User talk:Gp469

March 2018
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Lezginka has been reverted. Your edit here to Lezginka was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://youtube.com/watch?v=ub4xESAenVE) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 06:25, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Master-slave morality
Re this edit: Your version is not grammatically correct. "To which" should be preceded by a comma, not a semicolon. You can't say "to which slaves respond to". Too many tos. Fundamentally, you are trying to do too much in one sentence. It would be better to break it up into two. As proposed in my previous edit, I would drop the direct mention of "master morality" and "slave morality" from this sentence since it is completely clear from the context, and the terms are used in the next sentence. Nothing is lost but redundant words.--Srleffler (talk) 03:26, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

31 in notable integers
I don't think that makes it anymore notable than 29 (the number of day the least months have). Actually, not all countries use the same year system.Marvin Ray Burns (talk) 15:51, 8 April 2019 (UTC)