User talk:Dariovitori

Welcome!
Hello, Dariovitori, 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: 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 ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 02:05, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Getting Started
 * Introduction 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

January 2014
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Jacques Lacan does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history.

The edit summary appears in:
 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision differences
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list and
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! AllyD (talk) 07:32, 21 January 2014 (UTC) Specifically, when deleting content, an edit summary is useful to explain the rationale. AllyD (talk) 07:32, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Multiple articles
I agree with your query that the multiple articles on Lacanian movement and Lacanianism do look a bit superfluous. Broadly, I'd say they should keep clear of what Lacan himself said and did, as that should be carried in the main Jacques Lacan article, but everything after his death should be in one article under either name. It may be worth checking with User:Jacobisq for the rationale on there being two articles? Maybe you should propose a Merge discussion (see WP:MERGEPROP) to collect opinions, as there are probably two or three interested editors. AllyD (talk) 20:03, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

June 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=611030676 your edit] to Sinthome may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:43, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * *to Read Lacan'' London: Granta Books, 2006

WP:APPENDIX
Hello. Please see the style guide above. --Omnipaedista (talk) 04:40, 9 July 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) 16:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

May 2017
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in David, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. See WP:ERA Please do not change any more BCE to BC. Sir Joseph (talk) 16:11, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at David. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. ''You were warned already. Please stop or you risk being blocked.'' Sir Joseph (talk) 16:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

November 2019
Your addition to Te Deum has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. Elizium23 (talk) 17:31, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Zizek Bibliography: deletion of Russia Today publications
Hello Dariovitori,

I write to you, because you have been editing the Slavoj Žižek bibliography. I'm editing the Zizek bibliography. Here I also mention the op-ed publications on Russia Today. There is a WP editor who holds the opinion, that these edits violate RSP. I can't see how this is applicable. You can read my argument here. The editor doesn't respond.

If you have an interest in the subject, I would be happy, if you could contribute your opinion. If you don't have an interest, maybe you know someone else who might have?

With kind regards.

--Quin451 (talk) 13:30, 2 September 2021 (UTC)