User talk:GenQuest/Archive 2

Your Questia online library codes failed to deliver
We tried to use Wikipedia email to deliver your account access information but you either did not provide an email address in your preferences or had it set up not to receive messages from other editors. You can change both on the first page of Special:Preferences. To fix the situation directly or to let me know you've changed your preferences, just email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers, Ocaasi 05:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rujm el-Hiri
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rujm el-Hiri. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

1rr
You have violated the 1 revert rule per 24 hours at rum el hiri. Revert yourself or ill file a complaint. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:10, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Your POV pushing doesn't work here with a neutral editor passing by fixing an article. File away and have a good day.   GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 10:14, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

1RR
Hello, you've violated the 1RR at Rujm el-Hiri. Please self-revert and seek consensus for your change on the talk page. Otherwise you may be reported and potentially blocked. Thank you,  nableezy  - 15:03, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see you were notified and neglected to self-revert. It's fine that you think you're "neutral" and others are "POV-pushing", but you are not the arbiter of "neutrality". We have talk pages for a reason, and you are not excused from using them. I'll be filing a report now.  nableezy  - 15:05, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * ??? ::yawn::  GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 21:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

July 2013
To enforce an arbitration decision, and for violation of 1RR per Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles on the page Rujm el-Hiri, you have been blocked from editing for 12 hours. You are welcome to make useful contributions once the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and then appeal your block using the instructions there. Tiptoety talk 18:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)  Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure prohibiting administrators "from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page." Administrators who reverse an arbitration enforcement block, such as this one, without clear authorisation will be summarily desysopped.


 * I edited this article per a Request for Comment involving a non-political article involving an archeological dig which happens to be in the Middle East. I thought for several weeks before making my one word edit, only to be immediately jumped on by a group of POV-pushers. A quick review of the article edit history reveals that there is no assumption of good faith by these guys, who have "owned" and somehow politicized this article going on two years-plus now.


 * Please note: There is no template or warning on the talk page regarding a "1RR" rule. I consider this a blind-side attack by a clear group showing article ownership and meat-puppetry.  As such, I will proudly and gladly sit out a12 hour ban (I have to go to work anyway) placed by an obviously biased admin.


 * Thank you for your careful {sarcasm*} consideration and helpful insight {more sarcasm*} in this matter. You and your meat puppets {fact} are clearly an un-biased, fact finding, resolution-seeking group {further sarcasm*}.  Some of the greatest assets to Wikipedia. {Extreme sarcasm*}  GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 22:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Note: * inserted so 'small minds' can understand.

Please comment on Talk:M-87 Orkan
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:M-87 Orkan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 18:15, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Biography review request
Could you take a look at the Bennett Greenspan article and comment on its review? Specifically, have your concerns when you added the Advertisement bannor been addressed? Many thanks.--RebekahThorn (talk) 00:41, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Will do. GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 11:09, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 07:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Armoured fighting vehicle
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Armoured fighting vehicle. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 19:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Vietnamese)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Vietnamese). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 08:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kamapitha
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kamapitha. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 12:15, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:16, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Georgian alphabet
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Georgian alphabet. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 13:15, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Magyar tribes
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Magyar tribes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:16, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kidnapping of Hannah Anderson
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kidnapping of Hannah Anderson. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 01:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Question About Discussion Area for Merger
At Proposed_mergers you've listed the place to discuss the merger proposal of List of Presidents under the articles of confederation and List of Presidents of the Congress under the Articles of Confederation into Articles of Confederation as >>>here<<<. However I also noticed that there there is more recent discussion going on here: Talk:Articles_of_Confederation. So I'm somewhat confused where we are supposed to opine. Holdek (talk) 02:27, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Answered ✅

Please comment on Talk:Derry
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Derry. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Disinterested opinion on 3 proposed merges
Hello, GenQuest. I note that you have been active in helping with proposed mergers. There are three proposals that have been open for more than a month at Talk:Nagoya Bunri University, Talk:Matsumoto University, and Talk:Kanto Gakuin University. There have been no comments since my own, some weeks ago.

Since I have participated in the discussions, it would be better for an uninterested party to determine whether consensus exists to merge. I'm willing to do the actual merging, if that's appropriate. Full disclosure: I also proposed several similar mergers after commenting in these three. A full list is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities. Cnilep (talk) 04:09, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * OK. I'll take a look this weekend.  GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 13:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Eastern Front (World War II)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Eastern Front (World War II). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Street fighter mergers
I did try to merge it myself but I keep messing it up. Dwanyewest (talk) 19:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I can help if you need. GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 19:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages
 * -- 19:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

See the Feedback
at The_Wikipedia_Adventure/Feedback

Please comment on Talk:John Calvin
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:John Calvin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ GenQuest  "Talk to Me"

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:20, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

Please comment on Talk:Iraqi Kurdistan
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Iraqi Kurdistan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure! (Alpha tester)

 * Hi! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages
 * -- 19:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

See the Feedback
at The_Wikipedia_Adventure/Feedback

Disambiguation link notification for November 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yakshagana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lakshminarayana Temple (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Iran–Iraq War
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Iran–Iraq War. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * NO WAY... talk about your edit war potential!

Please comment on Talk:Death of Adolf Hitler
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Death of Adolf Hitler. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Doubt
As you have done many mergers, i thought of asking you this. Shouldn't the afd-mergeto template from Police patrol zones of Atlanta be removed as its already merged and redirected? The redirect page is present in the Category:Articles to be merged after an Articles for deletion discussion for no reason. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 11:27, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You are correct. The editor doing the merge left the AfD template behind for some reason; he also missed the talk page redirect.  I've fixed these now.  Thanks.  GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 20:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Will follow it around. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 03:52, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Philippine Military Academy
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Philippine Military Academy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Liao Dynasty
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Liao Dynasty. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

WP:GOCE November backlog elimination drive barnstar
~see list~

The Wikipedia Library's Books and Bytes newsletter (#2)
Books & Bytes Sign up for monthly delivery Welcome to the second issue of The Wikipedia Library's Books & Bytes newsletter! Read on for updates about what is going on at the intersection of Wikipedia and the library world. Wikipedia Library highlights: New accounts, new surveys, new positions, new presentations... Spotlight on people: Another Believer and Wiki Loves Libraries...  Books & Bytes in brief: From Dewey to Diversity conference...  Further reading: Digital library portals around the web...   Read Books & Bytes , 16:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Adam Levine tag
Hi. I noticed you tagged the Adam Levine article for copyediting recently. While I find your feedback useful, as a frequent editor to the article, I'm having a bit of a hard time deciding what exactly needs to be improved. So it would be very helpful if you could briefly mention which particular areas of the article you feel need rewriting, and what exactly the issue is (Grammar? Style? Cohesion? Tone? Spelling? Or all five? "Copyediting" is quite an expansive term). Thank you for your time. GinaJay (talk) 11:41, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. Mainly Style issues. I'll try to do a run through this weekend.   GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 23:28, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Holodomor
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Holodomor. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:00, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Babe's & Ricky's Inn
Hello GenQuest. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Babe's & Ricky's Inn, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''The other article refered to doesn't exist. A2 doesn't apply because there is an infobox (explicit in WP:A2 ).''' Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:33, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

re: "Circular links", or as I've known them, selflinks
Hi! The reason I changed the format of Orrefors and Parkour was that the parser actually takes those links and makes them bold anyway. However, they also use the element and a class "selflink" to indicate that this string refers to the page itself. I find this to be enough of a semantic difference in the HTML output that the self-link is superior in most cases.

Other than the fact that most people Just Don't Use It (though whether out of ignorance or policy I don't know), I don't see any real compelling reason to go back to the just-bold-it style of doing things.

Thoughts? --MarkTraceur (talk) 16:30, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Mark. There is a large body of style policies. See Manual of Style regarding circular links.  GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 16:52, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I looked there, but didn't find anything. There's WP:LEADSENTENCE, which shows bolding is important, but it doesn't specify a method (though the examples are all just done with ''', given the lack of specificity, I don't see why that should be binding). Do you see a policy that requires one bold method or the other? --MarkTraceur (talk) 17:06, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, WP:BOLDTITLE. --MarkTraceur (talk) 17:09, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Bolding should happen whenever possible for the first instance of the article subject in Lede only. You use the three apostrophes ( ' ) before and after the word(s) making up the subject to create the bold.  Circular links cause problems with other aspects of wiki, and should be avoided or fixed when found, as part of normal copy editting, and when editing the lead; and is specifically addressed under the  what not to link'' as a circular (redirecting to itself) link.  Hope that helps.  GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 21:37, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It talks about redirects, not a link to the article itself! On Orrefors, Orrefors is parsed into something like Orrefors, so it's not a circular link per se, but it gives the article extra semantic information. Like, "this bold thing is important, and has a meaning outside of its formatting, it's actually the name of the article". --MarkTraceur (talk) 18:20, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Self-links are circular links. Any link that redirects the server back to the article in which it is initially invoked (either directly or indirectly) uses server resources and are to be avoided.  Titles are bolded by use of the three apostrophes as I indicated above (and at Boldface formatting) and at Help:Self_link, where it specifically states: Self links are usually not recommended. One exception is within a text that is transcluded between several pages.  Per the Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Article titles, you should not use self-links to make the article name bold in the first paragraph... [bolding is mine].  For further and in-depth technical explanations (for which I am eminently unqualified), you would need to take this to Village_pump_(technical).  I can transclude this discussion over there to generate more input if you think it would help.  Let me know.   GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 18:45, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I think I'll let this go now. It seems sane that the status quo, at least, should be respected, and that there's ample policy (though outdated policy) supporting your view. I'll update Help:Self link to better reflect the current MOS, but I'm done raging against the machine for now :) FWIW, server resources wouldn't be significantly affected by self links (I'm not even sure the link update jobs would even read it), especially given a slow rate of adoption. I do see why you would self-link in a transcluded page, though, because it would give you much more semantic utility in that context. Sorry for the technical talk, I'll just leave you with that :) --MarkTraceur (talk) 20:17, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Riga supermarket roof collapse
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Riga supermarket roof collapse. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Union of South Africa
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Union of South Africa. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

South Africa coat of arms
the colours of the svg version is wrong, can someone change the colours to the exact same ones as in the gif version 90.132.42.165 (talk) 15:05, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I left a message to the .SVG creator, on the graphiv Talk Page, but I don't know if that will help you, or how soon the creator will get back to fixing it. Let me know if there is anything I can do.  Regards,  GenQuest  "Talk to Me"

Reference your concerns...
"Reference your concerns regarding the "Category: Huguenot participants in the American Revolution"
 * RE: I have marked as patrolled. However, unless the articles contain reliably referenced identification of these people as "Huguenot", they will be removed. As that may be problematic, you should consider that this may be better suited as a list article, not a category. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 12:28 am, Today (UTC−6)

Reference your concerns regarding the Category: Huguenot Participants in the American Revolution, this topic has at least much usefulness as many other categories on Wikipedia and on focuses notable individuals who share at least two common characteristic, that being a refugee heritage and participation in a distinguishable period in world history. It also follows a template that identifies the refugee characteristic in multiple similar, long-existing categories covering multiple countries. The only distinctions here between those existing, related categories are that this category focuses on a particular event (The American Revolution) and maintains a neutral viewpoint regarding national origin and even the political affiliation of everyone listed. All the individuals listed are of verifiable Huguenot descent and compilation of their names may assist further research. In fact, in preparing this new category I have identified and referenced several Huguenot descendants and referenced their ancestry myself on Wikipedia. Furthermore your singular decision to delete the links to biographical articles you do not feel distinguish how "Huguenot" someone is demonstrates a subjective value judgment on your part, which violates the stated policies of Wikipedia, to include the guidelines for the creation of articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gruntldr (talk • contribs) 06:59, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * So much for AGF.
 * First point: My concerns are just that: Concerns. Nowhere have I decided to delete any links of yours.  I don't understand where you get that I have somehow decided to delete any of your category links.  I made no judgement of any kind on your new category.  In fact, I saw that you're new here, and thought I could save you some time and grief in the long run, because the policy is very clear on these things.  I am simply offering you some tips on making your category "policy-compliant" in order to be able to withstand a W:CfD discussion.
 * Second: If the individuals you are adding to this category are indeed Huguenot, and identified themselves as such, then once they are reliably sourced in their respective articles, they can be added to your category. If that is the case, and these are as verifiable as you state, that should not be a problem for you.  (Your own research–however accurate–does not count.)  Anything else, per your own statement above, is original research and is not allowed.  I guarantee you, in that case, someone will delete the links, and possibly the whole category.
 * Third: I raised a concern about articles being categorized for which there is not yet a basis for such categorization. Several articles that I quickly checked fall into this situation.  BTW: You can add such content to the articles, if you have reliable, third party sourcing for it.  If that does not exist, even though you may have the research to back such claims up, it falls again under the umbrella of original research and those individuals can not be categorized as such.
 * Finally: This discussion should take place at one spot or another, not here AND at the talk page of the affected article. I have moved it over there for now.
 * Good luck, and let me know if I can help.  GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 08:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sasanian Empire
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sasanian Empire. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 07:50, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

RfC reply
Agreed as long as you can pin-point reliable boundaries, go ahead and have it made. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 07:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Additional needed comments: to User:Keeby101. I came to this as a neutral editor as a result of a request for comment, I hope you can receive my opinion in the spirit of constructive criticism in which I offer it.


 * Referring to the above debates, you seem to have crossed the line from reporting sources, into OR with both your maps and misunderstanding of history. Military campaigns, even successful ones, often simply resulted in the "conquered" lands paying tithes, tributes, or ransoms, with the result of the victor withdrawing their forces and never exercising any real control over an area thereafter.  To try to say otherwise is Synthesis; to then try to add such areas into a map is OR and just plain wrong.


 * You have additional problems with your use of unreliable forum sites as "sources". This will not advance your cause either.  These sites have no editorial control, no reliable sourcing of their own, and anyone can post anything there.  You need to step back, and do some reading of history texts, focusing on the extent of the empire and NOT military campaigns.  Skip the web-sites.


 * You may find in your research that much of what you are saying is, in fact, correct. However, Wikipedia, being a tertiary source, reports what is verifiably reported elsewhere, not necessarily what you or I may know to be true.  For instance, if Wikipedia existed back in 1490, it would rightly report the earth is flat, even though many scholars at the time, and at least one sea captain, new differently.  The available sources at the time, however, would have mostly stated: "the earth is flat."  That, my friend, is the reality of Wikipedia: we can only report what our sources tell us.


 * I do hope this helps clear up some of your confusion in understanding the above editors resistance to your new map(s).  GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 19:03, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Family name
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Family name. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

South korean football club Merger
Hi, like merger of Bucheon SK and Jeju United FC, There are articles to merge. Please comment on talk page and merge them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Anyang_LG_Cheetahs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pusan_Daewoo_Royals Thanks Footwiks (talk) 10:29, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Re-Posted at Merger Request noticeboard GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 18:20, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

John Adair
I noticed you recently tagged John Adair as needing copyediting. Since this is a featured article, I'm wondering what your specific concerns are. It was on the main page yesterday, so there may be some things that slipped through that I am not aware of. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 19:18, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi. A red-linked editor went thru it a day or two ago and introduced numerous grammar, punctuation, mis-capitalization; WMoS and other issues.  I noticed that you were attempting to clean it up recently, but several of his bad edits have survived.  I'll be glad to do a copyedit this weekend if you'd like—I just can't jump on it today.  Regards,   GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 20:16, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, if you wouldn't mind; I'll be swamped all weekend. I was trying to leave anything I thought wasn't too egregious from the red-linked editor, assuming his were good faith attempts to improve the article and not wanting to just roll him back wholesale. I also wanted to explain each change individually in the edit summary so he could see my rationale. Unquestionably, I might have missed something (or multiple somethings). Acdixon (talk · contribs) 20:33, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * OK. The problem is that the editor, "Duane," is not responding to any of my attempts to help better his edits.  I think he is trying in good faith, but his grasp of English grammar, punctuation, writing, etc. rules are lacking; as is any knowledge of the Manual of Style.  He started on Dec 31 (just ten days ago, and has already made 880 edits—most of them bad).  I've considered an ANI, but don't really know what should be done about this enthusiastic, though misguided, newbie and the damage he's doing to the project.   GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 20:54, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ GenQuest  "Talk to Me" 03:56, 16 January 2014 (UTC)