User talk:Thereisnous

April 2016
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Cryonics. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Alexbrn (talk) 16:13, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Fringe science
-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by JzG (talk • contribs) 19:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Suspended animation into Cryonics. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. If you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 04:03, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Telecom and Coherence. 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) 10:40, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Spider, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Portia. 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) 10:43, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Bare URLs
Please read WP:BAREURL and provide complete citations when you add refs. See what I did here.

Also please don't repeat refs. use a ref name and like this.

Also techcrunch is a wiki and is not a reliable source. Thx Jytdog (talk) 09:43, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the recommendations. As far as I know, there are bots which are automatically replacing bare urls, The same thing with ref names. No need to waste time to do it manually --Thereisnous (talk) 09:51, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Please actually read WP:BAREURL.  Neither of your assumptions is true.  People format refs.  There are automated scripts people use to do that, but people do it. Jytdog (talk) 09:56, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I know about WP:BAREURL. But it's simpler to run the script over a hundred links once than manually do every link. And there are indeed bots which are doing it.
 * In any case, WP:BAREURL is an essay. Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines. --Thereisnous (talk) 10:00, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * There are not bots doing it. People go to a page and runs scripts.  You are just making work for other people. Which sucks.  Jytdog (talk) 10:06, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Please explain me why we should spend 100 minutes for 100 links if we can do the same thing in bulk automatically in 1 minute using a script?--Thereisnous (talk) 10:11, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * What do you mean "we"? You obviously never run those scripts, so you mean "other people".   These other people don't always run them on every article.  Link rot happens all the time -  I have to delete dead links all the time because the lazy editor who added them didn't provide any other citation information, there is nothing on the internet archive for the URL, and nothing to go on - so I either waste my time finding a new source or I just delete the content and source.   Slapping a URL into a ref just shows disdain for everyone else here and for readers.
 * And in any case there are scripts built into the editing toolbar that take seconds to run. The next time you edit, look up at the top edge of the window and you will "Cite" with a little arrow next to it.
 * But hey you are going to do as you will. Done here. Jytdog (talk) 10:43, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Input requested for a Talk page discussion
There is a discussion going on re improving the bitcoin article, and how the blockchain ought to be referred to with respect to bitcoin, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bitcoin#Bitcoin_is_not_the_blockchain.3B_it_is_a_blockchain

As a previous commenter on that Talk page, would invite you to consider weighing in on this conversation so that we might see if a consensus is possible. Cheers. N2e (talk) 19:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Crater of eternal darkness, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mercury. 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) 06:28, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

"Interference" from Roskomnadzor
Hi!

If you happen to read French (which could be the case given your reference to fr:Station hertzienne militaire de Pierre-sur-Haute), you might be interested by (and even contribute to...) this discussion on the French WP.

Regards. Azurfrog (talk) 11:53, 2 March 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) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Theory of Phoenician discovery of the Americas. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 12:14, 5 December 2022 (UTC)


 * If you wish to dispute this, please go to No original research/Noticeboard. Thanks. Doug Weller  talk 12:15, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 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 2023 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) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)