User talk:PassedDown/Archive 1

December 2019
Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 14:31, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Current Events
Hello. I wanted to invite you to the WikiProject Current events as you have done edits on Portal:Current events. Most editors aren't aware that the project became active again in April 2020. Just wanted to inform you about that and hope you join. Elijahandskip (talk) 16:45, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Please don't over-use the Minor edit flag/checkbox
Please don't mark edits Minor unless they meet the criteria for such edits (see WP:MINOR). From that article:

A check to the minor edit box signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous versions. Examples include typographical corrections, corrections of minor formatting errors, and reversion of obvious vandalism. A minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. An edit of this kind is marked in its page's revision history with a lower case, bolded "m" character (m). By contrast, a major edit is one that should be reviewed for its acceptability to all concerned editors. Any change that affects the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it concerns a single word; for example, the addition or removal of "not" is not a minor edit.

You flagged your recent edits of the Spanish flu article as minor; they were good additions, but were not minor edits.

Cheers! &mdash; UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 22:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh I'm so sorry about that! Thank you for notifying me.

Disambiguation link notification for January 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 United States presidential election in Alaska, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vox.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:33, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 United States presidential election in Arizona, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages KJZZ and KTAR.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:29, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

St. Louis
I noticed this edit and agree with you. I don't think these city and county articles benefit from such detailed historical election data. I strongly urge you to start a discussion on the article's talk page. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:52, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I disagree with you on that. Every county should have such detailed election data. I just deleted the data provided because we don't need one table for election results and one for recent election results. They provide the same exact information but one provides less.

Disambiguation link notification for February 24
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2022 United States Senate election in Georgia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Axios.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 22
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 United States presidential election in New York, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albany.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 Arkansas House of Representatives elections, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Whitaker.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Invitation
BawinV (talk) 05:09, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Help with "Ivy"
Hello! My greetings. Someone created an article for "Ivy" and did not bother to develop and expand it to quality. It's in a very rudimentary state. I'm currently working on creating an article for "Long Story Short", or else I would've expanded Ivy myself. Just wanted to let you know that I've seen you doing great work in expanding song articles and Ivy might be needing your help. Your help will be very appreciated! Thank You. Regards. BawinV (talk) 08:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * First of all, thank you so much for noticing the work I've done! I'd love to expand the page for "Ivy"; I'm probably available to do it today or tomorrow. Thanks for all the work you've contributed! PassedDown (talk | contribs) 12:53, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Wasn't sure if I should give out a barnstar, but I saw your work on Ivy (Taylor Swift song), and wanted to send a message of appreciation for your great work on that page. Fantastic job, keep doing what you're doing!

LivelyRatification (talk) 02:29, 18 June 2021 (UTC) 


 * Oh wow thank you!! PassedDown (talk | contribs) 02:30, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of You All Over Me
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article You All Over Me you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of VersaceSpace -- VersaceSpace (talk) 17:02, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of You All Over Me
The article You All Over Me you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:You All Over Me for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of VersaceSpace -- VersaceSpace (talk) 10:02, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Background
Hi, I reverted your recent good faith addition to "You All Over Me". We don't have to add the summary of Taylor Swift masters controversy to every song article belonging to a re-recorded album. We only created a separate article for the masters dispute to serve that purposes and deduct redundancy. A small sentence about the masters dispute is enough for the song articles. Regards. BawinV (talk) 14:38, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi! I personally get what you're saying, but in the good article review for "You All Over Me", reviewer VersaceSpace said to add a bit of context. I'm not so experienced with good article reviews, so I'm not really sure what happens now. Would a good compromise be adding the further information template and linking that to the masters dispute? PassedDown (talk | contribs) 14:54, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of You All Over Me
The article You All Over Me you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:You All Over Me for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of VersaceSpace -- VersaceSpace (talk) 22:01, 10 July 2021 (UTC)