![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Please provide reliable sources for your edits. Corvus cornixtalk 02:36, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Is there a "user page wizard" or the like to help me make my user page anywhere?
Good move, well done! DBaK (talk) 11:24, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
((helpme))
How do I give an image a relative width? I'd like it to be as large as an article can be wide on someone's screen, but no larger. Specifically the duck at Wikipedia:Please_be_a_giant_duck,_so_we_can_ban_you. Egg Centric (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Mlpearc powwow 15:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Some people call it a decline. I call it a transition! :P --SGCM (talk) 23:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
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.
A tag has been placed on Christopher Ward (watches) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding ((hang on))
to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. E. Fokker (talk) 21:27, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Pertaining to this edit.
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you are reminded not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you.Canterbury Tail talk 02:41, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the head start on the big break. KimChee (talk) 10:33, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.
If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:49, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Hi,
Is there a "this user is stoned" userbox? I thought I should announce it to such a wide caring world :) Egg Centric (talk) 22:11, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
((Userbox | border-c = #999 | border-s = 1 | id-c = red | id-s = 14 | id-fc = black | info-c = #EEE | info-s = 8 | info-fc = black | id = [[File:Hemp.JPG|43px]] | info = This user is [[Cannabis (drug)|stoned]] | float = left ))
This user is stoned |
Tweak it as you see fit, dude. Chzz ► 22:32, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Hey, I responded to your response to my comments, at my talk page. Also, this is not a good idea. Even if you felt it was an accurate description, WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL and WP:TALK are all pretty clear that just because you have a WP:USERSPACE doesn't mean personal attack are ok there. Also, something to consider is that we desperately need more women among our ranks (for many reasons, but one of which is that we're just literally missing out on the contributions of thousands of potential editors). Comments attributing bad behavior to menstrual cycles is an old jab that strikes, well, below the belt. Keep it clean! Ocaasi (talk) 02:44, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, personally I've never regestered an e-mail address to my account so I wouldn't really be able to tell you how it may benefit. All I know about it is that it will allow Wikipedia editors to contact you off wiki. I guess if you're willing to do that, it's your decision. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 08:58, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~))
, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. MASEM (t) 14:53, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Previous unblock decline, collapsed so as to make it clear I have a current one:
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
![]() Egg Centric (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: If a block is to protect the encyclopedia, rather than punitive, and if I have been harming the encyclopedia by my edits on ANI (I dispute that but don't feel that I need to elaborate as it's irrelevant to the request) I am quite happy to manually block myself from ANI and anything to do with that user for 24 hours. There is no need to calm down as I am perfectly calm anyway. Thus I request an unblock to continue making other edits on Wikipedia. Decline reason: I'm sorry, but I don't think I can trust you to "manually block yourself" after seeing warnings for the same behavior in the history of this page. TNXMan 15:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC) If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the ((unblock)) template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
|
Egg Centric (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have no such history. There's a warning for personal attacks (related discussion here - last part of it - in relation to some comments on my user page, e.g. MISSING LINK - sorry can't link to it without breaking template) but that stems very much from a misunderstanding, they were intended as a joke. That's the only thing I can find. And I certainly have no history of breaking solemn undertakings in real life, much less here (indeed I haven't given any here until this one :D) - so it seems curious to think I couldn't be trusted to not edit a page.
Decline reason:
You've been here only a few weeks. It takes longer than that for us to trust a user if he agrees, as part of dispute resolution, to voluntarily refrain from editing a certain page. And when you are accused of outing, that complicates things greatly ... — Daniel Case (talk) 19:15, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the ((unblock)) template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
missing link: [1]
A tag has been placed on Marianne Ny requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template ((hang on)) underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. aprock (talk) 01:23, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure to what you are implying here "Indeed, it is not unreasonable to wonder whether the authorities ought to have been contacted!" [2] but would appreciate a clarification. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the kind present. I could not help but notice you also wrote WP:GIANTDUCK. Perhaps the humor needs to go one step further, such as retitling "Please be a giant duck, so we can bake you" (or "cook you" or "eat you") and adding a few silly examples in the spirit of the page that you are parodying? KimChee (talk) 20:46, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Since the time that you have commented at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Unblock_request (where there was some messy brainstorming about what terms are necessary for an unblock), a specific proposal has been made by Doc James about the restrictions/conditions that will come into effect upon the user being unblocked. Your comments/views on this proposal are welcome. Regards, Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I've ended up with a few edits ending up with my (static) IP address, even though I thought I was logged in at the time as, so it seems, was this edit (actually the one before it). Tim PF (talk) 21:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:37, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
((helpme)) I would like to "spam" something to the talk pages of a range of IPs, specifically the same message as at User_talk:212.183.128.2. Is there an easy way of doing that? Egg Centric (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
(edit conflict) x 2
OK, so, 150 is not a big deal; but 'coz of the possible ramifications, I want to run it by AN. Before I do so, it might be good to come up with a bit neater 'template'. Give me...an hour, and I'll do one. Here. And/or, make your suggestions. Chzz ► 21:23, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Shared IP address
This IP address, Egg Centric/Archive 1, may be shared by multiple users. If proxy servers or firewalls are used, this IP address may represent many users at many personal computers or devices. For this reason, a message intended for one user may be received by another, and a block intended for disruptive users may also affect innocent users. If you are editing from this address and are frustrated by irrelevant messages, you can avoid them by creating an account for yourself. Sometimes, in response to vandalism, you may be temporarily unable to create an account. If you are autoblocked repeatedly, contact your Internet service provider or network administrator and request it contact Wikimedia's XFF project about enabling X-Forwarded-For HTTP headers on its proxy servers so that blocks will affect only the intended user. Alternatively, you can list this IP address at Wikipedia:WikiProject on XFFs.
Review contributions carefully if blocking this IP address or reverting its contributions. If a block is needed, administrators should consider a soft block using Template:Anonblock. ![]() |
...that is, ((Shared IP))
...and see also ((SharedIPEDU)), ((SharedIPAdvice)), ((SharedIPPublic)), ((SharedIPCORP))
I started to edit those, to try and re-word the message on User talk:212.183.128.2 appropriately; and as I did so, I realised that, the problem is, you are leaving a "message to admins" on other talk pages.
I'm not convinced that is a useful idea.
Also, the example you gave states, "For more info, talk to me" - it's a bit too...well, specific.
Mostly, the message we leave will be read by the editors, not the admins. Admins are pretty much going to ignore whatever is on the talk page.
So...I'm not convinced this will help.Really, the notice you wrote is saying "Admins - do the right thing; follow the right policies" - because, they shouldn't be blocking an IP anyway, unless it is necessary to protect Wikipedia.
In conclusion, after some thought, I don't think this blanket message is a great idea.
However, if you disagree, I suggest you start a discussion - initially, WP:PUMP would be best, but if you do plan to 'spam' to a few hundred pages, then I'd certainly recommend posting to WP:AN.
I can, very easily, help you 'spam' a message out to 100 people, or 1000, or 10,000. However, I cannot in good faith do so, unless I see that it is a good idea.
Sorry to be negative in this post; I hope you'll see that I have given it thought. If you still want to 'spam' those specific 150 users, I don't think that'd be a huge deal, but I do think it'd be worth asking on WP:AN - and saying exactly what you want to do, ie "I think we should put THIS on THESE pages, for THESE REASONS". If AN consensus agreed, I'd very happily actually perform the 150 posts. Chzz ► 22:25, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
No, essays don't have to conform to NPOV. Like everything else here it seems, there's a page about them - WP:ESSAYS - where it says "Essays typically contain advice or opinions...". Everyone is free to write as many essays as they like; a lot of people keep them in their userspace.
No problem, and as I see you are a fairly new editor: Welcome! And happy Wiki'ing! Herostratus (talk) 02:39, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Just because you very likely don't know this as yet. If you copy a mainspace article into your userspace for whatever reason (tests, tweaks, you want to do something else with it personally), remove the categories. The reason for this is if you don't then your test user page will appear in those categories on the mainspace. USerspace isn't allowed in the main article space categorisation system.
Note, this is just informational as chances are very high you didn't know this, and it's a common enough mistake. It's just to stop cluttering the main encyclopaedic categories with pages that the regular user shouldn't be navigating to during normal reading. Canterbury Tail talk 11:52, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh, one other minor point, again something you likely haven't come across. In your copy of the Jeremy Bamber page, several of the images on that page are Fair Use. Fair Use only applies, to my knowledge and I'll be the first to admit I'm not a copyright expert here, to the main encyclopaedia. I don't believe Fair Use images are allowed to be utilised in Userspace. You may want to check it out, see Wikipedia:Removal_of_fair_use_images#Fair_use_images_on_userpages for details. Again, I haven't removed them as I'm not expert in this area, it's just a friendly word. Canterbury Tail talk 11:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
May I use a photo as a cite? Egg Centric (talk) 21:57, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes, if it's something really obvious, maybe not if it's not obvious. Is the photo already on Wikipedia? How do you want to use it as a cite? Where do you want to use it as a cite? Banaticus (talk) 22:11, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
You can cite a gravestone; I have done so before. It you specify where it is, in sufficient detail - ie, Church/city and/or geolocation, then it is a verifiable source. You cite the gravestone - not the pic. The pic is for convenience; if someone wants to check the facts, they can go visit the grave. Chzz ► 04:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, this is just to let you know that I've granted you Rollback rights. Just remember:
HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:42, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
...for the revert on my talkpage, and your followup. LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:25, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
See [3] --173.49.140.141 (talk) 22:43, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
|
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:14, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Egg Centric, I've reverted your edit again as I think that you are referring to the prevention of damage from a tsunami rather than prevention of the tsunami happening in the first place - technology could potentially do something about the former but not in any wild imaginings could it do anything about the latter. Mikenorton (talk) 16:42, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Just a friendly note to explain why I reverted your change to the article, as my reversion could be seen as questionable. Neither of the two sources specifically states that there was a "lack of" budgeting, but rather that the budgeting done was inadequate or wrong, which is better represented by the phrase already used. I realize that an error in budgeting can be seen as a lack of, but since this was a lead section statement I feel its more important to keep it concise and brief, using the phraseology used in the references. I have no objections though to saying, in the controversy section, not the lead, that the "inadequate" budgeting was seen by some as a "lack of budgeting", subject to a reliable source being found that says this. Ravendrop 19:55, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
It often takes a little while before someone gets around to handling expired PROD's. Putting them on ANI as soon as they expire isn't helpful and may attract the wrong type of attention. 75.57.242.120 (talk) 22:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
is another example of a HILARIOUS joke/pun. 195.43.48.142 (talk) 17:19, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
I noticed the warning you placed on my talk page regarding Toast however when I went to investigate what happened...nothing had been reverted or restored...just a warning on my page. I had originally reverted the addition of 'You can also get French Toast' then realized that was not clearly vandalism at the time. As you are probably aware, reverted vandalism must be indisputable and I thought that addition could possible be argued in the article so I undid my revert as well as removed the warning from the user's talk page. Now I can see the user is currently blocked, and majority of their edits were reverted so I removed their contributions. Carmichael95 [TALK] | [CONTRIBS] 00:20, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello and thank you for your recent support in my last RFA. I have unfortunately had chosen to withdraw my RFA with a Support of 7 and Opposition of 26 and 0 Neutral. I am in good sprites to attempt a possible RFA in a later time with more experience. This seems one of the main concerns expressed by the Wikipedia community as well as fixing my grammatical errors.I hope you support me in my discussion to withdraw and I am looking forward to your support in a future RFA's and other edits made by myself here on Wikipedia.
Thanks Again,
Staffwaterboy Critique Me 00:45, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:AVERYGREATDEALOFCAPITALLETTERSTHATULTIMATELYREDIRECTTOTHEARTICLEREGARDINGTHECONCEPTTHATONWIKIPEDIAONEOUGHTTOBEAGIANTDUCKRATHERTHANASMALLOREVENMEDIUMDUCKSOTHATWECANBANYOU. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:AVERYGREATDEALOFCAPITALLETTERSTHATULTIMATELYREDIRECTTOTHEARTICLEREGARDINGTHECONCEPTTHATONWIKIPEDIAONEOUGHTTOBEAGIANTDUCKRATHERTHANASMALLOREVENMEDIUMDUCKSOTHATWECANBANYOU redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Chzz ► 19:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
---
Hi!
Re. "one of my favourite and most respected editors here [..] you sound pissed off" [5]
Thanks for the nice words about me! No, I'm not angry. Honestly!
As I said, I won't waste more time in the RfD, and won't comment on that further. However, I wanted to assure you - I am not "pissed off" or anything like that.
I was just stating what I thought, in a direct way.
I apologize if I gave the impression that I was annoyed. I'm really not.
I've stated my opinion, and I really don't mind what happens in the RfD. - that's it, honestly; nothing more, nothing less. No bad feelings whatsoever.
Cheers, Chzz ► 11:38, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Egg Centric for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. – GorillaWarfare talk • contribs 23:14, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
I've decided to unblock you, as you've demonstrated that you can be trusted to edit again. You seem to understand that trolling is inappropriate, even if the trolling is directed at friends you know off-wiki. I trust you will only continue productive editing, and raise no more concerns about the security of your account. – GorillaWarfare talk • contribs 19:07, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Very unfortunate that I have to post this as my 2nd edit after being unblocked - and given the amount of time admins have spent on me already please do not see this is a priorty - my only intention was to apologise to Chzz as the other involved admin above, and then to take the evening off to reflect (and enjoy spagbol)... but it seems I still can't edit anything other than my talk page! Hope the following helps:
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Egg Centric". The reason given for Egg Centric's block is: "Possible compromised account".
Accept reason: Oops, that was my fault. You should be set now. – GorillaWarfare talk • contribs 19:31, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
User talk:Chzz#So sorry about all that...
Chzz ► 19:54, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm definitely sympathetic to getting rid of this article, & the chief problem was that most of the people who !voted wanted to keep. (And I'm definitely getting gun-shy of preferring the arguments over counting noses.) The problem is with finding good grounds for a convincing deletion argument. One would be to thoroughly research both this company & its business niche in order to show that it isn't notable; that's what I do in similar cases, even though proving a negative is a tough row to plow. Another might be to show that this company gets unwarranted attention from having a Wikipedia article; I don't know how well that would go over, but if I learned that a given business of marginal notability was using its Wikipedia article to claim it was, say, "a leader in its field", I'd be inclined to vote delete. A final, & perhaps the best, approach would be to simply forget about it. If this business doesn't try to turn this article into an advertisement, & no one pays the article any attention, then what harm does its existence cause? (I hope no one is making important decisions solely based on the presence or content of Wikipedia articles.) Eventually someone else will find it, decide to try again to delete it, & may succeed without you having to lift a finger. -- llywrch (talk) 19:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:49, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
No, I did it on purpose. I had photorefractive keratectomy surgery a while ago and don't wear corrective lenses anymore. And what's wrong with Comic Sans? bahamut0013wordsdeeds 12:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Hiya!
This request might seem a bit...odd, out-of-the-blue, or whatever...but bear with me; I am looking for a few random Wikipedians to help me out with something...and after our recent communications, I wondered if you might be able to help.
There's a liaison project between Wikipedia and some universities (currently, USA, and re 'public policy' - it's a trial) - the students write an article as part of their uni course.
Two specific courses have only a few weeks left, and I want to help them; what they need is, comments and feedback on their two articles - and some interaction with the Wikipedia community. Hence, getting random folks involved might really help!
The article Education policy in Brazil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) was started by Elizabetsyatbu (talk · contribs),
The article California Proposition 19 (2010) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is, re. lorink (talk · contribs) abond112 (talk · contribs) Dross33 (talk · contribs)
If you could provide any comments, feedback, suggestions, or other interaction - to help with this - that'd be superb.
I hope you don't mind my asking. Any little comments to those users, and/or on the article talk pages, would be brilliant; thanks so much in anticipation...I'd really appreciate it. Cheers! Chzz ► 04:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Don't trust him!
NJW (GS) 82.25.188.231 (talk) 10:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:08, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:17, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Please stop it with the disruptive edit summaries or you are liable to find yourself blocked without further notice. ╟─TreasuryTag►condominium─╢ 19:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Silent Minority 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/Silent Minority until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. — Jess· Δ♥ 20:05, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Where is it you go to ask for views of uninvolved editors in fairly simple (i.e. non-bitter, no entrenched sides, no bombings etc) content disputes again? Egg Centric 22:33, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
WP:Dispute resolution Gavin Perch talk 00:03, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:45, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ╟─TreasuryTag►Woolsack─╢ 17:43, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Would I be correct in thinking that if TT removed his 'indictment' of BoP from his user talk page, you would be willing to revert the edits to your userbox he finds so offensive? Regards, Bob House 884 (talk) 20:05, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Egg Centric, THIS is completely unacceptable, and in more ways than one. I don't know what started it, but I would strongly suggest you remove it. Feel free to leave me a diff, but my "initial" reaction to this would almost assuredly vote oppose at any RfA you wanted to have. Like I said, I don't know how it started, but either way ... two wrongs don't make a right. Feel free to leave me a diff, and I'll look things over tomorrow, I'm too tired to research enough to actually "block" anyone tonight, but you need to tone it down. In case you're not familiar with it .. see WP:NPA thank you and good night. — Ched : ? 03:43, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
I've tried to respond helpfully at my talk page :) Bob House 884 (talk) 22:36, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Jack of Oz [your turn] 11:36, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
((helpme))
I believe there's some bot or some other thingy that will help me move a page with lots of links to it (i.e. correct all those links at the same time). Could some kind lady or gentleman (or one of the lower orders) please direct me to it?
Egg Centric (Esq.) 18:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
I'm typing this in the middle of a party. I have to be up for work in 5 hours. If I had sense, I wouldn't be on Wikipedia at all. Where can I "summon" editors to watch an article for me that is being edited with all sorts of shite? Egg Centric 23:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
A request for comment has been filed concerning the username of I Jethrobot (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion here. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 17:16, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi Egg Centric, it seems that another admin has fully-protected the 27 Club article in light of the edit-warring there. I'm sorry that it wasn't me who protected the page after you left your message on my talk page. Acalamari 20:05, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Umm, I'm confused: what kind of response did you expect? I didn't realise that you were expecting any response on any part of your comment. I'll happily respond once I know what you'd like to know. Nyttend (talk) 17:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
Though I am sure you were acting in good faith, I am not sure that it was wise for you to do a non-admin close of this debate. Please review WP:NAC which says such a close is OK "absent any contentious debate" and recommends avoiding such a close in the case of "controversial topics".Given the intensity of this debate and the controversial event involved, with many people recommending other outcomes, I believe it would have been best to let an administrator close it. That being said, I admire your boldness. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the link to that article. It's a name that's been part of my family heritage for four generations, and my grandfather, who died 60 years ago, used it as his first name. Actually, it was his middle name.
I won't say more about the AfD because I think the outcome is fine. Best to you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:05, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
I am an all-American mongrel. Supposedly about three-eighths Irish, and who knows just who they married over the generations. A bit of that might be Scottish-Irish. About one-eighth "English" but that was all mixed up and some ancestors go back to pre-Revolutionary War days. Maybe a trace from Alsace-Lorraine. Some Swedish, some Norwegian. Who knows what else - a few knaves and rogues without pedigrees. I have Catholics, Protestants and Jews in my family. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:02, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much, Egg Centric. I am especially honored because you have praised the trait that I have consciously tried to bring to this wonderful project. As for the family origin of "Cullen", I had always assumed it came from Ireland. However, my grandfather died the year before I was born. My father showed no interest in things Irish, as his ancestors had been here since about 1850. He scoffed at Irish-American sentimentality. So I never knew for sure. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:21, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
I've re-cut the statements about me. I don't agree with your removals, but calling someone too lazy to avoid a bad block is definitely a violation of WP:NPA, especially since the block was for 3RR, which is essentially an automatic thing except in very specific cases, which this block wasn't. Nyttend (talk) 21:14, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Awarded to you for being bold and applying common sense in your early closure of the Mark Duggan AFD!
ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 23:40, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Stop posting, anywhere on Wikipedia, suggestions [10] [11] that I have any form of addiction to Wikipedia in particular or to the Internet in general. It is considered harassment and will not be tolerated. ╟─TreasuryTag►stannary parliament─╢ 17:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
I disagree with your characterisation of it as harrasment, it clearly isn't, but will do so except where to do otherwise would be incoherent. Egg Centric 17:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
I disagree with your assessment that your actions are not harassment. They clearly are could be! Under the a perceived guise of concern you allege the existence of some form of medical addiction which 1.) you are likely not experienced to diagnose and 2.) if you were you would be explicitly violating Wikipedia's policy against giving medical advice. You really should cease with that form of counsel. IMO - My76Strat (talk) 18:24, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi
I see you've been having trouble with our mutual friend recently! I prefer editing as an anon, and he's gone and protected his talk page so I can't "pop the question". Could you ask him exactly why an "established editor" such as himself feels the need to childishly demand off other admins that I be blocked? It's extremely petty, and all simply because I've been trying to remove an inflammatory and completely unnecessary rant from his user page. Thanks! 94.2.240.29 (talk) 17:53, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Please reconsider your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Mark Duggan, especially claiming it is a "snowball"; please check WP:NAC and WP:SNOW. Thanks, Chzz ► 02:08, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
How do I get a list of all the pages I've created again? Egg Centric 17:44, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to hear what you think at Talk:Anders_Behring_Breivik#Proposed_compromise. causa sui (talk) 21:06, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Not that IP (based in Massachusetts - behavior is different as well). I was thinking about an IP-hopping editor based in England that's been very actively harassing the same user. If the "Ttwatchr" "Ttstlkr" (ad nauseum) accounts are all found to be in England, that would be a mighty significant coincidence indeed. Doc talk 22:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for being my first interaction on wikipedia! It is not normally considered good English to have a noun repeated in a sentence if it can be avoided so that sentence needs rewriting if you insist on that format. PorterO'Shea (talk) 12:46, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
D'you think you can hold off from commenting on the guy for a while? I'm sure it won't help him turn himself around, and I'm sure you can find other things to do. Thanks. --88.104.46.22 (talk) 18:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
But I deleted you comment at 92.29.195.208's talk page per WP:DNFT. The more attention we give to LC the more they will keep being disruptive. --Jayron32 23:35, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
It's not eligible for revdel. Best thing to do is not draw additional attention to it, hence my WP:AN edit. 28bytes (talk) 21:29, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Where do you nominate a category for renaming? Egg Centric 17:51, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi Egg Centric, thank you for your appreciation for my contribution to the state leaders articles! It's a very nice surprise that you noticed and even took the trouble of expressing it. :)
ZBukov (talk) 08:54, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Please be a giant duck, so we can ban you, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Please be a giant duck, so we can ban you and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Please be a giant duck, so we can ban you during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Rcsprinter (talk) 20:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
I'll take the duck. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
I believe it was around about 8-9 January this year on the talk page where you have most people indicating in the affirmative in favour of the plan but also if memory serves me correctly, it was also discussed and mainly agreed at IMOS too. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 18:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Odd question, but how do you move pages on the spanish wikipedia? I don't speak spanish.... Egg Centric 19:27, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Please close discussions with templates instead of deleting them. ((Discussion top)) and ((Discussion bottom)) for example. --GraemeL (talk) 22:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. You queried an edit of mine i.e. " .... What is this all about? I actually thought it may have been placed there by some confidence trickster in preparation for a claim to be nobility... but clearly not. Still, I am confused.... Egg Centric 23:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC) ..... "
That page is not for humor.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:33, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:39, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Question about this comment: do you have access to scholarly sources you've read and synthesized, or is it simply a question of not recognizing some of the entries? Before threatening a purge, as you've done here, please check sources and references first. Truthkeeper (talk) 15:04, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Egg Centric. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place ((helpme)) on your talk page and ask your question there.
Again, welcome! Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 16:10, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
What is [13] this supposed to mean? A request for self-block? Materialscientist (talk) 23:03, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Is there a universal editnotice for myself? E.g. the editnotice for this talk page says wibble. I would like to make an edit notice for myself that I (and only I) will see on every page when I try to edit it. Is this possible? If not, is there a way of acheiving something similar? Egg Centric 23:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
#editnotice-area {
border:1px solid #BBB;
}
to add a border (I think)
HurricaneFan25 — 00:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for replying but that wasn't what I was asking. I would like to see some text chosen by me on every edit page. For example, a checklist. Presumably that's doable with javascript. I don't have any real practical experience with javascript, and what I do have was well before AJAX came along, but I'm surte if a mock script was created then I could hack it to change the text. Or perhaps it could get the text from another wikipedia page? Is there somewhere for script requests? Again, it wouldn't surprise me at all if this is a fairly common request and something like it at least already exists. Egg Centric 15:50, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
:before
or :after
CSS pseudo-selectors (you can use these to generate a slab of boilerplate text), which are pretty obscure, but it ought to work. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:09, 4 January 2012 (UTC)I'm on content work now, not really much into vandalism patrols. Jasper Deng (talk) 00:01, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, actually, there is a huge difference in principle between my home address (which is not publicly available) and the email address of a company which is published on their web page.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 04:31, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Egg Centric/list of bastards, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ZZArch talk to me 20:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Egg Centric, I just wanted to let you know that, to create a user space page, you should not use Egg Centric/list of bastards, but User:Egg Centric/list of bastards instead. I have tagged the previous page for SD. Thanks! ZZArch talk to me 20:49, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Just wondering where this discussion ended up? I couldn't find it: Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard/Archive_16#Community_Ban_Proposal. Thanks, stmrlbs|talk 03:45, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
I have deleted it as you asked: the whole history is preserved so that, on request, any admin can restore a particular version. WP:REFUND would be the place to ask. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 23:17, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Egg Centric. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 02:20, 6 April 2012 (UTC) |
rather a stacked deck, huh? (they even censor your talk page)Humanist 41.43.31.52 (talk) 18:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)