User talk:AntiqueReader

A page you started (Université Paris-Saclay) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Université Paris-Saclay, AntiqueReader!

Wikipedia editor Missionedit just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Thank you!"

To reply, leave a comment on Missionedit's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Speedy deletion nomination of Ahmad Sardar


A tag has been placed on Ahmad Sardar 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 a person or group of people, 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. M. Caecilius (talk) 08:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I believe that the subject of the article is notable for one event only, which is insufficient for meeting the notability criteria. M. Caecilius (talk) 08:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Ahmad Sardar for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ahmad Sardar 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 Articles for deletion/Ahmad Sardar 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. M. Caecilius (talk) 08:59, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Edits on the NATO article
Hi there, I saw you reverted my earlier edits to the article on NATO. I started a discussion on the Talk Page and was hoping you'd discuss this there. I wanted to emphasize that I'm not dismissing your contributions by reworking them into the Post-Cold War section, but just suggesting we can include them better and perhaps keep the section in line with Wikipedia policy. Thanks!-- Patrick, o Ѻ ∞ 20:50, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Vermicular Dither!
Great expression! Thanks for all your work on Zweig, and I hope you don't mind that I tidied up the refs a bit - they were getting a bit tangled. I'm not sure about the two Walton citations, but the first one, at least ("pedestrian") is him, not Hofmann, so I imagine that it should stay. I'm less sure about the other, but unwilling to resort to fisticuffs over it! Best wishes DBaK (talk) 19:51, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries about improving my footnoting! Much better! Hofmann's is such a hilariously scathing demolition, is it not? Regarding the Walton citings I plead not guilty! Walton was there before I rolled up. I can only claim for the unnecessary Literary Review one and Hofmann's LRB destruction. Thanks for stopping by and making the improvements.
 * Bravo, Hofmann! AntiqueReader (talk) 07:49, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi
May I raise a small point about your last edit in the "Militant Activity" section? The text now reads:


 * "He continued to lead the group upon its formal expansion into Syria on 8 April 2013, the organization later adopting the name Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). He is in charge of running all ISIS activity in Iraq."

Should there not be a reference to ISIS being an aternative name to sort out the apparent contradiction there? I put in a reference to the name difference in my edit yesterday (12:10 UTC) so that readers would not get confused; some may not know that ISIL and ISIL are interchangeable. But I really don't want to get into an edit war, so will leave it to you to judge this. --P123ct1 (talk) 22:05, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello! Do as you please! :D AntiqueReader (talk) 22:35, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Will do! Thanks. : ) --P123ct1 (talk) 22:58, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Liked your edit of my edit re "association/dissociate". Brill! --P123ct1 (talk) 23:25, 21 June 2014 (UTC)


 * That's very nice of you to stop by for such kind purposes! You are doing good things on ISIS-related articles. I encourage you to keep up the good work! AntiqueReader (talk) 07:57, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
Thanks very much for the barnstar! It is much appreciated. As for the other point, I was only alarmed that the Lead is now only a handful of lines long, and the Lead is supposed to give a brief summary of the facts in the article, as I learned on another Talk page recently, so I will add back in the salient points. I didn't want to revert you, which is why put that message in the "Edit summary"! --P123ct1 (talk) 13:02, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I have made the Lead what I judge to be the right sort of length for an article of this size, but I see you disagree! I think the best thing is for me to leave a note for Technophant on his Talk page - he put up that banner - and if he still thinks it is too long, we can cut it down again.  --P123ct1 (talk) 15:32, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * No, I promise I could not care less what you do! And that is not meant in a dismissive, haughty way: I'm just rather easygoing. I only chopped it down because the tag was there, but, if you have put it back how it was, more power to you! All my very best wishes! :D AntiqueReader (talk) 10:49, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

ISIS
Just to let you know, I reinserted that muddled sentence in "As Islamic State" as although you said in the Edit Summary you had marked it until someone could sort it out, it was invisible in the text! I had already left a message with the user asking him for clarification, as I did once before successfully with a non-native English speaker: he told me what he was trying to say, provided more backups, I rewrote the passage, he agreed with it, problem solved. I'm hoping the same will happen this time, but if he doesn't respond, it'll have to go, not least because the footnotes don't remotely back up what seemed to be trying to say!

Congrats on the Barnstar! I saw what you said on the Talk page about that dreadful paragraph, but was too nervous to remove it myself. :D --P123ct1 (talk) 01:29, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Bravo on sorting out that paragraph! It was an abomination, but you have rectified it. That article has benefited enormously from your editing. And thanks for the congrats! :D AntiqueReader (talk) 09:15, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Have only just read your kind words. Thanks!  Tidying up this article and the al-Baghdadi one seems a never-ending task, doesn't it, especially when newcomers barge in and blithely revert carefully discussed passages/names/words.    :{        --P123ct1 (talk) 19:56, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Your input is requested
While I've had nothing but good interactions on Iraq related articles, I've had major problems trying to get recent research regarding acupuncture theory incorporated in acupuncture, referred itch, and myofascial meridians. There's an Rfc at the myofascial talk page. Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. - Technophant (talk) 18:18, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

your vacation from ISIS article
I notice that you seem to have taken a Wikibreak from editing. You haven't edit this article for a month. I was just checking in to see if everything is ok.~Technophant (talk) 03:16, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Your edit in ISIS
You have restored an edit that was deliberately cut out recently during an attempt to cut down on the history parts of the "Names" section! I did this with consensus and moved that part to the "History" section. Glad to see you back. There have been a lot of major changes to the article since you were last here! --P123ct1 (talk) 11:54, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)