I never know if changing the spelling of a ping'ed name tries to ping it again or if that's a one shot thing. Anyway, I pinged you here! [[1]] Springee (talk) 02:47, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think of last nights episode of TWD? The Optimistic One (talk) 06:23, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An edit was made to the Nintendo Switch article, and a list I added underneath the Nintendo Switch Online section including a list of NES Games (with cites) was removed. I was just wondering if you removed it by chance? I'm not mad, just curious! Thanks! :) CreeperDudeBro (talk) 05:15, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How are you so good at editing? I’m new too. Lotsoflolzandbloxs (talk) 03:18, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:24, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK. It's been basically ready for six hours, though. Sca (talk) 23:09, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what cased that edit conflict at VPPOL. About once every 3-4 months of active editing I have MediaWiki's edit-conflict processing stuff fail, and either clobber some posts, or appear to save mine but not actually do so. Has been happening for years, and I have never been able to isolate it to specific conditions. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 08:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
thank you for nomination in the news[2]--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:29, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Masem. 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]
Hi Masem. Would you mind taking a look at File talk:2018 Asian Games Shooting Skeet and Trap.png#Deletion? I'm asking you since you previously offered some opinions on non-free collages/montages at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 67#User-created montages using non-free images. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:53, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You have TWICE reverted my edit, which only says EXACTLY what the cited source [Forbes] says. Zoe Quinn made the DMCA request, and Youtube determined it was not valid and restored the video. The cite even links to the evidence here: http://archive.fo/UqAwg
John Bain addressed the matter ONLY because of the false DMCA claim, as he stated on twitlonger. Why do you want readers to think differently?
Restore my edit.
The most effectual Bob Cat (talk) 19:11, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You know .... ~~ oh sorry wrong page ~~ ~mitch~ (talk) 21:46, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:OtherSide Entertainment Logo.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:58, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Messenger (upcoming video game). Since you had some involvement with the The Messenger (upcoming video game) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 16:39, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for undoing my recent edit in the article for Toy Story 4. After looking at the previous version, it is far superior than mine. I was just trying to find a way to say that the character will be in the movie, especially since he is featured in the teaser, despite Rickles passing away. However, I should have just left it the way it was. And1987 (talk) 04:26, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any particular reason you undid my edit just now? If so, you need to list it in your edit summary. Treybien, talk 20:31 4 December 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Net neutrality in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can anyone revdel the first edit made to User talk:213.162.124.186? Apparently, the image added to it is NSFW... -198.111.211.2 (talk) 16:55, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think this edit is a fair reading of the consensus at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive27? I will start an RFC next, but that honestly seems like a waste of time for such an obviously bad and biased edit. But if people are going to keep re-adding this and not agree on noticeboard consensus, the RFC may make sense. This place sometimes. Jesus. Marquardtika (talk) 05:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Raw fury games logo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Willy1018 (talk) 15:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
CATAN: There have also been several unauthorized video game implementations of Settlers. One of these, "Java Settlers", was developed by Robert S. Thomas as part of his PhD research at Northwestern University. His dissertation is available from the abandoned project home page.[26] The source code for Thomas' Settlers of Catan implementation along with the AI code was released under the GNU General Public License.
You said not to add non official versions but there are other non official versions like this. Either remove that too or I'm adding back the other ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esqarrouth (talk • contribs) 19:12, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please give an opinion into the appropriate part of the Talk:Neil_deGrasse_Tyson#Text_proposals section for easier evaluation? ResultingConstant (talk) 22:20, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
On19 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1993 congressional hearings on video games, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that sales of the video game Night Trap were initially boosted following the 1993 US congressional hearings on video game content ratings because it was one of the games under discussion? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1993 congressional hearings on video games. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 1993 congressional hearings on video games), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Happy Christmas! | ||
Hello Masem, Early in A Child's Christmas in Wales the young Dylan and his friend Jim Prothero witness smoke pouring from Jim's home. After the conflagration has been extinguished Dylan writes that My thanks to you for your efforts to keep the 'pedia readable in case the firemen chose one of our articles :-) Best wishes to you and yours and happy editing in 2019. MarnetteD|Talk 03:48, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of video games notable for negative reception, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page GB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I, (TheMasterGuru), would like to invite you to join WikiProject YouTube! We're working on:
|
Hi there. Isn't a 38% discount on the PlayStation Classic, during its month of release no less, a notable discount? If it were covered by a gaming news outlet, would it be fine to mention it on Wikipedia? --LABcrabs (talk) 02:55, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019! | |
Hello Masem, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Hey! I tried to fix the issues with the article and shift from primary sources to reliable third party sources. I'd appreciate another set of eyes. Feel free to re-add tags if you think I blew it. Could also use some help with the main series article, since I remember hating all the merge / split / move type of stuff. If you can get that going, I can keep going with the citation and clean-up. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
With English being the Philippines' second official language, and this being the English Wikipedia, the film's release date in the country deserves to be mentioned alongside the US, UK, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand ones (The latter three should also be mentioned in the article in an efficient way). This, of course, does not apply to the infobox, which should only mention the release date and distributor/s of the film in its original country (unless it has other notable premieres). LionFosset (talk) 06:06, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I noticed you contributely substantially to this article. I'm here to tell you that I'm planning on nominating the article for GA and was hoping you'd be able to help me with the nomination in some way. Thanks! Jalen D. Folf (talk) 00:52, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I noticed that my edits were removed from the TF2 page. Do you think that such content should have its own page? SimplyMashedPotatoes (talk) 06:21, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paradox Interactive, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crusader Kings (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that it is an artile of Wikipedia and not a game guide, however, for any other game you see, like PUBG, Fortnite, etc., all these games have detailed explanation of their gameplays. In fact, many people use the Wikipedia article for the tutorial. So, I feel its worth mentioning about these basic, necessary things. Although I have excluded many like clearing of chocolate bars, or black chocolate bars, or function of fish, or colour bomb, or the continuation of the row where a lighted boundary is seen, auto-completiton of levels etc. I hope you get my point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justlookingforthemoment (talk • contribs) 05:50, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to go into an edit war, but it feels against the spirit of Wikipedia to censor information in light of overwhelming evidence. I also don't understand how time-stamped clips cannot be used as sources, especially when there are multiple examples that show a consistent trend of instability. We allow YouTube citations, so why should Twitch clips be any different? The bug is being demonstrated in real time; it's a smoking gun, and I've listed a plethora of examples. I literally did the research to prove it's a widespread and recurring issue. What sources are considered valid (if not these)? I listed first-hand sources... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Electricmaster (talk • contribs)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Internet phenomena, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Twitch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 17 January 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Brexit, 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. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 17 January 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Laurent Gbagbo, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:49, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Masem: I am bringing this to your attention now. There is a discussion regarding the new film that is currently in development. The reverts you have exibited on the franchise page are in conflict with information released by the film studio. There is no basis for the fact that Ghostbusters 3 that has been in and out of development for years, was developed into Ghostbusters: Answer the Call. The film has persistently been stated to be a "passing of the torch" to a younger team, with The Hollywood Reporter just announcing that the new film will revolve around a teenage team. You cannot simply revert edits because they conflict with your outlook/opinion. This page is far to fan-page in style and requires major restructuring. Dealing with the new film and its status as the third film in the main series is step number one.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 06:23, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An article that you have been involved with (Stranger Things) has content that is proposed to be removed and move to another article (Stranger Things (season 1/2/3)). If you are interested, please visit the discussion at Stranger Things. Thank you. SomethingToTellYou (talk) 16:41, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I did so much work on finding all the players who was participating in the League 2018. Can I write it somewhere somehow? Muikale (talk) 12:55, 22 January 2019 (UTC)Muikale — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muikale (talk • contribs) 12:04, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your edits and for your patience on 2019 Indigenous Peoples March Incident while one section is under construction. I am updating the section on the "Initial". The content was cut-and-pasted from the Indigenous Peoples March article I created and I am re-organizing the content to better suit a stand-alone article. It may seem unbalanced during the construction period. I am working on chronology etc. as well as changing the story based on RS that are constantly emerging.Oceanflynn (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Masem, which respect to comment at AE, it looks like you were confused about the scope of the GMO case. It's called that in a shorthand, but the DS specifically apply to all pesticides, not just those used on GMOs. I'm up against the word limit there, so I can't really clarify it further than I did in my reply to Sandstein. If you look at the DS, it says: Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for all pages relating to genetically modified organisms, commercially produced agricultural chemicals and the companies that produce them, broadly construed.
That has always included all pesticides and would need a new ArbCom case to change that to be only those used on GMOs. Here's one example of such an AE case.Kingofaces43 (talk) 22:39, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
including use of the broad class of pesticides (no specific products named)is what brought it within the DS content-wise (even just broadly construed if there was any question), but even if that were ignored, there's still the whole bit about me apparently being pro-pesticide, etc. as being some of the main rationale on the talk page for the battleground behavior. Assuming this wasn't within a pesticide topic for a bit, such an example would be like if I was editing at biological control that normally wouldn't be under the DS (excluding some biopesticide stuff), and someone claimed various pesticide aspersions towards me because I added content about a particular critter having problems for use with biological control, maybe for making a "competitor" of pesticides look bad.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Collection No. 1, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dropbox (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop editing over me like this, it's made a mess of everything and I don't even know how to fix it. The article has to be understandable for people who aren't software developers, you are removing content in plain English and pushing development mumbo jumbo without even bothering to link it. Dalvik? Do you really think anyone cares about Dalvik? People will literally decide against something because they don't understand what you are saying, don't you think we should try to make the important parts of the article coherent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by YusufAdnan (talk • contribs) 05:04, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 3 February 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, 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. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:30, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:The walking dead the final season cover.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:57, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Masem. Would you mind taking a look at this article since (1) you're a member of WP:VG and have a good understanding of video game articles, and (2) you've also got lots of experience dealing with WP:NFCCP matters. Somebody just uploaded and added quite a large number of non-free files to the article (more than 20 it seems). While I understand that non-free screenshots are often used in articles about videogames, this seems to be rather excessive. The article is a GA and it's hard to imagine the addition of so many non free images not affecting that status. There were seven non-free files in the version which was GA reviewed; that might be a lot but it's certainly not close to almost 30 non-free files currently being used in the article. FWIW, not only screenshots, but also non-free cover art files were added, the latter which clearly fail WP:NFC#cite_note-3. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:57, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure the removal of some of the files covers should be considered much of a compromise since their non-free use in the article clearly didn't meet WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFC#cite_note-3I never said it was a good compromise. I was merely commenting on the apparent motivation of them removing a number of the images. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:05, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, this forum post I mentioned in my edit is the only source I've found regarding this law's impact on Nexon. That post was posted 2 days ago by an official CM from Nexon America and I thought it worth mentioning. Is there a specific rule against using forum posts? TheStriker (talk) 20:36, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Ratatouille-remy-control-linguini.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:04, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Xbox Game Studios, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I have no opinion on the product in the article, except that the reference quoted clearly identifies it as spyware. Ifnord (talk) 18:22, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Activision, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marvel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:33, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The table is coded to allow easy updating, as the standings will need to be updated frequently. I suppose "cleaned" was not really the correct word to use. Pbroks13 (talk) 05:52, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey again. I've created new tables for OWL 2019, and I wanted your opinion on them before I put them in the article (I know, right after I tried to do the whole column/now alignment!). See them here. Thanks! Pbroks13 (talk) 18:13, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Masem,
Please excuse any potential canvassing, but I read your comments on the Mark Dice talk page, and I'm wondering if you might be willing to take a look at the second AfD of the article about me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Waugh, which I feel was the subject of a deliberate take-down by Wikipedia editing group "Art + Feminism" because my gender and race do not serve their quotas of representation on Wikipedia. The two most notable sources for the article in question had already been vetted in a previous AfD as having satisfied the notability requirement before the second AfD.
Thank you, Jesse — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessewaugh (talk • contribs) 16:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You omitted to mention Shin Lim's Chinese name, which I had included with each of my edits plus a source link for it. So you missed the point with your most recent edit. There was absolutely no valid reason or good faith from you to intentionally delete his Chinese name, unless you have some ulterior motives.2604:6000:D786:6C00:3DF7:791D:751C:69D4 (talk) 19:39, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's properly sourced, has support at talk and would allow us to comment on one of the few actually notable things about this guy. Please review. Simonm223 (talk) 19:41, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We appear to use a fair number of refs by "Contributor" to Forbes. Should we be working to delete these generally? Does Forbes not provide fact checking etc?
We have ones like[4] here Bohemian Rhapsody (film). But also many potentially thousands more.
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:29, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Browsingman, here. You just reverted an edit of mine due to the fact that the source was from Forbes. I can see why now, but for future reference, are there any other sites similar to Forbes that I should avoid citing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Browsingman (talk • contribs)
Thanks — Browsingman (talk) 00:46, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 25 February 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 91st Academy Awards, 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. Tone 17:09, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Masem, just a head-ups for when you write the summaries for The Walking Dead: the character's name is Alden, as you keep writing "Aiden" (one of Deanna's sons in season 5). [6][7][8] Happy editing! Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:30, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Content Creativity Barnstar | ||
Among many other contributions, I love how you wrote a good article about Kisor v. Wilkie the day after the Supreme Court granted cert.! It's such an important case--great to have it on the world's encyclopedia well before oral arguments. Thank you! - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) 06:02, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply] |
Could you assist me with Edge (video game) Its currently under GA review and addressed most of the issues. the main concern I have is the reception section. I originally added scores and some quotes but that wasn't enough for GA status and had to be revised. I revised as much as I could but still need some assistance on it. I'd appreciate any help really. :) Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 15:59, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Linda mccartney with camera photograph.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:31, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed you reverted my edit on Markus Persson giving the reason "Not a reliabl source" First, I'm confused as to why you consider GameRevolution to be unreliable, given that it's (to my knowledge) a well-known, reliable source. Secondly, I'm not sure how the general reliability of the source matters in this context, considering the original tweet is still available, meaning there's no reason to doubt GameRevolution's brief account. If necessary, I could add two more sources, from inquisitr and metro, as additional citations, but I feel like I'm missing something about why this keeps getting removed, which is why I'm leaving this message. Sorry for any inconvenience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Graxwell (talk • contribs) 02:47, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Have a very happy first edit anniversary!
From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 21:43, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
While I realize the following source may not be considered a RS, the author, Cathy Young, made some good points (closer to accurate than some news source reporting that it was a lawsuit): "Of course, just because the SPLC’s opinions are often issued and treated as statements of fact, that doesn’t mean that they are facts in a legal sense (as White has pointed out in a different context, just because some privately owned social media platforms present themselves as public spaces and often feel like public spaces doesn’t make them such legally). If Nawaz’s lawsuit had gone forward, the SPLC’s attorneys could have tried to argue that the Center’s list of “anti-Muslim extremists” was only an expression of opinion. But that would have required the SPLC to renounce any claim to special authority and expertise—and, in effect, to undermined its own raison d’être.
Perhaps that’s why SPLC leadership was willing to accept a settlement that amounted to a total capitulation. It is also possible that, as White speculates, they were worried that “discovery would have revealed ugly things about the SPLC’s process of writing such lists.” (Nawaz believes they may have taken their guidance from Muslim advocacy groups with an Islamist-leaning outlook.)"
I'm not going to speak to the merits of the case, just trying to distinguish that SPLC's analysis is the same type of analysis/opinion as what NewsOrg considers to be primary sources. I brought it here because I won't be commenting in that particular thread on RSN any further. Atsme✍🏻📧 20:41, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello sorry to bother with you this. I commented on here and had not gotten a response. I am not sure if I posted this the right place, if not hopefully you can point me in the right direction. StaticVapor message me! 01:02, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User "Masem,' why are you deleting, "undoing," factual information from the article(s) about DJ Hero and giving credit to those who did not create the game by deleting it? For some reason, when I am just doing fact checking and updating, I get block from editing articles even though I am adding correct and useful information. Message me! I want to know why you are deleting content from the creator of the video game that the article is about, when I am trying to add it in for readers of the article(s). CKJohnson1 (talk) 02:16, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I did not "vandalize" anything on Wiki. I started to update the page you are referring to when I google search my work I have done over the years to see what it has to say about it if anything and you call it vandalizing. Sorry Mister, but I have the copyright for that video game. You might not realize that I am the game creator and that I am trying to up date the article in a fashion that readers will be able to read it without confusion. CKJohnson1 (talk) 02:30, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Get Out (board game) 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/Get Out (board game) 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.
Hello User:Masem, could you please let me know why you removed the disambiguation template from Memento (film)? From my understanding it can be used to drive the attention of readers to a similarly named article.--Joseph 13:50, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Masem, I noticed that your March 1, 2017 move which reverted GSG back to IG (in order to start a new GSG page) inadvertently split IG from its historical talk page because of a bot fixing a double redirect. Do you mind speedy deleting Talk:Irrational GamessoTalk:Ghost Story Games can be moved there to restore the edit history to the correct matching? Then a new talk page can be made at Talk:Ghost Story Games. Thanks, Axem Titanium (talk) 20:28, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lisa Littman 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/Lisa Littman 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. Safrolic (talk) 09:31, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Masem, I hope you don't mind the random question. I heard this assertion recently and, while I understand the logic behind it, I can't for the life of me find anyplace it is discussed/outlined on WP:RS or any other guideline/policy page. Can you please point me in the right direction? I'm surprised it isn't explicitly outlined somewhere. Thanks. - PaulT+/C 23:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus is no, a newspaper headline is not in itself a reliable source. As encyclopaedia editors, it's our role to read the whole source and evaluate it for reliability. The headline is designed to attract attention rather than present a balanced summary of the article, and to read it in isolation is not sufficient.
I have read through this discussion and the previous discussions on this topic in the archives, and there is clearly general agreement that headlines should, at the very least, be treated cautiously and taken 'with a pinch of salt'. There is not a consensus for any sort outright prohibition on the use f headlines as sources, nor for any of the proposed wordings. I recommend further discussion to establish satisfactory wording which discourages the use of headlines as sources but is nonetheless not an outright proscription.
Hi,
I think the picture from of the Beat Saber crew from GDC Game Awards has wrong description. The girl's name is not in the image's description. I think you have confused the people ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.116.222.29 (talk) 14:58, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The following GA became a redirect. I don't have access (or at least I think I don't) to the reasons for it. I was hoping you could explain why it wasn't worthy of being a stand alone GA. Atsme Talk 📧 23:30, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Masem. Was wondering if you'd mind taking a look at User talk:Shalor (Wiki Ed)#User:CalebPhelps99? Since you've probably got much more experience with articles about video games than I, maybe you could offer this student some advice not only about image use, but also about the other content as well. It seems like quite a good first effort made by a new editor, but maybe there things you notice which need fixing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:09, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting that page:
Note the "if any of the following apply" language at the outset. Clearly #2, "[t]he issue has not been resolved;" applies here. —Locke Cole • t • c 08:28, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
talk
parameter). —Locke Cole • t • c 09:22, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
{{POV}}
is one of those that generate more heat than light and is used primarily as a weapon by editors with WP:BATTLEGROUND mentalities. I'd certainly be a Deleter in that MFD. We have a list of discussion notices about the current article, and it's called the talk page's table of contents. Editors who are only interested in the most active discussions look at the recent page history. Editors who ignore talk pages should steer clear of issues that are predictably controversial. ―Mandruss ☎ 09:45, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]Hi Masem. I am requesting one more time that you move you AE comments out of the results section of WP:AE#BullRangifer and WP:AE#Galathadael per the instructions at the very top of those sections and the procedures outlined by Arbcom at Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Procedures#Expectations_of_administrators. Thank you. - MrX 🖋 19:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Masem, I note that you are quite a prolific contributor to WP:BLP related issues on the dedicated noticeboard. May I request you to please consider opining on this particular thread — WP:BLPN#Vishwa Mohan Bhatt and sexual harassment allegations? It is a pretty sensitive issue since the "harassment" allegations are from an incident that is several years old, when the alleged victim was 14 years old. Someone likely connected with the subject has been removing the disputed content, claiming that the sourcing is not good. Thank you! — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 05:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The role of the flying butresses is significant in preventing the collapse of the walls.
The Epic Barnstar | ||
The gif that you added is a really clever method of displaying the before and after. Great job! Have this! :) Aviartm (talk) 23:18, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply] |
Thanks for uploading File:Dauntless cover art.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 22:38, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you would like me to help you with anything just let me know ~ mitch ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 02:11, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited PlayStation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 8K (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) 12:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The file File:Ratatouille-remy-control-linguini.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-free screenshot being used in a decorative manner in Ratatouille (film)#Plot. Non-free screenshots are generally not used in plot sections as explained in WP:FILMNFI when they are simply used to illustrate a plot element. There might be a way to keep this if the screenshot itself was the subject of sourced critical commentary or used as a representative example of some kind of technical aspect of the film's animation process or style so that the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC#8 was provided; simply using it, however, to show a plot point of one character "controlling" another character by pulling the other character's hair is not really a valid justification for non-free 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. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:03, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure about File:Notre Dame 531 transverse crop rot highlighting wood-frame rooves tightcrop.jpg? It seems to be exactly the same as the original. EEng 10:00, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do not "apologize" for me, or make any assertions on my motivations or intentions. If you have some problem with me, or how I conduct myself, or the method by which I come to my !vote, you can should contact me directly. If my behavior is disruptive, head on over to WP:ANI. I can't think of a single scenario where your remarks are appropriate; they should be stricken immediately.
Regards, --LaserLegs (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Administrators must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
View additional information
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:36, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the detailed edit summary! --NikkeKatski [Elite] (talk) 15:49, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
There is quite clearly an edit war on the roguelike article.
Both you and I have tried to resolve it in the talk page however it seems apparent to me that the anonymous user instigating the disputed changes does not understand the rules of wikipedia.
You are a far more experienced Wikipedia user and contributer than I.
How would you suggest that we resolve this and stop the anonymous user from forcing their point of the view into the summary of the article?
I would have suggested dispute resolution, however it's hard to believe that they will respect this process.
Is a block or a lock appropriate? Seems a shame...
Thanks for your time,
TheSLEEVEmonkey (talk) 13:22, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 16 May 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Tim Conway, 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.
Webb2k (talk) 16:06, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I recently brought Amy Sequenzia to the alert of the noticeboard, and I saw you had some fair-minded responses. However, the argument is continuing over on the page, enough that one of the editors has now placed "dubious" tags next to everything she's said. I think this is inappropriate, but I was wondering if you might be able to weigh in on it. I'm only coming here since you already read the background conversation regarding the controversy of facilitated communication, but if there is someone else I should speak to, let me know! --Anomalapropos (talk) 19:16, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I noticed you reverted the revisions in order to keep your summary of the page at the beginning but older revisions with said summary include the "readable prose" warning. Is there a way we can reformat the article to better appeal to the average reader and also how can we reduce the current size of the page in memory without removing important details?
This is also regarding edit from Ferret on the page suggesting that the extra details regarding the joycons were unneccessary in general. At the very least what should we do to clean up the page without purging what was already there?
In the mean time here's an attempt at your suggestion. And here's my old revision for comparison: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nintendo_Switch&oldid=897825403
Thanks. 🐺RooWritten🐺 TALK 16:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to let you know that everyone at my school talks about Fortnite. 99721829Max (talk) 22:25, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, all the Fortnite games. 99721829Max (talk) 16:52, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to let you know that we shouldn't be including references for articles that are linked for obvious page size limitations. Thank you! Zacharyalejandro (talk) 00:37, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Bloodstained ritual of the night logo.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:24, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Video gaming in China, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Perfect World (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Akira (2021 film) 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/Akira (2021 film) 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. Rusted AutoParts 05:15, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Vgy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. TarkusABtalk 12:54, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You are invited to join the discussion at WT:FOOTY#Bhutan national football team. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:25, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t understand why, as opposed to just moving the draft into mainspace, you copy and pasted lines from it instead. The verbatim lines in the casting section tell me you knew about the draft. This isn’t some WP:OWN or me angry I’m not getting credit thing, I hope it’s not interpreted that way, I’m just feeling pretty put out time I spent building that draft is for naught. Next time please make sure that there isn’t an existing draft before creating an entirely new article in the mainspace. Thank you. Rusted AutoParts 14:34, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 4 June 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Leah Chase, 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.
Stephen 02:03, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Isthis a legitimate iVote? It's red linked to nowhere and no IP address is shown. Shouldn't it be deleted? Atsme Talk 📧 14:34, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've replied to your message on total biscuit's talk page. :) 71.215.83.8 (talk) 22:46, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Masem, the single quickest source of news when you can't watch E3 live. :) Thanks for constantly updating the page so quickly! --Bchill53 (talk) 16:26, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that doing a Google search with the recently announced Gods and Monsters, and is replaced with the & symbol. Can we use that? Zacharyalejandro (talk) 22:45, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Masem. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Atlas".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}
, {{db-draft}}
, or {{db-g13}}
code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CptViraj (📧) 08:49, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Cadence of hyrule cover.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:29, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Posting here, because I pressed Enter too soon and so when I reverted your edits, a reason didn't show up, so I apologize for that.
Anyways, I removed that development section because for starters a game doesn't need one, if it says nothing. Sly 2 also has no development section.
The Sly 3 one only contained a Cancellation subsection, which arguably shouldn't fall into Development, instead getting it's own section, but most importantly, is utterly unnecessary because the game was not cancelled, it was indeed released.
Also the only thing under Cancellation had nothing to do with it, it just mentioned a not sourced lawsuit against the game's composer, which doing a quick google search and browsing said composer's Wikipedia page, I could not find any evidence of it existing.
Therefore, and because your edit appeared to be made by a bot, Twinkle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Twinkle), tough to be fair, I am unsure how it works so I may be assuming wrong, I decided to reverse them again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catralitos (talk • contribs) 17:50, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You’ve reverted the plot section to be incorrect. I can accept reverting the escape section (even though the word escape holds a meaning of intent - which number 5 did not have) but you have also reverted the article to a plot inaccuracy - The article states that Crosby was trying to convince Howard of number 5’s sentience before meeting with Stephanie, this is simply not true as during the conversation he tells Stephanie that sentience is impossible for a machine. He does not believe that number 5 is sentient until number 5 “captures” him and they talk all night. Removing this edit removes a huge plot point of number 5s creator coming to the realisation that he is sentient. You have also removed plot information that Crosby was not aware that Schroeder was double crossing him, which is pivotal to plot progression and the relationship between characters. Nealbo (talk) 22:19, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I get that but the plot summary is simply incorrect. It states currently that Crosby always believed number 5 to be sentient but a large portion of the film is Stephanie trying to convince him multiple times of sentience (and him denying it as number 5s creator) and eventually a long scene where number 5 finally convinces him of his sentience. It is literally the major storyline running through the second half of the movie. Nealbo (talk) 22:32, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I mean I fail to see how a shorter incorrect plot summary is preferable over a slightly longer correct summary. Nealbo (talk) 22:34, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for updating it, I really appreciate it. There is one more inaccuracy I’d like to fix - it states that Crosby takes his van to find Stephanie and Number 5. This doesn’t happen in the movie - it’s the other way around, Number 5 captures Crosby and takes him to Stephanie with the intention of proving his sentience with a one to one chat - during this chat Number 5 himself proves to Crosby that he is sentient which is very important from a creator/creation point of view. If I promise to keep that alteration as succinct as possible, are you OK for me to go ahead and update it? Nealbo (talk) 22:50, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Masem ~ just want to let you know I just copied and pasted a discussion on my sandbox page ~ and then I realized that when ever I copied the whole discussion ~ it put your signature on it ~ I didn't want you to think that I'm trying do something behind your back ~ regards ~ mitch ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 22:56, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bill & Ted, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Sadler (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 21 June 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Gloria Vanderbilt, 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.
Stephen 02:38, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Based on what you told me at the talk page of Ghostbusters 3, should I also remove the redirects I made at Candyman (2020 film) and Indiana Jones 5?Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 23:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Masem! I see that you are active at the Etika article. I move-protected the page when I started the discussion about the title. I am hoping that consensus on a new title may be reached within a short time, maybe a day or two, but by then I will be traveling and unable to use admin tools. Will you please continue to keep an eye on that article, and if it looks like consensus has been reached, would you be willing to do the honors with the rename? Thanks! -- MelanieN (talk) 21:31, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 26 June 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Etika (streamer), 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.
Stephen 00:12, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Martha Davis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:The outer worlds logo.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
To all interested parties: Now that it has a proper shortcut, the current events noticeboard has now officially opened for discussion!
WP:CEN came about as an idea I explored through a request for comment that closed last March. Recent research has re-opened the debate on Wikipedia's role in a changing faster-paced internet. Questions of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:Recentism are still floating around. That being said, there are still plenty of articles to write and hopefully this noticeboard can positively contribute to that critical process.
Thank you for your participation in the RFC, and I hope to see you at WP:CEN soon! –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 19:10, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 19:34, 29 June 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)[reply]
I made a tag specifically highlighting the fact that there was an incoming link to a subsection in the article and asking that the name of the subsection not be changed without taking that into account . . . and then you removed my tag and changed the title of the subsection without ever dealing with the incoming link. Please, if other editors go out of the way to take preventative measures like that, don't do things like this that just make their effort in vain. Cheers! LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 21:40, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know that the forthcoming book will feature only some content from the interviews, as well as content from elsewhere. It was widely misreported that the book is just the interviews, when it's not that clear cut. Cheers! —Flicky1984 (talk) 23:13, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 21:06, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Masem! I just wanted to ask you something. I've been working on a draft about Videogamedunkey (not close to done yet, but getting there). Do you think it's notable enough with the sources I've gathered/used? I'm not too familiar with BLPs for I wanted to ask for some advice. JOEBRO64 18:21, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Come on, man, you know as well as I do how confusing those conversations can become if you fail to indent properly. Even if you did note that your reply was to BMK, you need to preserve the indents, so others can follow the conversation. All your revert of the indent fix did was to confuse the reader as to who was actually speaking, and drowned out the posters who posted after BMK but before you. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 07:04, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Without identify inprose who the speakers are, this section violates NPOV / NOR." - Each quote is clearly identified with a reference to the original article, specifying author's name. There are other quotations in this article, which do not have inline author, for example in the Casting section:
There is a reference to the article in Variety, which is more than enough. Same practice is used in other articles on Wikipedia, as inline attribution litters the main text. Prepending every quote with author's name will break the flow of the paragraph that I built from the quotes, it will turn into boring "he said" - "she said" mishmash. If you think that the response section is now veers into the negative side, then add specific positive quotes instead of simply stating that the show has 90% approval rating. Mikus (talk) 18:20, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Above the Law (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Could you elaborate on why you remove the predecessor field? Back in April 2017, we all seemed to have come to a consensus that it was, including yourself. See Talk:Nintendo_Switch/Archive_2#Console succession -- ferret (talk) 13:31, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 11, No. 1 — 2nd Quarter, 2019
Previous issue | Index | Next issue
Project At a Glance
As of Q2 2019, the project has:
|
Content
Project Navigation
To opt-out or sign up to receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to update the distribution list.
(Delivered ~~~~~)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:10, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Akira (2021 film) 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/Akira (2021 film) (2nd nomination) 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. Rusted AutoParts 19:05, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Breaking Bad, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AMC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Open main menu Wikipedia Search Show my notifications Changes ← Previous edit Talk:ZeniMax v. Oculus (edit) Revision as of 21:04, 17 July 2019 452 BYTES REMOVED, 2 DAYS AGO m Reverted 1 edit by JohnLasheras (talk) to last revision by Masem (TW)
This is a subpage of Masem's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Facebook hacked me and took my wife. One day, I will sue them for much more than this and I will win. If anything ever happens to me or my family, there will always be evidence for this.
I gave them plenty of opportunities to do the right thing and to make it up to me, but they didn't.
It's a shame. JohnLasheras (talk) 21:03, 17 July 2019 (UTC) Thank Masem ADMINISTRATORS 125,011 EDITS[reply]
Wikipedia Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted. Terms of UsePrivacyDesktop JohnLasheras (talk) 07:54, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I wish you and BlackKite and what's-his-face would stop bandying around the words "ANI" and "disruption". Can't you just accept that it's OK if somebody votes "support" on certain things? And why do you think that that tactic would generate good will from me? And any threat to take me to ANI is empty because I'd just argue that I'm being taken to ANI because I disagreed with you, and ANIs that grow out of disagreements in votes almost always go nowhere. pbp 17:19, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Minecraft Story Mode Logo.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:33, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think those comments disqualify you from being an "uninvolved admin" and I remember saying something similar at AE in arguing against the topic ban of another editor who was being disruptive in their defense of a BLP. I think it's healthy to have editors with opposing viewpoints watching for balance in our BLPs. I think what is bugging me in the Wumbolo case is not the way they were exercising caution at Donald Trump (SPECIFICO's diffs), but the double standard demonstrated by their complete lack of caution in the BLP of what seems to be a liberal activist...accusing him of hypocrisy and then reverting it back into the article when challenged. ~Awilley (talk) 19:47, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 23 July 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Ricardo Rosselló, 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.
Stephen 04:38, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]