User talk:The Mighty Forest

Welcome!
Hi The Mighty Forest! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Firsfron of Ronchester 11:54, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charles Churchill (British Army officer, born 1656), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jacobite. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:05, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 10
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pistol Star, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Solar.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 17
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
 * Stingray Nebula
 * added a link pointing to Emission-line star
 * Thuban
 * added a link pointing to Northern

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Manuals of style
Hi. Although I acknowledge the good-faith edits, can you tell me why you deleted all templates (via MOS:APOSTROPHE), ,   and  in Dolores O'Riordan's article? In addition, we reproduce the quotations as they appear in the source, per MOS:PMC, including the en dash. Oroborvs (talk) 17:25, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Regarding the —I’m assuming you mean the ones on the ? I deleted them because are not needed since the italicising apostrophes can go within the brackets (rather than on the sides where it can get muddled with the possessive apostrophe), thereby obviating the need for the apostrophe template. Not sure why the curiosity about this because I thought how I did it was fairly obvious. Also, having   &   codes aren’t necessary if the actual characters they represent (– and —, respectively) are present. Again, this is obvious. The Mighty Forest (talk) 17:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I prefer what I wrote myself, which is more readable: Billboards, rather than what you do: Billboards. Either way, I will add to the article again. If users prefer to write en dash and em dash manually, for reasons of habit and choice, I don't see where the problem is. Stop putting em dash (—) into quotations that do not have any in the sources. Thanks. Oroborvs (talk) 19:35, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The link you provided (MOS:PMC) refers to wording only; that has nothing to do with punctuation marks (such as em dashes and em dashes), which don’t change the meaning or intent of the quote/comment. Preserving typographical styles employed by outside publications isn’t recommended. According to the guidelines (see MOS:CONFORM), it says:
 * '''A quotation is not a facsimile and, in most cases, it is not a requirement that the original formatting be preserved. Formatting and other purely typographical elements of quoted text should be adapted to English Wikipedia's conventions without comment provided that doing so will not change or obscure meaning or intent of the text. These are alterations which make no difference when the text is read aloud, for example:
 * Normalize dashes and hyphens: see § Dashes. Use the style chosen for the article: unspaced em dash or spaced en dash.    The Mighty Forest (talk) 11:43, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 4
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Murder of Junko Furuta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saitama.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 15
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited William Rowan Hamilton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hamiltonian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Redirects
Please do not alter direct links to be links to redirects, as you did on Starship Troopers. For multiple links you removed the correct WP:pipelink and replaced it solely with a link that causes a redirect back to the original link. For instance you altered the link of fascist to just link to Fascist which is a redirect back to Fascism. These are not link corrections. I note you've been doing the exact same thing on multiple articles, altering direct pipelinks to be links instead to redirects, such as on Birdboy: The Forgotten Children and others. Additionally, please do not alter the variety of English that an article has been written in, per WP:ENGVAR and also be aware of WP:OVERLINK where we do not link to common English terms such as star, sun, grass etc. Canterbury Tail talk 12:56, 24 November 2021 (UTC)


 * regarding your quote:
 * ”For instance you altered the link of fascist to just link to Fascist which is a redirect back to Fascism . These are not link corrections.”


 * Yes, they are. I quote from WP:NOTBROKEN:


 * It is almost never helpful to replace redirect with redirect .


 * So, in the case of facist (which the rules above state is not a helpful link, as opposed to facist ), you are telling me I’m incorrect removing the target link. Based on your suggestion, which clearly conflicts with what it says in the manual of style, my conclusion is you clearly lack an understanding of the rules. I suggest you familiarise yourself with the rules on redirecting (I’ve helpfully provided a link above), and then come back to me and apologise for your suggestions, which I will disregard.
 * The Mighty Forest (talk) 16:58, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

WP:DONOTFIXIT
Do not change things like  to , because it changes the appearance of the page. Why should "Pope" be in blue when "King" and "Count" and "Bishop" and many other titles on the same page are not when they are used in the same way, i.e. ? Srnec (talk) 14:28, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Please quote the specific section of WP:DONOTFIXIT that states, for example, the title of the Pope, the very thing that’s actually part of the article title, cannot be included in the link.


 * And also, here’s the thing: You say “why should it be in blue?”, yet the actual Wikipedia page includes Gregory VII’s occupation title. (Curiously, I will concede, Henry III of England does not include King.) I appreciate you want consistency, but Wikipedia is itself inconsistent, as I’ve just shown. Here’s the thing: if you want to go ahead and change it for whatever reason, go ahead and change it but please don’t message me again with a link to an editing guideline which doesn’t even back up what you’re saying. I’m familiar with the rules. Thank you and goodbye.
 * The Mighty Forest (talk) 22:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)


 * The titles of articles are not any indication of what should appear in prose or what should appear in blue. You changed:  to   which is clearly against the guideline that "there is usually nothing wrong with linking to redirects to articles". Srnec (talk) 00:09, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Again with your assertions—this time about how article titles aren’t any indication of what should appear in blue. Okay. What specific editing guideline are you citing?
 * You are, however, correct in that it says "there is usually nothing wrong with linking to redirects to articles" but the context of that is to emphasise avoiding piped links where unnecessary, e.g.  versus  . In this instance,   versus   does not have a piped link. So, therefore, this is merely an issue of style: it has nothing to do with the specific guideline you’re citing. Maybe there’s another rule, but I’m not aware of it.
 * You’re bugging me over a linked word which, in the grand scheme of things, does not warrant a discussion such as this. In fact, if you’ve got such a problem with it, I’ll be happy to compile a list of articles you can go around correcting, as I see a lot of ‘link vs. de-link’ inconsistencies during my browsing. I’m certainly not going to go around fixing them.
 * Additionally, here’s a thought: why don’t you just keep the redirect link to Gregory VII and leave the word “Pope” out seeing as how you’re so fixated on its omission—honestly, this is not an issue I will be dealing with. You edit the way you think is best, I’ll edit the way I think is best. Thank you and goodbye. The Mighty Forest (talk) 01:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 4
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anglo-Spanish War (1796–1808), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anglo-Spanish War.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)