• @MichaelQSchmidt: I think you meant "wack", which is short for wacky. This isn't The Sopranos, you know. Ha! Happy New Year, Schmidt! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:12, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I prefer using a revolver to shoot articles into the drywall. Worked for Sherklock Holmes, after all...although it does annoy the neighbors.

Thanks very much for the kind words, and happy editing into 2016! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:26, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

• @Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Thanks, and hope 2016 brings you prosperity and happiness. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:29, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Tank

Ewe

Berry

Muff

I wish you the same. == BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 16:49, 31 December 2015 (UTC) |}

Sorry about broken template. Yours, Quis separabit? 21:44, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

@Rms125a@hotmail.com: I've been adding </div> markup when I come across it, and also add ((clear)) after the </div>, so it doesn't cut into subsequent threads. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:46, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

@Rms125a@hotmail.com: Thanks for the message below. It had the same problem, missing the closing </div> markup. I fixed it, but please be careful about these types of matters. Thanks! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:51, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Quis separabit? 22:03, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use ((subst:Happy New Year 2016)) to send this message

Spread the WikiLove; use ((subst:Happy New Year 2016)) to send this message

By the way, did you know that this edit was the last edit made in 2015, and this is the first edit of 2016? (Times in UTC, of course). —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 00:27, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

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

Boldog üj evet! Si Trew (talk) 03:37, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

• @SimonTrew: Thanks! Do you still have your Bachelor griller? North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:40, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes. Haven't used it for a few weeks as we have a gas cooker and stuff but the spit roast is really good on it. It was my only cooker for most of a year. Si Trew (talk) 03:53, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

@SimonTrew: I still want to get one of those...I like the hot plates atop it. Much better than a plain old toaster oven. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:55, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, the brand is Orion and they do other appliances here in Hungary, but have not seen them in the UK, though they are manufactured in the UK. This one came from Tesco but they sell into other large stores here, so I don;t think it is just a trade name/marque of Tesco. You do get a lot that are a combination oven but as you say the hobs on the top are the key difference. I took it apart about three months ago to give it a good degrease and the hobs and most of the components are just standard parts from China. I wanted to put a longer flex on it because the socket in our new house is farther away then the one in the background of the pic which is a British socket I installed in a Hungarian house (our other house is about half and half UK and EU sockets with the intention of not needing to use loads of adaptors – actually had the opposite effect of having half and half plugs and so without a doubt one would have the wrong socket/plug combination and had to use an adapter, although probability should suggest it would be an evens bet). Si Trew (talk) 04:01, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

@SimonTrew: You sound quite adept regarding electricity. Just don't electrocute yourself! Maybe the ultra-adapter at right would work out! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:06, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm a Member of the IET, what was the IEEE, so I am kinda all right to do a bit of electrics. Si Trew (talk) 04:09, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I got a nice 3-gang made in China the other day that fits every socket known to man and has switches on each socket (whcih is unusual). The only thing is that it doesn't actually earth any earth from a Hungarian plug (which are on the circumference of the plug) – it works fine but you won't be earthed, which isn't entirely necessary because both live and neutrual run RCD to earth unlike int he UK where only live runs through the trip and neutral is not tripped; oh well, it is fine for devices that are not earthed. The one you picture looks like it could hurt you electrically, although the UK standard BS 1363 plug is VERY painful if you tread on one. Si Trew (talk) 04:14, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @SimonTrew: For what it's worth, I was almost a member of the Cosmic Charlie campaign circa the mid 1980s. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:16, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

You have hidden shallows. Si Trew (talk) 04:23, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

@SimonTrew: That 3-gang you mention sounds like it would be great for international travel. Regarding the CCC I mentioned as a bit of a joke, the campaign failed, but it was kind of a funny thing among Deadheads in Deadland back in the day (e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:50, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

@SimonTrew: I wouldn't mind a link to the "3-gang that fits every socket known to man" that you mention above, if you could provide one. From a quick search in the U.S., prices vary wildly, from around USD $25 to $200 and more. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:43, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

@Savvyjack23: Thanks, and here's to a productive and happy 2016. Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:54, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

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

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

Spread the WikiLove; use ((subst:Happy New Year 2016)) to send this message

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

Apologies for being a bit late but Happy New Year as well. Donnie Park (talk) 02:20, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use ((subst:Happy New Year 2016)) to send this message

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

• Draft:Awan (town)
• Draft:Plunet BusinessManager

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Waterstart at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:48, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello. Recently you moved User:Partmedia/CMOV to Draft:CMOV; thanks for letting me know. I stopped working on this draft a long time ago but couldn't figure out how to delete it. CMOV is an extended x86 instruction and definitely does not deserve its own page (see X86_instruction_listings). It's no longer in my user space so I can't simply mark it for deletion, and I'm not sure how to proceed after reading Wikipedia:Drafts#Deleting_a_draft. —Preceding undated comment added 15:15, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

@Partmedia: Since you're the primary contributor of the content (my edits were just to move and format the entry), you can add ((Db-author)) atop the page to request speedy deletion per WP:G7. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:09, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Northamerica, a few days ago I removed reaction to the reaction to the Tobacco segment on LWT. You re-inserted, citing balance. I posted a thorough argument on the talk page... would you please take a look, and, if you disagree, respond there? Thanks!Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 01:06, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

@Moishe Rosenbaum: Thanks for the notice regarding your edits to Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. I have copied the content you removed to the article talk page here, to provide context for the discussion. I may or may not comment further at the talk page thread. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:57, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks -- works for me. Much appreciated, and happy new year.Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 00:35, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Dl2000 (talk) 23:12, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Museum of Goa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Curation. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

•  Fixed. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:40, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Museum of Goa at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:34, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Legacypac. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your to reversions at List of classic rock songs. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. Legacypac (talk) 13:33, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

For sending me such cheery messages. I still laugh about Chips and dip and how many people die during the superbowl playoffs double-dipping. The president of your fan club,

  Bfpage |leave a message  01:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

@Bfpage: No double dipping ever! Anyway, thanks for the kind words, and hope your New Year is a great one. Keep in touch, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:05, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

• Draft:Bhavesh Joshi

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

• Draft:Shut Up Weirdo

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Northamerica1000 reported by User:Legacypac (Result: ). Thank you. Legacypac (talk) 13:40, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I see you are an upstanding editor, so I AGF you are not aware of point 13 under WP:LINKNO because you just copy pasted general site links into a whole list of Miss Earth articles, a topic filled with dedicated promotional content and link building editors. Significant effort has gone into reducing the fancruft and Linkspam in these articles. Legacypac (talk) 10:37, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

@Legacypac: I added the official website to External link sections, which are directly related to the topic. LINKNO states in part that "sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject" should not be linked, but an official website is highly correlated. Adding official website links in articles is rather common practice on Wikipedia. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:43, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

The specific subject of the articles is the 2007 or whatever edition of the pageant, not Miss Earth generally. You will have a difficult time finding much detail about past pageants because the organization does not care to host that, they use Wikipedia for that. The fact you posted the exact same link about a dozen times should indicate these were determined to be different subjects. The presence of these general links incorrectly gives the appearance of sourcing to these pages. See below. Legacypac (talk) 11:06, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject: the link should be directly related to the subject of the article. A general site that has information about a variety of subjects should usually not be linked from an article on a more specific subject. Similarly, a website on a specific subject should usually not be linked from an article about a general subject. If a section of a general website is devoted to the subject of the article, and meets the other criteria for linking, then that part of the site could be deep linked.

• @Legacypac: I don't view adding a single external link to an article for an official website as linkspam. I see what you're saying, but in this case, I view the addition of the link as beneficial to Wikipedia's readers. Also, said linkage is quite acceptable per WP:ELYES #1, "Wikipedia articles about any organization, person, website, or other entity should link to the subject's official site, if any." Now, if I were to add, say links from this search, that would be a different story. Ultimately, per WP:ELYES, adding an official website link is just not linkspam. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:14, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Wishing you a very happy and prosperous new year (tad bit delayed though, but better late than never) ! warm regards Devopam (talk) 02:19, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Please see the comment. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:06, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

How was my rationale not valid? I've nominated a few articles with that rationale and everyone agreed with me. Its short and to the point. I think you made a mistake. Koala15 (talk) 16:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Koala15: The nomination you provided at the AfD discussion, "the list is trivial", is subjective, and essentially provides a WP:TRIVIAL and WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC rationale. For example, see the definition of "trivial" in Oxford Dictionary, "Of little value or importance." The nomination does not provide qualification for deletion per any of Wikipedia guidelines or policies (e.g. such as WP:NOT). Feel free to renominate the article using a valid rationale for deletion. WP:NOT has several rationales. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

It is a valid rationale, your just misunderstanding it. You closed it like I was a new editor or something. I've nominated plenty of articles for deletion and no one ever closed it like this. Koala15 (talk) 19:43, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

@Koala15: I disagree, per my rationale above. Perhaps you should renominate the article with a valid deletion rationale, such as WP:INDISCRIMINATE, which is part of the Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not policy page. This would be quite easy to perform, and would probably take only around a minute of your time. Also, your rationale was ambiguous, consisting of four words, so sure, it can be easily misinterpreted. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Everyone on here knows what i mean by "the list is trivial", I doubt it would have been misinterpreted. Koala15 (talk) 19:55, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

@Koala15: Consider using objective qualification describing why you perceive the list as trivial, rather than the subjectively-worded, open-ended statement you presented therein ("the list is trivial"). Seriously consider incorporating a guideline or policy in your rationale to further qualify it. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:47, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

• N.b. User renominated on 10 January 2016 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of The Late Late Show guests (2nd nomination). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:50, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I wanted to let you know you closed this before I was actually going to comment. SwisterTwister talk 06:21, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

• It's delete for me. Drmies (talk) 06:22, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@SwisterTwister and Drmies: I re-opened the discussion. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:27, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

You're a good person, NA1000. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 06:28, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I've written to you previously about WP:NPASR, and on the surface this is another example, albeit a variation of the previously expressed concern.  The fact that this one editor's deletion argument was insufficient is not a reason for either this editor or anyone else to feel that they should wait for six months before opening a new deletion discussion.  In such a context, WP:NPASR allows and encourages editors to improve the quality of their deletion argument, and this is a path to improving the quality of AfD in general.  I'll avoid expressing an opinion about this specific case, as you know specifics about this case and I don't know.  Thanks, Unscintillating (talk) 17:30, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

• I stated to the nominator that I had no problem with them renominating in a discussion above on this talk page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:51, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• N.b. User acknowledged my reply above by thanking (available in Thanks log), so archiving. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

You have 6 comments in this AFD - that's a bit heavy handed. Let this be a democratic process and don't try to undermine all comments that don't agree with your perspective. In the greater scheme, the process is far more important than this article. The nave bar will stay at the bottom of the page as others comment. Wiki-psyc (talk) 00:25, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

There are no limitations in commentary at AfD discussions, nor should there be. Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a democracy. Otherwise, carry on, and happy editing. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:27, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:49, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• @Davey2010: Thanks for the star, and feel free to waffle on here anytime. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:46, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• 
  Breakfast
• 
  Waffle on rabbit

• No worries anytime :), Haha I've actually never tried waffles before but after seeing I suddenly have the urge to try them ...., I'm a weird individual lol –Davey2010^Talk 16:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• @Davey2010: Never had waffles, are you BS'ing me? Well, the way to go is with Belgian waffles, imo. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• They're not really a big thing in the UK and to be honest I've never thought about it, They look rather delicious tho, When I'm next shopping I'll get some –Davey2010^Talk 16:14, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• @Davey2010: Precooked frozen waffles are an easy way to go about it. If you can get it there, be sure to use real Maple syrup, and don't forget the butter! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)