User talk:Mamyles

Thanks for uploading Image:Detailed wilderness.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It had not been orphaned for over six months - I am not responsible for someone removing an image from an article. Mamyles 00:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed content tags in Lostboy!_AKA_Jim_Kerr because I already improved this article! See and check it!

Lurulu (talk) 23:14, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should go to bed: it's late!

Lurulu (talk) 23:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
What about this? Looks like ready with the updates.  - The Herald (here I am) 16:19, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It looks ready, if the orange tags have been resolved. Only an administrator can post though, and I am not one. Mamyles (talk) 16:25, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh! Know that. i just wanted to know whether it is advisable to change it to [ready]..  - The Herald (here I am) 16:31, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to change any header to [Ready] if you think it is, but be aware that any editor can remove it if they disagree. As the top of the ITN/C page says:

• Items can also be marked as [Ready] when the article is both updated and there seems to be a consensus to post. The posting admin, however, should always judge the update and the consensus to post themselves. If you find an entry that you don't feel is ready to post is marked [Ready] you should remove the header.

Mamyles (talk) 17:03, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You entirely missed my point with your response. The OR statement was related to the fact that some commentators at ITN wish to just give their own opinion on things, entirely unreferenced, hence original research. As for the "number one" thing, well I don't see any sources claiming Gore to be a "pioneer" or an "icon", which is actually far more important than the sheer number of hits. Gore had one number one and nothing more, other than the affection she gained in people. So what, big deal, certainly not ITN-worthy. Anyway, just wanted to clarify that you misunderstood my OR point. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think I understand your point now. You want others to reference their opinions with quotes from the article or reliable sources. However, you also did not put any references for your statement of "clear notability". Also, wouldn't citing sources for every opinion, even if the facts are readily apparent from reading the article, cause the discussion to be rather long-winded? Mamyles (talk) 20:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well clear notability is self-evident from the fact that items have an article. I'm not suggesting people need to cite sources for opinion, just that the amount of personal opinion relating to someone's perceived significance is really irrelevant. It's what reliable sources say about things, not what we think about them on a personal level. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, when you phrase it that way. Perhaps if editors had used those reliable sources you mention to expand the article, it may have caused consensus to shift to support. Mamyles (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is with reference to comments on a different nomination. The point really is that we should refrain from giving our own personal opinions on the so-called significance of individuals and rely on reliable sources instead. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:27, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply & inquiry made to:
Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Why_does_.22Template:Current_Florida_statewide_political_officials.22_list_non_Floridians.3F

Looking forward to your suggestions.
Yellowdesk (talk) 22:03, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 can be used to revert vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you do not want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Happy editing! Malinaccier (talk) 14:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 14 May 2015, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Peter Gay, which you substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

Hello, Mamyles. You have new messages at Cyberpower678's talk page.
Message added 19:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 19:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit to Template:2015 Stanley Cup playoffs has been reverted.[1] Sure at the time, Tampa Bay held a 3-1 lead, but shortly afterwards the Rangers scored to cut the lead to 3-2, and it is now currently the second intermission -- NOT yet the end of the game. Please do not do this, as this is considered vandalism, especially since you have been established user since 2006 per your contributions log. Regards.Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:05, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An administrator for ten years should know better than to accuse an established editor of vandalism. See WP:NOTVANDALISM. Alakzi (talk) 02:26, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism it may not be technically the right word, I'll admit that, but it is still disruptive in adding misinformation before the fact. Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Zzyzx11: Perhaps I'm just not familiar with the policy on sports templates. At the time, another editor had already set it to 0-1, and my edit was a positive contribution that brought it (temporarily) up-to-date. Please link the policy on when/when not to update score templates. Thanks for the heads up! Mamyles (talk) 02:57, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. Looks like it represents the number of wins, rather than the score. Goes to show my knowledge of the current NHL format. I'll update template documentation and clarify that on the playoffs page. Mamyles (talk) 03:00, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, in hindsight, maybe I was overreacting a bit. Apologies for that. At least your account was not compromised, which also crossed my mind. Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for help. Again, apologies for the mix-up on my end as well. In hindsight, I think I should have pushed for that type of summary earlier (like last year when that format was first used). That current NHL/Stanley Cup playoff format, with the seeding and pairings in the first round based on divisions, seems unique compared to other sports competitions and leagues around the world. Best regards. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This edit probably was a bit too much.-79.223.26.113 (talk) 15:09, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Already taken care of. Cheers!-79.223.26.113 (talk) 15:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mamyles, I think you accidentally removed my comments from ANI when you made this edit. Not sure how I restore my comment without having to re-write it all out again. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 15:09, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@79.223.26.113, 79.223.26.113, and Wesley Mouse: Sorry about that, please be assured that it was not intentional. I did do "show changes" to ensure that only my edit would be saved, but the software still overwrites if we both click the button in the same second. Mamyles (talk) 15:15, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I added the geographical imbalance template to European migrant crisis because it's biased on Western European countries and the Italy route more, when in fact, as it turned out, the Balkan route is now he main route and Germany (or Sweden) is the ultimate destination. While the article in whle needs a lot more details, it should be geared towards Central and Eastern Europe in it's coverage now. See the Expansion is due, possible Western European bias section on the talk page. You might even consider adding the template back, if you agree, that is. --Rev L. Snowfox (talk) 19:39, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An RfC you were recently involved in (RfC: Filmography navboxes) is being discussed in a Templates for Deletion discussion (TfD Template:Anthony Marinelli). Please excuse this unsolicited contact, and avoiding WP:CANVAS, all of those involved in the RfC discussion (for, against and comment) are being notified.

Again, I apologize for the intrusion -- seeking clarification. Cheers! -- Paid Editor -- User:009o9^Talk 08:20, 17 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) 16:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise for my mistake, which I have now corrected. Coffee not working this morning! Mjroots (talk) 05:46, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can up it to template editor if you would like. The problem is that while the Hillary Clinton page is on rather a lot of watchlists the template pages are not.©Geni (talk) 14:54, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Geni: You're welcome to apply template protection instead - the criteria for use of that level of protection are much more subjective. Mamyles (talk) 15:01, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. If you remember could you poke me after the election to lower this stuff to a more conventional level.©Geni (talk) 15:11, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There was already a source to Polygon there, see <ref name="polygon-nvidia">. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mamyles. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mamyles. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elinruby (talk • contribs) 16:46, December 21, 2016 (UTC)

You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk (sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for this. You were reverted, I removed it again though as it clearly was a personal attack based on nationality, i.e. racism. Fram (talk) 14:08, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:52, 24 July 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Mamyles. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 February 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2018 Hualien earthquake, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Zanhe (talk) 05:36, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mamyles. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]