect to the the object of the article itself, has removed the deletion tag with no further discussion.

I don't know the procedure from here where I continue to dispute the object's notability. Please help. Eugene-elgato (talk) 18:40, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He is allowed to remove the PROD - see WP:DEL#Proposed deletion: "Any editor who disagrees with a proposed deletion can simply remove the tag" - and once an article has been dePRODded, it may not be PRODded again. The reason is that PROD is meant only for uncontroversial deletions, and once anyone has objected it is no longer uncontroversial. At a quick glance the article asserts enough importance to pass the speedy criterion WP:CSD#A7 (which is a lower standard than WP:Notability), but probably does not pass the academic notability standard of WP:PROF. What you can do next is nominate it at WP:Articles for deletion - that page explains how to do it. WP:Autobiography is discouraged but not prohibited, and per WP:OUTING it is probably wisest not to make a big thing of that suspicion without concrete proof - the question, in any case, is notability. JohnCD (talk) 18:51, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent- this really clarifies the procedure. I will take your advice and consider nominating in the appropriate forum. And yes, it may or may not be bad whether he did create his own article or not; just whether it's right for Wikipedia. Thank you.Eugene-elgato (talk) 18:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for bothering you, but since I noticed in the past your interest about the history of the Eastern Roman/Byzantine Empire, and I thought you might want to know that there is a request for renaming the article "History of the Eastern Roman Empire" to "History of the Byzantine Empire". If you have time, please check it carefully. However, there's no problem if you're not interested or if you're too busy with other things. Cody7777777 (talk) 20:19, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey - as a recent contributer to the Adam Hollioake article I'm letting you know that I've requested comments regarding some of the issues surrounding the subject at WP:BLPN. Cheers Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:00, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tulāsana 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/Tulāsana until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article.

Factual addendum to above template notification: The AfD discussion concerns a total of 58 asana articles. MarB4 •ɯɒɹ• 14:05, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you get a chance could you look into the talkpage of the militant atheism article? LoveMonkey (talk) 19:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The sourcing part about the article, is there any sources to the article that you might know that could be added? LoveMonkey (talk) 13:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Harrow International School Hong Kong requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 19:05, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

How do you make it so that a link takes you specifically to a section within an Article, and not merely to that Article generally (the top of its page) i.e. clicking on that link goes to the page, then automatically scrolls itself down to the relevant section and instantly? Thank you Eugene-elgato (talk) 22:41, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At the article, use the table of contents to chose the section/subsection. Copy the url, pruning everything that isn't needed; I then replace underscores with spaces, but that's personal style preference. Add the piping, and what you see in edit mode will resemble [[Examples#Grammar_and_style|Examples]] or [[Examples#Grammar and style|Examples]]. Once you're familiar with it, you can do it without the copy/paste portion, but as any error won't link correctly, I'd always recommend previewing, which will show a redlink unless correct. Dru of Id (talk) 23:25, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, of course. I should have noted that this is covered at Help:Section. Another caution, though. If the section is renamed, the link will break, so make sure it doesn't need to be corrected first. "Grammar and Style" should be "Grammar and style", unless it is a proper noun (book title, movie title, rock group, etc.). Dru of Id (talk) 23:48, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to go about blocking it. If it happens a few times, there will be a warning, then action. It's terribly stupid behaviour really! My page has not been vandalised before this. Amandajm (talk) 10:43, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Material Scientist has blocked them. Amandajm (talk) 10:44, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read edit comments. Be sure typos really are before changing them. ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:25, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. This helped me realize I should leave a comment in the markup when there is an issue like this. ⇔ ChristTrekker 16:49, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

== Non Free Image Removal ==

Please do not delete non-free images from articles like you did to Dekha Ek Khwaab. Please read this what an admin says:

"Thanks for uploading File:Soni and Chicky.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).......Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)"

:Please whenever replying leave me a Tb template!--Jagadhatri(২০১২) 04:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected a typoEugene-elgato (talk) 07:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So it may be a spam. --Jagadhatri(২০১২) 07:41, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eugene-elgato - I was wondering if you could give me any advice on how to improve this page? It's not showing up in Google, and I would like to improve it's status/quality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr_Meeble

Thank you! Devin Michael (talk) 02:11, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well caught! μηδείς (talk) 08:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, mhdeis!!Eugene-elgato (talk) 10:14, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eugene-elgato, I am looking for volunteers to re-create the link below for all 196 countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mcnabber091/Economy_of_the_United_States The goal of this project is to map out the global economy. Here is the project page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_Economic_Map — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcnabber091 (talk • contribs) 03:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your message on my talk wall.Mcnabber091 (talk) 15:10, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eugene-elgato, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bloomberg L.P., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Intellectual Property Office. 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) 09:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent - all corrected nowEugene-elgato (talk) 12:39, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eugene-elgato. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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) 14:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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) 02:24, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 wish to participate in the 2021 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) 00:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Benedict Birnberg, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:43, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Abdul Nacer Benbrika, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 09:11, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]