User talk:Mk270

Hello. I agree with what you intended when you changed


 * Civil law is any of three different bodies of law:

to


 * Civil law has at least three meanings.

But when you're writing about a term rather than using the term to write about what it refers to, it should be italicized. Thus "A dog is an a animal", but "Dog refers to an animal". Usually it's better to write about the thing than about the term that refers to the thing, but of course when divergent meanings are involved (as in this case) or when you need to say that the term is misunderstood or offensive or something like that, then you need to write about the term rather than about the thing the term refers to. Michael Hardy 21:49, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * PS: I put the italics there. Michael Hardy 21:50, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

why did you vote on afu rfc?
I never saw your id up to now at the subject. Why did you vote? (Just curious) Thanks, antifinnugor 20:50, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC) Thanks. What did you ask? Did you sign your question? (e.g. by ~ )? antifinnugor 19:09, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

RfAr
Hey, Mk270, nice evidence in the Antifinnugor RfAr. It looks like there's a bit of a problem with the diffs at "more mischaracterisation of edits". Best, Bishonen | Talk 23:06, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Johann Hari
Hi there. I reverted this edit you just made to the Johann Hari article: When contributing to Wikipedia articles, you should avoid phrases like 'this Wikipedia article' or referring to Wikipedia as 'this website'. This is because our articles can easily be copied elsewhere, where those references would not make sense. See WP:Avoid self-references for more details. Robofish (talk) 22:34, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


 * this shows that the rules are wrong and facilitate Hari's kind of abuse. When the notable fact about someone is that he's editing his own Wikipedia page, telling me that I can't mention this on that page is taking his side and rewarding his behaviour. Mk270 (talk) 23:56, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rinus van Schendelen


The article Rinus van Schendelen has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created 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. Gbawden (talk) 10:41, 6 May 2014 (UTC)