User talk:RichardMills65/Archive 2

August 2012
It may not have been your intention, but one of your edits, specifically one that you made on Suzi Quatro, may have introduced material that some consider controversial. Due to this, your edits may have been reverted. When adding material that may be controversial, it is good practice to first discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them, in order to gain consensus over whether or not to include, phrasing, etc. If you believe that the information you added was correct, please initiate that discussion. I think that you may have missed the two citations at the end of the paragraph and also the comment which says "If you feel that Quatro did not ... (or was not the first female bass player to become a major rock star), please join the discussion on the talk page at Talk:Suzi Quatro". Plus I am not sure what "firest" means, please help — Peter Loader (talk) 13:44, 7 August 2012 (UTC) 

Peter.loader has given you a WikiTrout! Trouts promote WikiFun and hopefully this one has made your day more fun. Spread the WikiFun by giving someone else a trout, especially when they are doing something silly. Happy slapping!

Spread the fun of trouts by adding {{subst:Troutalt}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!


 * Hey Peter, i wasnt able to verify the statement on either of the sources. The first was a PDF and it looked like it was an essay from someone. And the second was to a video and it wouldn't play when I tried it. It just seemed like it could be an exaggeration or puffery since I couldnt verify it in the sources. And the "firest" was just typo that Im not sure how I missed. Thanks for fixing that. I think it could help to have better sourcing but im fine leaving it be for now. RichardMills65 (talk) 23:50, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Richard, I have just accessed both the PDF and the video, and they both worked on my computer. If you still cannot access the references, there is more information about them further down the article — the lead only gives a very short summary of them. For the PDF see Suzi Quatro; for the video see Suzi Quatro.
 * The "essay" (in the PDF) was a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal, see.
 * The original wording "She is the first female bass player to become a major rock star" is quite precise (either some other female bass player become a major rock star before Quatro, or they all came after her). If you can find some other female bass player who become a major rock star before Quatro, or are still dissatisfied with the references, please discuss it at Talk:Suzi Quatro — Peter Loader (talk) 14:42, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Neutral notice of an RfC
A Request for Comment has been posted for an article on which you have been an editor. If you wish to comment, go to Talk:Isle_of_Wight_Academy.&mdash; alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:57, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

EL on Chrism
Richard, perhaps you didn't notice that the piece you linked to on herbcompanion.com is accompanied by a significant promotion of the site's magazine. I think we need to stay clear of promotional sites such as that, so I reverted your edit. If you think that was an error, let's discuss it on the article's talk page. Cheers. Joja lozzo  03:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for insight Jojalozzo, I must not have looked at herbocompanion.com close enough. After careful inspection I completely agree with your argument, and will make sure to avoid such promotional sites.--RichardMills65 (talk) 17:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

dead links
Not sure what the official Wikipedia policy on dead links is, but I generally do several things before I remove a dead link, if I do at all. These might include:


 * double-checking the link to make sure it's actually dead
 * checking to see if there is an archival copy somewhere
 * trying to find the new location if I suspect the page has moved

Just FYI; the dead link you removed at the Venera article, for example, wasn't actually dead. Cheers! Wingman4l7 (talk) 06:09, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I do apologize, must have missed this one. I agree with with your order of operations for removing dead links, and will make sure to be more vigilant.  Cheers!--RichardMills65 (talk) 17:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

September 2012
Hello, I'm Stephenwanjau. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Gathiruini, but you didn't provide a reliable source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ₫ӓ₩₳  Talk to Me.   Email Me.  02:26, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Stephenwanjau. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Githagoya, but you didn't provide a reliable source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ₫ӓ₩₳  Talk to Me.   Email Me.  02:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Gachatha. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. '' I have also noticed that your recent edits on the mentioned article and other ones in the same category have not been constructive. In some instances you have added the Kenyan map yet it was already existant while in some you have copy pasted the climate and weather condition from an article to another. Kindly consider doing more constructive edits.'' ₫ӓ₩₳   Talk to Me.   Email Me.  04:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Stephenwanjau thank you for your input, and I completely agree. I will make sure to be more vigilant when adding content, and will do my best to have all information referenced as my goal is to only do constructive edits.  Cheers--RichardMills65 (talk) 15:16, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Glad to know that you are here for the good of Wikipedia, in case you need some help leave me a message on my talk and I would do anything in my reach to assist you in the constructive editing.Happy editing :) ₫ӓ₩₳   Talk to Me.   Email Me.  16:48, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maria Goia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unionist (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) 11:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Fernando von Reichenbach (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Converter and Analog


 * Jacques Bordiot (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Conspiracy

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:31, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:26, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Alexrexpvt (talk) 15:17, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:34, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:39, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Grammatostomias flagellibarba, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Blurpeace 03:19, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Disambiguation link notification for December 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grammatostomias flagellibarba, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scaleless dragonfish (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) 11:56, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Bob Griese
You edited the See also section of the article to add a wikilink there to the Miami Dolphins. Please note WP:See also says "As a general rule the "See also" section should not repeat links which appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes. Thus, many high-quality, comprehensive articles do not have a "See also" section." So I removed the link....William 17:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up William...any input is always appreciated. Cheers!  RichardMills65 (talk) 17:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Chestnut-bellied Cotinga (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Degradation


 * Chestnut-capped Piha (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Degradation

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Removal of red links
Hi Richard. I noticed you removed red links from the Long Karabangan article, but I don't think this was in accordance with WP:REDLINK. On what basis did you consider that the red links were "unlikely ever to have an article"? The MOS section "When to create red links" (WP:REDYES) says "please do create red links to articles you intend to create, technical terms that deserve treatment beyond a mere dictionary definition and topics which should obviously have articles."

I've been working slowly through some of the villages in Sarawak, creating short articles and interlinking them. I don't want to have to go back and put links back in every time I create a new article. The red links are intentional and are in accordance with the MOS.

I'm not doubting your good intentions, but I think that your removal of red links may be based on a misunderstanding of their value to Wikipedia. As it says in the MOS, red links help Wikipedia to grow: "Good red links help Wikipedia—they encourage new contributors in useful directions, and remind us that Wikipedia is far from finished." Best regards — Hebrides (talk) 08:47, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hebrides, thank you for your input and it was indeed a misunderstanding, I have gone over WP:REDLINK and now have a better understanding of how this all works.  Thank you for you for your continued support, my only intention is to add viable content.  Once again, I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.  Cheers!RichardMills65 (talk) 16:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Unsourced material in Florence and the Machine
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Florence and the Machine. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 02:53, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You are completely correct, after careful inspection I now realize that that this is definitely poorly sourced information. I will be more conscious with future edits. Cheers!RichardMills65 (talk) 16:48, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Sailor Mouth (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Robert White and David Snell


 * The New Road (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bill Henderson

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:10, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

red links
Hi Richard,

It looks like you aren't doing this any more, but just in case. Could you not delete red links like this one? They serve several purposes: they show where new articles are needed, and when those articles are created, they're automatically linked from relevant articles through the red links. Also, when you enter a topic in search (such as the ISO name of a language), and the article doesn't exist, you can still click 'what links here' to see its context on WP. I'm not into geo, but I would assume that red links serve a similar purpose in cases like this. See WP:REDYES, if you aren't familiar w it already.

Thanks — kwami (talk) 23:42, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Kwami,I have refreshed myself with the red link process and now feel more confident in my ability to make viable edits. I will continue to be more vigilant in assuring that the content I add is viable and in accordance to Wikipedia's guidelines.  Cheers!RichardMills65 (talk) 16:38, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Red links (again)
Hello Richard, I see this has been brought up a number of times before. But you are still continuing to delete red links from articles. Here you deleted a ship link. These are valid links, given that naval ships are continued article worthy, an article will one day be written. And again here. As a Member of Parliament the subject will one day have an article, one just hasn't been written yet. Here you deleted another one, which left a mangled mess of wiki formatting, and here is another example of this. Here you delete a perfectly valid blue link for some reason. And here you actually add a couple of links that are textbook cases of WP:OVERLINKING. I've been watching your edits more closely since they've been popping up on my screen. Please take into account what people are saying about WP:REDLINK. You are actually making more work for other people now, which might lead to this situation escalating. If you are in doubt about whether a red link is a valid one, please err on the side of caution and do not delete it. Benea (talk) 16:58, 4 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Richard, following the numerous requests and warnings on your page about redlinks, I see you continue to take no notice of these requests, as this edit shows. Simply failing to mark your edits with the customary 'deleted wiki link' won't stop these edits coming under scrutiny, and again you are deleting valid redlinks. I'd link the guideline, but it's been done often enough that you must be aware of it (oh well, here it is again WP:REDLINK) so please, start paying serious attention to this. As an aside your other work, the addition of references, is also problematic in its way and has led to several reverts. To avoid wasting both your time and other peoples', please change your editing patterns, or they will start to be considered as disruptive. Benea (talk) 22:30, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Benea (talk) 23:38, 4 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Richard, I saw this matter raised at the administrators' noticeboard and I'm in agreement that this isn't productive. As you haven't stopped to explain why you are removing these links to valid future articles, and appear to be doing so without any obvious pattern or rationale, I'm afraid that doing so again will be seen as disruptive and will result in your being blocked. Please stop to explain why you're removing these links. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. You have been asked politely again and again to elaborate on your constant removal of redlinks, but still you went on here after Chris Cunningham warned you about a block. So I have now blocked you to prevent further disruption. Please take this time out to respond to this disputed editing practice of yours – either here at your talk page or at the admin noticeboard once the block has expired. De728631 (talk) 15:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you all for your input and vigilance, I have seriously and carefully looked through WP:REDLINK and now have a much better understanding of how this all works. It was definitely my fault and a serious misunderstanding, and I apologize for the excess work I have created.  I vow to be more careful with my edits, and to better familiarize with Wikipdia's polices and procedures.  Any help and support is much appreciated.  Cheers!RichardMills65 (talk) 16:48, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Inappropriate references
I notice you've been adding citations to references, but the references don't always support the claims you're tagging. For example, in this edit you tagged the sentence "It also features songs that weren't used in the show but were inspired by it." with a citation to http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0492878/soundtrack. However, that IMDb page is simply a list of songs; nothing on it supports the claims that they weren't used in the show, or that they were inspired by the show. Similarly, in this edit you cite http://en.vionto.com/show/me/Muhnot+Nainsi for the claim "Muhnot Nainsi (1610–1670) was an Indian historian who wrote many books on history of region of the present Rajasthan and Gujarat." However, that link goes to some sort of linked data visualization and exploration tool which uses Wikipedia itself as a source. It doesn't make any direct claims about Nainsi's identity and literature, but even if it did, this would be a circular reference to Wikipedia. And in this edit, you cite http://www.fishwatch.gov/seafood_profiles/species/sea_bass/species_pages/black_sea_bass.htm for the claim that "[The black sea bass] is a type of Grouper (Serranidae) found more commonly in northern than in southern ranges." That web page does indicate that the black sea bass is a grouper, but it doesn't make any claim about the difference in size of the northern and southern populations. (It does say that the southern one is overfished, but doesn't claim that its population size or density is lower than the northern.)  Could I please ask that in the future you carefully check the material in the citation against the claim you are using it to support? And please make sure that the source is reliable before adding it as a citation. Thanks! —Psychonaut (talk) 15:11, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I completely agree and will make an effort to better source any information I add. My only intention is to add viable content, and I will now pay much closer attention to any reference I include.  Cheers!RichardMills65 (talk) 16:51, 6 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm glad to hear that, and also your statement in the thread above. If you need help with improving a particular article, the best way is usually to ask directly at the article talk page. And for general questions about Wikipedia business please feel free to contact me at my user talk page. Happy editing. De728631 (talk) 17:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

You added a reference here. Not only is a link to a Google books title page seldom helpful and was it unclear how this book was supposed to reference that exact statement, but worse is that the book you linked to is published by Alphascript, which does nothing but republish articles taken from Wikipedia. Basically, you were using the Klystron article to reference the Klystron article...

Similarly, your reference here was a link to a page that copies Wikipedia.

I have no idea what you are trying to say in this edit, the link discusses the survival rate "after discarding" (i.e. a deepwater fish is brought up with a net, and then thrown back into the water: wil it survive this?), not the general survival rate. I have removed your edit here as well.

Here as well you used a republisher of Wikipedia content as a reference for Wikipedia. Please make sure that the books you use as references come from reliable publishers only.

Here you added an empty section. This should generally be avoided. And a minor point, the section header should have been "Awards and nominations", lowercase n.

Please be more careful when adding (or using) sources. Fram (talk) 09:11, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Amsacta nigrisignata (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Gaede


 * Leonys Martín (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Rangers


 * Sophia Jex-Blake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Assistant

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Your recent additions for climate
Two things here: John of Cromer (talk) mytime= Thu 07:34, wikitime=  06:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) The climate sections should go before ==References== (which should be last but one before ==External links==) - don't you check the page after you've changed it? There is a  at the bottom.
 * 2) You could include a reference/citation to the Koppen Classification work, thus
 * Usually I am very conscious about this, must have missed this one-my sincere apologies. I will try to be more vigilant with my editing efforts.  Thanks for the heads up.  Cheers! RichardMills65 (talk) 14:15, 5 July 2013 (UTC)


 * More than one! :-) John of Cromer  (talk) mytime= Sat 12:44, wikitime=  11:44, 6 July 2013 (UTC)