Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

Greetings! I would like to thank you for your efforts in giving an unrequested third opinion and reaching consensus in Talk:Malta convoys. Even if you were unsuccessfull, I appreciate your sound intervention. Best regards, Lord Ics (talk) 14:12, 26 September 2017

Hello Cinderella157 sorry for bothering you i will be honest i am a not regular editor on articles regarding people. Personally i think removing the titles is wrong . I would also like to add that i was not aware of the talk page i have created a new section on the talk page and i would like to hear your opinions i have come up with an idea to both add the regnal titles and make sure the infobox is not bloated Friendlyhistorian (talk) 09:05, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, I just wanted to mention that this edit didn't actually ping the user. You need to add both the ping template and your signature to the page in the same edit. See H:PINGFIX for more info. — mw (talk) (contribs) 11:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year!

Cinderella157,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
 — Amakuru (talk) 20:05, 5 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding ((subst:Happy New Year fireworks)) to user talk pages.

 — Amakuru (talk) 20:05, 5 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you Amakuru. Best wishes for a prosperous and happy year for you as well. Cinderella157 (talk) 22:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was unaware of the "Supported by" discussion on Infoboxes (which I would have opposed). The IP who deleted the "Supported by" lines in Infoboxes is suspected of being recidivist socker Orchomen. regards Mztourist (talk) Mztourist (talk) 03:28, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mztourist, I thought you might have been unaware, just as I was about the socker. I can only say that the RfC was notified several places including MilHist. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 09:26, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, I think I was on vacation when the discussion took place. Mztourist (talk) 09:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see no contradiction with the criteria the battle of kiev was a blunder which resulted in the collapse of the soviet army group south,

i really don’t see any contradictions in my edit with the criteria. CoffeeRZ (talk) 15:37, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CoffeeRZ, the critera given is: Entries on this list are those where multiple sources dealing with the subject of military disasters have deemed the event in question to be a military disaster (or an equivalent term). [emphasis added] The subject of sources must be military disasters. Sources used to support other entries are specifically on the subject of military disasters. Cinderella157 (talk) 21:47, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Listen dude if the largest Encirclement in history isn't a military disaster i don't know what is CoffeeRZ (talk) 00:52, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Listen CoffeeRZ, we rely on what sources dealing with the subject of military disasters have to say on what are military disasters, not on the WP:OR of editors. That is what the inclusion criteria is telling us. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:09, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I respect your efforts in trying to cleanup the template in the 1965 war article, But it is unfair that I had to go through all the effort of making a collage, for it to be removed by one click. If it doesn’t fall into the category of WP:MONTAGE then edit it to do so, or provide feedback on how to. I have spent a day laying out those images in the infobox, Please respect my efforts and work. Titan2456 (talk) 20:02, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]