User talk:Synopticus

Your submission at Articles for creation: British Berrichon sheep has been accepted
 British Berrichon sheep, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-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. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:48, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Improving British Berrichon sheep
It's good enough to publish as a start, but it could use more citations other than to the Society, ideally from serious scholarly books or articles about animal husbandry. Also, if you attend events where such sheep are shown, taking your own photo and uploading it (must be your own photo for copyright reasons) to illustrate the article would be a big help. Nice work! MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Synopticus. I noticed your query at MatthewVanitas' talk regarding this article, and have answered there. Haploidavey (talk) 14:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi again, and thanks for the message at my talk. I shouldn't really try to answer a question that's best aimed at the editor who did the redirect... but I shall do so anyway. My inexpert guess is that the Berrichon is categorised as the same beast on both sides of the channel, and that DEFRA doesn't recognise a distinctively British Berricon. Additionally, WP's policy on naming might apply here; in which case you can always add your material to the redirect's target article. Haploidavey (talk) 14:23, 1 April 2017 (UTC)


 * PS: Seems to me that the Society is British but "British" is not part of the breed name. It's just a Berricon du Cher that's been bred in Britain. Of course, I might well be wrong. Haploidavey (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Double wikilink
Is it okay that Peter Harkness has a wikilink for Hoylake in both the infobox and the in the text of the article? I'm not sure what is standard practice. Thanks for clarifying.Trilotat (talk) 23:47, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Model aircraft
I rolled back your recent edits to Model aircraft since they're inappropriate in the article lede. Please consider adding new sections to the article itself. -- Jmc (talk) 19:40, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lt Col A.N.Lee, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Edward, Prince of Wales and Western Front. 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) 09:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Arthur Lee (Army officer)) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Arthur Lee (Army officer), Synopticus!

Wikipedia editor Mduvekot just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Thanks!"

To reply, leave a comment on Mduvekot's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Mduvekot (talk) 19:35, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Danson foundation for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Danson foundation is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Danson foundation until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. agt x 17:46, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of GFirst LEP


The article GFirst LEP has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "No secondary sources or evidence of meeting WP:ORGCRIT"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AusLondonder (talk) 18:33, 17 February 2024 (UTC)