User talk:Abductive/Archive 10

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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) 12:37, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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) 12:19, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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) 12:43, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways: Sign up now Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
 * Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
 * Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
 * Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
 * Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
 * Research coordinators: run reference services

C105
Your original edit summary was accurate; C105 is used for many things. At the time, C105 on Wikipedia was only used to refer to the C-Code for that particular species of Corydoras. When you came up with an additional use for C105, what you should have done was to create a disambiguation page, so someone who entered "C105" as a search term could then determine the correct destination, not, as you did, eliminate the existing C105 redirect and hijack the term to redirect it to your preferred destination. I am quite certain that nobody will be entering "C105 (fish)" into a seach box at any time in the future. Refer to the C106 page for an example of how it should have been done. Neil916 (Talk) 19:13, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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) 12:12, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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) 12:37, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Canis anthus
Please do not change the Senegalese golden wolf article so that it will seem to be the Canis anthus article. The reason is the same reason that the Eurasian wolf article should not be changed to make it seem like the gray wolf article. Both subspecies are the nominates for the two canid species. You're free to create the Canis anthus article if you want, since it currently does not exist yet. Thank you. Editor abcdef (talk) 12:46, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Al-Qaryatayn
... town name is Al-Qaryatayn and pronounced so, not Qaryatayn! kindly undo and redirect Qaryatayn to Al-Qaryatayn... impatient move... 495656778774 (talk) 16:25, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * for the future you can transliterate official name of city and match with tongue name, example: input  Al-Qaryatayn to http://www.google.com/intl/ar/inputtools/try/ and match with official name....

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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) 12:39, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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) 12:54, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

the unnecessary rewriting of metadata...
In this edit you rewrote perfectely good references -- changing the number of blanks. I never rewrite perfectly good references -- in order to keep diffs useful. I'd appreciate other contributors doing likewise. Some automated editing aids suggest a lot of unnecessary changes to metadata. I would prefer other contributors to not allow their editing tools to make unnecessary changes.

In particular, although I personally find cite templates that put everything on a single logical line, I don't add newlines, when I fix these templates, or add new fields.

I use a monospaced font in the editor. I use enough spaces so all the equals signs in a cite template line up. It makes errors easier to find and fix. Collapsing all those spaces doesn't alter how the wikipedia software parses the template. So, why would you collapse all the spaces, to a single space?

WRT the MOS -- doesn't it explicitly recommend not rewriting compliant references for internal cosmetic reasons? Geo Swan (talk) 23:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 September newsletter
The finals for the 2015 Wikicup has now begun! Congrats to the 8 contestants who have survived to the finals, and well done and thanks to everyone who took part in rounds 3 and 4.

In round 3, we had a three-way tie for qualification among the wildcard contestants, so we had 34 competitors. The leader was by far in Group B, who earned 1496 points. Although 913 of these points were bonus points, he submitted 15 articles in the DYK category. Second place overall was at 864 points, who although submitted just 2 FAs for 400 points, earned double that amount for those articles in bonus points. Everyone who moved forward to Round 4 earned at least 100 points.

The scores required to move onto the semifinals were impressive; the lowest scorer to move onto the finals was 407, making this year's Wikicup as competitive as it's always been. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:


 * , who is competing in his sixth consecutive Wikicup final, again finished the round in first place, with an impressive 1666 points in Pool B. Casliber writes about the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy.  A large bulk of his points this round were bonus points.
 * , second place both in Pool B and overall, earned the bulk of his points with FPs, mostly depicting currency.
 * , first in Pool A, came in third. His specialty is natural science articles; in Round 4, he mostly submitted articles about insects and botany.  Five out of the six of the GAs he submitted were level-4 vital articles.
 * , second in Pool A, took fourth overall. He tends to focus on articles about cricket and military history, specifically the 1640s First English Civil War.
 * , from Pool A, was our highest-scoring wildcard. West Virginia tends to focus on articles about the history of (what for it!) the U.S. state of West Virginia.
 * , from Pool A, likes to work on articles about British geography and places. Most of his points this round were earned from two impressive accomplishments: a GT about Scheduled monuments in Somerset and a FT about English Heritage properties in Somerset.
 * , from Pool B, came in seventh overall. RO earned the majority of her points from GARs and PRs, many of which were earned in the final hours of the round.
 * , also from Pool B, who was competing with RO for the final two spots in the final hours, takes the race for most GARs and PRs—48.

The intense competition between RO and Calvin999 will continue into the finals. They're both eligible for the Newcomers Trophy, given for the first time in the Wikicup; whoever makes the most points will win it.

Good luck to the finalists; the judges are sure that the competition will be fierce!

, and  11:47, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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) 12:47, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Please see
What Wikipedia is not. Doug Weller (talk) 11:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Edit warring
Your recent editing history at Sulfoxaflor shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Please slow down, as you are adding content that is not reflected by sources see WP:OR and adding editorializing language. Kingofaces43 (talk) 03:25, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Listen, bud, I am becoming concerned that you really are a corporate shill. You know damn well that a court of law has found that the FDA erred, and the court found against Dow. You know that sources exist. And it is you that are in front of arbcom. Now, if you are wise, you will cease your pro-industry stance and go away.  Abductive  (reasoning) 07:58, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this isn't how we handle content disputes by resorting to personal attacks (WP:NPA) or avoiding discussing content disputes on article talk pages. Looking at your edit count, you should know better than the engage in this kind of behavior, inserting personal views that are unsourced, or scientific claims from newspapers. We don't suspend Wikipedia's policies just because the topic is pesticides. Kingofaces43 (talk) 13:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

The posting can be found here. Kingofaces43 (talk) 13:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * See Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. It would be helpful to get your side of the story before this report is closed. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 14:15, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

3RR again
Your recent editing history at Sulfoxaflor shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

As mentioned previously, once a newly proposed edit has been disputed, that's the time to back it up on the talk page rather than hit the revert button again. Please do not make this article into a WP:BATTLEGROUND. Kingofaces43 (talk) 06:37, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Per the new complaint at WP:AN3, it looks like you have made four reverts in 24 hours. There may still be time for you to avoid a block if you will undo your last revert. In any case these reverts are silly because sulfoxaflor is chemically a sulfoximine. It acts in insects like a neonicotinoid, according to a number of reliable sources, though not all. Discussion on the article talk page can work out the best way of acknowledging the different properties of this chemical. But you need to negotiate it. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:22, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Edit warring at Sulfoxaflor
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at Sulfoxaflor. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice:. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. In spite of advice about the edit war situation, you have continued to edit at Sulfoxaflor after my warning. You didn't accept my offer (above) to avoid a block by undoing your last revert. I perceive you made four reverts on 14 September: at 04:51, 05:33, 06:12 and 07:09. You haven't offered to stop, or to wait for consensus. I consider the edit war to be live rather than stale because the original complaint was filed on 11 September, and even on 14 September you were still reverting at Sulfoxaflor in support of your original views. EdJohnston (talk) 16:23, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you and chin up
Dear Abductive, i am sorry to see that you too have been trapped by a block (temporarily abducted by unreasonable force?) trying to defend reason, reliably sourced neutral information. (so was I, see my talk page, and also by Bbb23) Thank you for your spine. people like you make me not to feel too sorry about myself, or want to retire, ashamed of my first block, after 2 and a half years of pretty heavy editing and difficult situations. Because then I d feel bad about leaving people like you behind! It almost looks like a mass arrest, if we add up all these blocks we have received in speaking truth to power, you and I, SageRad, dePiep, ...--Wuerzele (talk) 08:39, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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) 13:11, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Genetically modified organisms arbitration case opened
You may opt-out of future notification regarding this case at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms/Evidence. Please add your evidence by October 12, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC) on behalf of L235 (t / c / ping in reply ) 20:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC)