User talk:UConnHusky7

Operation Dragoon
Bear with me; this is my first attempt to talk with another editor. The motivation for my edit was to eliminate what I felt was redundant information. The first three sentences of the paragraph state "A significant benefit of Operation Dragoon was the use of the port facilities in Southern France, especially the large ports at Marseille and Toulon. After Operation Cobra and Operation Dragoon, the Allied advance slowed almost to a halt in September due to a critical lack of supplies. Dragoon enabled the use of the Southern French ports." The fact that a result of Operation Dragoon was the use of southern French ports is stated twice in three sentences. I sought to correct this and I still think it should be fixed. UConnHusky7 (talk) 12:53, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I agreed with your original goal. Your edit, though, left a run-on sentence that, while fixing the initial problem, created a new problem. I went back later and cleaned it up with another edit that, I hope, achieves both of our mutual goals. I am still a little troubled by the article conclusion, which basically endorses the Churchill view that the operation was a waste. That ignores the reality that Marseilles became a hugely important logistics base for the US Army (which is why I am kind of hung up on the port issue). DMorpheus2 (talk) 13:19, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Boomer Esiason, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aaron Brooks ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Boomer_Esiason check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Boomer_Esiason?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) 09:29, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 22
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Boomer Esiason, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Taylor ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Boomer_Esiason check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Boomer_Esiason?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Your edits on the Sharpeville Massacre
Hello, I saw that you made some edits on the Sharpeville massacre. However, I have removed them because they fail to fit in thematically with the page, and within its structure. Twice, you added sections that were already on the article, instead of implementing them into whatever was there. The result was a very disorganised entry.

If you are to edit the page again please ensure that there is a structure and consistency. Cartney23 (talk) 09:01, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Danbury, Connecticut
Please don't delete citations from articles. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Old Greenwich, Connecticut, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page House & Garden. 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) 05:59, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Billy Gray (actor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pat O'Brien.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion
In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk)  00:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Please explain the reversion, I don't understand the reason for it. I cut and pasted from an NBC News article which I properly cited. Is that not allowed? UConnHusky7 (talk) 02:33, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Jerry Vale
Please explain your edits made to the Jerry Vale page in more detail. They seem very vague and biased, especially when they were initially posted by a biographer of tge entertainer. Thanks😀 Robvale (talk) 23:06, 4 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I didn't make any edits to Jerry Vale page. UConnHusky7 (talk) 17:36, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh wow, are you talking about from Dec. 2016? That's a long time ago! I don't remember exactly why I deleted them, but it's probably because you didn't provide any proof or the statements, and I couldn't find them on my own.  You have to provide references from valid sources like books, magazines, newspapers, legitimate web sites etc. to back up your statements. UConnHusky7 (talk) 20:21, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * If you provide the proof in the form of reference(s) you can restore the information. UConnHusky7 (talk) 20:27, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Arjayjay
I found your edit summary here was rude. Rush has been added without a citation or a bogus citation repeatedly. In defense of Arjayjay, hopefully this won't happen again. Iterresise (talk) 00:41, 11 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I apologize for offending you. I thought Rush, one of the greatest progressive rock artists of all time, needed no reference. I was perturbed at such an egregious reversion with no thought other than the rigid position that there was no citation. I thought that was rude. Why not tag it "citation needed"? What I prefer to do with information that bothers me that isn't cited is research the info myself for a reference, then add the citation myself. If there's no reference, THEN I delete it. To me, that's polite.
 * Perhaps you can help me with a long standing question I have about lists. I have seen many "lists" in Wikipedia where the subjects aren't referenced, as long as the subjects in the lists have their own Wikipedia articles and are linked to them. Why then does the subject need a further reference just for being in the list, when the reader can go to the subject's main article and verify the justification for the subject being in the list? Can you point me to the Wikipedia written policy on this? I can't find it. Thanks, I would appreciate it. UConnHusky7 (talk) 12:20, 23 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) 01:25, 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) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)