Jump to content

User talk:SUM1/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Welcome

File:Verifiability and Neutral point of view (Common Craft)-en.ogv
A video showing the basics of verifiability and neutral point of view policies.

Welcome!

Hello, SUM1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like Wikipedia and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  - Ahunt (talk) 10:23, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Discussion over at the RT News article

There's a discussion on the talk page of RT News that you were originally involved in that has carried off again and become a debate on the talk page about criticism in the lede of the article (which has been locked with the criticism removed from the lede by an admin). I ask that you contribute to the talk discussion, since it was originally your idea to remove the criticism from the lede in the first place.

Thank you, Solntsa90 (talk) 19:58, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

National varieties of English

Information icon In a recent edit to the page Muhammad al-Badr, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to India, use Indian English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Valenciano (talk) 13:31, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 10 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, SpikeballUnion. 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)

Deletion discussion about Dicko Fils

Hello, SpikeballUnion,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Dicko Fils should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dicko Fils .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

DarjeelingTea (talk) 23:41, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Issuing level 1 warning about removing AfD template from articles before the discussion is complete. (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Dicko Fils. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 00:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sofiano

Hello SpikeballUnion,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Sofiano for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Bensci54 (talk) 18:03, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dassoui

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Dassoui requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Pastorma (talk) 22:50, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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.

Belembaoghin
added a link pointing to Gounghin
Belemboulghin
added a link pointing to Gounghin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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.

Dapelgo, Gounghin
added a link pointing to Dapelgo
Donsin, Bissiga
added a link pointing to Donsin
Donsin, Gounghin
added a link pointing to Donsin
Godin (Gounghin)
added a link pointing to Godin
Gounghin, Ganzourgou
added a link pointing to Gounghin
Gounghin, Gounghin
added a link pointing to Gounghin
Gounghin-Grand
added a link pointing to Gounghin
Gounghin-Petit
added a link pointing to Gounghin
Pissi-Zaoce
added a link pointing to Pissi
Zaka, Gounghin
added a link pointing to Zaka

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Material you included in the above article appears to have been copied from the copyright book Aruba, Bonaire & Curacao Alive! by Susan Brushaber and Arnold Greenberg. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:16, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from History of Grenada into Grenada. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:19, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Entailment (pragmatics)

Sorry for reverting, but the concept of "entailment" is not identical to that of "logical consequence". Although I agree the article is in the bad state of referencing. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:45, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Okay and yes it is a poor article. Then why is Logical consequence also called Entailment in its article? And why does "Entailment" already redirect to Logical consequence? SpikeballUnion (talk) 11:34, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Entailment redirects to Logical consequence because it must have been deemed to be the primary topic of the term. But it's not the only topic that this term can refer to (ambiguity is a pretty common occurrence). – Uanfala (talk) 11:43, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Indic Script

Please do NOT add Indic script, in ANY language, to the lead section of an article, as you did at Visakhapatnam as this contravenes WP:NOINDICSCRIPT - thank you - Arjayay (talk) 12:45, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Arjayay, WP:NOINDICSCRIPT only applies to articles within the scope of Wikiproject India. Of course, this would include Visakhapatnam, but it doesn't include for example articles that have to do with Wikiproject Hinduism or WP Languages. – Uanfala (talk) 13:02, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Reflist|4

Hi. Just letting you know that reflist|2/3/4 are all deprecated per Template:Reflist#Columns. If you don't know the best ways to format these are:

  • reflist|35em for 2 columns
  • reflist|30em for 3 columns
  • reflist|40em for 4 columns

Most of the time, 4 columns don't really need to be used unless an article has well over 200 or so refs. thanks --Jennica✿ / talk 10:10, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

Information icon In a recent edit to the page Libya, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to India, use Indian English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. ansh666 21:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I understand this rule. However, may I point out that throughout the article, such as in the 2011 Civil War, Post-Gaddafi era, Government and politics, Foreign relations and Religion sections, English English (British) is used. May I also point out that no comment or other issue (for example on the talk page) was made establishing the standard of English used on the Libya article. Numerous times before, I've normalised the standard of English of an article to English English with no issue or objection. Thank you for your reminder anyway. SpikeballUnion (talk) 22:33, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
With regard to the standard of English of the original author, it cannot be ascertained, because no regional spellings were used in the original version of the article. The article today is an agglomeration of multiple user inputs. SpikeballUnion (talk) 22:37, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Alright, just wanted to make sure you were aware. Cheers, ansh666 23:44, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Joseph Stalin

Many of your edits aren't supported by any sources, they seem to be your OR. Your opinions aren't neutral by definition.Xx236 (talk) 09:21, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

May 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm DrFleischman. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:RT (TV network) that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 19:21, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

I have removed another similar personal attack against the same editor on this page. Please do not dismiss anyone's comments on the basis of their ethnicity. This is a blockable offense. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 19:28, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 21:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
For Spike's information only: In the US it was (is?) common to nickname and insult new immigrants. Irish=Mick, Italian=Guinea, etc. Poles showed up here in Chicago about 1900 and were "dumb", when I met my wife in 1970 she was still a "Polack" (who had the last laugh there?). Either "Political correctness" or just time has made most of these obsolete, offensive, backwards, or just plain stupid, I rarely hear them anymore. Sammy D III (talk) 20:20, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Right, well that was not the way in which I used it at all. Thank you for this information. SpikeballUnion (talk) 20:27, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Mansa (title)

I see you are doing a lot of solid work around these articles, but surely it doesn't make sense to put a redlink into "See also"? Pinkbeast (talk) 19:31, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

There is no red link there anymore. I removed it, as the Keita dynasty covered pre-imperial and late-imperial figures of Mali. SpikeballUnion (talk) 19:34, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Regardless, I was about to create the article anyway, so I put it there. It wouldn't have been red for long. SpikeballUnion (talk) 19:37, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
The latter scenario was what I thought might be going on; all I mean is I would have done it in the other order. But since as you say it is moot... Pinkbeast (talk) 21:32, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Fair enough. I know it isn't good practice, but I thought so few people would be viewing Mansa (title) at the time that they wouldn't notice the link red at all. SpikeballUnion (talk) 22:08, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Keita dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Niani. 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) 10:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Francafrique

I recently reverted your edit again. I made the reversions based on a guideline (WP:Redundancy) and on a policy (WP:ISATERMFOR). If you disagree with my reverts, I think it would be more fruitful that we discuss it on the talk page. Thanks. danielkueh (talk) 19:24, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm not going to bother. A simple line in an edit summary was all the input I had, and now I'm going to leave it alone. SpikeballUnion (talk) 19:27, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Also, that policy you've linked to is one I haven't seen before and has helped me understand that my edit won't be accepted. SpikeballUnion (talk) 19:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
No worries. There are so many policy pages. It's really hard to keep up. Overall, I find your contributions (improving the grammar of WP articles) to be valuable. Please continue! danielkueh (talk) 19:33, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
I reverted your edit again per WP policy (WP:ISATERMFOR). Plus, the New York Times article seems to be fine defining it this way. I thought we had resolved this issue. If you do not like it, then you should propose an amendment to the Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary page policy page or at the very least, discuss it on the article's talk page. Thanks. danielkueh (talk) 19:12, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
I left a message on the talk page. SpikeballUnion (talk) 19:42, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Undue weight

Exactly how is the caption supposed to be Undue weight? There is no debate that Western culture, for most of its history until the Cold War, was nearly the same as Christian culture. By claiming this to he POV you ignore tge existence of the Middle Ages, which takes up most of the history of Western civilization. And just because my contributions support Christianity is irrelevant, because they cite reliable sources.Music314812813478 (talk) 00:33, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

The caption is undue weight on two conditions: its placement right at the top of the page and its claim that most of Westerners are "cultural Christians". Regardless, however, the main issue is that it is not suitable as the first image of the page when the other more understandable, relateable and descriptive images are present, such as the Leonardo da Vinci's Vitruvian Man or the bust of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato. This is how the lead has been for ages, with no disagreement. SpikeballUnion (talk) 01:53, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Its placement at the top makes sense, since Western culture was nearly the same as Christian culture for the majority of its history. Regarding the cultural Christians claim, cultural Christians are those whose culture have been influenced by Christianity. Even atheists such as NeildeGrasse Tyson appreciate Handel's Messiah. For another example of a Cultural Christian, see firm antitheist Richard Dawkins, who describes himself as such. While the other images are more relatable, placing them at the top would sacrifice due historical coverage, since the Middle Ages take up the majority of the history of the West.Music314812813478 (talk) 02:39, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017

Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Borana languages, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. - please don't blank redirects. If you disagree with a redirect, the proper procedure is to request it's deletion through RfD. Take care. Onel5969 TT me 03:12, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know how to delete redirects. SpikeballUnion (talk) 03:13, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Stalin's Dictatorship

SpikeballUnion, your dedication to improving the Joseph Stalin bio is commendable, especially your attention to the smallest details, such as whether or not there should be an indefinite article between governed the Soviet Union as and dictator. Your work inspired me to think more deeply about the lede; thanks to you, I've come up with a stronger solution: He governed the Soviet Union as its dictator. Scaleshombre (talk) 22:21, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure how sarcastic this post was meant to be, but you're welcome, I guess. SpikeballUnion (talk) 22:53, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

IP address

You may have accidentally revealed your IP address with your last edit. This happens from time to time. (It's happened to me.) If that's the case, and you want to keep your IP address unknown, then you can e-mail the oversight team to have your IP address erased from the talk page and its edit history. Apologies if you already know this. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:09, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Where is my IP address visible? I looked but I couldn't find it. Thank you. SpikeballUnion (talk) 17:12, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Ohh I get where there was a misunderstanding now. I wasn't referring to the original post being mine, I was referring to the post I was writing. SpikeballUnion (talk) 17:14, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Ok good. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:29, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

MOS:ENGVAR

Hi, some of your recent edits have been creating inconsistincies within articles on the type of spelling used. This changed center to centre twice and left center in four other locations. Per MOS:ENGVAR we should be retaining whichever national variety of English was used in the article and be having internally consistent spelling. Your edits violated both of those. Please do not continue making such changes. nableezy - 20:04, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

On Doha, both "center" and "centre" appear throughout the article, as do each standards' spellings on every article I edit. I wasn't creating inconsistencies – the inconsistencies were there from the start. If anything, I'm trying to normalise the English standard, but the expectation of objections like this one prevent me from normalising entire articles at one time. SpikeballUnion (talk) 20:10, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Fair enough, I see that on Green Line as well. Sorry, was a bit quick to judge there. nableezy - 20:12, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

MOS:ENGVAR and other matters

In a recent edit to Bazaar you changed the spelling of two words - "centre" (Brit English) to "center" (US English) and "organization" (US English) to "organisation" (Brit English), but left other inconsistencies in spelling in the article (e.g. "modernize" and "centralised"). No doubt you are aware, that the spelling should be internally consistent within the article and should follow the English variation used in the first version of the article. If you plan to change the spelling, at least those changes should be consistent with other usage within the article. If you do not intend to change all the spellings to a consistent variation of English, then it is probably best left alone. (I cannot seem to determine which variation of English was the original, but have now converted all spellings to British English.)

In addition, you added a wiki link to a word, "caravanserai" that had already been linked in an earlier part of the article and as I am sure you are aware, should not be linked twice within the same article. I have deleted your change on the basis that there was already a link to that article.

Finally, you changed the title of a painting and put the new title in italics and lower case. However, capitals are normally used for the first word in a title (of a book, magazine, TV program or work of art). And, although italics arguably should be used for titles, they seem to attract the attention of reversionists, so I have ceased using this format for titles. All the other titles in this article do not use italics, so the use of italics for one painting title while leaving other titles in the unitalicised form introduces another inconsistency. BronHiggs (talk) 23:05, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

1. On Bazaar, "caravanserai" was not linked in the lead of the article. I checked this by searching the word, and then I added the hyperlink. Now that you've reverted it, it doesn't have a link again.
2. Refer to the above post on this talk page for your issue with MOS:ENGVAR. SpikeballUnion (talk) 11:52, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Telegram NPOV?

It seems you are the user who added a WP:NPOV banner in the reception section of the Telegram (messaging service) article. Do you mind explaining the rationale in Talk:Telegram_(messaging_service)#NPOV.3F so a debate can take place? Normally, such banner is associated with an entry in the talk page or the Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard. Thanks! --TheAnarcat (talk) 17:37, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Telegram (messaging service)#Reception section is virtually entirely criticism. SpikeballUnion (talk) 19:19, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

November 2017

Information icon In a recent edit to the page Sudan Liberation Movement/Army, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to India, use Indian English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand or Ireland, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. AusLondonder (talk) 15:49, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

The original article (one sentence)'s standard of English cannot be determined. However, some of the first authors of the article used British English, evidenced in part by the lack of the usage of the serial comma (common in American style guides but rare in English style guides). Additionally, the major early contributor User:Leutha is from the United Kingdom and uses British English. SpikeballUnion (talk) 16:18, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Sofiano concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Sofiano, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Sofiano concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Sofiano, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:33, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Please pay attention when reverting

Your revert here was not justified by invoking having reverted a blocked IP. Please check the history of the article, and the talk page before making blind reverts. The lyrics of Anthem of the Karelo-Finnish Soviet Socialist Republic were removed again after the IP's removal (which was, actually, justified by their edit summary of WP:NOTLYRICS). A thread was opened specifically to address the situation on the article's talk page here. If you have any concerns as to the legitimacy of the removal, feel free to respond to the thread with relevant policies and guidelines. Thank you for your understanding. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:04, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

I've reverted your restored content as the sources you provided are not reliable sources, but user generated sources. I understand that you are adding the content in good faith but, as I've already noted, I've created a thread dedicated specifically to sourcing on the article's talk page. Please follow WP:BRD and we can discuss how best to tackle the article's content from there. Thanks. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:49, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

"Tell"

You just erased some 20 wiki-links I was creating by adding your own note "This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it."  :( Please resume where you cut me off:

Happy New Year--Aboudaqn (talk) 17:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

How did I erase anything? Please explain. SUM1 (talk) 13:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sofiano Balzak (Musician) (January 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bingobro was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Bingobro (Chat) 09:28, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


Teahouse logo
Hello! SUM1, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Bingobro (Chat) 09:28, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi SUM1,

I've noticed that you've been converting red links to fake blue links. Turning everything blue can be detrimental to the encyclopedia. For instance, we may have a red link to [[X sprachbund]]. That's a useful red link -- for example, an expert reader of the article may see the red link, think it's important to cover and so decide to create an article on the subject. If you make it blue by changing it to [[X]] [[sprachbund]], you make it look like we now have an article on the subject when we don't, confusing readers and discouraging the creation of the article. Perhaps worse, that destroys the link if an article ever is created. Also, neither 'X' nor 'sprachbund' may be worth linking to at this point in the article. In general, the MOS and other WP guidelines discourage placing one link immediately after another, without any intervening material, because that looks confusingly like one long link, and also encourage the retention of useful red links -- ones that link to a potentially useful future article.

— Thanks, kwami (talk) 16:39, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Please link to where I have supposedly done this. SUM1 (talk) 16:43, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
I located the instance which caused you to leave a message on my talk page. I cannot find any other instance of me doing this.
It is clear that it was you who added this red link, therefore I apologise for reverting it. It was a simple passing assumption that either the author had linked to an incorrect name for an existing article or that, if it were notable enough, there already existed the concept of the Kalahari Basin sprachbund in the content of other articles such as the Khoisan languages. I would not have expected such a notable concept to not have an article, let alone for the creator of its red link to have been you. It was not an attempt to "fix" a red link, despite the summary. I understand the concept of red links and have used them myself before. SUM1 (talk) 00:38, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Labourd, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Basque Country (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 10:13, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SUM1/Archive_1&oldid=1079462571"