User talk:Cmeppping

Welcome!
Hello, Cmeppping, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

Reference errors on 22 October
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:35, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Alternaria citri page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=687024007 your edit] caused a cite error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F687024007%7CAlternaria citri%5D%5D Ask for help])

Alternaria citri
I reverted you because the there were named refs that were defined multiple times. In the refs section, there was big red warning about this. I don't know which ref goes where. Go ahead and revert me, but make sure you fix the refs.

It would also be much nice if you used the referencing scheme. Make it easier on readers. Bgwhite (talk) 01:11, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * To be fair, this seems to be a bug with the 'Visual Editor' tool. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Just to make it clear (you're quite new to this?) Bgwhite's revert might look "brutal" and "heavy handed" and all the rest of it, but please remember that wikis have audit trails, so all of your work is still here. WP wants it, it's just that it needs another edit to get it live. If you edit the link for the old version (your last) at, everything will still be just as you left it and you can move forwards from there. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:13, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I just took a look at it and (like Bgwhite) I'm not able to fix it myself. The problem is that the editor has seen two references to works by Timmer and treated them both as "Timmer" rather than "Timmer (2000)" and "Timmer (2003)".  I could fix this technically, but you have two sets of citations to ":1" and they need to be identified manually and changed, according to which source they're referring to.
 * If you'd like help straightening out the technical formatting and then you can patch the citations back straight, just ask.
 * Oh yes, don't use Visual Editor either! Andy Dingley (talk) 11:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * BTW, it has now been broken, a deliberately misleading edit summary used (by someone who ought to know better) and one reference discarded entirely. Maybe he'll be more careful and fix his "fix"? 8-( Andy Dingley (talk) 11:30, 23 October 2015 (UTC)