User talk:Ita140188/Archive 6

List of ammonium nitrate disasters
My apologies, I am certainly not skilled in these matters. I am sorry if I have caused a problem. If you have the time, could you point me towards a WP page that explains the concept: "This makes sorting across all listed events impossible)"? I would like to learn, but I don't wish to make a mess of things while doing so! Pleased that a knowledgable editor is watching....

Thanks for your kind edit summary. Best wishes,  Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect!  03:58, 7 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the message. No worries for the edit, and thank you for contributing. You can find further information about tables in MOS:TABLES and in Help:Table (in particular MOS:TABLES summarize why it's better not to split). --Ita140188 (talk) 04:05, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for providing this information! I shall study... Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect!  04:21, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

kudankoolam
qui dice che sarebbero in costruzione. ma sia PRIS che la stessa WNA dicono nisba, non sono ancora in costruzione. idem l'internet, tutto tace. tu riesci a trovare qualcosa?

hai poi notizie di prima mano dal giappone e dalla cina?--Dwalin (talk) 17:27, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Probabilmente hanno iniziato la costruzione di steam generators per la futura unità 5, ma non hanno ancora iniziato la costruzione sul posto. Credo che la maggior parte delle fonti consideri l'unità in costruzione solo dall'inizio della costruzione delle fondamenta. Sinceramente non so che tempistiche ci sono in questi casi, ma è possibile che alcune parti vengano costruite prima. Per il Giappone non credo si muoverà nulla per un po'. Cina non ne ho idea. La situazione non è chiara. In ogni caso pare che il 2020 sarà un anno molto molto lento per il nucleare. --Ita140188 (talk) 01:53, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * si, alcune parti vengono iniziate molto prima dell'inizio ufficiale dei lavori, come l'RPV, ma nell'articolo scrivono chiaramente che i reattori 5 e 6 siano in costruzione (ultima riga). anche sul sito NPCIL non lo riporta in costruzione. boh......attendiamo....--Dwalin (talk) 06:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

cina
https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-a-f/china-nuclear-power.aspx "Where construction has started, but has not been formally announced, the dates are marked in bold."

sembra che ci siano 2 reattori in costruzione iniziati ma non formalmente annunciati. bislacco.......

cmq oggi hanno iniziato Zhangzhou 2--Dwalin (talk) 21:03, 4 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Mi sembra che quei due reattori siano già categorizzati come in costruzione su List of nuclear reactors. Anche Zhangzhou 2 è già segnato in costruzione nella lista. Non ci si capisce molto con la situazione in Cina. Conto sul fatto che PRIS prima o poi si decida ad aggiornare la situazione dalle loro fonti. --Ita140188 (talk) 03:58, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Chianghiang SMR non è "in costruzione" nella lista. mentre shidaoguan PWR era messo in costruzione solo in funzione dell'articolo di reuters che considerava il permesso di costruzione come l'effettivo inizio dei lavori. zhangzhou 2 invece è da aggiornare la data al 2020 ed huizhou 2 è ancora da iniziare (per il PRIS), così come non si hanno notizie di xiapu FBR (anche se da google earth riconosco 2 edifici in costruzione che assomiglierebbero a centrali, quindi ne avresti 2 in costruzione e non 1). --Dwalin (talk) 08:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * qui parla di voler costruire fino ad 8 reattori fino al 2025. non riesco a leggere l'articolo completo quindi non so il contenuto. ma se fosse vero, è una notevole diminuzione rispetto agli 8 all'anno detti l'anno scorso. --Dwalin (talk) 22:28, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

xiapu
cheppalleeeeeeeee. notizie totalmente scollegate ti dicono che xiapu è in costruzione. ma il PRIS tace. --Dwalin (talk) 11:03, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Ahah ci si mette pure Varesenews a complicare il quadro! --Ita140188 (talk) 09:51, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * oltretutto carico URGENTE. che urgenza puoi avere se la centrale non è in costruzione? mentre se è in costruzione hai il pepe al culo! cheppalleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee--Dwalin (talk) 11:02, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * dimmi che la cina ci prende per il culo. DIMMELO!!!!! --Dwalin (talk) 18:36, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ahah ci sono sempre delle sorprese dietro l'angolo dalla Cina! --Ita140188 (talk) 01:02, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

CAP1400
qui dice che sono completi al 99.2%. o per "costruction design" intende solo i progetti su carta?--Dwalin (talk) 17:24, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Non saprei. Un esempio di giornalismo pigro, senza spiegazioni o contesto. Ma credo che si intendano i progetti, dato che la costruzione e' iniziata solo da poco. --Ita140188 (talk) 03:41, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * qui diceva che era in costruzione già nel 2014. --Dwalin (talk) 07:05, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

August 2020
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Heat pump; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. VQuakr (talk) 05:04, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * Hello, I did use the talk page to discuss, but the editors that deleted the section did not engage in much discussion. I don't see how my actions can be defined as an "edit war". I would be grateful if you could review the talk page discussion yourself. Thank you. --Ita140188 (talk) 05:21, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Noticed your edits on High-speed rail in India
Apparently there's a pre construction tender out for power utilities identification and shifting that was made public a few days ago. It pertains to the Delhi-Ahmedabad high speed rail corridor which seems to neither have an article nor a mention in the High-speed rail in India article. Am I missing something here?  Pro lix 💬 12:25, 6 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Hello, thank you for the link. Honestly I am not sure what is the status of the extension to Delhi. But from what I understand, there is still a long way to go, see here for example: . But it should definitely be listed in the proposed lines in the article. I am not sure why this isn't the case. --Ita140188 (talk) 23:41, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I think this is a rather recent development which is why it hasn't been listed yet, will you be doing so? I could work on making the article. Also kindly ping me like so next time or leave a talkback on my talk page so I don't miss your reply  Pro lix  💬 03:50, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It may be included in the Diamond Quadrilateral project. In general, the table in the article should be rewritten since there is overlapping among lines. --Ita140188 (talk) 03:27, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , the article definitely needs a lot of work. I really appreciate you taking the initiative, I don't have much knowledge in this field but I will try my best to add to the article.  Pro lix 💬 03:52, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

References in Plant nutrients in soil
There is a whole bunch of sfn references in the article that don't link to any full citation. For example: Allison 1957, Donahue, Miller & Shickluna 1977, Russel 1957, etc. Please add proper bibliography. Also, suggest installing a script (explained at Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors) to highlight such errors in the future. Thanks, Renata (talk) 04:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for noticing this. The article was created as a section split from Soil and I forgot to copy the bibliography. I fixed it now. I will check the other articles derived from Soil for the same problem. --Ita140188 (talk) 05:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

EV vehicles sales, annually by country
Hi there. I carefully checked for the latest stats, but I hadn't figured out how to enter the references yet on that page. Is it possible to undo your reset? The data is accurate, I assure you. Obviously ideally the references should be entered with each edit immediately - just wasn't able to do it this time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.62.10.137 (talk) 04:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello. Citing the sources is a fundamental requirement on Wikipedia. Numbers are not accepted on trust. Since you probably found these numbers from sources, please report the source in the edit. Even just writing down the URL is enough, better to have no formatting than no reference: the first problem can be easily solved by other editors. Also, and more importantly, do not report false references as you did, taking old references and passing them for new. --Ita140188 (talk) 04:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

SMR holtec
questa notizia è una notizia, non l'inizio dei lavori. ma è mica il caso di iniziare a pensare a come raggruppare tutti gli SMR? questi della holtec sono da 160 MW, non 50 MW come i NuScale. ma.......tenerli sempre tutti separati come si è fatto fino ad oggi o che fare? (+1) --Dwalin (talk) 13:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Ciao, scusa il ritardo mi ero dimenticato di rispondere. Intendi di raggruppare diversi reattori in List of nuclear reactors? Secondo me per ora non c'è bisogno, e considerata la lentezza dello sviluppo del nucleare, non sarà un problema per i prossimi 20 anni purtroppo. Sarei molto sorpreso se ci saranno più di una decina di SMR in costruzione nel 2030. Il problema ci sarebbe se cominciano ad esserci centinaia di centrali tipo NuScale, con ognuna una decina di reattori. Ma credo che se ne riparla per il 2050 forse. --Ita140188 (talk) 22:31, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:51, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Signpost: 29 November 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:45, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Operational vs Commercial operation
Talking about the page : List_of_nuclear_reactors you just edited. The plant is now operational, but not defined as "in commercial operation" as that is an administrative artefact when the supplier hands over the controls to the customer. It is however not really in testing phase. However, the plan is operational, and generates electricity for the grid. Isn't the point of this page to reflect that, rather than administrative status ? Hence why I've set the status as "Green", but not Operational, but rather "Generating Electricity". An idea could be to use a different colour, in the model use the  "Generating Electricity"  to distinguish from commercial operation. Checkxp (talk) 16:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

If you look here https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails.aspx?current=AE : it says operational. Checkxp (talk) 16:13, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * if you go here you see "commercial operation date N/A"--Dwalin (talk) 23:02, 21 December 2020 (UTC)


 * in the page you linked, reactors are defined in operation after first grid connection. This is arbitrary, other sites define "operational" as achievement of first criticality, others as first achievement of full power. The page List of nuclear reactors follows a different convention for operational status (which is more relevant for power generation): commercial operation. It is just a convention, which however has been followed by all reactors in that list. I don't see why we should change the rules for Barakah. In the page that linked, you can see that PRIS also confirms the reactor is not commercially operational yet. Wait a few months and the reactor will finally be in commercial operation. --Ita140188 (talk) 01:47, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

reattori proposti inglesi
moorside è sia elencato nei cancellati che nei proposti. solo che i 3 AP1000 erano solo proposti, non pianificati. non mi pare che avessero neppure comprato il terreno. è corretto quindi dire cancellato se non hai fatto neppure le opere di escavazione? discorso quasi uguale per whylfa 2 ed oldbury B. nel caso, in italia dovremmo aggiungere ALMENO 8 reattori (le centrali avevano 2 reattori ognuna). trino 2 (escavazione fatta, dovevamo solo fare la prima colata di cemento nucleare), termoli, lombardia, veneto, puglia (erano denominate così sul PRIS prima che lo modificassero e rendessero quelle pagine inaccessibili) e poi il CIRENE. e quello si, sarebbe da mettere--Dwalin (talk) 23:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Sono d'accordo. Specialmente nel caso di Moorside, è un po' ridicolo averlo sia nei proposti che nei cancellati. Credo che sia inevitabile avere Wylfa 2 e Oldbury 2 perché sono notable in lingua inglese (in poche parole è probabile che qualcuno che legga quella pagina voglia sapere il loro stato). Io direi intanto di cancellare Moorside con gli AP1000 (mi sembra abbastanza ragionevole). Poi in futuro bisognerebbe trovare consenso su cosa fare con reattori proposti ma mai iniziati e poi abbandonati. Meglio passare per una discussione sulla talk page prima di fare modifiche sugli altri. --Ita140188 (talk) 02:04, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * fai tu la discussione, io poi ti approvo. per me se non hai fatto le opere di escavazione non lo metti nella tabella riassuntiva. lo citi solo da qualche parte, ma è TROPPO fumoso per essere messo lì
 * oltretutto, per moorside, la tabella cinese dovrebbe raddoppiarsi. moltissime centrali hanno cambiato il reattore proposto cambiato. mentre per le proposte molte centrali sono state cancellate, ma da WNA erano solo in lista, senza neppure un tipo di reattore designato. quindi erano solo "dichiarazione d'intenti" come la centrale pugliese o quella molisana. "facciamo una centrale in quelle regioni". tutto qui.
 * per l'italia sono da mettere il CIRENE sicuramente. trino 2 invece? escavazioni fatte e la prima colata sarebbe avvenuta a metà 1986. --Dwalin (talk) 08:57, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * su WNA moorside è ancora messo ad horizons, non ad EdF. --Dwalin (talk) 22:08, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:25, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability&#32; on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 14:52, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

ZeroAvia
Dear Ita140188, I've noticed that you have contributed to the article on Hydrogen-powered aircraft and based on your credentials seem like a qualified person. I've recently created a page for the hydrogen aircraft company ZeroAvia. It will be great if you could help with additional contributions and page revision. Thank you! --Verbal.noun (talk) 19:40, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * thank you for the comment! It is an interesting article. I will try to contribute when I have time. --Ita140188 (talk) 01:39, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tesla, Inc.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tesla, Inc. you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Willbb234 -- Willbb234 (talk) 12:20, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Request for input on SpaceX Starship
Greetings, I have started a discussion on the SpaceX Starship talk page about reoganizing the prototype section. I would really appreciate your input. Please take a look and leave a note. Many thanks. JaredHWood💬 01:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note, I will check it --Ita140188 (talk) 10:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

What other cleanup / reorganize do you suggest for the Tesla Autopilot page?
Hi. Thank you very much for your cleanup of Tesla, Inc.. Nicely done! On the Tesla Autopilot page, I see that in December, you added a tag "Cleanup reorganize: organization of sections is confusing and disorganized." I have cleaned up the functions section. What other cleanup do you recommend? ReferenceMan (talk) 02:51, 29 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I think you did a great job at Tesla Autopilot by reorganizing everything into a table. My biggest problem with the organization was that section. Now it's much better, so I removed the tag. On a related note, I think we will soon need to split FSD into a new article. At that point, we can keep a summary of it in the Autopilot article under "Driving features". --Ita140188 (talk) 05:32, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Philosophy Tube&#32; on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 09:32, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:10, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

History of Tesla article
Hi there! I noticed your rigorous editing on Tesla, Inc. and I was wondering if you would be interested in assisting me with cleaning up History of Tesla, Inc.? As you must have apprehended already, it needs quite a bit of attention. Thanks. QRep2020 (talk) 06:45, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * thanks for the message. I will see if I can help later, but first I want to focus on the GAN on Tesla. But yes I agree, that article definitely needs some attention. --Ita140188 (talk) 13:59, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Tesla Factory
Hello, could you help explain commons:Special:Diff/519510314? Is there a better way to keep images of the two Giga Press machines at Fremont grouped together? —Sladen (talk) 15:51, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I removed the section because the parent section commons:Category:Giga Press was already a subsection of Tesla Factory. Now that presses are being installed in other factories, I think we can reinstate the categories --Ita140188 (talk) 01:16, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Controversies and Product Issues
Hi. I did some serious work on Controversies and Product Issues sections of Tesla, Inc., but maybe do a read too. Also, I have a feeling the reviewer might have an issue with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla,_Inc.#Vehicle_sales because of that "deliveries" versus "sales" comment from earlier in the GA2. QRep2020 (talk) 06:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the support in this GAN! These days I am a bit busy, but as soon as I have time I will check all your changes and start replying on the more tricky comments in the review. --Ita140188 (talk) 06:37, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Merger discussion for 100% renewable energy
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash;100% renewable energy&mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Viareggio train derailment
Ciao sei il primo connazionale che incontro nella community della Wikipedia in inglese. Fa piacere :)

Ho trovato il tuo nome quasi per caso esplorando la cronologia della voce Rete Ferroviaria Italiana. Stavo cercando qualcuno a cui rivolgermi per capire come procedere in merito a una questione delicata su cui non voglio intervenire perché sono in conflitto di interessi.

Di recente, la Corte di Cassazione si è espressa sull'incidente ferroviario di Viareggio, quindi sarebbe utile riportare nella voce gli ultimi sviluppi. Ho segnalato la cosa nella pagina di discussione relativa (qui) e qualora fosse possibile sarei felicissima di proporre alla community un testo. Al momento nessuno ha ancora risposto. Posso chiederti di dare un'occhiata? Mi faresti davvero una grande cortesia.

Grazie mille in anticipo :) Claudia Frattini (talk) 09:33, 12 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Ciao! Grazie del messaggio. Credo sia ok proporre una modifica nella talk page. Non ho familiarità con il disastro né con il processo, quindi non sono sicuro di poter contribuire direttamente. Se riesci a scrivere il testo da aggiungere, poi posso procedere ad aggiungerlo alla pagina dopo aver controllato le fonti. Le fonti dovrebbero essere da una terza parte (possibilmente non la sentenza della corte, che è difficile da interpretare, e sicuramente non un comunicato di FS), idealmente un giornale nazionale o simile, meglio se in inglese ma non necessario. --Ita140188 (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Ciao, grazie mille della disponibilità e dell’aiuto. I've written this message in English so that everyone can follow along with the conversation :)


 * Shortly, I will publish in the RFI talk page (here) an update proposal supported by third-party sources, as per your instructions. I will also add a ping so that you can receive the notification. Once it's up let me know what you think about it, I treasure your opinion :)


 * Grazie mille in anticipo Claudia Frattini (talk) 11:19, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tesla, Inc.
The article Tesla, Inc. you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Tesla, Inc. for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Willbb234 -- Willbb234 (talk) 21:44, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Huh? Don't know what's gone on here. I passed the article and yet Legobot says it's failed. Any idea? Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 21:59, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for reviewing such as long article. It was a pleasure to improve the page together. I am not sure what happened with the GA bot, but the issue seems resolved now. I think the article still needs to be added to Good articles in the appropriate section, per Good article nominations/Instructions. Thanks again! --Ita140188 (talk) 23:53, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations!

 * wow! Thank you! --Ita140188 (talk) 02:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

linking to a section
Thanks for cleaning up my edits on Wind power in the United States. I see that you changed levelized cost of energy#Levelized_avoided_cost_of_energy|levelized avoided cost of energy to levelized cost of energy I'm surprised that this works, since the target is a section, not a page. But of course it does. What's the behavior? When WP doesn't find a page by that name, it looks for a section by that name, on any page? What if it finds more than one match? Leotohill (talk) 16:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * there is no automatic process, I just created the page Levelized avoided cost of energy as a redirect to the section. In this way, if in the future we want to have Levelized avoided cost of energy as a separate page, the links already exist. Also, by linking to a unified page that redirects to the section, if we change the section name we only need to change the redirect, not all the links in the rest of the articles. --Ita140188 (talk) 01:52, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * got it. thanks. Leotohill (talk) 02:29, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Milan Area C
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Milan Area C you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 19:41, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Milan Area C
The article Milan Area C you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Milan Area C for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 15:01, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Milan Area C
The article Milan Area C you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Milan Area C for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 14:22, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

nuclear power...
Could you not direct some information, to where the deleted parts have gone ?

now it looks more that you are only deleting

J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (talk) 15:19, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I replied in your talk page --Ita140188 (talk) 04:04, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:List of tallest buildings in New York City&#32; on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 04:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 19
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Levelized cost of energy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Discount rate.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of SpaceX
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article SpaceX you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of OgamD218 -- OgamD218 (talk) 07:20, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Category talk:Faculty by university or college&#32; on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 16:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Rasmus Paludan
Hello. I see you previously undid my edit to remove the broken link to the non-existent page of Tomas Polvall on Rasmus Paludan. May I know why? I just see no purpose to have a link to a non-existent page? --184.146.212.5 (talk) 00:30, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the message. Red links are useful to indicate that an article is missing. As long as the article has the potential to be included on Wikipedia, these links are not broken links, they are a kind of vote on which articles are needed the most (for example, check Most-wanted articles). There is more information in Red link. --Ita140188 (talk) 01:18, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:44, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Russian battleship Dvenadsat Apostolov&#32; on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 21:30, 28 March 2021 (UTC)