User talk:Wtwilson3/Archive 1

Lost River Idaho
If you want to work on Lost River go head it was one the first pages i did. Since then in looking at maps of Idaho i found that there is a Big Lost River and Little Lost River and the lost river page is for a town not the river.

[]

[]

[]

Lazarus-long 15:50, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Chonga AfD
hi -- I definitely didn't mean to delete your comments; the version of the page I edited didn't have yours, and I was replying directly below "George H"'s comments, but I didn't get an edit conflict. How weird -- I'm sorry about that, but I certainly would never edit someone else's comments! best -- bikeable (talk) 17:20, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Prosper Marketplace, Inc. AfD
Thanks for referring me to the criteria for companies, Bill... it sounds like "multiple" published articles is a criteria for inclusion, not just one. Will keep in mind for future articles. Best regards, Andrew. --Amartinezfonts 20:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

PLOrk
No problem. Curling is a noble sport: nothing to apologize for. I agreed to let the author try to improve the page because it had been deleted for A1 (which actually means too little context, not notability) rather than through AfD. I guess I jumped the gun also. Savidan 00:22, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Absalom Image
I fixed the image which you placed on the Absalom article. I found that it was the frame attribute in the image tag that was causing problem. I saw that you had placed a help message in your edit summary. The message in the edit summary is not seen by many people. Its generally better to drop a message on a user talk page for help. Feel free to contact me on my talk page. Gaurav1146 10:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

User ACLU
Looks to me like it was speedied. I will add that this was the correct decision. Phil Sandifer 06:26, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * According to the deletion log: 02:29, 18 February 2006 Drini deleted "Template:User ACLU" (T1). I personally would not call a userbox that states "This user supports the ACLU" polemical nor inflammatory, but apparently others think differently. I would recommmend discussing the deletion reasoning with User:Drini (talk • contribs). You may also wish to start discussion at Deletion review/Userbox debates. Anyway, here's the subst'ed verstion of the ACLU template below if you want it. Of course, you could always just state your beliefs in a nice paragraph on your userpage. Hope this helps.&#160;—  The KMan  talk  15:58, 18 February 2006 (UTC)




 * Thanks! — Bill W. (Talk) (Contrib) –  February 20, 2006, 04:59 (UTC)

Chonga?
What's "Chonga"?  OhNo itsJamie Talk 04:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It was an article that went through AfD a few days ago about the exact same racially stereotyping bullshit only about hispanic girls in south Florida. — Bill W. (Talk) (Contrib) –  February 20, 2006, 04:59 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the help out with keeping the Greg Fahy article from being deleted! I was wondering if you might help by leaving a comment about Brian Wowk as well. It is pretty much the same situation as the Greg Fahy article. If you don't want to, its cool, thanks for the help on the other article! (Cardsplayer4life 23:41, 20 February 2006 (UTC))

Speedy Deletion: Music...
hehe... I was just going through the Speedy Deletion page, adding reasoning behind why certain non-notable people's articles were being deleted, and came across your quote "Once more, with feeling, first you get famous, then you get an article. Not the other way around." in response to another music-related SD. Just had to comment on how priceless your quote is. :-D Ehurtley 09:56, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

TvRage & Formatting
Well, of all the things people have said about me, being at a loss for words was never one of them. Thank you so much for the help and support. As you can see, I'm not really experienced in the finer formatting details of this place. It would be so much easier if the pages used simple HTML, but that's a whole different discussion. I added a bold intro to define it from the other discussions. As to the WP bashing, it's not my intent to disgrace or insult, merely to make a point. In prior discussions we have been branded as spam, porn, moneyscamers, and virus users. Not to mention the demands and senseless reminders posted over and over. I thought it best to show that some of those users demanding we be removed weren't exactly in the best position to judge. I really wish people would come use the site instead of just reading the front page and flipping a coin. I do have just cause for being suspicious of the deletion process. We had more Keep votes last time we were here, and we were still removed. Be behaved, stayed off, built ourselves up to meet the requirements, came back with a less-billboard look, only to end up fighting this fight over again. I don't like arguing with people I'll never meet over silly issues that even congress would settle by now. I just wish we could stay, have a head admin with unquestionable writing skills edit it to be ultimately neutral, and be done with it. Again, thanks for the support, and I would be happy to discuss anything you wish to discuss. JohnQ.Public 23:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject
Would you be interested in helping start an Idaho WikiProject? Let me know. --Faustus37 17:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

How NOT to steal a Sidekick 2
Hi! I noticed that you agreed to change your vote to Move but did not see the change. Would you be amenable to change it personally? I do not think I am qualified as I am the original editor. Link is How NOT to steal a SideKick 2. Thank you. -- Evanx  (tag?) 20:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Muffaletta
I was wondering about your claim that Emmantaler is stadard feature on Muffaletta sandwiches. Do you have a source for this? Or is this personal experience? The versions that I have seen growing up in New Orleans seem to only have Provolone. I don't think that Emmantaler would even be recognized as a type of cheese by most folks in N.O. --Jdclevenger 21:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies
Hello! I noticed that your userpage mentions that you are interested in LGBT issues. Would you be interested in joining WikiProject LGBT studies? The WikiProject's been a bit inactive recently and some of us are trying to get it going again. We'd love to have you on board! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Idaho
There is a new Wikiproject for Idaho. Hopefully the project will coordinate the creation and editing of articles related to the US State Idaho, its cities, sites, history, etc. It aims primarily to expand Wikipedia's resources on Idaho and present the state in a fair and accurate manner. Check it out. You can leave a message on the WPIDAHO talk page or on my talk page --Robbie Giles 16:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:AndreWatts.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:AndreWatts.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell (talk) (random) 21:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CampfireSongsCover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:CampfireSongsCover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Eagleisp.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Eagleisp.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. MECU ≈ talk 17:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Article move
Hello, just wanted to let you know that I just created Eagle Island State Park (Washington) so I moved your article about the Idaho park to Eagle Island State Park (Idaho) and created a new disambiguation page. I'm also fixing the links in all pages that link to Eagle Island State Park. Best, W.stanovsky (talk) 22:06, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Overpass images
I don't have a problem with the changes you made to the image layout on Overpass (except it appears you have moved all but one image to the railroad overpass section). I do not know the policy that you refer in the edit summary to as guiding your edits. Please explain. Thanks. Joja lozzo  02:42, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Cleanup invitation

 * I noticed that you recently joined WikiProject Citation cleanup, so here's an invitation to WikiProject Cleanup! Northamerica1000(talk) 08:45, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 20
Hi. When you recently edited Crossbones (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Luther (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:09, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Poète maudit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Czech (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:24, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Secret World
Because of the way you singled out that particular paragraph to be fixed instead of doing it yourself came off as very lazy to me. Like I said, all that needed to be done was some minor re-wording and suddenly future tense is now past tense. ☆ Antoshi ☆ T 22:36, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

London region
I'm sorry, but what on earth are you on about?

There is no "ongoing discussion" regarding the region's name at Talk:Greater London and the region is named "London" - that is a fact that is well sourced across Wikipedia. My removal of "Greater" from the Region field in the infobox is entirely correct and means it is now consistent with the remainder of the Greater London page and Regions of England et al. David (talk) 15:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The discussion I'm referring to is at Talk:London. For now I'll leave it alone. This is not an article I'm terribly interested in, but I won't be surprised if someone else reverts it. — Bill W. (Talk) (Contrib)  –  29 July 2024,  (UTC)


 * That discussion is not about the naming of the region, which is London, but about what article should cover what and whether new articles should be created for the region/ceremonial county/etc.


 * You haven't actually read into this have you? Neither the discussion in question nor the naming difference (which is not disputed - it is quite straightforward) between the administrative area & ceremonial county ("Greater London") and the region ("London"). So, no, it won't be reverted again. David (talk) 18:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Your signature needs subst!
As of my edit of Templates for discussion/Log/2013 May 1, or later edits, you'll see it looks like you edited at exactly the same time as the last editor. This is because your signature uses 29 July 2024, instead of  , . Mark Hurd (talk) 02:30, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip. Funny no one ever mentioned it.  I've been using the same sig for so long it took me a while to figure out how to edit it. — Bill W. (Talk) (Contrib)  –  14 May 2013, 03:12 (UTC)
 * FYI - That didn't work either. Because then my sig always showed the time I saved the sig page.  Took me two days to realize all my postes were dated "4 May 2013, 03:12 (UTC)".  So I've just taken the date out completely.  I wanted to have the date small like the links, but that does not seem possible just now. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 20:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

You are now a reviewer and rollbacker
Hello Wtwilson3! I just noticed your anti-vandalism work, and after browsing your contributions I was impressed enough to give you both reviewer and rollbacker user rights. The rollback right will enable you to use some of our more powerful anti-vandalism tools, such as Huggle and STiki. Take a look at WP:RCP for a more detailed summary. I'm including some boilerplate messages about your new user rights below, but feel free to get in touch if you have any questions about them. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 11:44, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Rollback granted
I have granted rollback rights to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 11:44, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also: — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 11:44, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.


 * Thank you for your confidence. I have been trying out the new tools, and it's just made me more interested in fighting vandalism.  Thanks again. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 20:08, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Property, Marx Section
My "Marx" section on property cited the chapter in Capital it summarized and gave a quote from that chapter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.200.137.96 (talk) 20:12, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I understand what you're saying, but the quotation as presented in the article did not make it clear what work it was from. You should include a citation, or some explanatory text.  I will also put something on the talk page at Property so we can have input from other editors. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 20:23, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

NRA pres
the "Monday" referred to in the news stories was several weeks ago. Ive added some refs (in addition to this one)

(published 14 days ago) http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/01/nra-to-get-new-president/ Gaijin42 (talk) 21:46, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the references. Sorry for the misread on the news articles. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 22:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

GAGA
I work for the "Haus of Gaga" and Interscope Records gave me the entire list of charts for Lady Gaga songs. You are spreading fake informations, so you should just change it, or well Gaga & Interscope are going to sue the entire site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muglergaga (talk • contribs) 16:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Simply provide a source for the material and the edits will remain unchallenged. Wikipedia wants all our articles to be as accurate as possible, and our policy at WP:SOURCE tries to ensure that.  Please make your edits in compliance with that policy and there will be no issues. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 16:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

User Comment
Hey pls don't edit my boxing page any more. Belive me I know what I am doing. thx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abcdefgh100 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

thx for the information, Bill. but if a fight is over, then I am deleting it. that's how the game is going. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abcdefgh100 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Please remember that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. This sort of problem could be avoided if you used an accurate edit summary every time you save an edited page.  This will explain to other editors what you are doing. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 17:23, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Pending Changes on Clive Holland
Note that pending changes was activated on Clive Holland specifically to ensure this BLP-violating poorly-sourced contentious information was not restored without consensus. Please do not accept such edits to the article in the future unless consensus determines that the wording and sourcing are appropriate. Thank you, --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:35, 28 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I wasn't aware of the history. I'll make sure that it doesn't resurface. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 17:44, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It can be tricky when a source is included, but in this case the source is very poor and the addition appears to be aimed as an attack. Thanks for keeping your eye on the pending changes! --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 19:44, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Philly Building Collapse

 * No prob... fixed it. Thanks for the notice my friend. Kennvido (talk) 23:19, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

WP:BITE
Good spot, and my apologies. I was dealing with a sudden tranche of vandals and got mixed up. Thanks for calling me out! — &mdash; PretzelsHii! 19:44, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem at all, it happens to everyone. I was particularly surprised when I came to your talk page and found the Help Project newsletter. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 19:48, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

About users blanking their own talk pages
Hi. I just thought maybe you'd want to know this: BLANKING Kind regards, — Ginsuloft (talk) 16:31, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but that page also says, in part, "A number of important matters may not be removed by the user—they are part of the wider community's processes ... any other notice regarding an active sanction ... For IP editors, templates and notes left to indicate other users share the same IP address." And this blanking included several instances of these types. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 16:50, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

WP:DTTR
Ouch! You've used a template to send a to an experienced editor. Please review Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humor. Best wishes. Canuck 89 (chat with me) 11:30, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, you made me laugh. Sorry about that. I accept my trout. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 11:33, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

SPLC
Thank you for letting me know. I was trying to make it all look right and thought I had better do it in easily undone baby steps instead of trying to do too much at once and screwing something up. Boomermike (talk) 17:52, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Cher
Not sure how to use this talk back page, but I was questioning your undo-ing of my edit for the Cher page. Unless you can make Caesar and Cleo fit the context (which neither name is mentioned in any text on that page any other time other than Caesar's Palace) it doesn't work. Sonny's real name was Salvatore and Cherilyn was Cher. So if you're going to take away my edit at least put their real names down. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.158.76 (talk) 21:54, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Caesar & Cleo is mentioned 4 times in the article and the usage you removed fits well within the article. The best place to discuss this is the Cher talk page.  If you want to discuss this further, please do it there so all concerned editors may participate in the discussion. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 22:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

New Age Shrine image
Dear Wtwilson3: The problem is not that two images cannot coexist. The poblem is that the Shrine image is completely out of place in the Political Movement section of the New Age article. By contrast, the AmericaSpeaks image relates directly to the text around it, as called for by the Wikipedia style manual; see MOS:IMAGELOCATION, paragraph three, first sentence.

If you would ike to retain the Shrine image, I suggest moving it to one of the first two or three sections of the article. - Babel41 (talk) 23:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * It's not that I want to retain the image, I just felt bad removing the image. It felt a little like biting a newcomer.  So I wanted to keep the image if possible.  I'll let the original poster decide what to do with it. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 23:35, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I remember the feeling, and still have it sometimes. But here the person was violating an unambigous Wiki rule - images must connect to the text at hand.  I have now moved the Shrine image to the History section / development sub-section.  Hopefully someone wiser in New Age spiritual lore than I will assess whether the image is worth keeping. - Babel41 (talk) 02:57, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Republic of Ireland
Re: the Ireland thing - it's pretty clear that recently the Republic of Ireland has supported America in its war effort and historically has supported the UK in WW2 (as the irish free state) So it's neutrality is a bit dubious. It is officially neutral, but is clearly in favor of some sides more than the other! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.209.212 (talk) 12:10, 5 July 2013


 * While the neutrality of the government might be suspect, the neutrality of the article cannot be. For more information, please see WP:Alleged.  Also please sign your posts on talk pages with four tildes like this:  ~ .  If you would like to add a section on controversy to the article, please discuss it on the talk page.  Thanks. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 12:22, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest on The Lone Bellow
The page The Lone Bellow was having content copied from the band's website by 12.233.96.228 an IP associated with the band's label. After I called this out, and after being reverted a couple times, a new user Dougster333 popped up and started doing the same thing. In order to avoid problems with conflict of interest and copyright violations is there anything more I could/should do? —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 18:10, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I have given the editor explanations of some points regarding conflict of interest, copyright, and neutral point of view. That may be enough to get the point across, and if the problem does continue then feel welcome to contact me on my talk page, so that I can consider whether administrative action needs to be taken. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:57, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. I have the user and the relevant articles on watch. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 12:19, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

List of LGBT characters in film and radio fiction
Hi there, just thought I'd drop you a line that I'd removed Castiel from List of LGBT characters in film and radio fiction‎. He's not an LGBT character, but various IPs are constantly trying to add him and Dean Winchester to various LGBT lists for months now. Most of this activites seem to stem from tumblr, where I'm active as well, and they have movements to try and add them to wikipedia to add legitimacy. Neither character is LGBT, as far as the actual show goes. Thanks! AD (talk) 01:20, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up. I saw so many people trying to add it, but doing it wrong, I wanted to help.  I'll be on the lookout for these in the future. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 02:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

FYI
wikt:abbreviate

My word choice was correct. Srnec (talk) 18:24, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

New Question
I don't know how to even use the talk feature...I'm really confused. How do I actually use air quotes in a new wikipedia article? Air quotes become italics, but I really just want air quotes.

Dispute comment
Hi. If it's no bother, could you weight in on this post of mine regarding another editor's content removal? I'm not expecting much understanding from them, so an outside opinion would be greatly appreciated. Dan56 (talk) 19:00, 16 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 19:50, 16 July 2013 (UTC)


 * The minor edit box is automatically checked with the MOS scripts I have uploaded (general formatting, dash fix, etc.). This removal was of an unnecessary chart publisher name, and this was also an MOS/punctuation change. Dan56 (talk) 20:13, 16 July 2013 (UTC)


 * The script should not be marking a removal of content as minor. Even if the content should be removed per a Wikipedia policy, all editors should be aware of it.  —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 20:30, 16 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm going to bow out of your edit war. Both of you are guilty in some way of exacerbating the situation, and I'm not going to be able to help.  Good luck, and I really do highly recommend you avail yourself of official channels per WP:Dispute resolution. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 21:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion re Ulster Defence Regiment
The discussions between myself and Werieth were about the Ulster Defence Regiment but have been conducted elsewhere.

There are two discussions here: User_talk:Cailil which are the most telling.

One here: Non-free_content_review

Several here (some archived): User talk:Werieth

And here:

There may even be more. There has been so much it's getting confusing but it remains that the content on Calil's page is the most informative as per this case. SonofSetanta (talk) 14:39, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Will you be reopening the case? SonofSetanta (talk) 15:39, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Me? I can't re-open anything.  I responded to a helpme notice.  I'm just a regular user, you're already dealing with at least one admin on this issue.  You should stick to that path.  Using helpme is just going to get you a regular user to help.  If you need an admin use admin help.  I'm bowing out of this.  In the future, please don't use helpme for issues already being dealt with by a sysop. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 17:24, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Paul Giustiniani
Hello Wtwilson3. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Paul Giustiniani, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''This is likely notable - I found a few mentions in Google Books. If you still want this deleted it should be discussed at WP:AFD.''' Thank you. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 12:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry
I was being rude on my talk page, that's why I deleted it. Sorry, man. Didn't mean it.Justaguy120 (talk) 18:30, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. I could see you were just venting, so I did not get upset.  I know how frustrating this all can be at first.  I also thought if I replied to your deleted comment that it might serve to remind you that nothing is ever truly deleted around here because the history is always there.  —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 18:49, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm releived yo hear that. aI realise that could've hurt someone. Justaguy120 (talk) 19:00, 23 July 2013 (UTC)



Justaguy120 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

I'm very sorry.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!


 * Really, no problem at all. Thanks for the cookie. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 00:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Stereotypes of Americans
That reeks of censorship, sir or madam.

When you say 'talk page' do you mean your own personal talk page? Because as far as I can figure out, the only way I can talk is by performing edits. Which doesn't mean that I'm trying to be a jerk, but rather that wikipedia is not extremely user-friendly, nor intuitive.

Incidentally, calling all American women materialistic sluts is something akin to calling all African-Americans lazy, stupid apes. They are both extremely insulting. It's one thing to profer opinions, but another to be sexist, chauvenist, and hateful.

Perhaps you will think I am over-reacting. But, I read a statistic somewhere which said that 80% of wikipedia editors were men. I strongly suspect that the person who wrote that portion of the article was a man. I also strongly suspect that you are a man. Not that there's anything wrong with being a man, as you can't really help it, but it does pose a problem in that you are unaware of the female perspective. You may be unaware of other perspectives as well, but you are definitely unaware of the female perspective.

But to the offending article itself: it profers an opinion which not only is deeply critical of an entire gender, is poorly cited. Some comedian somewhere called American women sluts. That is not evidence. A study would be evidence. Even a paper, with proper arguments and such, would be evidence. But so far, you do not have evidence, and this is because I'm pretty sure that you are blatantly wrong. And this is what bothers me the most: that you are wrong, and that you are influencing other people to view American women as money-hungry whores, and you really should know better.

Thank you. Dailyshampoo48 (talk) 03:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC)


 * That's how talking works around here, you edit the talk page. And I meant the article's talk page.  Sorry I was unclear.  I will respond in full there later today. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 11:31, 25 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "Bill, it is not so easy to find the talk page from the main article. Perhaps you should provide a link on the page itself.

Dailyshampoo48 (talk) 05:46, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I usually do, sorry I forgot in this case. —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 10:56, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Kirkby-in-Ashfield Central railway station
Dear Bill

Thank you for giving KiAC the once over. I welcome constructive comment, and take your action as being in that spirit.

I have two problems with what you have said and done:
 * I was taught years ago that comments on someone's work or actions should always include specifics and concrete suggestions or recommendations for action. Simply tagging an article as crap (however politely put) gives me no hint as to how to improve it. Referring me to a general tome on style is only slightly better. What would be more helpful would be to give specific examples (two, usually) of things which are crap and show how they could be better done.
 * I have gone to great lengths to apply what I understand to be "Short citations" within the Harvard referencing method (sorry if some of that terminology is imprecise.) In this I have been poked with a stick by Redrose and Lamberhurst. It is highly likely that I have made individual errors, such as mis-typed authors' names and the like, but I reckon I have remained true to the approach and that the work I have done on KiAC is true to that approach.

Could we please look at KiAC's references? There are six citations overall, all six refer to numbered pages in specific works and each of the works is given a full identification in Harvard style - author, title, publisher, year and ISBN

Please let me know what is unclear.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Best wishes, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 21:07, 25 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry the advice wasn't specific enough. There's nothing wrong with the citations per se, but I felt they would be better if they were in the more usual method of citation used around here to have the references in the body of the work and reflist at the bottom.  Also some of the reference are related to footnotes, and some are not.  If a reference discusses the subject of the article but isn't tied directly to the text in the article, it might better be called "Further reading" rather than reference.  As to the tone of the message I sent, it's a template sent by the page curation tool.  I should have then edited the message to stay within the spirit of WP:DTTR but I did not.  Sorry you were offended.  And I did not call the article crap, just suggested an improvement. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 23:36, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for responding. I was not offended, but I'm still perplexed. a. you say it would be better "to have the references in the body of the work and reflist at the bottom", er, aren't they? b. You say that "some of the reference are related to footnotes, and some are not." Without giving any example, let alone an example of one which is and one which isn't, I'm once again faced with a refined version of something vague and no idea how to improve it. The article's ref 1, gives the source of a factual statement, ref 2 gives the source of a factual statement, refs 3 & 4 give places where the reader can see evidence of the statement, ref 5 gives the source of a factual statement, ref 6 gives a place where the reader can see evidence of the statement, ref 7 gives the source of a factual statement. Please tell me which of them are and which aren't "tied directly to the text in the article". Best wishes, DaveDavidAHull (talk) 19:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry I was unclear. The article uses short citations and has the References section broken into two parts, "Notes" and "Sources."  This is an uncommon (though not prohibited) method within Wikipedia. And my opinion is that it would be better to use the method shown in WP:CITESHORT. In any case, I've said my piece and will not be concerned with this whatever you choose to do.  I can see you are an active and competent editor, and I'm sure you will continue to make this a quality article.


 * I would also like to add a personal opinion here. I don't think Wikipedia should allow so many different citation methods.  In any other publication one can expect the entire publication to cite sources in the same way.  I believe there should be one standard that we all use, to avoid confusion for editors and readers alike.  And if I were asked my opinion, I would say we should all use the standard inline citation/footnote method shown at Citing sources which is used by most Wikipedia articles. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 20:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your opinions. I'm sorry I can't get you to answer any of my specific questions to aid my learning. I have studied short citations once more and the only difference I can see between it and what I've done is that I've used a heading ("References") then two sub-headings ("Notes" and "Sources"), rather than just two headings, "Notes" and "References". I'm still in the dark about which references are and which aren't "tied directly to the text in the article". I've only been contributing in a sustained way since April, so I won't presume to comment on your personal opinions, except to ask what an article which is more substantial than Kirkby-in-Ashfield Central railway station would look like if the sources were printed out in full every time. Take Beighton Junction, for example, which I am three quarters of the way through writing, it seems to me that the list would become daunting to readers, whereas the WP:CITESHORT method presents the reader with something usable with one, clear sources list rather than some works being listed again and again. Thank you for your kind closing remarks. All the best. DaveDavidAHull (talk) 07:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Look at the references on this article: Inverness - This is what I'm talking about. One reference list with all the details in one place.  References that are used more than one, like #39 on that article are named and only appear once in the list.  This method is actually shorter and easier for the reader to understand.  The method you use is a holdover from the days of print publication when footnotes appear at the bottom of each page and the sources at the back of the book.  Considering the way an electronic article is laid out a single list is easier to understand.  Try using the "Random Article" link and see how many articles you find that use the method you use.  They are few.  I hope that helps you to understand my opinion. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 11:21, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hurrah! Hurrah! Thank you for giving me something concrete to pore over, get my teeth into and learn from. Although I'm still in the dark about which references in Kirkby-in-Ashfield Central railway station are and which aren't "tied directly to the text in the article" by the simple act of giving me an example of your general thrust you have transformed your intervention from somewhere between useless and vaguely superior to actionable and helpful. The Inverness article does look pretty damned good. Warm thanks, DaveDavidAHull (talk) 14:47, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I hereby retract the "tied directly to the text in the article" statement. That was a misstatement of fact on my part. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 16:32, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've been following this thread with some concern as I've helped Dave in the past in connection with a couple of the articles which he's worked on. Regarding the method of referencing used, I should point out that shortened footnotes are a recognised means of referencing as per WP:CITESHORT. For this reason, your addition of to Kirkby-in-Ashfield was  by an admin. More to the point, WP:CITEVAR specifically states that personal preference is not a basis on which to challenge or change citation methods. In addition, the comments about not splitting the references section into "sources" and "notes" run contrary to WP:ASL. Furthermore, there are a number of featured articles which use this method; see for example Brill Tramway and its associated articles or even yesterday's featured article. The Inverness example mentioned is not particularly helpful given that the sources are in fact urls. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:23, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your input. I am no longer following that article or concerned with it in any way.  Have a good day. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 10:59, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Deprodded Classical Music Discoveries
Hello Wtwilson3. I have decided to remove the proposed deletion tag from Classical Music Discoveries as Wikipedia policy states that anyone, including the original author, can object to the proposed deletion and that such objections cannot be overridden by reapplying the proposed deletion tag (see diff:). However, I do agree with you that the article has many issues. A quick Google search certainly brings the article's notability into question. If you still believe the article should be deleted, feel free to nominate it at Articles for Deletion and remember to notify the original author. While I understand that putting the article through AfD would consume more time than a simple PROD, it is important that we adhere to PROD policy and use it only for uncontroversial deletions. Thank You. Altamel (talk) 17:54, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Just to let you know
...that you've been mentioned on my talk page. Probably best to let me have a look into it before posting there, though - things usually go better when an outsider surveys situations like these. (Not that I've seen whatever the problem is yet, mind.) — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 13:03, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

AfD
I noticed your question on the Classical Music Discoveries AFD and wanted to let you know; AFDs typically run for 7 days unless little interest is generated, in which case they may be relisted a couple times to attempt to spark some discussion. You can read WP:AFD and it explains how the process works. -- T K K ! bark with me if you're my dog! 23:00, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Prestonmag. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Brinly-Hardy Company, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.
 * Sorry about that. My mistake. I'm having a problem with new page curation, especially any but the last 30 or so pages. I clicked this one to mark it as approved, not not to mark it unapproved. My fault entirely. Sorry. Prestonmag (talk) 18:46, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Help with Mahira Khan article
Well, thanks for guiding me..would you tell me about yourself? Zubin Irani (talk) 17:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Everything about me personally that I care to share with Wikipedia is available on my user page. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 17:43, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

BACKLOG OF THE WEEK Category:Pages with broken reference names
Hello - some editors fight off the vandal hordes, as I do repairing pages with citation errors. If I didn't - there would be a large backlog in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting and in Category:Pages with missing references list as in Category:Pages with broken reference names (more than 1500 yesterday). But it is impossible to work it alone. Do you know how to do a "Blitz" (excuse the comparision) to find willing editors to work on it. It is much more easier to repair references if you do it one hour, one day or one week ago after the errors were made instead of months and years after the error was done. Very, very difficult to find these errors.

Only with WikiBlame Search it is possible to find and repair such errors.

Best wishes --Frze > talk 08:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Backlog template made by User:TheJJJunk
Best wishes --Frze > talk 04:27, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

New REFBot
There is a suggestion on Bot requests for a new REFBot working as DPL bot and BracketBot do. I beg politely for consideration. Please leave a comment if you wish. Thanks a lot in anticipation. -- 04:27, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank You
Thank you Bill W :) LynneMerkerGibson (talk) 00:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank You
Thank you for helping me Wtwilson3 LynneMerkerGibson (talk) 00:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Citation
Hello Bill W. ! I think you made a mistake. Sure, youtube is not a reliable surce, but in this case i'am quoting the TV-Magazin "Kulturmontag" on ORF (Austrian National Broadcasting Company). Someone posted this episode on youtube. In this broadcast there is an interview with Hundertwasser's manager. I'am only quote him. Unfortunately it's all in German... Best Thorsten Brandt (talk) 20:52, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It's OK to cite the German source directly. In fact it's preferable.  There's no rule that all sources have to be in English.  In this case YouTube is not the source anyway, the actual program is.  So add the citation that way and you're golden. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 21:23, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Lilian lilith russo
Ciao, thank you for assistance. how can i see published the page in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilian_lilith_russo what step by step process should i follow? which content you suggest to add first? and what next? please assist me as it's the first time i m creating content on wikipedia, regards, giovanb.grilloGiovanB.Grillo (talk) 13:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Answered on your talk page. —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 14:05, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Muhammad Ilyas Qadri‎
Because you accepted this I'm a bit reluctant to revert you, but there are several problems. There's a mixture of dating systems, eg 1413 and 2013, the background and early life sections are from an affiliated webpage (ie not independent) - ah, "In 1401 A.H., he founded an islamic movement called Dawat-e-Islami, for the propagation of Qurānic knowledge and Sunnaĥ." is lifted from. This: "His most prominent endeavour is his book Faizān-e-Sunnat. He expertly elaborates and explains," is both pov and has the hallmarks of being copied, and is from the same website,. There's no source for "Now that policeman Mumtaz qadri has been sentenced to death and all investigation is over finally. Pakistan security agencies has not found any proof of relations between the two" and the quote following that, although it can be sourced, isn't in the cited source. Do you mind reverting it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 17:28, 28 December 2013
 * Unfortunately you misunderstand what a reviewer does. If you revert the edit, you're not reverting me, you're reverting the other editor. If you feel the changes are inappropriate then you should be bold and fix it.  "The purpose of reviewing is to catch and filter out obvious vandalism and obviously inappropriate edits...."  If a reviewer was required to fact check references and learn the history of every article there would be a huge backlog of things needing to be approved.  I will not be returning to the article and making any changes.  I see some of those things have been changed already anyway.  Feel free to make any edits you see as necessary and one of the over 5,000 editors with reviewing rights will approve it. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 19:27, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course I am, but I'm also overriding you. I thought I was being helpful explaining why I had problems. I thought the edit was obviously inappropriate, but then I've got over 100,000 edits and you get an eye for this sort of thing, espeically copyvio, so it wouldn't be reasonable for me to expect you to catch what I might catch. Dougweller (talk) 20:05, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Well you don't have to get snippy about it. Again, you can't "override" a reviewer.  That's not what reviewing is. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 20:37, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I just realized that some of this seems like I am ungrateful for your intent. I did not mean it to sound that way.  I just think that communications like this should go to the editor, not to the random reviewer that happened to see it. YMMV. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 20:45, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You're probably right, I just didn't want to tread on your feet. No need to discuss this any further, I think we are both ok now. Dougweller (talk) 22:09, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Help Needed
Dear Wtwilson3 you had helped me during the earlier times. Some people are trying to delete the page I had created called Cenk Aydin. I don't know how to protect it. Can you please contribute or show me how to fix it. These are extremely reputable sources. Need some advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kemaleer (talk • contribs) 01:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Uzbekistan
I am from Uzbekistan, I'm an Uzbek Citizen, I know the correct translation for Uzbek "O'zbekiston Qurolli Kuchlari" which is Armed Forces of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Please if you could stop the non sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Izzy.neon (talk • contribs) 21:19, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * It is not nonsense. Please read the article at WP:NOTBROKEN.  You are changing a redirect that it is not necessary to change.  The naming convention "Military of" is used throughout Wikipedia, and is often redirected.  As you can see the main article is named as you state.  Please do not change the redirect. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 21:24, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

I have changed the names for others just like other pages with similar names, any more questions missiye? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Izzy.neon (talk • contribs) 21:19, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:26, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

My {help}
Thank you for looking at my help request. 207.255.184.104 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:52, 17 January 2014 (UTC)


 * You're quite welcome. —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 15:54, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

unconstructive edits (maritime pilot) January 2014
I was forwarded a letter form you today:

"Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Maritime pilot. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators can block users from editing if they repeatedly vandalize. Thank you. —   Bill W."

I just wanted to write back to let you know that these, though they may have seemed nonconstructive, were all truthful edits. This happens to be my profession going on 11 years now as well as what I studied for in college. What is currently posted on Wikipedia is false, and I was making only a few edits. I am new to editing Wikipedia, so I am not sure if I did it correctly. I am sure that I probably made several mistakes in the process, but my information is true and helpful. Some of the information on the page is actually the exact opposite of what is stated on Coast Guard examinations. I would hate for someone to take this information and fail their test because of it. There is not much margin for error during USCG exams (90% accuracy) and every little bit helps. Here is an example where the information provided on Wikipedia would mislead someone into the incorrect answer: http://www.uscgq.com/question/deck/2/2306

If you like, I can provide copies of my licenses and certifications.

Thank you -Jon — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaAllen64 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 22 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Jon, I'd like to discuss your concerns on the talk page for the article. I have a meeting here at work that is about to start and it may be a couple hours before I can reply.  I just wanted you to know that I am aware of your message, and will respond there later today. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 21:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi again Jon, I've posted a reply to your concerns at the bottom of the talk page for the article. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 00:18, 23 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Moved comment by JaAllen64 to the Maritime pilot talk page. —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 14:39, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Paloma Faith
Hi there, I think you made a mistake by removing my edit - here's a link to the painting of Paloma, http://www.joe-simpson.co.uk/gallery/musician-portraits.aspx#.UuEM82TFJQI and http://www.joe-simpson.co.uk/gallery/musician-portraits/paintings/paloma-faith.aspx#.UuENN2TFJQI Paloma's official facebook page - https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150364854735970.376287.72691320969&type=3 Royal Albert Hall link - http://life.royalalberthall.com/2012/05/14/joe-simpson-musician-portraits-exhibition/ NME coverage - http://www.nme.com/festivals/photos/musician-portraits---joe-simpsons-paintings-of-rock-stars/249522/7/1  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparkletomato (talk • contribs) 12:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Reply on your talk page. —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 13:34, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Lukewarm (film)


The article Lukewarm (film) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No indication of how this might meet notability guidelines. Lacks citations to significant coverage in reliable sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. RadioFan (talk) 21:52, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you kindly
Thanks for the intervention on that IP user. Not sure how I attracted his attention, but he's been leaving 'friendly notes' on my personal and talk pages these last few days.

Cheers! Bagheera (talk) 23:53, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Quick thing I want to say
Yes someone the same IP as me that's why my account on community central wiki account is disabled I came to wikipedia for a new start.

I'll create an account though.

Thank you.

--69.47.197.27 (talk) 00:10, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Geku25

I already created an account --Special:Contributions/Sadukan (User talk:Sadukan) 00:15,6 February 2014 (UTC) Bad Motherfucker

Willy Monfret
Hello, You nominated the article Willy Monfret for removal, with the feedback: Does not meet any of the notability guidelines for musicians. It's quite complicated, since Willy Monfret is not only a musician but also a model, actor and the ambassador of Guadeloupe Islands. I checked the guidelines and he has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network. He had a guestmix in a Japanese radioshow. Could you tell me if this is enough? And maybe how I can solve the problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosaenv (talk • contribs) 08:59, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Answered on your talk page. —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 13:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Please help me!
Hello, my name is Vlad Mateescu, i used to edit on Wikipedia pages, but now I'm blocked, please can you put the page I Feel Free, the song from Paula Seling? Because the page I edit was delete. This is Paula manager wish, to create this page, you can verify the page, means a lot for us. The page was named I Feel Free (Paula Seling and Plan D song)

The page is here. Thanks a lot. Please help me Matei Traian (talk)


 * No. —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 12:13, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Mary I of England
Sorry, about the erroneous edit. Although the page refers to Henry VIII's sister, I apparently read it as daughter and assumed they meant Henry VII. I made a similar edit to the Execution of Lady Jane Grey page, but after double checking it, I believe that edit is accurate. At any rate, thanks for the backup. Aepryus (talk) 15:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Ranchi edits
I removed a heading which was a repetation of the text (and picture) before it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.118.144.210 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 17 February 2014‎
 * Yup. And I realized the error and removed the warning right after I sent it. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 17:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Thomas Hardy
Thank you for your edit to Thomas Hardy. After I put "In spite of this", I was thinking "Even so" would probably be better.CorinneSD (talk) 19:46, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. I really wish I had more time to help with his article.  I wrote an article for The Blinded Bird but there are several other Hardy works that I think deserve their own page but I haven't had time to work on it.  —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 21:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

SSM in USA article
Hello, I disagree with your decision. There is no same-sex civil marriage, but there is only same-sex marriage. So I deleted the word civil, and that was correct act. I think your undo is still wrongfull. 217.76.1.22 (talk) 12:48, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The word "civil" is used throughout the article to distinguish between religious marriage and marriage sanctioned by civil authorities. All marriages that are recognized by the government are civil marriages, regardless of the gender of the participants.  Further discussion on this topic should be handled on the article talk page. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 13:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Rosemary West
I have made an initial case at Talk:Rosemary West and would be grateful if you could respond. Lineslarge (talk) 18:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Response written. —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 19:04, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the way you handled this. The dialogue is much appreciated. Lineslarge (talk) 18:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Willy Monfret
I am quite flattered you picked me and asked for an opinion on this. I spent quite a long time and added my two cents worth to the discussion using tongue in cheek wording that gave me great pleasure. We need to loosen up. I don't mind stuffy colleagues answering me there with "put down" comments. I am a self-deprecating person. I would rather cherish that knowing it struck a nerve with them... I am a very inclusive person, and get worked up when people from lesser known areas like Guadeloupe get the wrong side of the stick. For me he is quite notable... seriously, no joke. Since this is our first direct contact and I was overwhelmed by you choosing my profile for a comment, here is an aspiring artist from a not well followed country - Finland- out of all places. "A.N.G.E.L. by Isac Elliot The lyrics are directed to you. And talking of Caribbean, I also dedicate to you an Icelandic major hit about exotic hot places "Bahama" by Ingó og veðurguðirnir. It was number one in Iceland for 8 consecutive weeks!!! No kidding. It is real for me as I am looking outside my window in ice cold and snowy Montreal. LOL And a song I dedicate to practically everybody who contacts me directly through Wikipedia "I Wish For You The World" by Alistair Griffin and is my true feeling and a nice wordplay I find to my user name and philosophy. "Do one act of kindness per day, you will touch the hearts of 365 people a year. Make one edit a day in Wikipedia, you might touch the hearts of millions a year. Or better, do one act of kindness and one edit per day.. in that order" werldwayd (talk) 22:29, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Frederic William Henry Myers
I saw a large number of edits to Frederic William Henry Myers by an editor with just an IP address. I noticed a few issues with syntax, punctuation, and word choice, but I cannot judge the changes to content. I wonder if you feel like reviewing the edits. I had gone through the article a few months ago and thought I had left it in pretty good shape. I also asked User talk:Parkwells to review them. He said he would but that it was outside his area. In the meantime, I thought I would ask you, too. I thought you might be interested in Myers. CorinneSD (talk) 03:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Mary Ping
Hi - I do understand the concerns of the editor who is trying to remove the designer names from the article, but have tried to explain how Wikipedia works, and that the names are mentioned because they are cited in existing sources (a published book AND a museum website from a major exhibition on the subject!), but yes, I guess we will see how it goes. Thanks for keeping a tab on the situation too! Best wishes, Mabalu (talk) 21:44, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Joan of Arc
Dear Mr. Wilson, Would you mind pointing out to me the exact unnecessary links I added? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:90.2.113.193&oldid=597517194&diff=cur Thank you in advance. --90.2.113.193 (talk) 12:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Wikilinks should only be added to the first mention of a subject/person in an article per WP:OVERLINK. I saw that some of your wikilinks were to subjects/people that had already been linked previously in the article.  If I made a mistake, please feel free to replace any links that comply with policy. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 13:43, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Mr. Wilson,
 * I just went back to the article to see the unnecessary links I had repeated & to my surprise saw that, instead of removing these links, you reverted all of my work! I believe my contribution/s to the article was/were more important than the so-called overlinking or keeping unlinked some places that should be; for instance "Les Tourelles", which was a fort in Orléans, or Gien, which you kept unlinked under the name of "Gien-sur-Loire", Saint-Loup where was the fort of Saint-Loup, Saint-Jean-le-Blanc, to a non-French reader & even to many French ones, all would be difficult to pin point on a map of France if not linked to an existing article.
 * In addition to the above, grammatical mistakes (verb tense) & misspelling of French remain. So, may I suggest that before reverting the work of a contributor who, obviously, is not a vandal, or worse, you first take the time to read the whole article & correct what you consider to be mistakes, while keeping what is valuable, instead of doing this.
 * Best regards, --90.2.113.193 (talk) 14:09, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * P.S. Please note that I had written the above before your reply, but got confronted with an "edit conflict", and simply copied & pasted my answer to you as was.


 * You are editing a protected article without being logged in. Please see this policy for details.  Your edits will be either accepted or rejected en masse based on the reviewers opinion on whether any mistakes in the edit outweigh any corrections.  All I have to say on the issue is that if you feel I made a mistake, then you should add the content again.  If you do so while unregistered one of the more than 7,000 people who are authorized to do so will review and accept or reject the edits.  If you do so while signed in then your edits will be added to the article immediately, and the user base as a whole will see them.  It is highly unlikely that I will be the person to review your edits, since I don't follow that article, I just reacted to the edit when it appeared in the pending changes list.  This is what active reviewers do, they check pending changes and accept or reject edits.  Please do as you see fit with the article based on this information.  —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 14:58, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Edits
Why are you undoing edits that remove false references? 85.247.150.59 (talk) 21:15, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Because they appear to be blanking. Please use an edit summary to explain your actions. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 21:18, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to fix Category:Pages with URL errors. 85.247.150.59 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * That is definitely worthwhile work, thank you. But the edits I reverted did not have an edit summary to explain what you were doing.  Blanking and other inappropriate removal of material by IP users is so common it's likely your work will continue to be reverted by other editors unless you explain what you're doing in an edit summary.  You can just put "removing link with URL error" or something similar and you should be fine, an edit summary does not have to be fancy prose, just a brief explanation.  And of course you should be trying to fix the URL if possible before deleting.  Sorry for the misunderstanding, and feel free to fix or remove the links again but be sure to explain your actions so everyone understands. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 22:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry!
I honestly hadn't even noticed that someone had reverted my edit and left a comment. I just made a Wikipedia account for a school project, and thought that I hadn't posted my edit correctly the first time, so I reposted. Thanks for the notice!

Sally  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spayne0870 (talk • contribs) 16:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

And again, I'm sorry!
Whoops! I noticed afterwards that I should have added to the bottom. I did not realize that there was a new section button either! As I mentioned, I'm new to the site, and only created an account for the purpose of completing a graduate school project. I stupidly have not taken the time to read through all of the rules and such, as I only had planned on making that one contribution for my course. But thank you so much for all of your help so far!

- Sally spayne0870 — Preceding undated comment added 16:38, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

SwissLife
Hello, thank you for your answer. Compared to the content I suggested on SwissLife TalkPage, I can now add the two missing data for 2013 figures (Revenue and Operating Income), with their reference, useful also for some of 2012 figures which have been restated by the company. I've updated the tabs on the TalkPage. Should I find new third-party sources, I will definitely add them to the primary ones I had suggested. In the meantime, do you think I can move on editing the entry?

Thank you --Fabienne Strobel (talk) 09:24, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your signature.
Hello there Bill! I'm not sure if you are aware or not, but WP:SIG went from being a guideline to a policy a few months ago, and as such there are a couple issues with yours I would like to discuss. The first is your use of tags that are deprecated as of HTML 4.0 Transitional, are invalid in 4.0 Strict, and are not part of HTML5 at all. There is a section (WP:SIGAPP) in the policy that says we should try to avoid using deprecated code in our signatures. My bigger concern is that your signature is confusing per WP:SIGPROB where as your username is Wtwilson3 yet your signature says Bill W. The reason this is such a big concern for me is that I see you like to assist new editors that are using Help-me (Which I have a cool userbox to help monitor the category if you're interested)  May I suggest changing your current signature:

"Excellent examples removed for easier reading."

Thanks! If you need any further assistance, I'd be happy to help you where I can. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 14:21, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up Technical 13, I didn't know that policy changed. Also, I did a little research and found that &amp;nbsp; is also deprecated so I've added &amp;#160 instead.  What do you think? —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 16:49, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Absolutely fine by me... Looks good, the only concern is that the C0C0C0 color is a little light. Mind darkening it up a little or adding a contrasting background?  The color ratio is so low, I didn't even see it until I saw the source in the edit window, so it will be hard for people with vision problems to see. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 17:03, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Again, good advice. I've darkened it up a few shades. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 21:39, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Shuttleworth & Ingersoll
Hi, I notice that you were involved in an AfC discussion concerning this article. With the creator's permission I took a hatchet to the draft, added a few secondary sources and published the article. This is a courtesy note to let you know that it's been published and reviewed and that your continued input and participation are, of course, always welcome. Many thanks, -- — <b style= "color:#085;">Keithbob</b> • Talk  • 15:44, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Template:Population
Your request to discuss hasn't worked. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 18:33, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I changed one of his edits back.  But since the rest of the edits are legitimate, if extensive, I left them to the purview of the regular editors of that template.  The new edits he made are not an attempt to overrun the AFD discussion, so they are just regular contributions to be considered and re-edited as necessary. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 19:11, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Help merge my 2 user accounts.
can you help me combine my 2 user accounts into one? just created both today so there is no significant history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SongSlayer (talk • contribs) 18:18, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

just created today so no significant history. help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SongSlayer (talk • contribs) 18:20, 23 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. Please remember that Wikipedia editors are volunteers just like yourself, and as such we have lives outside Wikipedia.  Sort of.  Sometimes.  ;-)  Unfortunately I don't have much time to respond right now either.  Here is the policy on having multiple accounts.  I could not find any information on merging 2 accounts, so I don't know if that's possible.  At this point I recommend you post a message on the talk page of the account you want to keep and place the template Admin help at the start of the message.  Explain that you did not know it was against policy to have two accounts, and ask them how best to resolve.  Hope that helps.  Real life calls.  Have a good day. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 20:13, 23 July 2014 (UTC)


 * More info: I just found this statement here: "It is not possible to merge user accounts on the English Wikipedia...." So that answers the question.  You should pick an account you want to use, and ask that the other one be deleted.  If you continue to use both accounts you will be violating the sockpuppet policy. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 21:28, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Premakeerthi de Alwis
<<Message content removed by User:Wtwilson3>> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.135.146.65 (talk • contribs) 13:59, 8 August 2014‎ (UTC)
 * I have hidden your message because it is simply a copy of what you wrote on the article talk page. I will respond there when I have the chance. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 17:12, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


 * So far the Government of Sri Lanka has not conducted any investigation on Premakeerthi de Alwis’s murder or whether it was carried by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna or not. Hudson Samarasinghe, has been blamed by Nirmala de Alwis who has found about the details of murder through her research work; she has publicly told this in her book “premakeerthini” and even informed the President recently in a function held to name road in Colombo in Premakeerthi’s name. Somehow Sri Lankan Government has been reluctant to conduct a proper investigation since Hudson Samarasinghe is a loyal journalist of the regime. Meanwhile Ramya20 is alleging the JVP on murder of the journalist in order to save, Hudson Samarasinghe’s name. The reference she has given in the Wikipedia article never mentions that JVP murdered the journalist. This is false information provided to mislead the reading public by Ramya2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.88.145 (talk) 05:23, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the information. However I have no interest in helping to settle this dispute beyond what I have done in explaining the options.  Someone still needs to take the steps I outlines in my message on the article talk page.  You can stop presenting your evidence to me, I will not be the arbiter in this matter. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 11:33, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


 * pls see the talk page of Premakeerthi de Alwis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.135.223.206 (talk) 09:27, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the contribution to Bill W.   against factual vandalism. you all have done impartial justification to innocent journalist. Thanks  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.164.107 (talk) 11:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

final warning? when was the first ?
Final warning ? When was the first warning. I am allowed to do as I wish on my talk page so long as I am not disrespectful, or cursing, or defaming. 68.50.21.190 (talk) 12:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)


 * The prior warning was when you were blocked from editing that page for 3 weeks due to abusing the privilege. Also, policy states that warnings need not be progressive.  There are limits to what you can do even on your own talk page, and removing current warning messages and block notices is one of the things that is not allowed. The policy clearly states, "A number of important matters may not be removed by the user—they are part of the wider community's processes - Declined unblock requests regarding a currently active block and confirmed sockpuppetry related notices." Blanking the page removes content covered under this policy. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 12:58, 21 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Leave my talk page alone. There is no block so I may remove templates. Anything that needs to be seen is in the history anyways. Your last comments to me were an insult of my English. Go bully someone else. Actually dont do that. You should instead learn to be considerate. 68.50.21.190 (talk) 11:50, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry you feel insulted. I have reported you to AIV and we will let an administrator decide the matter. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 13:00, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello. The IP is correct; as per WP:TPV and WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages.  As a friendly reminder, while we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors- from removing messages or warnings from their own talk pages.  The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or shared IP header templates (for unregistered editors).  However, it should be noted that these exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system.  Thank you, — Kralizec! (talk) 13:46, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the clarification. —&#160;&#160; &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 13:48, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Bauer Media Group
Hi there - I understand what you wrote on my talk page about affiliations, but I'm only copy and pasting off our corporate website onto the wikipedia page to ensure that it is all accurate. Why is this not working? Thanks Bmcomms (talk) 13:58, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Bmcomms. You clearly did not read any of the policies I linked to in my message on your talk page.  First of all, Wikipedia is not a promotional web site, it is an encyclopedia.  Second of all, your corporate web site contains a copyright notice, therefore the content cannot be used on Wikipedia because is is not released by a proper license.  Please read the policies and procedures linked to previously, and then ask any questions not answered there. I would prefer to continue this discussion on your talk page, or the Bauer Media Group talk page.  —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 14:12, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

My {help}
Thank you for looking at my help request. \/ Copied and pasted! (: User:EKLBen-418 — Preceding undated comment added 11:17, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Draft:LaPorte CPAs and Business Advisors
Hi Wtwilson3,

I took a look at the comment you made to the Laporte Wiki site https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wiki-edit-king/sandbox In reviewing the user's sources and my understanding of the finance industry, LaPorte CPA does seem to be noteworthy at a national level. All of the credible sources provided by the user are in fact large and noteworthy accounting publications. If there is additional information you could pass along I could respond to the author with comments for improvements. Seeing that LaPorte is mentioned in notible Accounting Publications year after year, wouldn't that provide credibility for posting? Thanks for your assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.38.99.229 (talk) 16:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)


 * No, it would not. Please READ the corporate notability criteria and then explain under which criteria this firm would be notable.  Also, remember, you don't need to convince just me.  You need to have enough editors to form a consensus.  (Note: That link on consensus is also there so you will go and read the policy.) —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 16:37, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

New Comment
Hello :-)

Thank you for your message. The splendid editors of wikipedia have edited the page concerned having followed the rules and taken note of my comments on the talk page. I am still regarded with suspicion as regards my information and identity but I guess that's in the wiki rules too. It's hard to cite sources when they are personal - for instance: date of birth of son changed by someone who says they are the boy's mother - please read rules on neutrality etc. It's also hard to see blatant mistakes about your own life and to face the fact that on wikipedia anyone can change those details but you. As a university tutor I am very familiar with Harvard referencing and the like and I know one can't simply cite yourself or your mother-in-law: [ref: my nan, in the kitchen, 1970s]. Having had a discussion with my friends on facebook, many of whom have wikipedia pages about themselves, I found that some actors are simply writing their own pages and don't give a damn about the rules. I obviously spent too much time in Sunday school - I can not tell a lie. Not often anyway. The only thing left on the Paul McGann page which I think needs changing is the place of birth, which is wrong and I have explained about it in talk. I can't cite an article with the information in it. I know because I stood outside the house Paul was born in with his mother and she pointed it out to me. It would be better therefore if the article on wikipedia simply said he was born in Liverpool, UK because he was not born in Kensington. Picky I know but if that detail is in there then why not add the real detail? Why? Because then that means another sentence has to be written to explain that the family grew up in Kensington L6, 2 miles away from the house Paul was born in near Lark Lane L17.

Sorry for rabbiting on. I will definitely help with some basic editing on pages that need help. If I start that way I'll learn as I go along. It's an incredible job that the wiki editors and contributors do. Absolutely mind boggling but marvellous.

All the best Annie McG

Annie McGann 14:43, 8 September 2014 (UTC)--Annie McGann 14:43, 8 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnnieMcGann (talk • contribs)


 * I somehow posted my reply to you in some other thread. Don't know how it happened. So sorry. Here's me trying again ...


 * (No problem, I fixed it) I'm sure many people edit their own pages, the COI rules do allow it if all the rules are followed. The problems usually stem from failure to cite reliable sources, failure to remain neutral, and making the article sound like a resume.  If those pitfalls are avoided, it's unlikely a COI editor will ever be called out.  As far as the location details you mention, it seems something like "was born and raised in the area" would work to avoid unnecessary trivial details, and could likely be properly cited.  Good luck getting your feet wet.  Please let me know if I can help. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 15:13, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

War on Terror
Hi, I just wanted to tell you that unintentionally you just accepted an unconstructive revision on War on Terror.Petty means "of little importance; trivial" and pretty means "to a moderately high degree; fairly".I think that the word "pretty" is more suitable in that particular sentence.Thanks. -- Param Mudgal talk? 17:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately you are mistaken. A petty crime is indeed a small or trivial crime.  But pretty does not mean what you say it means.  There is no phrase pretty crime in standard English.  The spelling correction was proper. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 17:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Okay, i just had a doubt which i have cleared now.Thanks.-- Param Mudgal talk? 18:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Premakeerthi de Alwis
Dear friend, this article information are change by some one. we really appreciate if you can fix with your vision (                                                    https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Premakeerthi_de_Alwis&diff=622239256&oldid=622114748 ) (Academiava3 (talk) 17:09, 18 September 2014 (UTC)).


 * Let's start with some basics. 1) The edit you linked was almost a month ago.  2) There have been many edits and corrections since then all of which have been discussed on the talk page and are thereby agreed to by consensus.  3) I am not interested in, or following that article.  Therefore, if you want any further changes to the page, you should discuss it on the article talk page until a consensus of the interested editors is reached.  Or, as the saying goes, "Not my circus, not my monkeys." —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 18:10, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Question
Article of User:Sayyid_Ahsanullah_Qadri/sandbox made some minor correction as per suggestion. plz if any mistake again, Please kindly make it correct as per wiki article, if you good person kindly make it correct for me because of this is my first article.Sayyid Ahsanullah Qadri (talk) 11:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No. Please see the many messages on YOUR talk page. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 11:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Upcoming event at the WWI Museum in Kansas City
Hello! I would like to invite you to a Wikipedia editathon about WWI and Dissent on November 22 at the National World War I Museum in Kansas City. Join us for the U.S. branch of this international event as we write more social history from the era around WWI into Wikipedia! All editors are welcome, contributors to topics around WWI other than Dissent also encouraged! Food and drinks will be supplied by the WWI museum, Sadads (talk) 21:38, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

SVU episodes Questions
Hello, my email is Is it ok for me to ask you questions about SVU? Do you have every SVU episode? I am unable to use my cellphone to put my signature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.173.3.170 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 24 November 2014‎ (UTC)


 * First, you should not post your email in an open message on Wikipedia. Second, your question has nothing to do with the editing or creation of the encyclopedia, and is therefore also inappropriate.  Please feel free to contact me about matters relating to Wikipedia, I will be glad to help.  Otherwise you should probably contact someone from a fan site related to the topic you are interested in. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 17:07, 24 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay, fine, besides (tv.com & Wikipedia), what other website will accept questions about TV?(50.173.3.170 (talk) 19:27, 24 November 2014 (UTC)). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.173.3.170 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 24 November 2014‎ (UTC)


 * Sorry, I am not a web guide to TV show forums. And I would further contend that Wikipedia is not a good place to ask your questions.  This is an encyclopedia not a social network or question and answer service. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 19:56, 24 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Do you have a chance to find out what other websites that would accept my questions about TV incidents? (50.173.3.162 (talk) 04:53, 25 November 2014 (UTC)).


 * No. I am not your personal guide to the internet.  Please leave me alone. I will not respond to any further messages on this subject. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 12:13, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Michael Joy concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Michael Joy, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Michael Joy


Hello Wtwilson3. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Michael Joy".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. C<span style="color: #6A5ACD; text-decoration: inherit; -moz-text-decoration-color: #6A5ACD; text-decoration-color: #6A5ACD;">679 14:42, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Maintenance templates
Hello! I've done what was instructed -- adding secondary sources. Can you check if the entry is now okay? Thanx for your help, Tabulyantonia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tabulyantonia (talk • contribs) 19:11, 23 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I have answered this on your talk page and we should discuss this there. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 19:15, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Syntitium
Hi thanks for your note. I wasn't sure how to deal with this page - I'm grateful for your advice - this is a misleading/meaningless page as its title is incorrect and a page with a correct title (Syncytium) exists with appropriate contents. I've therefore proposed it for deletion - I hope that's the correct route. Adh (talk) 16:54, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, Actually the correct way is to create a redirect page to the correct term, which I have done. At least one person felt Syntitium was the correct spelling, so to help others we redirect them to the correct page. Please let me know if you have any other questions. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 17:24, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * thanks. Makes sense.Adh (talk)

"Fixing" errors
In this edit, you damaged the indentation of my response. I was responding to Atsme, not L.tak. Thus, my comment was indented one with respect to Atsme and in parallel to L.tak.&mdash;Kww(talk) 05:51, 8 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know. Sorry for the difficulty. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 11:57, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

 * Thanks! —&#160;&#160; &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 12:27, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

User page blanking
Hi Bill. Just a friendly note regarding the talk page of the (sadly) unreachable Fozzie and : the wording of WP:BLANKING was changed last summer, and the bit "and any other notice regarding an active sanction" was removed. Best, -- Sam Sing! 20:02, 26 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the update. I was not aware. —&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160;Bill W.&#160;&#160;  &#160;&#160; (Talk)&#160;&#160;(Contrib)&#160;&#160; (User:Wtwilson3) &#160;&#160;— 20:07, 26 January 2015 (UTC)