User talk:ExperiencedArticleFixer/Archive 1

Edit summaries
You've made many edits with the edit summary "(—)". This is hardly useful. Something more descriptive such as "replace dash with emdash per WP:MOS" would be more helpful. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:59, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Prince Muhammad Zahir Khan


The article Prince Muhammad Zahir Khan has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Compassionate727 (talk) 18:29, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Antipope Natalius
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Antipope Natalius, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Antipope. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page&mdash; you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:48, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Siege of Jerusalem (587 BC)
Please don't do page moves like this without consensus, we have a procedure for such moves. It's not an inactive page, and I just added a source yesterday pointing out that the duration of the siege might be either 18 or 30 months - your chosen title has Wikipedia saying which is correct. If you want to discuss the year it began, fine. Doug Weller (talk) 20:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 13 June
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) 00:32, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Battle of Mosul (2015) page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=666757566 your edit] caused a broken reference name (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%2F666757566%7CBattle of Mosul (2015)%5D%5D Ask for help])

Ephraim I listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Ephraim I. Since you had some involvement with the Ephraim I redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Compassionate727 (talk) 21:14, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Gregory VI of Constantinople for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gregory VI of Constantinople 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/Gregory VI of Constantinople 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. Sige &#124;д･) 18:13, 1 November 2015 (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) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Daniel Trajtemberg moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Daniel Trajtemberg, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations to reliable, independent sources (?) and everything that can't be referenced should be removed, as verifiability of central importance on Wikipedia. I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) so that you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the prompts on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. czar 17:52, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Daniel Trajtemberg (February 18)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Daniel Trajtemberg and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Daniel_Trajtemberg Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Daniel_Trajtemberg reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

 Onel 5969  TT me 13:49, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sir William Barker, 5th Baronet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Ward (MP). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:25, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Spelled Moon for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spelled Moon 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/Spelled Moon 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. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:14, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Daniel Trajtemberg


Hello, ExperiencedArticleFixer. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Daniel Trajtemberg".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the  or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. GamerPro64 23:48, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Longest animal


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Longest animal, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It appears to be a test page. (See section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do, and take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
 * It is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. (See section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 "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, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Chrissymad (talk) 15:20, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Next king of Thailand listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Next king of Thailand. Since you had some involvement with the Next king of Thailand redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --BDD (talk) 21:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Next king of the United Kingdom and others listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Next king of the United Kingdom, Next king of the UK, Next king of Canada, and Next king of Australia. Since you had some involvement with these redirects, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 08:00, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

A page you started (Next king of Australia) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Next king of Australia, ExperiencedArticleFixer!

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

"Debate already in progress about fate of this page. No additional tagging warranted"

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

Learn more about page curation.

A page you started (Next king of Canada) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Next king of Canada, ExperiencedArticleFixer!

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

"Already being deleted as redirects for deletion"

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

Learn more about page curation.

A page you started (Ignatius I) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Ignatius I, ExperiencedArticleFixer!

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

"I preformed a round-robin move to remove the honourific from the dab page (see Bartholomew I of Constantinople for an example of naming conventions here.) Thanks for creating this!"

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

Learn more about page curation.

TonyBallioni (talk) 20:21, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Beanato


The article Beanato has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * This is a non-notable surname per WP:APONOTE as there aren't at least two notable people with the name or is otherwise notable per WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Tavix ( talk ) 13:39, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Robert Ciranko for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert Ciranko 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/Robert Ciranko 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. Jeffro 77 (talk) 08:29, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Request for help re: n-dashes
I am aware that your list of articles on your User page present typographical issues. But I point out that they were all created by the cut-and-paste method, violating the copyright of David M. Cheney, Catholic-Hierarchy.org (or sometimes, without acknowledgment, another page on another language Wikipedia), an activity which was NOT carried out by me, and for which I feel no responsibility. My additions and changes are done in proper form, and I prefer to spend my time on Wikipedia creating or adding to articles. I thank you, though, for your work. --Vicedomino (talk) 16:47, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Greek Orthodox Ochrid Archbishopric listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Greek Orthodox Ochrid Archbishopric. Since you had some involvement with the Greek Orthodox Ochrid Archbishopric redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 23:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (List of monarchs of Belgium) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating List of monarchs of Belgium, ExperiencedArticleFixer!

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

"Just went through a bunch of your recently created redirects. For the most part they looked good, I only left about 5 out of the 70+ without review since I wasn't able to figure out how the redirect fit. The rest looked great! Thanks for your contributions :)"

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

Learn more about page curation.

S EMMENDINGER  ( talk ) 04:28, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

We use English (even bad English like Mine)
Please do not wrote edit summaries in a foreign tongue, we are supposed to be able to tell why you made it.Slatersteven (talk) 14:18, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Answered in their Talk. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 14:25, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

We're both right
Qyburn's dome was dashed against the wall, then smashed upon the rocks. Maybe if you watch in 4K slow-motion, you can see a glimmer of life left while he falls, but I sure couldn't on my copy. Your edit's good, though, covers all possibilities (and more quickly). "Just saying" is all. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:59, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Answered in their Talk. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 14:04, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Not sure where you'd like me to return the toast, but cheers to differing perceptions! Maybe the final episode will reveal we were both wrong, and he was just knocked out. On TV, people can stay unconscious indefinitely. Maybe Arya finds him in the rubble, learns the "evil center" of his brain was damaged and agrees to take him aboard after he patches up her horse (it looks a little too pale). Besides, who else is going to finally tell Bronn which of his three hookers from the premiere had the pox? He has to know!
 * And you might want to know that I'm just one man, who prefers singular masculine pronouns. No big deal if you forget, though. Technically, far more of "them" use "my" Talk than I do, so it's still good. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:14, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * EAF, unrelated, but good job on "human shield" in plot. It was very late here, and I was going to have to go back and rephrase that later. SportsEdits1 (talk) 00:26, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguators
Please stop moving biographical articles to disambiguators with date ranges. This is not standard as you claim it is. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:26, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 14:35, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

King Brandon listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect King Brandon. Since you had some involvement with the King Brandon redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed,Rosguill talk 17:21, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Parapsychology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Psychometry ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Parapsychology check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Parapsychology?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Kingdom Nation
Hello, ExperiencedArticleFixer,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username MJL and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect Kingdom Nation, created by you. Your comments are welcome over here.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

– MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 07:13, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Translation
Any interest in helping translate this ¿Cuándo hemos comido en el mismo plato? to es:¿Cuándo hemos comido en el mismo plato?? --evrik (talk) 20:47, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * None. It's not a very important article... But thanks for the offering! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 08:55, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It was just made a DYK. Let me know if you chnage your mind. --evrik (talk) 14:41, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

"Biggest mosque" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Biggest mosque. Since you had some involvement with the Biggest mosque redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 20:35, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

"William XI of Auvergne" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect William XI of Auvergne. Since you had some involvement with the William XI of Auvergne redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Prosequor (talk) 20:48, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of John Welles (by 1485-1515/18) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Welles (by 1485-1515/18) 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/John Welles (by 1485-1515/18) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Rathfelder (talk) 22:49, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fotios I (disambiguation)


A tag has been placed on Fotios I (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
 * disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
 * is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:13, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

The Merchant of Venus moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, The Merchant of Venus, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hughesdarren (talk) 10:00, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

spam cross wiki
Hi, like in it.wikipedia here you are spamming a (your) peer review study. Wikipedia is not a place to do promotion. --Ignisdelavega (talk) 11:30, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi! I don't understand. Wikipedia promotes knowledge, so it is a place for promotion. It does so by posting information referenced to reliable sources. What part of that am I violating? --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 11:34, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


 * if you insert in several page the same information, it is spam. If the peer review work is very relevant, just insert it in ONE page. Could be enough even if your behavior show that you don't want promote wikipedia but that job trought wikipedia. Regards --Ignisdelavega (talk) 11:39, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


 * and however I asked to a sysop to check your behavior. --Ignisdelavega (talk) 11:41, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Then I'll restore the content in One Italian-language article. But, why not having information in all relevant places? Many articles that I edited didn't have anything on science in Ancient Rome. Also, I thought that removing relevant and well sourced content could be considered vandalism. Cheers --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 11:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I just blocked you on it.wikipedia. No way that your behavior can be accepted, at least not in it.wikipedia --Ignisdelavega (talk) 11:55, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I must say, as a fellow sysop on it.wiki, I would have done the same. The sentence you added made little sense whatsoever, and its only purpose was to attach your work to it.  ×°˜`°× ηαη¢у  ×°˜`°×  11:59, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I have to disagree on the "little sense" comment. Conceptions of scientificity vary between cultures, so De divinatione is a source for that of Ancient Rome. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 12:03, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * But the comments just say Cicero is interesting, more or less.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:25, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I have reverted your Cicero bit from about 8 seperate articles. The explanation is in my edit summary. I won't rule out that it actually made sense one of those places, but I guess you need to work harder on two things to make it stick: Integrate it better into the article(s) where it is actually belongs, and find an independent source. With news and such, primary sources may be acceptable if they are all we have. With ancient history, we do not need cutting-edge research; we mostly cite broader expositions.--Nø (talk) 18:53, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sounds like everyone is giving the same feedback.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 20:07, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

African Americans
See the source. Doug Weller  talk 15:05, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I saw the source and I was right, there was a contradiction. The article reflects that now. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 11:41, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

DS
Let me make this clear, yes it was an accusation. I had already pointed out many users are breaching wp:brd.Slatersteven (talk) 11:39, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, but you said all of us. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 11:40, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes because all have us (including me) have (for example) breached wp:editwar or wp:soapbox. There have been many many breaches of multiple polices. It was just a warning for us all to stop, and a reminder to those who have not that those of us who have are in the wrong).Slatersteven (talk) 11:45, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I see, but most people don't know what those abbreviations mean or where to find out what those "sanctions" are. That's probably why they are breaching them. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 11:48, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * True, but it was really aimed at those of us who have enough experience to know what DS means. Anyone else would get one of these.

Slatersteven (talk) 11:54, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Dummy edits
I don’t know if you realize since you, but in case you don’t, spaces between cite templates and ref tags are dummy edits, which don’t affect the article appearance. The point of the edit was to clarify with a follow-up edit summary.

You don’t have to waste your time reverting dummy edits! — MarkH21talk 11:54, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * They affect how long the article is in bytes. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 11:56, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * And one bite of article length is important because...? — MarkH21talk 12:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * By reverting a dummy edit, you are creating a new row in the database (a new reversion ID number, etc.), and this creates many, many more bytes than the single space you are removing. Creating a new reversion in order to remove one byte is extremely inefficient: it increases, not decreases, the size of the DB and the load on servers. Just FYI. Levivich&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 17:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, similar request: I'd ask you not to remove line breaks between copy and references, e.g. as you did here and here. Your edit summaries read "Consolidated paragraph" and "Ease of editing should not trump paragraphs", but those edits you made did not actually consolidate paragraphs, and the issue isn't a choice between "ease of editing" and "paragraphs". Wiki markup does not render a line break, so the edits you've made do not change how the text appears to the reader at all. However, a line break between refs and copy helps editors read the refs (and the copy) when they're editing, without in any way affecting how the paragraph appears to the reader. It's useful to do it this way, especially in a high-traffic article with many long citations. We can have both ease of editing, and paragraphs. This is similar to the technique of including two spaces after a period in wiki markup (which only renders as one space to the reader), in order to make editing and reading of sentences in wikitext easier (one can search for a line break, or for a double space, for example). Thanks, Levivich&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 17:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)


 * That is interesting. I guess at some point we should delete all the ancient versions from the DB, and with them the editions ID numbers. I am consolidating a paragraph and it is visible to the reader, when the reader is editing, but anyway, can't go against the majority on this one... --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 17:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Multiple accounts?
Greetings. A recent edit on Latinx looks like it have been made by you under a different account. Please note that the policy on sockpuppetry requires editors to disclose alternative accounts and to generally avoid editing the same page(s) with different accounts. Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 10:13, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Answered in their Talk page. I don't use multiple accounts. Apparently just two similar editions or something like that. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 10:25, 12 June 2020 (UTC)