User talk:Norcaes

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Norca. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Norca~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 01:50, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:02, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Nader Shah
Hi, you have edited the Nader Shah article and i thank you for that, however, when i tried to verify your additions, it appeared that there was no link allowing me to check the sources, could you please add links in order that other users can check the quotes ? thank you very much.---Wikaviani (talk) 07:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Wikaviani, thank you for leaving a message. If I recall correctly, the bulk of my citations are referenced to a physical book, which is a legitimate offline source. Since the default template for citing books did not include a URL field, I didn't add one. However, I did cite specific page numbers, which I'm currently re-checking for mistakes that may have made it difficult for you to find the relevant content. If that's the case, I do apologise for my carelessness. In the event that you're having trouble accessing the book itself, you can find the book 'Kohinoor' (https://books.google.co.in/books?id=KPVrDgAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false) online. My page citations are based on the hardcover edition of the book but I imagine it won't be too difficult to find the information within the e-book. In case you need assistance with locating something, please let me know, I'll be happy to help out. Norcaes (talk) 18:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Update: Just checked the page citations and realised that I was overwriting the previous citation every time I changed the page number without listing the citation afresh (I think, still not entirely sure how it happened). Thanks for bringing it to my notice, I've made the correction. Norcaes (talk) 18:09, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * You're quite welcome, thanks for your answer and your help. Since you already corrected the cites, i don't need to check it out. And, by the way, thanks for improving the article. Best regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 22:44, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Great, and thank you again for bringing up the faulty citations, they might have languished on the page for quite a while if you hadn't mentioned them. Have a great week. Norcaes (talk) 13:56, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Tiger shroff
Google search says tiger is martial artist and many website says dancer Also please add in occupation Shikhar12 (talk) 01:54, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for leaving a message. As I previously explained in the Edit Summary while reverting your changes, an occupation is a profession for which an individual is compensated. Mr. Shroff's martial arts and dancing skills are only utilised as a minor aspect of his acting career. For example, the Bollywood actor Hrithik Roshan is not called a 'dancer' simply because he is considered good at it. If you can share reliable sources that claim otherwise, please do so. Norcaes (talk) 15:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Edit war at Bob Knight
Now that you've begun an edit war at Bob Knight I trust that you'll participate in the discussion that I've opened in Talk. (A discussion that you should have begun instead of edit warring!) ElKevbo (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for leaving a message. I would imagine that you aren't looking to discuss the same edit on the article's talk page as well as on mine, so I'll address the accusation of edit warring here to avoid mixing up the two issues. I think it's a stretch to describe my first reversion on the page as an 'edit war'. Since we can't seem to agree upon whether my reversion is part of an edit war, I'll try to explain why your edit summary prevented me from assuming good faith.


 * I would encourage you to look into what constitutes an edit summary for a reversion, in particular, WP:REVERT, relevant parts of which I've quoted below:


 * "Consider carefully before reverting, as it rejects the contributions of another editor. Consider what you object to, and what the editor was attempting. Can you improve the edit, bringing progress, rather than reversion? In the edit summary or on the talk page, succinctly explain why the change you are reverting was a bad idea or why reverting it is a better idea."


 * Moreover, you might find it helpful to review the section on actions characteristic of ownership issues:


 * "An editor reverts a good-faith change without providing an edit summary that refers to relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, previous reviews and discussions, reliable sources, or specific grammar or prose problems introduced by the edit."


 * Both of the above paragraphs disqualify 'so?' as a reasonable edit summary. Finally, please see WP:RV for the following:


 * "A reversion is a complete rejection of the work of another editor and if the reversion is not adequately supported then the reverted editor may find it difficult to assume good faith."


 * I hope this gives you a better understanding of my edits. I'll keep your suggestion to use the BRD cycle recommendations in mind going forward. Norcaes (talk) 21:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)