User talk:Namlong618



Because of some childish editors such as (names deleted per WP:POLEMIC Jeh (talk) 04:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC) ) I'll put this notice here, I'll immediately revert any additions by the aforementioned users to this talk-page (though I believe that no page on Wikipedia holds ownership, not even users' own talk-pages a certain level of maturity should be required, which the aforementioned haven't reached) note that this counts for every user regardless of who or what you are your statements are only as valid as what's presented not how or by whom it's presented, further if any of my edits or discussions seem to lean as "biased" for men's (human) rights organizations and Intactivism let me know as I do not wish to harm the neutrality and integrity of this esteemed site and neither do I wish to underplay supposed (alleged) "benefits" of genital mutilation. En ondanks dat ik een Nederlander ben verzoek ik ú om niet in het Nederlandsch te gaan schrijven omdat wij daar een Nederlandsch taalige Wikipedia voor hebben. Sincerely, --Namlong618 (talk) 21:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Template for discussion on Windows templates
Hello Namlong618, thank you for contributing to this TfD discussion. I just wanted to clarify a few more procedural points. The current discussion is not about the accuracy of the templates' content, which article is best to include the content or if that content should exist to begin with. All those aspects should be discussed in article namespace on the talkpages of affected articles. The main focus of this specific TfD discussion is the "technical" usage of the templates in question and if it complies with template guidelines. Once the templates' content is "back" directly in article namespace, it can still be moved to a different article, changed or deleted - after consensus was built on the article talkpage. As I said, the content will be preserved, what happens next with it is up to interested article editors. GermanJoe (talk) 10:20, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Oké, thank you for clarifying,.
 * Hochachtungsvoll, --Namlong618 (talk) 10:44, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Talk Archive
In relation to another talk page:

Microsoft Lumia sources Hello @ - NeoGeneric:, last year I spent hours finding secondary and tertiary sources from various (reliable) sites to add them to the list of Lumia devices, when you moved the devices to the wikitable you've removed most of the sources, this also means that this page mostly relies on first party information (something which Wikipedia tries to avoid) I don't know how to get in the editing section where I can copy-paste the sources next to their respective device on the table, ¿could you kindly tell me how so I can restore them? the page is notorious for needing additional sources for verification, the counter went down from 113 to 87, I don't want to restore all of them, just enough secondary and tertiary sources to verify every device listed. Sincerely, --Namlong618 (talk) 17:48, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Masculicide listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Masculicide. Since you had some involvement with the Masculicide redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:41, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Mascucide listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mascucide. Since you had some involvement with the Mascucide redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:42, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Difference between Online services and software solutions/products.
Hi Namlong618,

First, thanks for edition of Microsoft Mobile.

Please see this two sections in List_of_Nokia_products.


 * List_of_Nokia_products
 * List_of_Nokia_products

I don't see clear difference between services and solutions. I can't categorize them in these sections. I have included all Nokia services/solutions in the above sections. Could you please re-categorize the above sections correctly. I mean, services in services and solutions in solutions.

Also descriptions need to be added for titles in solutions sections.

And also, many of the above entries are also eligible to be inserted into Microsoft Mobile. Please take care of that.

Thanks again...
 * I only re-inserted the services as RaviC removed them without consensus from the Microsoft Mobile page and thereby removed all sources and references now that I've learned how to retrieve those I may have carelessly merged them, and only the services maintained under Microsoft Mobile Oy can be included in the Microsoft Mobile Oy article. If you feel like some more online services and online solutions can be included in the M.M.O. article feel free to add them, but I must say that despite the fact that Microsoft still does use .mobi and some other depreciated Nokia services these are mostly from sites that haven't seen an update in over 10 years and are migrated to Microsoft dot com, and the services included in the M.M.O. article are the ones that have been actively developed until 2015. But thank you for notifying me, you've done fine.
 * Sincerely, --Namlong618 (talk) 19:31, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

trying again
I made, and am again making, an earnest request for clarification, for advice in just how my comments were seen by you as childish or a personal attack. I did not intend them that way and I do not wish to give that impression to you or to others in the future. Could you please offer an explanation rather than simply deleting this as you did the last one? Jeh (talk) 23:27, 27 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Added: Using your talk page to brand other editors as "childish" and not reaching "a certain level of maturity" seems to me to be a personal attack, not particularly high on the hierarchy of disagreement diagram you linked. It is certainly no better than "responding to tone" and probably more at the "ad hominem" level. It is also contrary to Wikipedia policy and also to WP:POLEMIC. Please remove that material. Thank you. Jeh (talk) 06:13, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Windows Insider for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Windows Insider is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Windows Insider until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Codename Lisa (talk) 00:05, 18 March 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) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Windows 10 development history concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Windows 10 development history, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Windows 10 development history


Hello, Namlong618. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Windows 10 development history".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the  or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 00:22, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!