User talk:Tpwissaa

Nomination of Symbols of New England for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Symbols of New England 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/Symbols of New England until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 16:02, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Massachusetts General Court, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Old State House ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Massachusetts_General_Court check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Massachusetts_General_Court?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). 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) 09:24, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Typo on Regions media
Hi, there's a typo on the caption for the Regions of New England map. Number 30 should be "South County" rather than "South Country." I would have corrected it but I don't know how. Incidentally, the phrase is "once in a while". —Dilidor (talk) 14:51, 22 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for your help! I'll make the changes. --Tpwissaa (talk) 23:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)
 * Demographics of New England ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Demographics_of_New_England check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Demographics_of_New_England?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added links pointing to English, French, Portuguese, Spanish, Algonquin, Congregationalism, John Smith and American Indians

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:39, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Massachusetts Provincial Congress, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cohasset, Dedham and Benjamin Church ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Massachusetts_Provincial_Congress check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Massachusetts_Provincial_Congress?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 10
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Massachusetts Provincial Congress, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Benjamin White and Benjamin Church ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Massachusetts_Provincial_Congress check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Massachusetts_Provincial_Congress?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:05, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Province of Massachusetts Bay, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constitutional convention ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Province_of_Massachusetts_Bay check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Province_of_Massachusetts_Bay?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:09, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 25
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Humphrey ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Lieutenant_Governor_of_Massachusetts check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Lieutenant_Governor_of_Massachusetts?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Pittsfield, Massachusetts
I'm not understanding this edit at Pittsfield, Massachusetts. The parameters typically go from larger to smaller. For example, country...state....county. You added New England after the county level. Why? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:33, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * @Magnolia677, My rationale was that since it is more of a cultural designation and not an administrative one I should put it last. I am happy to move it if you think it is better suited above Tpwissaa (talk) 18:38, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message here and on my talk page. Your edits were all made to the infobox of various New England settlements.  For that reason, you need to follow the guidelines specified by Template:Infobox settlement.  When listing "subdivisions", you go from largest to smallest (that's why it's a subdivision).  At Cranston, Rhode Island, for example, it went country -> state -> county.  Then you added "New England" as the next subdivision.  I hope this explains things.  Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:23, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

I noticed your recent edit to Provincetown, Massachusetts does not have an edit summary.&#32;Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:


 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision differences
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting. ''Ditto for many other edits you have made. You appear to be on a campaign, and most of your edits are being undone. You may want to slow down and reconsider your approach.'' Eric talk 23:23, 23 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Eric, thank you for your message. I usually always include an edit summary, don't know why I didn't today with these edits. Thanks for your help, I appreciate it. Tpwissaa (talk) 23:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

April 2020 - New England as Region in Template:Infobox_settlement
Hi : --

I support the addition of New England as a Region for the pages where you added it.

Regarding : statement New England is not a "subdivision" of the county, per Template:Infobox settlement) and  and others... I read the Template:Infobox_settlement thoroughly and I can find nothing there that says that a Region cannot be listed as a subdivision. It's not required to be a subdivision of the County as Magnolia677 seems to think. The subdivision attribute is indeed able to be used for Region. It's clearly mentioned.

New England and North Shore (Massachusetts) are both Regions of Massachusetts, and I completely agree that adding one (or even both!) to the Infobox for municipalities is useful & helpful. Both are also listed on List of regions of the United States

I also noted that Magnolia677 has been somewhat arbitrary in the reverting of your additions, and hasn't replied back to your request for comment in more than three weeks.

Please let me know if you'd like any help in re-applying Region to any/all of those Massachusetts municipalities.

Stefan01902 (talk) 22:34, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your offer to help this editor. A "sub division"--by definition--is a place smaller in size than the place preceding it, that is, "a secondary or subordinate division" (see also Subdivision (land)).  This necessarily means a list of subdivisions must go from largest in size, to smallest in size, and is the reason every Wikipedia article about a settlement in the United States follows country > state > county > township > city, as does the example at Template:Infobox_settlement.  My concern with Tpwissaa's edits was twofold. First, they added "New England" as a subdivision of a place much smaller in size than New England.  Second, "regions" are rarely added to infoboxes.  A discussion took place at Talk:Waterbury, Connecticut where three experienced editors opposed these edits.  Finally, you wrote that Magnolia677 "hasn't replied back to your request for comment in more than three weeks".  Please see above where my response began "Thank you for your message here and on my talk page".  I hope this clarifies the issue.  Magnolia677 (talk) 08:48, 17 April 2020 (UTC)


 * , Thank you for your comments, I apologize I have not been able to respond for a few days. Stefan01902 I agree that there should be a regional entry in a "Settlement infobox" whether it be a smaller designation such as your example of "North Shore" or a larger cultural/geograpahical region or a combination of the two. This seems like an obvious help and good reference to the reader of an article. Magnolia677 I see your worries, especially regarding the formatting from larger to smaller. I however remain firm in my opinion that these edits should be included. I understand what you are saying in the other Talk page discussion about clutter but the template includes the "region" section in its formatting and it seems like such a minor addition (and one that is useful to the reader in my opinion). Is there a place to discuss this further? Tpwissaa (talk) 19:09, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * This has already been discussed at Talk:Waterbury, Connecticut where User:Meters, User:John from Idegon and myself opposed these edits. You are welcome to start a WP:RFC on the Waterbury talk page. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:56, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I notice that User:MattCHB has started adding New England to infoboxes as well. A firm consensus regarding this may be necessary. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:44, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response. I agree there should be a consensus on this matter. I am open to discuss this further in whatever forum you all view as necessary/sufficient.Tpwissaa (talk) 21:56, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I have been adding "New England" for the sake of consistency and was not aware this "consensus" mentioned was agreed upon. New England cities such as Boston and Worcester have had "New England" listed for years, without any complaint or question. Adding "New England" to other places adds consistency, not clutter. An argument can be made that it should be above State as Region is larger than state, but again I was following consistency and the precedents set on cities such as Boston's infobox. I support adding "New England" somewhere on every city and town for the sake of consistency, as that follows the existing precedents practiced on many New England locations for years before my edits. MattCHB (talk) 22:01, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree. If it is a formatting issue then I am fine moving it up in the list (so as to keep with Large to Small). The "region" slot is already in the infobox template, it is nothing new, and as you said many places have been already using it for some time now. Whenever I added it to a settlement infobox it was what I saw as being in line with convention, something that is already allotted for in the template, and a useful bit of info for an infobox.Tpwissaa (talk) 22:15, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Also just want to add, when I brought up the "consensus" I was referring to a conversation that would end an edit war.Tpwissaa (talk) 22:18, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry to ping again. I want to clarify my earlier response. I was referring to the subdivision list as already existing in the template, and the convention and practice of adding region to the infobox.Tpwissaa (talk) 22:29, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for agreeing. If anything, not adding New England would be inconsistent and unconventional. Additionally, I would like to point out the practice of including not only "Region", but also having "Region" below "County", is not just a practice for New England places, but exists on many other cities' infoboxes as well (see New York City or Los Angeles). It is also fairly important information, as New England is a strictly defined region with a somewhat distinct culture on top of being just a geographical area. Many organizations operate under "New England" rather than under the name of a state (for example, the Patriots), and state governments frequently collaborate with each other (such as in tourism) under the title "New England". MattCHB (talk) 22:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The "region" slot is one line of information which gives the reader of an article context to the cultural and/or geographical region a settlement is in. Within the context of the US, adding geographical/cultural regions such as New England, The South, or Pacific Northwest, gives the reader further info and context. The regions added are not colloquialisms but are instead well defined and documented.Tpwissaa (talk) 22:45, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Democratic Left logo
You can't claim the DL logo is your own work. It's a non-free image, so can't be hosted on Commons. And where did the text come from, do you have a source for that version? Fences &amp;  Windows  01:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the discrepancy, I uploaded it as my own image because I created it myself and didn't simply copy and paste an image I found elsewhere. I used an image from their website as a reference. Does this help/answer your question? Please let me know. I can always remove the writing and keep the image, however the reason I didn't is because the image and writing appears to be a part of a larger logo (image and writing). Tpwissaa (talk) 14:28, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

I realize I uploaded the image wrong, since it is an organization's logo. I see that it is nominated for speedy deletion, which is fine with me since I uploaded incorrectly. Can I help with this process or change the upload to reflect that its an organization's logo?Tpwissaa (talk) 14:45, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not a Commons admin, but I nominated your upload for speedy deletion as non-free. A version you edit would still not be allowed by their rules.
 * Why would you add wording to the DL logo? We need to show their actual logo, not your interpretation of it. Fences  &amp;  Windows  09:38, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, understood. I didn't add the words as an artistic flourish but used an image from the archived DL website as a reference. https://web.archive.org/web/19991105001011/http://www.democratic-left.org.uk/   The image I used at reference is at the top of the page. I have no desire to input my own artistic ideas, I was just trying to have the best representation of the DL logo possible.

Please see Talk:White Southerners
Hello, I wanted to let you know that I reverted your recent addition of a table to the article White Southerners. Please see the talk page discussion that I have started at Talk:White Southerners. Thank you. - Aoidh (talk) 00:39, 21 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the comment, I'll reply over on there. Tpwissaa (talk) 00:43, 21 July 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) 01:40, 29 November 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) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 30
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Matthew the Apostle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Athos.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

April 2024
Hello, I'm Remsense. I noticed that you recently removed content from Luke the Evangelist without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Remsense 诉  15:08, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I did not remove any information from these pages, I only added links to already existing information. Why did you revert all these edits? I see you said it was due to an inaccurate edit summary. However I described each edit as "reformatting links" which seems to be accurate considering that is what I did. Can you please explain these reverts? I think such links are helpful to readers and am not sure for the reason why you did mass edit reverts. Let me know. Respectfully, Tpwissaa (talk) 15:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello! There are a few things at play here, which I did myself unhelpfully summarize, my apologies. I would characterize the link of "Apostle" (for example) as WP:overlinking: this is likely a link that exists elsewhere where its target may have additional context, and too many links of the same target or too close to each other can be deleterious to the readability of an article. Additionally, it's not obviously so, but your choices to link to Apostles in the New Testament border a bit on WP:easter eggs, where it's not clear where a link was supposed to lead before one clicked on it—in cases far more egregious than these, you can imagine how people sneak opinions in by pointing links different places It was all very borderline though and arguably more my style than anything, so I should have certainly been more patient, apologies. Remsense  诉  15:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response. I understand your reasoning. Thank you for your prompt response. I assure you I was simply trying to aid the reader, often I feel infoboxes tend to be underlinked/delinked to the point where their purpose of easy navigation for the subject is undermined. No need to apologize. Take care, Tpwissaa (talk) 15:41, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You as well, thank you for contributing. Take this as a lesson that folks like me mess up often.  Remsense  诉  15:43, 7 April 2024 (UTC)