User talk:Aldair

Please remember to use edit summaries
Hi Lukecody, I hope you're doing well. I noticed that you edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field, as it helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks, and all the best,  Jr8825  •  Talk  13:04, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Kurt Cobain release/recording date
It was actually pretty helpful in terms of piecing together a chronological history, which is why I added it, but whatever. Mussman717 (talk) 16:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Question
To date, 42 of your 241 edits have been to remove dab hatnotes, citing only "WP:NAMB" in your summaries, (eg: removing The Witcher (disambiguation) from The Witcher (TV series)). Some examples are more specific while others are more generic. Can you clarify how your applying this (seemingly poorly written guidance)? Thank you -  wolf  18:33, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:NAMB indicates that it is preferable not to have a hatnote when the name of the article is not ambiguous. "The Witcher (TV series)" is not ambiguous. I have left the first hatnote because there is another TV series on Wikipedia with a similar title, but the second hatnote is unnecessary for the above reasons. I request that you revert your edition. 🥷 Lukecody  (→ messages) 21:39, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, the reason I ask for clarification is that is that given the number of articles, and other listed media that could potentially be searched out, all with the the name "the witcher", it would seem this is not that unique a title. This seems like a worthwhile hatnote in this case, and since a large number of your edits are spent on the removal of dab hats, all for the same apparent reason, this is why I asked for clarification. Is it possible some of the others you've removed perhaps shouldn't have been? -  wolf  22:14, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The title of the article is not "The Witcher", it is "The Witcher (TV series)". The Witcher is the only television series on Wikipedia with that title (there is a Polish TV series that adopts the title "The Witcher" in English, for this reason I have left the first hatnote). There is no other. In WP:NAMB there is a clear example of how not to use hatnote, but apparently you have not seen it. I'm always very careful when editing, and I almost always do it following an editing guideline. I ask you again to revert your edition. 🥷 Lukecody  (→ messages) 19:25, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've read namb, and it is a guide-line, not a particularly well-written one, and certainly not one carved in stone, like some of the policies here (for example, wp:iar which is a policy, and one that applies here). The Witcher tv series is arguably one the most popular Witcher articles right now. The article about the books is obviously popular as well. On WP, if someone searches for "the witcher", they get the book article, which at least has (the last time I looked) a hatnote for the dab page, though that just means extra searching for those looking for the tv series of the same name. Interestingly, if one searches for "the witcher" on Google, the WP article for the tv series comes up at the top of the search results, as opposed to any other "witcher" pages, which don't come up. From Google, one opens the "The Witcher (tv series)" article, and the only hatnote you would have there is for "the hexer"; not the book article, not any of the video games, not the dab page... this is not an improvement. Despite your interpretation of namb (and the poor example of "Water (Wu Xing)" that hardly equates to this situation), surely you agree that the goal of editing this project is to improve it. I don't see your attempts to rigidly apply your strict interpretation of namb to remove dozens of hatnotes, any number of which may be as useful as the hatnote being discussed here, as an improvement. I'm not self-reverting as I don't agree it should be removed. If you are dead-set on removing that hatnote, then I suppose you'll have to revert, again, but without a consensus here. I've already invested more time and effort on this than I really cared to. -  wolf  06:25, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2022 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)