User talk:Alphabett

High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy

I have just noticed your comments about the problems that you encountered with the edit filter. You are correct in assuming that this is a false positive: the filter's meant to stop edits like [1] or [2], not helpful additions like you were trying to make. I don't know enough to adjust the filter's settings, but I've left a note at the false-positives page to say that I've looked at the edit and agree that you were helping.

I'm sorry that this was your introduction to Wikipedia editing, but please understand that it's normally not this awkward. We humans will do our best to help you (especially when the software's misbehaving, like here), and I for one will be happy to try to answer any questions you may have. Feel free to leave a question at my talk page (just click the "New Section" button at top, near the search bar) on anything. Nyttend (talk) 19:01, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Good work on identifying the potential issue. The visual editor is a comparatively new thing, and I'd been editing with the old method (it was the only choice) for several years when they introduced it, so I've been comfortable with the old method and never tried the visual editor: I really don't know how it works. Meanwhile, did you see the response that Black Kite left for you at Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives? Basically, the filter's apparently misinterpreted the long Google Books URL as a string of random characters to an article: we humans know that adding https://books.google.co.il/books?id=p4lwXozo8YcC&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=indirect+effect+treaties+regulations+directives+decisions&source=bl&ots=-ieXCOn2iq&sig=gwPvbd2AQLhc3mYCPTYNU46DG4M&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=indirect%2520effect%2520treaties%2520regulations%2520directives%2520decisions&f=false to an article is not a problem, but the software thinks that it's the same as adding gwPvbd2AQLhc3mYCPTYNU46DG4M to the middle of the article, which obviously would be a problem. Maybe you could avoid this problem my using shorter URLs? When I cite Google Books, I just link the book as a whole and cite the page in question; for example, the book citation at Samuel Danford Farm uses the code ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=4ToVAAAAYAAJ History of Noble County, Ohio with Portraits and Biographical Sketches of Some of Its Pioneers and Prominent Men]''. [[Chicago]]: Watkins, 1887, 388. If you truncate everything after the books?id=p4lwXozo8YcC, the filter may not throw a fit as readily. I'd be happy to test this myself, but I don't think I can: many of the filters figure that administrators (I'm one of them) are less likely to make problematic edits, so they'd ignore something I do even if they'd stop you from making the same edit. Nyttend (talk) 19:47, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia was started in January 2001, and the first collaborations were getting going by September of that year, so they exist for lots of different fields; we call them "wikiprojects". One such project is Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations, but it doesn't appear to be hugely active, and the Wikipedia:WikiProject European Union appears to be thoroughly inactive. The strongest projects tend to be the ones with mid-level speciality — really general topics like the EU or international relations are so broad that people don't think in those terms, while really narrow topics have comparatively few people that care about those topics. You may get the best result if you work with one or more country projects; see Wikipedia:WikiProject United Kingdom and Wikipedia:WikiProject France for a couple of examples. Besides helping you to find people who can write or expand articles on the subjects that interest you, wikiprojects' talk pages can be helpful as a place to request opinions and ordinary assistance. For example, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United Kingdom — one person went there to ask for help with consistent use of British spelling, another asked about the use of stone vs. kilogrammes, and several have gone there to say "We're having a discussion about this topic, so please join us". Nyttend (talk) 14:43, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Saint-Malo declaration has been accepted

Saint-Malo declaration, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 19:15, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]