User talk:NotThatAnonymous

May 2013

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits to PlayStation Vita has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: PlayStation Vita was changed by PapiDimmi (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.953428 on 2013-05-29T11:47:51+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 11:47, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

July 2016

Hello, I'm SNUGGUMS. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:42, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I added Anthony Padilla’s middle name, as I found it on the YouTube wiki (Wikia). That doesn’t have any citations, either, though, so I’ll remove it from there, too.
―PapíDimmi (talk) 00:50, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikia is a fansite full of user-generated content, so I wouldn't use that within an article since pretty much anyone can alter it and potentially give people factual errors. If you need help providing good citations, see WP:Citing sources and WP:Identifying reliable sources. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:57, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I know, but I googled it, and it seems as though many people think that Anthony’s middle name is “Lorenzo.” I don’t know where it comes from, though. I realize that I shouldn’t’ve added it to the Wikipedia article without a reference.
―PapíDimmi (talk) 00:59, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Pokémon Go

Hey, just wanted to let you know that I undid your move on Pokémon Go due to the rules on MOS:CAPS. The word "Go" should not be in full caps because it is not an abbreviation. Cheers, Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:24, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

I see. My apologies for my mistake. I did not know of MOS:CAPS. It is impossible to’ve read all the policies of Wikipedia. I was about to add “(stylized as Pokémon GO)” after I read your post on my talk page but saw that you did already.
―PapíDimmi (talk | contribs) 11:27, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I kind of liked your signature, so I made mine similar, since mine was so bland. I hope that you don’t mind.
―PapíDimmi (talk | contribs) 12:08, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

However / But

In Wikipedia:Shortcut‬ I changed

Shortcuts are presented in all capital letters (ALL CAPS); however, the search box is case-insensitive. For example, in the search box, you can type wp:r, instead of WP:R. However, when using the URL method (or when making links) it is necessary to match the capitalization of the shortcut itself.

to

Shortcuts are presented in all capital letters (ALL CAPS), but the search box is case-insensitive. For example, in the search box, you can type wp:r, instead of WP:R. However, when using the URL method (or when making links) it is necessary to match the capitalization of the shortcut itself.

with the edit comment

Overdose of "however"

You reverted it with

“But” doesn’t make much sense in that context; they are not synonyms.

In what way are they not synonyms? Specifically, the conjunction is used here to contrast the way WP displays the name of the shortcut (always full uppercase) with the way the search box accepts a search (any casing at all).

Google defines this sense of "but" as

but

/bət/

conjunction

1. used to introduce something contrasting with what has already been mentioned.

   synonyms: yet, nevertheless, nonetheless, even so, however, still, notwithstanding, despite that, in spite of that, for all that, all the same, just the same; though, although

   "he stumbled but didn't fall"

I'm not going to insist on changing it back, but I don't understand your rationale, and I would like to. Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. --Thnidu (talk) 02:37, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

@Thnidu: Synonyms aren’t always words with with a meaning which is exactly the same.

“However” means “despite that fact,” so “Shortcuts are presented in all capital letters; however, the search box is case-insensitive” is equivalent to “Shortcuts are presented in all capital letters. Despite the fact that thye are presented in all capital letters, the search box is case-insensitive.”

I don’t think that “but” makes much sense in this context, as the search box wasn’t mentioned before; it’s just a fact provided, which also contradicts the previous statement.
―PapíDimmi (talk | contribs) 02:44, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Well, doesn't contradict it, since the presentation and the search box are two different contexts. But since they're related, there is an opposition to be noted.

Enough. Thanks. See you around the wiki. --Thnidu (talk) 02:47, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ratchet & Clank Future Tools of Destruction cover (PAL).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ratchet & Clank Future Tools of Destruction cover (PAL).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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions for MOS, edit warring

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Cut out the edit warring. Bold editing, even to MOS, is always Wikipedia's watchword, but when you've been reverted you must stop and take your proposed changes to the talk page if you wish to pursue them. EEng 07:10, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I didn’t edit war. After you told me that the sentence should not use parantheses, I changed it from parantheses to commas.

Em dashes are less formal than regular punctuation marks, because they can mean so many things. An em dash can be a comma, semicolon, colon, and paranthesis.
―PapíDimmi (talk | contribs) 07:13, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I specifically pointed out that 'some of what you substituted ("it still must end (with a period, a question, or an exclamation mark) after those brackets") is just wrong', but also told you that your edit changed "the emphasis and other non-denotative aspects" of the text. What Miss Snodgras told you about dashes in 8th-grade English is wrong; dashes are certainly used in good writing‍—‌for emphasis, for appositives which themselves contain commas, and for many other reasons. EEng 07:22, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

You keep throwing the word “emphasis” around, but I don’t see what you mean. What’s the point of using an em dash when you can use a comma, colon, semicolon, or parranthesis?

“I love food—especially spaghetti” and “I love food, especially spaghetti” have no difference, except that the first sentence can be interpreted many different ways, but the latter can be interpreted only one way. In every single situation where an em dash is used, another punctuation mark can be used instead. Em dashes don’t add emphasis, like you claim.
―PapíDimmi (talk | contribs) 07:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Pardon me for asking, but are you a young person? EEng 07:28, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I like how you can’t counter my argument, so you have to derail the conversation.
―PapíDimmi (talk | contribs) 07:29, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I was hoping to find an excuse to cut you some slack, but apparently you have no excuse. If you think your two spaghetti examples "have no difference" (?), or that the first "can be interpreted many different ways", then you have no idea what you're talking about. See, for example, [1]. After multiple edits you've finally made an acceptable, and even useful, isolated change [2] so let's leave it at that. But if you pull this stunt again you're headed for a block. EEng 07:40, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Whilst they may emphasize, they’re still overused on the page.
―PapíDimmi (talk | contribs) 07:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

...says the editor who only just learned they can be used for emphasis. Please be my guest and have the last word now. But remember: edit warring at MOS to force in changes you think are obvious will get you blocked. EEng 07:52, 20 September 2016 (UTC)