User talk:Hatster301

March 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. Your recent edit to the page Felinae appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. Anaxial (talk) 06:47, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Whoops, my mistake. I had noticed that "Felinae" wasn't listed on the "housecat" WP article, and thus presumed that they weren't included in Felinae (which seemed strange in retrospect). I guess I should have been a little more thorough. Sorry for the confusion. -Hatster301 (talk) 16:19, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Trillion.
Hi Hatster301, thank you for the enlightenment concerning trillion. I would like you to have a look at the Trillion article, as it's misleading. Do you think that the 10^18 should be deleted? Forasmuch as it's only bilingual English-speaking countries which use long scale; in French (Canada), Afrikaans (South Africa) and Spanish (Puerto Rico). The Trillion article claims that trillion can denote 10^18 in English. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 01:10, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe not deleted outright, but perhaps amended to clarify that the "long scale" (10^18) meaning is outdated, and that "trillion" almost always refers to 10^12 in modern English-language contexts. - Hatster301 (talk) 01:46, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Numbers game
Hello, I'm Hirolovesswords. I noticed that you removed topically-relevant content from Numbers game. However, Wikipedia is not censored to remove content that might be considered objectionable. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 06:37, 22 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Did you not read the edit summary? It had nothing to do with censorship or offensiveness; the problem is that the only supplied reference is from more than 60 years ago (1949 if I'm not mistaken), and therefore most likely inaccurate today.

If you can find a (much) more current reference to the information, then by all means, present it, and it can probably be included without issue. Otherwise, you keep adding incorrect information to the opening paragraph that is outdated by more than half a century.

When you revert changes from other editors, it's important to read the edit summary to understand why the change was made, instead of just assuming the reason without reading it. Making (or undoing) edits based on unverified assumptions stands contrary to the very nature of Wikipedia, don't you think? -- Hatster301 (talk) 06:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * As much as I hate to say it, a Google search of the term finds a variety of current and relevant references that could be added if you really think it's necessary to add any more weight to it. —&#91;  Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 07:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)