User talk:RuneMan3

'''If anyone would like to comment kindly on any content/subject, feel free to do so! -RuneMan3'''

Page move
I have reverted your move of Jacob wrestling with an angel to Jacob wrestling with God. This is not an uncontroversial name change, and requires discussion and consensus. If you wish to make such a move, please discuss it at Talk:Jacob wrestling with an angel first. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:22, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh well, different people have different interpretations of Scripture, and this is one of the more ambiguous pieces of it, so I will let this revert stand. Besides, it lists alternative interpretations of the event in the beginning of the article anyway, so shalom, peace. RuneMan3 (talk) 19:29, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't say that I believe your move is wrong, just not uncontroversial, and requires discussion first. So, open a discussion at the talk page and see where the consensus goes. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:22, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

March 2015
 Hello, I'm Donner60. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Dome with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 03:20, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through - in order to show that it is my deletion) because I made a mistake. You did leave an explanation and further explained it on my talk page. I just missed it for some reason. I am sorry about the mistake. Please proceed with your edits. Donner60 (talk) 03:31, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Broken bibliographies
Rune, you've been splitting off a series of articles from Dome. Unfortunately, you are breaking the bibliographies in the process. For example, History of prehistoric and ancient domes has a series of references that all point to a non-existent bibliography section, so none of the references work anymore. You need to create a reference section with a reflist template and also copy the relevant sources over from the source article, as in this revision. Then, you need to go thru the source article (Dome) and remove any sources from the bibliography that are no longer used. Thanks for editing, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:28, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Your article splits
RuneMan3, in addition to what Oiyarbepsy stated about your article splits, I want to address you with the topic of unnecessarily splitting articles. See what WP:Spinout states about "no need for haste." Ideally, WP:Spinouts should only be created when needed. We should not be unnecessarily forcing our readers to go to more than one article to read about a topic. Judging by this edit (where you asked about the matter at the article talk page), you are being careful when it comes to splitting articles. But I wonder if you are creating unnecessary WP:Stub articles and similar in other cases. Take your move of the Tooth development article, for example, which I noticed last year. I don't think that there was a need to split the content into a Human tooth development and Animal tooth development article. Per WP:MEDMOS, we generally keep the non-human animal content in one article as an "Other animals" section unless the content needs a separate article. This is the case for the other listings at WP:MEDSECTIONS as well. I will ask about the Tooth development split at WP:Anatomy. If you want to comment on it, I ask that you comment on it there to keep the discussion centralized (see WP:TALKCENT). If you want to comment about anything else I stated above, then I ask that you comment here at your talk page to keep the discussion centralized. Flyer22 (talk) 01:24, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liquefaction, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dissolution. 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) 11:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Point of View tag on 'Shift work' article
About the POV tag on the Shift work article, can you be more specific as to what's wrong? I was thinking of removing the tag. Willondon (talk) 02:16, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

September 2018


A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. &thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 21:47, 10 September 2018 (UTC)