User talk:Pldx1/Archive 1

See User:Pldx1/Detailed Indices/User talk:Pldx1/Archive 1

Wikipedia Signpost &mdash; February 16, 2009
This one got strange at User_talk:Crest_of_London/Archive/2009. Why ?



You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Delivered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 07:00, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Welcome and introduction
Hi, Pldx1. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person by golly! And this real person (that would be me), wants to say welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad you've made an account! Thanks for joining; you're on your way to making some great contributions.

Because I've noticed you've just joined, I wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. Any questions are fine, nothing is too silly (we've heard them all). Now, the tips below - hop on them - they should help you begin editing. Best of luck! JoeSmack Talk 17:48, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * image:Fist-pump.jpg was quite certainly send in good faith but, even now, I don't see why I should have felt welcomed by such a picture. Pldx1 (talk) 19:01, 11 September 2013
 * A better way to skip this image was archiving. Done some years later... Pldx1 (talk) 16:23, 13 January 2016

Your taxo sub-page
... was at "Utilisateur:Pldx1/taxo", but has been moved to User:Pldx1/taxo. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:41, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Muhak, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SBS (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Korean Buddhist temples, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Hwaseong and Danyang (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Painter of the Wind
Category:Painter of the Wind, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:03, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Joseon X-Files, Pldx1!

Wikipedia editor I dream of horses just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Please expand the article."

To reply, leave a comment on I dream of horses's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by I dream of horses (talk • contribs) 23:45, 29 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment: I have no clue about this section refused to auto-archivate. Done manually. Pldx1 (talk) 16:23, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Korean philosophers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yi Ik (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Pldx1 (talk) 11:13, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Periodic table
How is printability a fringe theory?? Of course the periodic table may be printed! And how is a Wikipedia talk page a reliable source?? Double sharp (talk) 11:08, 3 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Late Answer. [] was a way to keep track of the document threatened by Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_August_27. Of course the periodic table may be printed! Pldx1 (talk) 11:23, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

courtesy name
Hi! I'm sorry but this not how it works. I am not oblidged to start looking for references for every single unreferenced article on Wikipedia. But as a patroller I AM oblidged to warn readers that the article is unreferenced, thus the content might or might not be reliable. Taking the tag off won't solve the problem of the article. Are you trying to make it look like this is a good article? It's not the way to do it. Without proper sources the whole thing can just as well be fiction. Teemeah 편지 (letter)  10:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

This message from User:Teemeah seems to be a reply to a summary written at Courtesy name. The summary was saying: "If you want to add a reference, add it. If you want to remove something, remove it. Be bold, do it yourself!". Teemeah tell us she is one of these Galactic Patroller whose duty and oblidgations are limited to warn the innocent reader that an unreferenced page is unreferenced. Great job, indeed. Who shall provide the missing references? Some Galactic Referencer that will grace us with her venue in some future point of the time? Maybe taking the tag once more will accelerate the process? I will try perhaps. Pldx1 (talk) 18:00, 31 October 2013 (UTC)


 * You can provide the missing references if you want to. But not notifying the readers that the content may actually be unreliable because there are no sources presented is not the solution. Why are you asking me to start looking for references, when you yourself are not doing it? :) Ask only things you also do yourself. We have problem tags for a reason. You can as well correct the problems of the article. Untagged articles give the impression that the article is good for use. There 4 million pages in the English Wikipedia alone. patrollers job is to review and notify whether there are problems with an article. It's not about correcting every mistake. YOU can also correct the problems, if you have references. I don't have Chinese books, nor can I read Chinese to correct them. But I can show others there there is a problem with the article, so actually someone who reads it and has the necessary books/sources can actually see "hey, this is unreferenced, and I have a book about Chinese names, I can correct it". There are also editors who look through the problematic categories (eg. category:Articles lacking sources) and select articles that interest them and add sources. If we don't list problematic articles anywhere, nobody will know that there is a problem that needs a solution. Your sarcastic tone only shows you have absolutely know clue about how Wikipedia works. Read up first, maybe, before mocking people who have been doing this for 8+ years. Cheers. Teemeah 편지 (letter)  16:14, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Your comment at AN
Pldx1, I have collapsed the section you created at AN as it disruptive and incivil. If you would like to contribute to the discussion constructively you are welcome to do so. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:25, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Courtesy name, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Korean. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

OK, fixed. Pldx1 (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited French regional elections, 2010, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Total. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

OK, fixed. Pldx1 (talk) 10:21, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

WP:ACE2015
Hi Pldx1,

Unfortunately, you appear to have had under 500 mainspace edits as of the 1st November (480 as of today), so are ineligible to stand for Arbcom. Therefore, I have unfortunately had to delist you. For the Election Commission, Mdann52 (talk) 13:52, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Please explain
At ANI you wrote "And now, it remains to examine if the Washington Examiner is a more Reliable Source (RS) than The Atlantic when it comes to en:wp. A DC versus MA controversy ?" Please explain this to me. What's the backstory? -- BullRangifer (talk) 07:22, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello. Using Wikipedia as a source, I had the impression that WE is based in DC, while TA is based in MA. But, perhaps, I missed something. Pldx1 (talk) 08:14, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. BTW, what's the link to the article in The Atlantic? -- BullRangifer (talk) 15:44, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 28, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:32, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman
Hi there,

You are receiving this message as you have been involved with the Kevin Gorman Arbitration case. I just wanted to let you know that the case timetable has been changed - evidence now needs to be presented by 22 December 2015, the workshop closes 31 December 2015, and the Proposed decision is targeted to be posted 3 January 2016.

I would therefore be grateful if you could submit any additional evidence as soon as possible.

For the Arbitration Committee, -- Mdann52 (talk) 09:59, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by that: This case shall be suspended from December 22nd, 2015 to January 2nd, 2016. For the Arbitration Committee, Amortias (T)(C) 20:16, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Motion

Disambiguation link notification for December 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pierre de Saintignon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Les Échos. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Done. Pldx1 (talk) 17:49, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

second !vote vs. comment
Hi Pldx1. Thanks for catching my error in the Articles for deletion re S. Perera (Old Cambrians cricketer) (2nd nomination). In the future, instead of moving a second "delete" position to the right, consider striking out the "delete" portion and add comment, e.g. * Delete --> * Comment Delete. That way, you assume good faith by not asserting that someone is trying to get in two iVotes in an AfD discussion. I endeded up deleting my first posting. I posted the second posting because I thought the first one did not go through as I did not see it at the bottom of the page at the time. -- Jreferee (talk) 13:42, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your answer (and your move on the AfD page). Now, I will strike out my comment on that page. Obviously, good faith was assumed. Cheers! Pldx1 (talk) 13:47, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Votes
Hi there. I don't think it's safe for me to get involved in this situation any more. This AfD looks like it might have significant ramifications for the entirety of cricket coverage on Wikipedia and I'm not sure it represents how I feel any more.

I promise I'm not sulking, I promise I'm not throwing my toys out of the pram, I'm just sad that it's come to this situation. Bobo. 13:12, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Only just realized
You know, I just realized the stupidest thing after the longest time. You know you indented my second keep vote on the discussion, which you indented? I intended to write "Comment", not "Keep"! That was my fault. Hopefully this whole situation will die down now. Bobo. 16:02, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

minthreadsleft=1
Isn't it ? Pldx1 (talk) 16:28, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Test 01
This is test one. Pldx1 (talk) 09:47, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Test 02
This is test two (using archive now). Pldx1 (talk) 17:39, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

AfD
Hi Pldx1, I apologize if I misunderstood what was happening at that AfD and messed up something you wanted to do. I think the confusion was caused by the IPs that posted to talk by mistake. The best thing when that happens is to move them. It's usually neater not to have sub-sections too, though that matters less. Anyway, it will be closed soon and looks like a clear keep. Thanks for helping to keep it tidy. Best, SarahSV (talk) 22:07, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales Talk Page
Hi,

I notice that you've placed a test edit on Jimbo Wales' talk page to see if ClueBot III would archive it.

The bot hasn't archived it and as far as I'm aware it should have done by now. I was going to try and place the closing discussion template on the thread you started to see if that encourages the bot to archive it. Would it be ok if I did this to your discussion as the others all seem to be active?--5 albert square (talk) 17:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, please do. Pldx1 (talk) 17:41, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'll try the same on my talk page with one of the other bots edits.  Hopefully it will work!!--5 albert square (talk) 17:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi, I thought I would update you. I have had an email from one of ClueBot's admins.  They are waiting on access to Labs so they can check the code for the bot :)--5 albert square (talk) 17:58, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

1CA . Active even if disabled...
why ? Pldx1 (talk) 20:00, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand...
...the point you were trying to make at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Hawkeye7_2/Bureaucrat_chat --Dweller (talk) 16:35, 3 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I was saying that the rationale "score is between 2/3 and 3/4, therefore not so clear" will apply each time a RfA will turn between 2/3 and 3/4. If this is to be used to decide "not granted", this will apply each time and this is nothing but turning the decision "[2/3,3/4] is discretionary" into "[2/3,3/4] is never ever". And I was saying that I strongly disagree with that. Pldx1 (talk) 09:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That simply isn't the case, as a trawl of decisions taken in borderline RfXs will show you. Here's a discretionary zone cratchat that resulted in promotion last summer. And I didn't understand what the chart of Crats was supposed to show, either. --Dweller (talk) 13:37, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

essai 2010
Pldx1 (talk) 09:54, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 26 February
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * On the Grade I listed buildings in Wiltshire page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=707034637 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F707034637%7CGrade I listed buildings in Wiltshire%5D%5D Ask for help])
 * ✅ Pldx1 (talk) 00:48, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Archiving
Pldx1 (talk) 10:28, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

RfA
Hi. Thanks for your participation at RfA and other important elections for key positions within our ediing community. In order to attract more candidates of the right calbre to these posts, there have been long campaigns to reduce the drama. You could help. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

A second request. If this continues I will escalate for possible disruption. I have seen how you  have participated at  the ACE already. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:38, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Great Eastern Main Line RDT.src


A tag has been placed on Template:Great Eastern Main Line RDT.src requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

A10, F1; duplicate of Template:Great Eastern Main Line RDT

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Happy now? Useddenim (talk) 22:08, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Were you planning to write BS2ROUTE? Useddenim (talk) 22:40, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Discussion salvaged from Template talk:Great Eastern Main Line RDT.src
This page should not be speedily deleted because this file is the code source of template Great_Eastern_Main_Line_RDT. This source is coded in the BS-map format. This format is human readable, and was used to obtain the Routemap template that is actually used by transclusion. This other format is far less human readable. A really great solution would be to write a BS2ROUTE template that could do the translation. Using &#123;&#123;BS2ROUTE|Great Eastern Main Line RDT.src}} would be an efficient method to ensure that both files remain in sync. In fact, many of the templates written in the BS-map format generate an overflow when directly transcluded. Let us be nice with the people that are writing this kind of templates.

By the way, I am waiting for a message on my talk page about this request for speedy. --Pldx1 (talk) 21:30, 6 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree that a template (I assume it would be 'd) to translate BS-map to Routemap format would be helpful; but if you can't associate   with , then I have to question if you should even be editing RDT's in the first place. Besides, the syntax of &#123;&#123;BSmap}} is hardly "human readable" in the first place. Finally, keeping a second copy of a page in a different format in a separate location is a bad idea, and just begging for divergence. Useddenim (talk) 22:37, 6 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't think this ".src" page is a good idea either, it's not a conventional subpage to the root page like . Wiki keeps all the history of each page, so we only need to remark the last version of BS-map in the root talk page of this diagram template for sake of clarity. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 00:54, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * A10 is for articles, F1 is for files, and T3 is for templates. They are all for pages that are duplicates of another page. 96.41.0.15 (talk) 04:03, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for salvaging this discussion. Some remarks:
 * I agree that Great_Eastern_Main_Line_RDT/src would have been a more conventional wiki-name than Great_Eastern_Main_Line_RDT.src
 * I am not a regular user of BS-map or Routemap. I was rather a passer-by, with the intent of keeping the Great Eastern Main Line page below the template_include_size_limit.
 * I was curious of the reason of the avoidance of the new format Routemap by the usual maintainers of several RDT templates. I have drawn in petto my own conclusions, but maybe I was wrong about that.
 * Pldx1 (talk) 23:51, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Personally, I prefer Routemap because it's much friendlier when dealing with overlays (not necessary to keep track of what column an icon is in, which overlay it is), and it's not necessary to change the BS sub-template when adding or removing columns. I'm guessing the opposition to using the new template is fear of the unfamiliar. According to, about half of the RDTs at zh:WP have already been converted. So, unless there's a compelling reason (approaching the size limit, or left-and-right text) I'm not changing existing diagrams. Useddenim (talk) 16:55, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Dear Useddenim. I think that, sadly, this is far worse than fear of the unfamiliar. Everybody knows that "one should remain conceptual" in our mind and that we should think "let us call a subroutine" instead of "let us make a JSR", or "let us match a pattern" instead of "let us make a sed -e ". But the trend exists. Lets apply that to User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Trident13_Railways/src as example. This one is a BS-map-coded map, while User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Trident13_Railways is its routemap counter-part (where I have replaced all missing icons with a yellow disk). One can see that something turned wrong somewhere. What is your best guess about how to fix these maps ? (this is not a test, I simply have not found a convincing solution).  Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 18:37, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, the routemap version has been fixed. As far as I can tell, most of the problem came from attempting to load a non-existent icon. The rest was fixed with some half-width and quarter-width  icons. Useddenim (talk) 23:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

template include size limit
?!?!?!?!????? i didn't know there was a template include size limit. since a few months ago, i was wondering why my page doesn't render correctly. now i know why. i will try to split the page. thanks. Pancho507 (talk) 02:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Medway watermills diagram
There is a problem with the diagram now. Your edit has caused it to finish at Farleigh Lock. I've resisted the temptation to revert you. Please try to fix in the next 24h or I will restore the diagram back to the original pending a fix. Mjroots (talk) 09:36, 22 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Dear User:Mjroots. You left me a message on my talk page. I will reply at Template_talk:Medway_watermills_diagram because your message underlines a problem that goes far beyond individuals. Your are totally right when being infuriating when a template you created and maintained across the years, starting 2009, becomes messed because someone modified something somewhere without taking care of the consequences. But... I am not the culprit ! Let us continue this exchange at Template_talk:Medway_watermills_diagram. Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 13:23, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

About page splitting
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give List of Pokémon episodes/Header a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Requests for history merge. Thank you. Winterysteppe (talk) 13:25, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Dear User:Winterysteppe. With a Section title, this looks better. Pldx1 (talk) 11:00, 29 March 2016 (UTC)


 * hmmmmm ok. no objection from me. Winterysteppe (talk) 11:47, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ja Myung Go, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jung Kyung-ho. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 29 March 2016 (UTC)


 * fixed. Pldx1 (talk) 10:58, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: admin dashboard
thanks for bringing that to my attention. It's fixed now (hopefully). If not, feel free to fix it yourself. :) Cheers Thingg &#8853; &#8855;  02:32, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

List of Pokémon Adventures chapters
I have seen your edits to List of Pokémon Adventures chapters but wouldn't be better to split around every 15 or 20 volumes rather than leaving such a small sections? The anime and manga project tends to do that for long series like One Piece, Naruto and Fairy Tail for example. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 16:11, 2 April 2016 (UTC) copied and answered at Talk: List of Pokémon Adventures chapters. Pldx1 (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikicology arbitration case opened
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 22, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The message was sent using the case's MassMessage list. Unless you are a party, you may remove your name from the list to stop receiving notifications regarding the case.

Index
The task you're interested in seems better suited to either a bot to maintain, or a WMFLabs tool.--v/r - TP 07:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Excellent
An excellent piece of work. Thanks Peter Damian (talk) 18:59, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Gamaliel and others arbitration case opened
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others. The scope of this case is Gamaliel's recent actions (both administrative and otherwise), especially related to the Signpost April Fools Joke. The case will also examine the conduct of other editors who are directly involved in disputes with Gamaliel. The case is strictly intended to examine user conduct and alleged policy violations and will not examine broader topic areas. The clerks have been instructed to remove evidence which does not meet these requirements. The drafters will add additional parties as required during the case. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Evidence.

Please add your evidence by May 2, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. ''This notification is being sent to those listed on the case notification list. If you do not wish to recieve further notifications, you are welcome to opt-out on that page.'' For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Igogo festival
Hi Pldx1,

I trust you're fine. Thanks for your comment at the Evidence page. You said "a new reference has appeared, supposed to be about the celebration of new yams. This Poynor's paper is easy to find [1]. Page 86 is made of end notes. None of them is about yams or the Igogo festival. Nor any other part of this reference paper. Dear mentors, any comments ?

The source on page 86 reads:

"The number seventeen seems to be of ritual significance in Owo. Igogo, the most important annual festival in the kingdom, a combination of New Yam festival and purification ceremony merged with a memorial to the goddess Oronshen, also takes place over a seventeen-day period. The burial of the Olowo takes seventeen ritual days. These and other significant ceremonies all begin on the day of the five-day market."

Please, let me know if I am missing anything there and I will correct it as soon as possible. Thank you. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 00:13, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Before archiving. See Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology/Evidence for more details. Pldx1 (talk) 12:40, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

evidence
I'm not getting what you mean by  Don't presenting himself his own evidences here is another part of this behavior. ? NE Ent 10:47, 7 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Don't presenting himself his own evidences here is another part of this behavior belongs to Evidence. What could be deduced from that belongs to Workshop. Have a good day. Pldx1 (talk) 12:30, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Proper use of article talk pages
Welcome to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Talk:List of rulers of Ife, please bear in mind that page and others like it are meant for discussing improvements to the article in question. It is not meant for general discussion of the topic of the article, nor as a forum for criticism of other users and their behaviour, even in regard to their editing of the article. Please also be aware that sarcasm is not seen as conducive to constructive discussion on article talk pages, or elsewhere on the Project. Civility is one of Wikipedia's five pillars, and behaviour that is taken as uncivil can lead to editors being blocked from editing. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 12:46, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Dear User:Hijiri88. From https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3AHijiri88&year=&month=-1, I deduce that you have a great knowledge about blocks. Thank you for letting me know. Pldx1 (talk) 13:17, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
 * Preceeding unsigned message was left by User:Hijiri88. Pldx1 (talk) 19:12, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I forgot to sign my ANI notice. Please request that I be indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia. And be sure to ping me when you do so; of your last seven non-mainspace edits, you have forgotten to ping me in two of them. I have not explicitly asked you to ping me with every edit you make, but you appear to be doing so on purpose, so your not doing so on two occasions would seem to have been a mistake. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 03:18, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed
An arbitration case regarding Gamaliel and others has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted: For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Gamaliel is admonished for multiple breaches of Wikipedia policies and guidelines including for disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, removing a speedy deletion notice from a page he created, casting aspersions, and perpetuating what other editors believed to be a BLP violation.
 * 2) DHeyward and Gamaliel are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with or discussing each other anywhere on Wikipedia, subject to the usual exemptions.
 * 3) is admonished for engaging in incivility and personal attacks on other editors. He is reminded that all editors are expected to engage respectfully and civilly with each other and to avoid making personal attacks.
 * 4) For conduct which was below the standard expected of an administrator — namely making an incivil and inflammatory close summary on ANI, in which he perpetuated the perceived BLP violation and failed to adequately summarise the discussion — JzG is admonished.
 * 5) Arkon is reminded that edit warring, even if exempt, is rarely an alternative to discussing the dispute with involved editors, as suggested at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.
 * 6) The community is encouraged to hold an RfC to supplement the existing WP:BLPTALK policy by developing further guidance on managing disputes about material involving living persons when that material appears outside of article space and is not directly related to article-content decisions.
 * Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard

BS template scripts
Hi Pldx, some time ago I modified the scripts on WT:RDT so that they could add  as well. However the scripts don't seem to be working; could you help fix the scripts and/or run them? Thanks, Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 11:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 07:48, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Notification of RFC for Korean MOS in regard to romanization
Hello! You contributed in some capacity to at least one of the recent discussions concerning romanization of Korean for historical topics. Should we use McCune-Reischauer or Revised for topics relating to pre-1945 Korea? If you are inclined, please contribute here. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 06:26, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

You really should listen when told "I will report you on ANI if you post something like that again"
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 12:51, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

About Joseon's infobox.
As far as I remember, you've removed the part before.(tributary system) Recently, i saw that part is re-added. What happened? Do you know about this? 183.100.92.159 (talk) 07:55, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Dear [User:183.100.92.159]. I will post my answer at Talk:Joseon. Cheers. Pldx1 (talk) 09:47, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:List of Pokémon episodes/Header
Template:List of Pokémon episodes/Header has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:54, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of
Hi Pldx1,

I'm the bot who is deleting  . I noticed your edit on User:Pldx1/Kim Hong-do in which you added  . This template is deprecated and deleted. Please stop adding  . In case you want to support the Persondata project you can help with the migration of the dataset to Wikidata at KasparBot's tool. See Persondata or contact my operator T.seppelt in case you have any questions.

Thank you very much, -- KasparBot (talk) 01:00, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of
Hi Pldx1,

I'm the bot who is deleting  . I noticed your edit on User:Pldx1/Kim Hong-do in which you added  . This template is deprecated and deleted. Please stop adding  . In case you want to support the Persondata project you can help with the migration of the dataset to Wikidata at KasparBot's tool. See Persondata or contact my operator T.seppelt in case you have any questions.

Thank you very much, -- KasparBot (talk) 01:01, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

FYI
Could you please join the discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Appeal_of_community_sanctions_placed_on_User:Barts1a Twitbookspacetube 12:33, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:False positive
Template:False positive has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:10, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of
Hi Pldx1,

I'm the bot who is deleting <tt> </tt>. I noticed your edit on User:Pldx1/Kim Hong-do in which you added <tt> </tt>. This template is deprecated and deleted. Please stop adding <tt> </tt>. In case you want to support the Persondata project you can help with the migration of the dataset to Wikidata at KasparBot's tool. See Persondata or contact my operator T.seppelt in case you have any questions.

Thank you very much, -- KasparBot (talk) 01:00, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2017: Voting now open!
Hello, Pldx1. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday 00:00, 27 November until Sunday 23:59, 10 December, UTC to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Saturday 00:00, 28 October 2017 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Saturday 00:00, 28 October 2017.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page.

I am sending you this lightweight message as a reminder because the mass message scheduled by the "Powers that Should Work Harder" appears to have been delayed, and perhaps will be sent only after the ballot. Pldx1 (talk) 19:10, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Mister wiki case has been accepted
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 15, 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kostas20142 (talk) 21:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Closed XfD discussions
Please do not add comments to closed XfD discussions dicussions, as you did to do Categories for discussion/Log/2018 February 20.

Thanks. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:07, 27 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Dear User:BrownHairedGirl. Indeed, you can erase the comment. But you can't erase the fact that "exactly ONE person has decided something akin to Diana, Princess of Wales was a British monarch". And we have now another fact: the person who erased the comment was exactly the one whose conclusion was criticized. Great process again !!! Pldx1 (talk) 09:03, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Pldx1, if you disagree with an XfD closure, discuss it with the closer or bring it to WP:DRV; but don't edit the closed discussion. If you think an error has occurred, explain why you think so, and take the simple steps to get the issue reopened.
 * Your "facts" are one falsehood:
 * this was not the action of one person.  The proposal by nominator was supported by editor . The category was tagged, and the discussion properly listed for 7 days, and notified in WikiProject Korea/Article alerts. If other editors choose not to comment, their silence is assumed to be assent.
 * And one rhetorical flourish:
 * If you have a reasoned basis for your claim that this is akin to saying akin to Diana, Princess of Wales was a British monarch, then set it out with examples of non-monarchs who are now miscategorised. Otherwise you are simply engaging in hyperbolic rhetoric.
 * -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:38, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Gwanghaegun of Joseon Hyeonjong of Joseon Hyojong of Joseon Queen Ingyeong Queen Inhyeon Injo of Joseon Queen Inmok Queen Inseon Queen Inyeol Queen Jangnyeol Prince Jeongwon Queen Myeongseong Princess Hyomyeong Seonjo of Joseon Crown Prince Sohyeon Sukjong of Joseon Deposed Queen Yu hint: it could be 6 among the 17 listed here. I am not sure that $$6<<17$$ is hyperbolic rhetoric ! Pldx1 (talk) 11:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * From what can be seen at: Categories for discussion/Log/2018 February 20, the proposal was done by User:Hugo999, not User:Hawkeye7. These users appear as being genuine different users. Moreover User:Quuxplusone has not supported the renaming, but only said that consistency would be better... and was clearly aware of the fact that a more affirmative formulation could be more misleading... and even more false. It is clear that Diana, Princess of Wales was a part of the history of the British monarchy, but it is equally clear that she was not a British monarch. Perhaps User:BrownHairedGirl should open Category:17th-century Korean monarchs and ask herself how many genuine monarchs do we have among
 * Sorry, I got one username wrong. Point still stands: 2 editors, not one.
 * Sadly, you misunderstand the role of an XfD closer. The closer's job is not impose their own view of what is right or wrong; it is to weigh the consensus. You seem to believe that I should have made a WP:SUPERVOTE, which is not allowed.
 * As to your list, I have no interest in your Diana allegories and your hinting games. If you had actually identified miscategorisations, you could and should have linked them, instead of inviting me to play hide-and-seek.
 * AFAICS, your interest is solely in making smart-Alec points, rather than in problem-solving. I'm not playing. Goodbye. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)


 * For ordinary people, who are not professional letter-soup players, a smart-alec (according to Wikipedia Smart aleck page) is "someone whose sarcastic, wisecracking, or humorous manner is delivered in an offensive, obnoxious, or cocky way". Sure, asserting that $$6<<17$$ is all together offensive, insulting, hurtful, injurious, shocking, offensive, outrageous, gross, disgusting, wounding, hurtful, galling, withering, aggressive, truculent, cantankerous, petulant, coarse, rude, rough, gross, crude, repulsive, repellent, noisome. While promoting the Prince Jeongwon to the status of a Korean monarch is ... find your own words to characterize this "interesting Original Research" ! Pldx1 (talk) 12:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Pldx1, you may have a point that the "Korean monarchs" category name is misleading at the moment. (I'm inclined to believe you because that's exactly the point I raised in the CfR discussion, as you saw.) So, if you have a better name in mind, propose the rename on WP:CFR and I'll likely bother to support it. (As long as you can identify at least one non-monarch currently categorized as a monarch, i.e., evidence that the current category name is misleading. I was not motivated enough to bother finding such an example, and I still am not. You'd have to find it for me.) And if you don't have a better name in mind, then... um, what are we doing here? --Quuxplusone (talk) 23:20, 28 February 2018 (UTC)


 * The previous names, i.e. Category: xxth-century Korean monarchy, were better names for the categories as they were used then. Now, it appears that someone has expelled quite everybody not in the List of monarchs of Korea... except from the infamous Prince Imperial Heung. Moreover, the appearance of Lê Túc Tông is surprising. What are we doing here ? Indeed, a great question. Pldx1 (talk) 11:00, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Closed XfD discussions
Please do not add comments to closed XfD discussions dicussions, as you did to do Categories for discussion/Log/2018 February 20.

Thanks. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:07, 27 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Dear User:BrownHairedGirl. Indeed, you can erase the comment. But you can't erase the fact that "exactly ONE person has decided something akin to Diana, Princess of Wales was a British monarch". And we have now another fact: the person who erased the comment was exactly the one whose conclusion was criticized. Great process again !!! Pldx1 (talk) 09:03, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Pldx1, if you disagree with an XfD closure, discuss it with the closer or bring it to WP:DRV; but don't edit the closed discussion. If you think an error has occurred, explain why you think so, and take the simple steps to get the issue reopened.
 * Your "facts" are one falsehood:
 * this was not the action of one person.  The proposal by nominator was supported by editor . The category was tagged, and the discussion properly listed for 7 days, and notified in WikiProject Korea/Article alerts. If other editors choose not to comment, their silence is assumed to be assent.
 * And one rhetorical flourish:
 * If you have a reasoned basis for your claim that this is akin to saying akin to Diana, Princess of Wales was a British monarch, then set it out with examples of non-monarchs who are now miscategorised. Otherwise you are simply engaging in hyperbolic rhetoric.
 * -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:38, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Gwanghaegun of Joseon Hyeonjong of Joseon Hyojong of Joseon Queen Ingyeong Queen Inhyeon Injo of Joseon Queen Inmok Queen Inseon Queen Inyeol Queen Jangnyeol Prince Jeongwon Queen Myeongseong Princess Hyomyeong Seonjo of Joseon Crown Prince Sohyeon Sukjong of Joseon Deposed Queen Yu hint: it could be 6 among the 17 listed here. I am not sure that $$6<<17$$ is hyperbolic rhetoric ! Pldx1 (talk) 11:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * From what can be seen at: Categories for discussion/Log/2018 February 20, the proposal was done by User:Hugo999, not User:Hawkeye7. These users appear as being genuine different users. Moreover User:Quuxplusone has not supported the renaming, but only said that consistency would be better... and was clearly aware of the fact that a more affirmative formulation could be more misleading... and even more false. It is clear that Diana, Princess of Wales was a part of the history of the British monarchy, but it is equally clear that she was not a British monarch. Perhaps User:BrownHairedGirl should open Category:17th-century Korean monarchs and ask herself how many genuine monarchs do we have among
 * Sorry, I got one username wrong. Point still stands: 2 editors, not one.
 * Sadly, you misunderstand the role of an XfD closer. The closer's job is not impose their own view of what is right or wrong; it is to weigh the consensus. You seem to believe that I should have made a WP:SUPERVOTE, which is not allowed.
 * As to your list, I have no interest in your Diana allegories and your hinting games. If you had actually identified miscategorisations, you could and should have linked them, instead of inviting me to play hide-and-seek.
 * AFAICS, your interest is solely in making smart-Alec points, rather than in problem-solving. I'm not playing. Goodbye. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)


 * For ordinary people, who are not professional letter-soup players, a smart-alec (according to Wikipedia Smart aleck page) is "someone whose sarcastic, wisecracking, or humorous manner is delivered in an offensive, obnoxious, or cocky way". Sure, asserting that $$6<<17$$ is all together offensive, insulting, hurtful, injurious, shocking, offensive, outrageous, gross, disgusting, wounding, hurtful, galling, withering, aggressive, truculent, cantankerous, petulant, coarse, rude, rough, gross, crude, repulsive, repellent, noisome. While promoting the Prince Jeongwon to the status of a Korean monarch is ... find your own words to characterize this "interesting Original Research" ! Pldx1 (talk) 12:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Pldx1, you may have a point that the "Korean monarchs" category name is misleading at the moment. (I'm inclined to believe you because that's exactly the point I raised in the CfR discussion, as you saw.) So, if you have a better name in mind, propose the rename on WP:CFR and I'll likely bother to support it. (As long as you can identify at least one non-monarch currently categorized as a monarch, i.e., evidence that the current category name is misleading. I was not motivated enough to bother finding such an example, and I still am not. You'd have to find it for me.) And if you don't have a better name in mind, then... um, what are we doing here? --Quuxplusone (talk) 23:20, 28 February 2018 (UTC)


 * The previous names, i.e. Category: xxth-century Korean monarchy, were better names for the categories as they were used then. Now, it appears that someone has expelled quite everybody not in the List of monarchs of Korea... except from the infamous Prince Imperial Heung. Moreover, the appearance of Lê Túc Tông is surprising. What are we doing here ? Indeed, a great question. Pldx1 (talk) 11:00, 1 March 2018 (UTC)