User talk:Studerby

Archive 1

Thank you for cleaning up all my typos, misspellings and style errors on the Mel Sembler page.

As a participant of WikiProject U.S. Congress, please consider placing {{Project Congress to do}} to the top of your User_talk page. Thank you. —Markles 16:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didnt mean to remove the Deac part from the opening.--Yankees10 23:45, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added the correct Turkish spelling in brackets as (Turkish: Halil Süleyman Özerden) along side his so-called "Am ericanized" version of his name, as it would appear in a non-english speaking country. Please do not erase it, as I have not touched his so-called "Americanized" name in the text. Thank you for your "understanding". Saguamundi

Don't remove the CORRECT Turkish spelling (Turkish: Mehmet Öz) in the brackets. Even though he US "born and bred" and a US citizen (If he has Turkish citizenship, which there is no evidence so far, than all the letters of his name must be spelled with the letter "Ö/ö"), this is the way it is spelled in his native language and in tolerant countries whether these letters exist or don't exist in their languages.

And whether it is relevant or not in Wikipedia is a matter of PERSONAL OPINON and it is definately NOT Wikipedia policy.

Now that we both realise that it's not a question of sourcing :-) What's your reason for saying that there's a problem with including his race? We don't have a picture of him (at least as far as I know), so obviously IF his race is to be included, it must be by text; and his race is surely part of his...um...identity. I don't understand how a thirty-byte statement in a 3 KB article could be undue weight. Nyttend (talk) 03:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, do you perhaps think that I'm adding race to characterise him? I just checked the "badging" link in your edit summary, and let me assure you that I added these three words to the article where I did simply because I believe that it's appropriate to mention his race, and I didn't know where else to put them. The only thing that I mean for the reader to think of him by these words is that his skin is light coloured and that his ancestry is likely European. Nyttend (talk) 03:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, since you present the evidence for it being standard practice not to include race, I'll not keep trying. I still think it would be useful, but I am well aware of the idea of consensus, and I really don't feel like trying to change it here :-) Thanks for making a convincing and easy-to-follow argument. Nyttend (talk) 18:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On a totally unrelated question: how do you get the title of your page to appear as "It seemed like a good idea at the time"? Is it the "RealTitleBanner" coding? I have no desire to add it to my own page, so don't think I'm asking for help :-) but I am rather impressed that it's possible to do this at all. Nyttend (talk) 18:18, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't remove the CORRECT Turkish spelling (Turkish: Arda Öcal) in brackets! If you don't tolerate even this than you are RACIST! Saguamundi

Sorry about the apostrophes - will not change them in future. Rogermx (talk) 21:41, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I know you're not stalking me (I hope!). I also know I messed up my attempt to reverse a prior redirect that was done after an article I created was deleted. That page has since been recreated and a disambiguation page was needed as there are two different persons with the exact same name (Duncan Ferguson - a) political activist and b) Scottish football player). I left a message at the WP:ANI asking for assistance from an admin to fix the snafu. I do know how to do a page move or redirect under normal conditions. [email protected] (talk) 02:31, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I read your comment at Talk:Žižek! -- and followed it to the discussion points you made at Mehmed. Nicely presented. I'm going to be stealing a few of your lines. Cheers. — CactusWriter | ^needles 11:18, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there STUDERBY, VASCO from Portugal here,

Saw your message on User:Raymond_Cruise's page, and i think you may be doing something wrong as far as Defaultsorts go. Spanish, Portuguese and Brazilian have very specific modus operandi in this matters. You may want to read this discussion i brought forward at WPFOOTY (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Defaultsorts), maybe you change your views on sortkey's display.

Keep up the good work, Vasco - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 22:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can't say I agree with you there, and have never seen {{DEFAULTSORT}} used in such a manner anywhere else; generally it is used to sort people by their surname and titles that begin with the definite or indefinite article. Technically speaking you would want "Woman on the Beach" to sort as "Woman Beach"; "Woman On The Beach" is no more correct than "Woman on the Beach". PC78 (talk) 19:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your detailed answer to my concern; I shall defer to your judgement on the matter, except to say that seeking a technical solution to the problem would probably be better than trying to fix things manually. 18 months? Blimey, rather you than me. :) PC78 (talk) 21:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've noticed your work, and I consider you to be quite an expert on sort keys. I thought that your input might be valuable in the following discussion: WT:Categorization of people#Periods/full stops in sort keys. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for cleaning up the style in that article. I had a 2nd ref. to a Sec 3.1 in the Wiki article University of California, which gave the more recent news on that controversy. Can you please add that back into the article with correct style. Thanks, --EJohn59 (talk) 22:51, 11 May 2009 (UTC)EJohn59 Thanks for your detailed explanation. I understand the rationale. Much obliged.--EJohn59 (talk) 04:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)EJohn59[reply]

Dude, I am so HORRIBLE at this internet stuff, believe me I'll NEVER figure it out. I appreciate the input, maybe you can tell me how to change something. There are a couple of websites with an inaccurate birth year - likely based on the fact that I graduated so early. I've given them my driver's license copy but it did no good so I let it go. A buddy at my production office changed my entry here - somehow he magically tracked when someone would put up the inaccurate year but he got tired of it and emailed me today. Anyway, is there a place that you know of on wikipedia that I can send my driver's license or passport, birth certificate, whatever. Any help would be HUGE! Dean dcochran @newregency.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saintdean (talk • contribs) 19:51, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know on the omission of the dab link in the DEFAULTSORT. My concern is that if you do have the dab link in the DEFAULTSORT that it would create confusion among the names because if you hit a category for one John Roberts, you could end up with two or three different categories for one person. Say you clicked on the biography of the CNN reporter John Roberts, that could lead to the current Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or to the reporter on SPEED TV (All three John Roberts are in the US.). You can understand my concern with this. Chris (talk) 19:38, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Why would that be? It sorts just fine in the categories as D'Or. The problem is -- D'Or is his name, not Dor .... and putting the wrong name in would make it harder for people to find him.--Ethelh (talk) 04:58, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies; too tired and too rushed I guess. I really need to get into the habit of previewing my changes, because quite apart from confusing { and [ my typing is not too accurate either, meaning that a simple edit can take two or three goes if I hit the "save page" button too quickly. Mea culpa! Thanks for pointing it out. -- Timberframe (talk) 12:04, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that - "é" (e-acute) - it is not accented "e" - "e-acute" is a Spanish letter. Probably you know it better than me but I just want to be sure abut this rules. Do we classify "é" it as "e" when we sort articles in the categories? Regards! V1^t 10:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am making every effort to comply with the changes requested. Basically, this article is a section that I moved from List of Belgian Americans. Most of the entries there were short concise single paragraphs. This entry was extremely long and out of place so I thought it might be better suited as a stand alone article. I agree it was over-board and peacocky but it had some interest.--Buster7 (talk) 03:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added external references to the T.J. Gottesdiener article. Would you mind reviewing it again? I think the notability guidelines and source requirements have been met. Thanks! Kmsom (talk) 14:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You, I did not know that. Ositadinma (talk) 20:45, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the purpose of categorization is for convenience. Perhaps you can let me know which guideline in Wiki does not permit such categorization --Jhjlj (talk) 22:25, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your explaination, it is fine with me. --Jhjlj (talk) 19:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to this edit to Karen Muir and its associated edit summary, I've had a look at the MoS and WP:MOSBIO. I can't find any indication that the word "in" should not be used. The entry for Bill Clinton (under #Names) seems to imply that prepositions are acceptable.

I also see several featured articles where it is used (e.g. Alain Prost, Phil Collins, Bill O'Reilly (cricketer), Ian Thorpe, Bob Windle, Trevor Linden). I can't off-hand find any instances where the preposition is not used in an FA, but of course I only had a cursory glance and there may in fact be many instances.

In light of this, I wonder if you could clarify your position for me here. Regards, --DeLarge (talk) 10:33, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested to know that the question of expanding the use of the YYYY-MM-DD format has arisen once again, at [1]--VMAsNYC (talk) 09:53, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am puzzled that AWB has decided that this is a person, especially when it recognises that the cat needs a special sort. Something to raise at WP:AWB when I get a moment. Rich Farmbrough, 14:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

I do believe some people from different generations should be noted when one looks at the site. I was trying to see famous people from Generation X but there is no list there. The same goes for Baby Boomers and the Silent Generation. In my attempt to be impartial, I listed a number of different professions and those that are idolized a of a the generation by many though I may not. I came back to delete the Google people and add an inventor, but the addition was gone. There was a comment on the editing that took me off since I tried to be impartial as much as possible getting a number of different professions and trying to get people from throughout the the 20 year span. Obama was there because he is president. I had considered putting Sarah Palin in, but that would be being indifferent for indifferent's sake. The information I added was from other sites since I had to search to find people. I do not know how to not put a diverse list of contributes for Generation X, Baby Boomers, or the Silent Generation without running into the same problem and being deleted. Famous is a relative term and others can even out the list is my point-of-view, but any addition would be founded such as presidents and those widely considered icons though I may or may not consider them myself. What can I do to make sure my list meets an impartial test?

Pwalker1972 (talk) 21:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)Patrick Walker —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pwalker1972 (talk • contribs) 21:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Mandarax Barnstar of Excellence
		Studerby, I am pleased to award this MBE to you in recognition of your outstanding contributions in the area of sort keys. Your expert work in this field has been very valuable and I'm happy to spotlight that work by presenting you with this barnstar. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Just to let you know that this dab has been nominated for deletion using Template:db-disambig. If you have any questions about this, please contact me. Best wishes, Boleyn3 (talk) 22:10, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious: Did you read my posts on the Spielberg talk page before writing your response? If you didn't, I suppose it's rather promising that you can come to the same conclusion, by roughly the same methods that I did. At least indicates that my interpretation of the policies and guidelines is not unique. :-) —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 03:06, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I hadn't read the discussion page before posting my comments.

BTW, I'll point out this snippet from the BLP guidelines you quoted in discussion: can be sourced to reliable secondary sources (my emphasis). This is actually a significant part of the issue. Using secondary sources (other people's analysis) rather than us editors picking and choosing material from primary sources ourselves helps us avoid original research. Obviously, with some current issues involving criticism, they're too recent for secondary sources to have evolved yet, and we muddle through. However, Speilberg's been around for forever, so there should be at least some good critical analysis of his film career in secondary sources now. Even the "legitimite" criticism in the article (in my opinion, which seems close to yours) is actually a collection and synthesis of snippets from mostly primary sources, i.e. it's original research. It's well-done, and fairly even-handed, picking relevant and important criticisms (IMHO), but it's OR none-the-less. Given the existing collection of snippets and summaries from primary sources, it's not surprising that a naive editor assumes that adding some more snippets is OK. If not for the vitriolic nature of those bits, we'd be tempted to ignore them being tossed into the bucket.

Finally, the criticism section could benefit from some reorganization, splitting the general film criticism from the business/personal, probably with a sub-section for Schindler's/Holocaust stuff. Studerby (talk) 20:22, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A good point on the primary vs. secondary sources. I should have remembered that, having made a similar argument on Tito (don't go there, I wouldn't wish the Balkans on my worst enemy). —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 21:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking to improve a wiki bio of Igor Babailov and have already followed (your?) recommendations at the top of the page, what else would you suggest I work on? Thanks for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Armychild (talk • contribs) 19:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Garry Bradbury has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced BLP.

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. Unitasock (talk) 01:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I would like to add to the Alexandra_Powers atricle because I think she grew up in manhanttan because I read on on a website about 5 years ago. Should I add that? Thank you! Neptunekh2 (talk) 03:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I messed up the Alexandra Powers page. Could you please wikify or clean it up? Thanks!Neptunekh2 (talk) 05:38, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the sorting change in Brian J. O'Neill. I created several new articles for Category:Philadelphia City Council members, and I have questions on the sort order on the talk page bio template, as well as the articles themselves. I am supposing that Donna Reed Miller goes under Miller, not Reed, but Maria Quiñones-Sanchez goes under Quiñones and not Sanchez, reflecting the hyphen in her name, as a Hispanic American. Am I correct? --DThomsen8 (talk) 20:16, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sort order for biographical articles can be tricky. This has some information about some of the special cases, like the "O'Whatever" case and other odd cases. However, for your question, the main point is that we want to be sorting by "family name", which unfortunately depends on culture and individual preference in some cases. There are a set of templates that, when used, can give you guidance; however, usually when there's a question, there's no template. For Hispanic-heritage names of form "A B C", it is often the case that B is the person's father's "family name" and C is the mother's; in that case B is the "family name" that should start the sort key. If the article is named "A B C", then the sort key is "B C, A"; if the article is named "A B", with the full name "A B C" in the lead, then the sort key is "B, A". (The rule is that we are sorting the article title). However, there are sometimes Hispanic names where the B is an "English" style "middle name"; sorting that out is hard or even impossible without a clue from the references. Hyphenated names, whether Hispanic or not, are usually treated just like Hispanic names, except that we almost always be certain that B is the family name. That's the long way of saying, yes, the sort key for Maria Quiñones-Sanchez should be "Quinones-Sanchez, Maria" (no tilde on the n!!! see the "accented letter rule").

"For Donna Reed Miller, from the name, it could in theory be either "Miller, Donna Reed", or "Miller Reed, Donna" (if for example she's using a "modern" last name that keeps her maiden name and appends her husbands family name); looking at the reference, she more usually goes by "Donna Miller", so "Reed" is a normal middle name, and the article sort should be "Miller, Donna Reed". Studerby (talk) 22:46, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems crazy to me - the whole idea. But whatever your opinion, would you please weigh in on this discussion? Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 February 15 The category is entitled Category: House of Clare. Thanks Mugginsx (talk) 22:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have apparently misunderstood what they were discussing, anyway, I hope you will give your opinion anyway. Thanks Mugginsx (talk) 22:52, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Studerby. You may not remember me but you were able to find a picture of William-Adolphe Bouguereau to diffuse a situation a few years ago. I saw your post on Stokers talk page today and I wanted to let you know that those were the very words that I typed into google this morning. It led me to the same WSJ article that you found and I actually added it to the article at an appropriate spot. It was good to see your name again and cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 23:31, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I remember that little kerfuffle. Good to hear from you, and happy editing. Studerby (talk) 23:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Quick question. You deleted information at an article, w/the edit summary "No encyclopedic reason to include the street". I don't have a passionate view on the issue in that article. But am curious as to the genesis for your assertion. Is that founded in any wiki policy? Generally, we reflect what is in RSs, and I would think that if a street address is RS-reported it is acceptable to reflect it in the article. I'm not aware of a countervailing policy. Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good important question, replied on user's talk. Studerby (talk) 21:52, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may not have been ref'd, but it is in more than one RS. See, for example, here.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Once the AfD is over, would be interested in some of your further thoughts on the non-AfD issues. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I am feeling my way and overwhelmed when looking into the larger realm of articles. I was particularly disappointed in the article on Technology Integration (my forté). In looking at the edits and content, I think it probably ought to just be a section under Instructional Technology. I'm going slow, though. Thanks again!Lacbolg (talk) 20:39, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry to interrupt your normal programming, but I'd appreciate it if you could take another look at the Network TwentyOne AfD. The article was locked for edit warring until shortly before the AfD was placed and has now been substantially rewritten. You're one of only two uninvolved editors to have commented and I'd appreciate it if you could take another look. Part of the issue in your "quick look" is possibly that N21 is a substantially more notable organization outside the english speaking world and I suspect those were primarily the sources you looked at :). I've outlined the sources currently used and my position in a separate section at the bottom of the AfD. Thanks. --Insider201283 (talk) 18:36, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! I was thrilled that anyone noticed, especially so soon after I did it. It is very hard (and usually thankless) work trying to clean up someone else's ungainly prose style. All the actual info was valuable, but the prose was very much "in the style of a hastily written exam question" rather than an encyclopedia. If I have the time and the inclination I will tackle the whole article, but at least now the intro is vaguely acceptable. Thanks again for noticing! Invertzoo (talk) 18:34, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kindness help in improve the page named Braz da Viola. Hugs. Ricardo Ferreira de Oliveira (talk) 22:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The flags I made determine that the club's national country, I don't think this is bad I think it is good like in UEFA champions league when someone put the country's flag beside each team. Hhoshy 90 (talk) 04:45, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK I'm sorry I'll delete all my new changes so no one will be annoyed. Thank you. Hhoshy 90 (talk) 05:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

stop vandalizing on talk page al jackson jr, that was taken from his bio here anyways, proves how lowly hypocritical u r, dude do u ever read?! It seems to me you are trying to be administrator, well I'll make sure you dont become one, you are out of line! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.1.130 (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removing unsourced allegations of participating in a murder is not subject to the WP:3RR rule. Studerby (talk) 21:39, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. The IP has also been reported at AIV. The editors actions warrant a block in my opinion so we will see what happens. Cheers and have a great weekend in spite of this. MarnetteD | Talk 21:47, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The IP has now been blocked for seven days. It is a bit odd that an IP geolocating from Chicago is claiming to be editing from Germany. Oh well since "they won" at least we can get back to editing other articles :-) Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 21:53, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clearing that up. Wherever they are editing from their grammar is atrocious. Hopefull they won't return but it is good to know that you and others are on the watch if they do. MarnetteD | Talk 22:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that I would let you know that the 64.107.1.130 IP tried to alter my password today. Of course, they can't actually change it so there was no harm. Hopefully they have not tried this with you but I wanted to make you aware of this just in case. MarnetteD | Talk 22:32, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow - As you've seen the BLP violator from Chicago has paid you the dubious honor of trying to usurp your username. I've added the pages under attack to my watchlist to try and help you in this situation. Wonder how the editor will try and mangle my username. Cheers and have a great weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 21:26, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now I remember why I mostly do gnomish stuff, but sometimes a mess just can't be ignored. Oh well... Thanks to all who are helping out on this one. Mr. Chicago has certainly raised his profile here. Studerby (talk) 00:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you still have an interest in the Baker Botts entry? I just dropped a couple of lists from it, they seemed both rather advertish and uninformative, and added a couple of references. I'd be grateful for a quick oversight from you. JohnHarris (talk) 12:13, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know that, about DEFAULTSORT and the non-English characters. Thanks for the cleanup! Herostratus (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted an edit back to 2006, that I believe may have been incorrect. The Index Librorum Prohibitorum is the Catholic Church's list of prohibited books. Why would said book have been on the list if it said that the bible was the only source of truth (as the Catholic church believes)? It also contradicts the sixth paragraph of this section. Clarification is needed. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 14:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Studerby! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 18:21, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Studerby,

I am trying to improve the wiki page concerning Eric Reiss and I noticed that you made changes right after my first submission. I noticed that the external links were removed as per WP:EL policy. Some of them however are from official sites of prominent organizations (EuroIA etc.). Could you give me some guidance on what is acceptable in this particular situation?

Thanks in advance!

Borislavkiprin (talk) 20:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dick Crest 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/Dick Crest 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. Thisbites (talk) 06:23, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

United States National Archives WikiProject

Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts. There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Cross Keys, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. YBG (talk) 05:55, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

George Henry Strohsahl, Jr. (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to The Final Countdown

Jack K. Gamble (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to F-94

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Isaac Schapera, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tswana (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) 11:31, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware of the guideline you cited; can you review the pages again and let me know if I've corrected appropriately? My intention was not to promote anything BTW, I don't have a horse in this race, not that it matters I suppose. Iguana0000 (talk) 17:28, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would seem to me to be a good idea to put some sort of reference to that policy on external links in the dialog box that comes up when you press the 'link' button in the editor. Would help nip it at the source. Iguana0000 (talk) 18:38, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was just a joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esther35 (talk • contribs) 00:48, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to ask your help in dealing with recent edits on the Carlin Romano page. I don't know whether deleting all external references counts as vandalism; it seems like it to me. I am trying to avoid an edit war, with the subject, who I suspect is behind cinacina123. I'd appreciate any of your advice or direction to the appropriate editor. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philebritite (talk • contribs) 21:44, 8 June 2012 (UTC) (I don't understand the reason for signing, since my user name appeared anyway; anyway: Philebritite (talk) 14:09, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Floyd D. Hall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Army Air Corps (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) 12:26, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	A barnstar for you! Today's Xtra (talk) 17:02, 10 November 2013 (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) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Sutherland Asbill & Brennan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DGG ( talk ) 08:46, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jesse H. Neal Award 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/Jesse H. Neal Award 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. » Shadowowl | talk 22:41, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Steve stockman cong bio.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Spongecob Flairpants (talk) 06:30, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ching Arellano has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Greenish Pickle! (🔔) 04:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]