User talk:Mysterytrey/Archive 3

Question
Hi there! Thank you for approving my article, but I realized I screwed up. Somehow I misspelled the guy's name in the title of the article, and it went through as Robert LoCasio when it's actually Robert LoCascio. Any way to fix this? User:ConcreteFancy — Preceding undated comment added 17:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * ——No response from me. I had moved the page from a user sandbox to the draft space, as I believe was preferred at that time, on March 27.  I was not on from April 18 to June 25, but on the same day the user posted this, they also posted on the article talk page, and a helpful editor moved it later that day.   —Mysterytrey 00:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Parkour
I undid your reversion of the additional reference to Casino Royale. It is important as a major publicity for this sport, and there is nothing wrong with having two mentions in the same article, because of its importance. David Spector (talk) 00:42, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * ——No response from me. I also didn't remove the content again, or take this to any other venue.   —Mysterytrey 00:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks
Sir, Thanks for reviewing my page Victims' rights in India. Let me work on the points raised by you. I shall try my best to concise the article to make it fit for Wikipedia. 16.11.Rguru (talk) 05:22, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * ——No response from me.  —Mysterytrey 00:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Requesting resubmission
Sir, The article Victims' rights in India certainly deals with the interpretation of related laws in Indian context only. It can be a better supplement to other related articles in Wikipedia. I have tried my best to concise the article and its neutrality without deleting all essential points.I think it may meet your guidelines. 16.11.Rguru (talk) 02:19, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll leave it for another reviewer, as I have reviewed it once already. Hopefully the wait is not too long.   —Mysterytrey 21:59, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Its not that all the paragraphs should be placed together except for achievements, its that in the state it was in when I saw it, those paragraphs, they were a bit inappropriate, but not the whole paragraph. That especially goes for a "Business Model" section.  Unless it is really important to how that platform is offered or built, it probably should't be included.  Features of a product can be discussed, but not like that, so I just you should look over some parts of the Manual of Style.  Specifically, read this to help you understand when it is appropriate to include features.  —Mysterytrey 22:10, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
Requesting input at the discussion: !Vote requested to clarify matters about awards sent. NorthAmerica1000 00:17, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * ——I did not respond here, but I do believe I went to the page.  —Mysterytrey 00:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Question
For the sake of clarity, I noticed that you signed your name in the comments section at !Vote requested to clarify matters about awards sent. Was this meant to be in one of the sections above, rather than in the comments section? NorthAmerica1000 01:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * ——No response from me here, but I do believe I moved that per NA's suggestion.  —Mysterytrey 00:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar!

 * RomtamTalkToMe 07:22, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Jacobfeliciano1
Hi. Thank you for participating at RfA. We hope you will  continue to  support this vital  function  of Wikipedia management. However, some votes that are clearly  inappropriate will  be ignored by  the closing  bureaucrat or even indented by  established members of the community. To learn more about  the voting  process, before you  participate again, please take a moment to  read WP:RFAV. You may  also  wish  to  read WP:RFAADVICE  to  know what  is expected of candidates, and this page to know what regular  voters generally expect. If you have any  questions about  the RfA process, don't  hesitate to  ask me. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:32, 24 September 2014 (UTC)