User talk:Mww113

New Zealand sea lions
Hi Mww113,

Yesterday I made a number of edits to the New Zealand sea lion page, tidying up a bit of a dogs dinner that said little about the biology of this species! When I checked it half an hour later you had reverted it back to it's previous state. I'm curious as to your reason for doing that? I am a new user to Wikipedia and there may be some protocol for editing wikipedia pages I don't know about?

Thank you

Treburrick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treburrick (talk • contribs) 01:30, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I can see that I reverted some edits by an IP. Was that you?  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 02:39, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that was me. What was the reason for reverting these edits? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treburrick (talk • contribs) 00:38, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It seems I made a mistake. The tool I was using made it look like an anonymous user had removed a large amount of content. I did not realize that your edits were constructive. Please accept my sincere apology. I'm human and sometimes make errors.  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 02:40, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey no problem. I saved the source code and so can set it back to how it was. I was possibly a little over-zealous anyway, so the new edit will hopefully be an improvement. Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treburrick (talk • contribs) 03:34, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for understanding. You can also see this information by clicking on the view history tab. It will allow you to view and/or restore any previous version. I'm also happy to help you restore content if you'd like. All the best,  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 03:37, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Alfred Karney Young
Hi, Mmw113, I wonder if you could expand on your tag? I only uploaded the page to mainspace recently, and it's in the process of being pruned and split off into other articles. Cheers, :>
 * Sure. It looks pretty good actually. The only remaining concern of mine is why there's both a selected bibliography and a references/citations section. You can remove the tag if you want.  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 02:06, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind remarks. The 'Selected bibliography' section should be have been called 'Selected publications', and is now where it belongs. :>MinorProphet (talk) 02:49, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You are most welcome. Best of luck with the article!  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 02:57, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Little Mix – Salute
Regarding your reversion of an unidentified IP of the running time – while I agree with your edit summary as to the reason for reversion, that running time still needs a second look... isn't 53:81 actually 54:21? ;-) Richard3120 (talk) 04:17, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah! Good catch. I did this late at night it seems :P. I reverted myself. 54:21 seems more standard to me. Thank for for spotting this!  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 21:13, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd never noticed it until yesterday either, but that's because that part of the track listing is collapsed and hidden under normal viewing. I haven't checked myself, but I imagine the previous edit was in good faith and calculated by adding up the running times of each track. "53:81" is hilarious though, I wonder how long that's been there without anybody noticing? Richard3120 (talk) 22:24, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Haha. Yeah I wonder how that managed to slip through... I definitely didn't add up the numbers though. I just saw an ip changing an album time without an edit summary and figured it was just vandalism. My mistake for sure. I guess I'll be adding up times from now on when I'm patrolling the recent changes ;)  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 22:40, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Old Catholic Church IP contributor
Dear ...........

We are so sorry to give you cause to keep deleting the entry from the page. We will pray for you... God bless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.225.77.149 (talk) 16:22, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You can do whatever you like, but it does not excuse you from repeatedly edit warring against policy.  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 16:59, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

ACC tool access request approved
Mww113, thank you for your interest in the account creation process. I have verified that you are identified to the Wikimedia Foundation and approved your request.

You may now access the interface here pending a tool root marking your account as identified in the tool database. Before you begin handling requests, please ensure you have read and understood the account creation guide and username policy to familiarise yourself with the process.

Please subscribe yourself to the private ACC mailing list following the instructions on that page. I also advise that you also join us on IRC where a bot informs us when new account requests come in and you can get real time advice on how to handle requests.

Please note failure to correctly assess requests will result in suspension of tool access. Account creation is not a race, and each one should be handled diligently and thoroughly. Releasing personally identifying information (such as IP and email addresses), whether intentionally or unintentionally, is treated very seriously and will generally result in immediate suspension.

Currently you are allowed to create up to six accounts per day, and you won't be able to create an account with a similar name to that of another user; these requests are marked as "Flagged user needed" on the interface. However, if you reach the limit frequently, you can request the account creator permission at WP:PERM/ACC.

Please don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. Again welcome! DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) WER 19:50, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

superbowl L: BRANDON WEEDEN and the DALLAS COWBOYS
I added this because I found it entertaining and informative. And also it is a fact. FACT: it WAS a stupid decision. The first round of 2012 NFL draft was one of the darkest days in Cleveland Browns history. After taking future bust Trent Richardson with the 3rd overall pick, they thought 'you know who would be good to waste our second first round pick on, a slow, dim-witted HAYSEED from Oklahoma'. That HAYSEED was named BRANDON WEEDEN. He would go on to start in 20 games, going 5-15, giving him the worst winning percentage of any Browns Quarterback who has started more than 12 games. So yes, drafting him in the FIRST round was an objectively stupid choice. Though he does have the potential to turn his career around as quarterback for the Dallas cowboys in lieu of the injured TONY ROMO. I wish WEEDEN well in all his future endeavors, for nothing would make me happier than to see BRANDON WEEDEN lead the DALLAS COWBOYS to the superbowl. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.56.232.199 (talk) 05:40, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Have a look at Wikipedia's policies regarding the neutral tone that is required for articles. Best,  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 05:43, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Another Period
Mww113,

With regards to your recent counter-revision of my correction to the "Another Period" page, I am slightly confused. How is correcting an error in the actual name of a recurring character in the cast "not constructive"? IMDB, show transcripts, and all other sources clearly list Betsy Sodaro's character on the show as "Abortion Deb," not "Nabourshimdeb" as some tin-ear has transcribed onto "Another Period"'s Wikipedia page. Indeed, it is hugely difficult to find a source for "Nabourshimdeb" that does not seem to have been copy-pasted from Wikpedia's "Another Period" page. By contrast, "Abortion Deb" appears on both IMBD and Ms. Sodaro's Wikipedia page, the latter of which features a link to said IMBD page for corroboration. As a fan of the show, I just thought I'd do my part to spruce up the accuracy of Wikipedia, which is after all what we are striving for.

I look forward to hearing back from you and seeing Ms. Sodaro's character properly labelled on "Another Period"'s Wiki page.

Sincerely,

Awarewolf (talk) 01:53, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi there. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. At the time I reverted your edit, I was using an automated program that is used to identify vandalism and other non-constructive edit patterns on Wikipedia. At it so happened, your edit involved (in part) replacing a piece of established text with the word "abortion". To the program and me, this looked highly suspicious. However, as you rightly pointed out, I neglected to read the edit summary and some of the broader context of the article which would have indicated your edit was legitimate. Please accept my sincere apology. This was a lack of oversight on my part. As you can see, I've reverted myself and reinstated your edit. Should this happen again with me or any other editor, please feel free to make use of the "undo" feature which can be found under the "View History" tab to restore your version. It's generally polite to leave a message on the editor's talk page when you do this (as you have done here). Again, my apologies.  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 02:47, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

reagan (given name)
how did i wrote incorrect information in that article --166.137.96.165 (talk) 11:52, 19 October 2015 (UTC) --166.172.59.103 (talk) 11:57, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Reagan (given name)
Which one I mentioned what did I do reply on my talk page. Thanks! --166.137.97.98 (talk) 17:15, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)



Happy New Year 2016
Peppy Paneer (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Possible removal of AWB access due to inactivity
Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!
 Happy Birthday! Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes,  PA TH  SL OP U  08:59, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!
 Happy Birthday! Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:54, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!
 Wishing Mww113 a very happy birthday on behalf of the Birthday Committee! CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:31, 26 October 2021 (UTC)