User talk:Georgia guy

• User talk:Georgia guy/Archive 1
• User talk:Georgia guy/Archive 2

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to English plurals may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Nouns ending in a ''y'' preceded by a consonant usually drop the ''y'' and add ''-ies'' (pronounced {{IPA|/iz/}} (or {{IPA|/aiz/}} in words where the y is pronounced {{IPA|ai/}}):

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:02, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you have noticed, someone, we only have an IP, tried to complete the history for the WDAS page. This user's writing style lacks context (this was a critical/financial _______ is not suitable). I think the timeline we had to break up the history was right because decades aren't the best way to organize the history of an organization like WDAS. I'll post some of the completed sections (Move to CG and Lasseter/Catmull) that I've worked on to the rewrite page. Let me know what you think. Thanks LeicaMan LeicaMan (talk) 00:43, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lander, Parkin, and Selfridge conjecture may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• that follow from the commutative and reflexive properties; there are solution for n=2, 3, 4).

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:00, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where in the WP:MOS does it address the gender appropriateness of a transsexual? I don't see it mentioned at all. I have no issue with sex changes or gender identity issues, but the Alexis Reich article becomes very confusing when feminine pronouns are used with someone who was a man at the time the article refers to. It appears, by looking at edit histories, that I am not the only one who has seen this as confusing. It would only make sense that one refers to the biological gender identified at the time the event happened--When Reich is John Mark Karr, Reich is a "he", and when Reich is Alexis Reich, Reich is a "she". Eauhomme (talk) 06:46, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(1) You have asked me several times to log in. I have heard and replied to your requests. Further such requests are not needed. I understand that you would prefer that I log in.

(2) Editors are not required to log in to make edits.

(3) Because I have a dynamic IP address, it changes often, but the first numbers are always "99.192". I make a point of indicating where I am the same person who made a previous edit in the same discussion or on the same page with a different IP address signature by using an "(=99.192...)" style indicator. Knowing which edits are mine is not difficult to determine.

(4) Wikipedia does have policies against people making edits using different logged in names or different IP addresses, but only when it is done to deceive other editors. You can have two different logged in names if you like, one solely to edit articles on classical music and one solely to edit articles on the American interstate highway system. Making edits with different IP addresses is similarly permitted provided there is no attempt to deceive. By indicating where I am the same editor as one who made previous edits in the same conversation, I clearly am not trying to deceive. I am doing the opposite.

(5) You have said you want me to log in "so that [my] edits will be kept together." But edits are not kept together by logging in, only a person's edit history is. In my experience, the only reason people have for wanting to know about my edit history is when they want to make a discussion personal rather than about the subject at hand. If I made edits 6 months ago to update the filmography of Meryl Streep, that is immaterial to the discussion here and so it is odd that you would care about it. If it is important to you to know something about my past editing, you can always ask. But expect my first reply might be: "Why does it matter to you?"

(6) If it is really very important to you to keep a list of all of my edits on the current discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, just search the page for all instances of 99.192, click in the IP address, and you will get the lists. You can then copy and paste the information from those pages onto a sub-page on your own user page that you can create for yourself. But why you need to have a master list of all my edits is beyond my understanding.... Unless you want to stalk or harass me.... Which is one more reason not to want to log in. 99.192.67.148 (talk) 16:29, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I wanted to discuss this with you here. I assume you are a resonable person. My question to you is, do you understand the difference between gender and sex as I have described it to you? I have endeavored to make it as simple as possible. Sex is biologically based, it is the body, the genitals and the secondary sex characteristics. Right? Gender is the social construct of being man or woman. It is in the mind. Transsexual minds are wired differently than cisgender minds. Most people have a congruence between the two. They have a male body and they have a man's mind, or they have a female body and a woman's mind. It is all very straightforward for them. They give it not a second thought. But transgender individuals find that there is a disparity between their body and their mind. Those male bodied may feel that they are more like the women and girls around them, that their thoughts and feelings align more with the thoughts and feelings of a female. Transsexuals report this feelig very early in life, under 7 years old, usually around the time of the first memories. This causes a horrible condition that can only be cured with medical intervention. To treat the condition, the body is made to correspond to the person's gender. Hormonal intervention and surgeries allow the individual to have the body that matchess their gender. Then, they are congruent, a woman in a female body.

There is really no problem with the term male to female. What test do you propose so that I might prove it to you? Would you want to leave the term there if it were reasonable and properly the way to describe the condition of transsexuality? I ask you to consider what I am saying to you and to look into the matter for yourself. If you do, you will find that my description is very close if not exactly what medical professionals would say on the matter. Let's settle this as reasonable adults. JanetWand (talk) 20:03, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You previously participated in a discussion of the title of traditional animation. There is currently a move discussion at Talk:Traditional animation you might be interested in. —  AjaxSmack  00:53, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to point out that transwoman is most often one word. Once again I am annoyed by your trivial edits, because it seems that you WANT there to be confusion. 'trans' is not a word by itself. Actually, using it that way violates key rules itself. Yet, you say that it MUST be used that way. That is false. Once again, you are misinformed. I am just baffled. JanetWand (talk) 15:06, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Many months late...) Actually, it's not a completely mistaken assumption. Some hyperbolic tilings like {3,7} or {5,4} can be made this way, but that concentrates all the curvature at the vertices of the tiling. Double sharp (talk) 15:37, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I added an explanation on the talk page as to why not Indiana and Michigan (or Illinois, for that matter). There is currently nothing in the article (other than listing definitions that include them) relating to any of those states. Ohio seemed like a borderline case, since the only information in the article that is inclusive of Ohio is about Federal Prisons. If it were up to me, I would subtract out any Federal Prisons in Ohio for the figures in the article, but I'm sure that would result in someone crying about WP:OR. Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 15:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S., I would love to hear your take on the most recent brush-up over the addition of political party strength and election results. Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 15:20, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The image caption in the infobox at the top of the article Chelsea Manning says "Manning in 2012". Please don't undo the text that says "as a male", as the image is clearly not of a female. Thanks. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:03, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style.
Message added 20:25, 22 November 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ok I'll talk, there's a rumor going around that the female lead named Angelina from the upcoming 2016 Disney film "Giants" based on "Jack and the Beanstalk" is going to join. I just wanted to warn people not to add that to the "Future Princesses" section just like Moana. - JaDangerz (talk) 01:41, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Sesame Workshop funding sources has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

As per this article's tag, the content of this article has been folded into other articles (mostly Sesame Workshop, so there's no longer any need for its existence. Thanks.

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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:25, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As there is no chance of this being deleted, I think it would be a good idea if you would withdraw your nomination. That would of course show good faith. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 17:02, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just add a line at the bottom withdrawing it, I'll close it. Dougweller (talk) 18:36, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it's closed. Dougweller (talk) 18:52, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about Birmingham City (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) ? It currently redirects to a soccer team, but this is a different target than City of Birmingham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) redirects to. As you implemented a solution to the flag requiring disambiguation problem, I thought I'd ask your opinion. There are quite a few incoming links on this one though. My personal view is that "Birmingham City" should redirect to Birmingham (disambiguation). -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 23:43, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interstate 540 as this is a matter for WP:RM, not WP:AFD. Also I looked at Talk:Interstate 49 in Arkansas and it did not appear there was consensus to merge Interstate 540 (Arkansas) into that article. If/when consensus is reached please use WP:RM to request the deletions and moves you asked for. Thanks, —KuyaBriBri^Talk 00:06, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit someone else's comments without their consent. Editing comments is a slippery slope that is just best not to go down. Now, I understand why you edited my comment, but it was not necessary. –Fredddie™ 22:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited She'll Be Coming 'Round the Mountain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Raffi (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) 08:55, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Unit of length, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Depth (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) 08:51, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chemists call this stuff carbon tetraiodide, that is the reason the article was so entitled. There probably are rules of grammar that argue that chemists should spell things differently, I understand. A search of our databases will reveal that carbon tetriodide is not used by chemists or anyone for that matter. If you think that this or other articles should be renamed and you are not a chemist, it would be a good idea to leave a note on the Talk page or something like that. --Smokefoot (talk) 17:29, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Love Bug (Raffi), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.amazon.com/Love-Bug-Raffi/dp/B00K6D1O42.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:02, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You make an excellent point, that album does seem no different to the rest. Which means that they should all be redirected, almost none of the Raffi album articles have any real content. I will be redirecting most of them, please do not restore them unless you intend to bring them in line with WP:NALBUMS, through the use of reliable 3rd party references and more content that just a track list and some trivia--Jac16888 ^Talk 14:29, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

{{not a forum}} is the template you might use. At present I'm hoping that the present BLP template, ANI discussion, and hatting of various off-topic threads will work. The heading of the talk page already has a lot of templates. But thanks very much for your suggestion. If things don't calm down, you ought to post the template. – S. Rich (talk) 21:53, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Be honest do you think that this essay is written fairly and without bias? Large portions were edited by User:Sportfan5000 a now indef blocked sock puppet as well as this stemming from the Chelsea/Bradley article debate. Don't get me wrong I think that we need an essay on how to deal with trans articles but it would be nice to start from scratch or rework the essay a lot so that it does not give the impression of a WP:COI. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:15, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't continue to revert the user at Christine Jorgensen. If a user is persisting in such a manner, please bring it up at the Administrators' noticeboard :) Razorflame 23:36, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not blaming you for making the reverts. I'm asking that you bring it up on the Administators' noticeboard instead of continuing to revert them :) Razorflame 23:40, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Would you consider amending your nomination to base it more around the page view stats mentioned in the first comment? I realize that they are discussed later on, but many people do just seem to jump to a !vote by reading only the nomination, and therefore we end up with opposes that don't take into account the more solid and most significant fact.--Yaksar (let's chat) 01:52, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that's an improvement. It would help if you indicated that it wasn't just recently, but rather that page view stats for the Massachusetts city have consistently been above the UK one, and even more so when other cities with the same name are included.--Yaksar (let's chat) 03:05, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited WJZZ (FM), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Montgomery, New York. 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) 11:06, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Due to your modification, the sentence

The exact term for 16 bits should be sexdecet, directly related to the term octet. Because it is harder to pronounce, the short form "hextet" is used.

doesn't make sense anymore. Please read the Internet Draft to see where the word hexadecatet comes from:

"hexadectet" is directly derived from IPv4's "octet", thus technically correct and convenient to get used to. Because it is harder to pronounce, the short form "hextet" is used.

It is also used to prevent confusion with sextet, which is used to e.g. indicate a music combo.

Please review your changes in the hextet page to make the sentence consistent again.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Avmaele (talk • contribs) 10:31, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Georgia guy! Were you able to see how a(n)=(n-1)! for n>1. I had expected you to drop a note back on WP:RDMA#Number of ways to arrange n items so that... indicating whether or not you understood how to do the computation. Note that besides making an appeal to Sterling numbers as described at the end of Permutation#Cycle notation, you can also directly compute the number of possible cyclic derangements of n objects using standards combinatoric methods. -- ToE 18:21, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Transition of Caitlyn Jenner. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:22, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Georgia guy/Wikipedians by how I view them, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Georgia guy/Wikipedians by how I view them and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Georgia guy/Wikipedians by how I view them during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:34, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi dear "Georgia_guy"

Is the sentence below grammatically correct? thanks a million.Alborzagros (talk) 13:09, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Respecting to some idiots will make us feel slighted by them.

No. It is not grammatical. Zero^talk 13:34, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

then how do you correct it?Alborzagros (talk) 13:39, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What it is supposed to mean? It doesn't make any sense to me, sorry. Zero^talk 13:59, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia guy, the comments on WT:MoS clearly matter a lot to you, but Ascherf is probably a kid. This is probably some teenager who just doesn't know what's what. Say the word and I'll take the chat to his or her talk page so you don't have to have it shoved in your face when you're trying to deal with MoS issues, but this is one way to get opinions like this off Wikipedia (not to mention the planet) without banning them. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:13, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Iowa has used mileage-based exit numbers since the 1970s. The fact that I-74's exit numbers fall consecutively is pure coincidence. –Fredddie™ 22:03, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Misao Okawa is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Misao Okawa until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Fiddle Faddle 21:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't worry too much. The first thread is probably going to end with "no consensus," which means the status quo stays in place. If they can use that procedural rule to keep WP:LQ from being replaced with an ENGVAR-based rule, then we can use it to keep Wikipedia sensitive to transgender individuals' preferences. Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:32, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Gender identity in the MoS". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 27 December 2015.

The request for formal mediation concerning Gender identity in the MoS, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

I think I might need a character witness. RGloucester started a thread complaining about Dicklyon and myself over at AE. It was promptly hijacked by SMcCandlish with a long screed of accusations, half-truths and non-truths. I could use someone to put in a word for me. None of the admins will answer any of my questions or requests for specifics. If you're not comfortable with this, I get it. If you go over there and say you agree with what SmC has to say, I get it. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:10, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The Planck temperature is not defined as the largest possible measurable temperature, nor is the Planck length and the Planck time defined as the smallest measurable units. The Planck unit system is based on 5 universal constants and the rest of the units are simply derived from these definitions. Most of them have no obvious physical significance other than making calculations easier by removing the need for constants. In some (but not all) cases, the Planck units represent a scale where quantum mechanical effects are expected to overtake the classical physics and what happens at these scales are hard to predict. More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_units, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time

As your entire addition is completely incorrect and misleading I decided to revert it. There is not much to explain in terms of the removal, as the definitions of Planck length and Planck time are given on their respective pages and is not controversial at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatsT (talk • contribs) 20:25, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain that the Planck units are not the smallest possible units of length and time?? Feel free to give me an example of a real-world use of a smaller unit in whatever way you can.

There no real-world uses of lengths anywhere near the scale of the Planck length, so I can not. From the page on Planck length:

"There is currently no proven physical significance of the Planck length; it is, however, a topic of theoretical research. Since the Planck length is so many orders of magnitude smaller than any current instrument could possibly measure, there is no way of examining it directly. According to the generalized uncertainty principle (a concept from speculative models of quantum gravity), the Planck length is, in principle, within a factor of 10, the shortest measurable length – and no theoretically known improvement in measurement instruments could change that."

This is not what we are talking about or what your addition claimed though. It claims that the Planck length is defined as the smallest possible unit which is false. It's defined as:

${\displaystyle \ell _{\mathrm {P} }={\sqrt {\frac {\hbar G}{c^{3}}}}\approx 1.616\;199(97)\times 10^{-35}\ \mathrm {m} }$

where ${\displaystyle c}$ is the speed of light in a vacuum, G is the gravitational constant, and ħ is the reduced Planck constant.

See here for some additional discussion of the Planck length: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/hand-wavy-discussion-planck-length/ MatsT (talk) 21:11, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per the rubric at the top: We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:09, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Summersault has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, very few edits per year, likely to remain unfixed. Also years are disputed at OTRS 2016102710012138

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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 15:29, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Georgia guy, I do have objections against drive-by changes in articles for the sake of being politically correct, and the usage of mere essays like WP:GNL to support them. Much like "mankind", "man-made" is a perfectly valid term in modern English - or maybe it would be more fair to say, that the term's usage is generally accepted but under discussion by some modern authors and feminists. Its occasional usage does not violate the relevant MOS guidance at MOS:GNL. Also, Wikipedia should not be misused to push any particular PoV in that regard, while the issue is still under discussion by scholars and other experts. I generally don't edit-war about such minor points, but wanted to clarify why I reverted to begin with. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 15:03, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How nice to see that a name from the old days is still here, and still active! Joyous! | Talk 04:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I invite you to join a centralized discussion about naming issues related to China and Taiwan. Szqecs (talk) 04:41, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sadly she died today. You can find news on main italian on-line news (see note 1 in it.wiki for example).--Ysogo (talk) 16:33, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. You have new messages at Talk:List of Walt Disney Animation Studios films#Ralph Breaks the Internet and Frozen 2.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Oddbodz - (Talk) (Contribs) 18:51, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you jumped in quickly! If you do have time can you go through this skeleton of an article and correct other errors- and put on a bit of meat. You, from your name, have been a consumer while I am a mere observer trying to sort out other areas of conflict that couldn't be done until someone had actually filled this hole. Comments and criticisms gratefully received. Certes is busy knitting together all the links. --ClemRutter (talk) 15:31, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's some background on why the article has appeared at Talk:High school#Ready to reverse the merge. I've rambled on a bit, but the last paragraph gives the current situation. Thanks, Certes (talk) 15:42, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Android Oreo".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Legacypac (talk) 08:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PEACOCK

WP:V

So let's actually look at this. Currently, 22 teams in MLS and seven use "FC" in their title.

1. Atlanta United FC
2. FC Dallas
3. Minnesota United FC
4. New York City FC
5. New York Red Bulls
6. Seattle Sounders FC
7. Toronto FC
8. Vancouver Whitecaps FC

That's 32% of teams, which would be increased to 35% when LA enters, assuming that they keep FC in their name. And it would increase to 37.5 if Beckham's Miami team joins and keeps the current name. How is nearly a third "few"?

Then you have to add the United Soccer League teams, 16 of 30 teams, which is 53%. Although only two of the five upcoming expansion teams use FC.

Then you have to add the North American Soccer League teams, 4 of 8 teams, which is 50%.

And then there are third- and fourth-division teams that use FC or some variation. Few is not only not correct, it's WP:OR.

Finally, WP:TRIVIA.

Unless you can find a source for this, don't add it back. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:26, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "George Hempl".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. TKK! bark with me! 15:14, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I put it at the top as it is possibly the original Lexington for which all the others are named Unibond (talk) 19:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Toll-free telephone numbers in Anglo-America. Since you had some involvement with the Toll-free telephone numbers in Anglo-America redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:09, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your revision on Super Mario Bros. 2 (disambiguation), “North American” does not imply that the game takes place in North America. A North American game is a game made in North America. In comparison, a Japanese film is a film made in Japan, and a European comic book is a comic book made in Europe.

“North American” is an important distinction here since initially, the game was exclusive to North America, and it was only made since the Western audience was deemed not ready for the original, Japanese sequel to Super Mario Bros. with the same name.

Also, “a game commonly considered a sequel” isn’t needed; the game was the (North American) sequel to Super Mario Bros.. Interqwark ^{talk contribs} 22:41, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lists of Crayola colors is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of Crayola colors until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lojbanist ^{remove cattle from stage} 23:06, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to deal with this now (off to work), so here's what will happen. Unless you self-revert OR provide a reliable source for this BLP violation I will a) have this article fully protected; b) take you to ANI for edit-warring/BLP violations or possibly c) take you to ARBCOM for violating longevity sanctions. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 18:17, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Chiyo Miyako. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Andrew D. (talk) 17:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Kane Tanaka. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 100.40.125.198 (talk) 10:48, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Misao Okawa is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Misao Okawa (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — JFG ^talk 04:01, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I add a comment on Talk:Gregory Hemingway#‎Categorization. --Jesamsex (talk) 01:52, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to thank and apologize for my mistake on Contiguous United States. I had not taken the entire United States out of the ranking. Allice Hunter (talk) 18:06, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "George Hempl".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Dolotta (talk) 18:24, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is to my understanding that you opened up the WAKL → WYAY (FM) move request on the WAKL talk page. There is one major problem; the Flint, Michigan station never changed their callsign to WYAY, as the page move was laid out, but to WKMF. The WYAY call letters are available for use. Please close this move request as it is now both preventing the proper move of multiple articles, and creating needless confusion. Nathan Obral (talk) 04:53, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Rockstonetalk to me! 18:00, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Please see here; I'm attempting to develop consensus on whether or not Jeanne Calment's age should be considered in dispute. Feel free to contribute. Rockstonetalk to me! 18:22, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Just an FYI... if consensus doesn't develop, I'm going to remove references to Jeanne Calment's age being in dispute, because a single article isn't enough alone to be a reliable source; and her age is not in serious dispute among scholars. I do welcome your input. Rockstonetalk to me! 21:01, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking care of the offending comments. I've posted a standard welcome message and a DS alert on the IP's talk page. If they fail to get the hint, I'll bring up the matter at WP:ANI or WP:AE. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 03:15, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I saw a new edit today.I support it but aren't you leaving17:14, 6 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.16.99.72 (talk)

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely apologize for using the Gerontology Wiki as a source for Alelia Murphy's death, though they've got hundreds of supercentenarian articles. I promise I'll use a reliable source in the future when editing that article.🙂 Timothy McGuire (talk) 02:48, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, your revert of me on the U.S. Space Force page just restored language that it already exists. Today the House passed the NDAA, but neither the senate or president have signed it and it had not been activated yet. Would you please revert your revert, or if you disagree with the substance of this request let me know and we can start a discussion on the talk page about it. Thanks! Garuda28 (talk) 00:10, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think I identified the concern - please let me know if that fit the intent of your edit! Garuda28 (talk) 00:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but why do they have the billion and trillion page pools? - Ferctus

I don't know. Georgia guy (talk) 00:34, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you added a citation needed tag into the lead, and I try to fix the issue. For what fact is a ref needed? There is a section which talks about the naming issues, if the refs are there sufficient it would be not an issue at all. Is the fact in question controversial? Than we can also put refs in the lead. --Stone (talk) 12:25, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• [1] This looks like the ASTM is still not giving up the columbium.
• [2] That is a not so old book.
• [3] and this one is from last year.

That looks like there is still a little bit of columbium out there. --Stone (talk) 21:57, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Would you block me if you were an admin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferctus (talk • contribs) 02:48, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyo 2020 are the Games of the XXXII Olympiad! Key word there OLYMPIAD! Since 1896 (I Olympiad) since the games were revived there have been 31 Olympiads. An Olympiad is a FOUR YEAR PERIOD of time. Even if the IOC didn't go by that they would still be the 32nd Summer Olympics as the IOC Recognizes 1916, 1940, & 1944 as Olympic years. We should be going by what the Organization which controls it, wants to call it, not what we want to call it. The IOC has decided they will be called the 2020 Summer Olympics. And that right there is all the common sense you need to have.Subman758 (talk) 21:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please use an existing stub tag at "The Other Girl". --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:05, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please, don't be biased in your edits, that tone truly can be used to illegitimate that the island is of Denmark. --Picklespitlizyr (talk) 01:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, last week I closed your requested move of WRDG to WBZW.

In the future, when you need something uncontroversial like a call sign change that you can't pull off because of interconnected redirects, use {{subst:RMassist}} to get a page mover who can make the move. I have this permission as well—primarily for cases like this—and am willing to help, so you can also ping me. Raymie (t • c) 04:43, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I'm doing a story for Gizmodo on how editors monitor pronoun changes on Wikipedia. I've noticed you've contributed to a few pages by contributing the correct pronouns for folks who transitioned later in life/were known by their dead names during their professional lives. I'd love to set up a chat if you're interested in speaking. My email is henry.giardina@gmail.com. Please feel free to reach out, and keep up the great work!

Your recent editing history at Trans woman shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. SummerPhD^v2.0 23:44, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Trans woman, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. —DIYeditor (talk) 01:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Check the hundreds in the column for Greek cardinals and ordinals in the very first table of the article, i.e. List_of_polygons#Greek_numbers.
Or even a Greek-English lexicon...
Then compare to the relevant ones in the third and fourth table.
See any problem, any differences?!?!? The "Naming Polygons". The Math Forum. Drexel University ref is not a ref on Greek language (let alone an authoritative source); they simply created ("worked out") a naming system based on Greek but not necessarily actual Greek, ancient or modern.
The hundreds parts is simply not actual Greek, number system or even language at parts. At least not one I'm aware of; perhaps, e.g., in some obscure geometric treatise of late antiquity some fellow Greek got bored with having to use proper (very long) names for hundreds and decided to shorten/alter them and the drexel university people (or whoever) based their system on that dude's innovation. That's not impossible. But if something like that is to be the case then if there is a fact/cn template to be added is not on my additions/clarifications but on parts where e.g. hectogonon(-on), dodecacontagon(-on), dihectagon(-on) are presented not as barbarisms but as proper Greek.
In any case I haven't removed anything. Thanatos|talk|contributions 23:44, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Channel 4 News (United States) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Channel 4 News (United States) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 00:10, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ballerini is already listed at Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Uncontroversial_technical_requests. Do we really need to start a one week discussion for an uncontroversial request? --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:52, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article B major (person) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, and can't find any sources to indicate notability. All original research and probable conflict of interest.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. ~EdGl talk 21:42, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on B major (person) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. ~ GB fan 18:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article B major (person) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/B major (person) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ~EdGl talk 23:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Closing_instructions -- insensitive In ictu oculi (talk) 13:27, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at List of countries and dependencies by area shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — 𝐆𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐚 ☎ 01:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Having seen your edit summary I did seriously wonder for a split second whether it was going to be a musicians/drinking joke! But, actually, good point and thank you. I wonder why that is? Cheers (hic!) DBaK (talk) 20:50, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 2518. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 6#2518 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i thought you may find this interesting. It looks more solid than what came out of Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Language/2021_June_4#Words_ending_in_-eng. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trolley dilemma (talk • contribs) 23:28, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are from Georgia, right? Which Georgia are you from? Georgia, USA or Republic of Gerogia? Axolotl is a Pokemon (talk) 13:19, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect WSUS and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 17#WSUS until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:22, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What relevance does that have to your deletion? No one is disputing that. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:58, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I believe that U were the one who nominated windows 10 version history back in June 2018, right? U stated that the reason for the discussion is due to the fact that the page is getting lenngthier over time. @ the time of nomination, the page size was 245,232 bytes as of this revision. My question is, does the size of the page still matter nowadays? I am asking this because I made an WP:ER @ the talk page. However, despite my efforts convincing editors that my modifications have no visual changes and that it is best to prevent those numbers getting multiplied monthly, I have been reported @ wikipedia:administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Block evasion at Talk:Windows 10 version history. What do we do now? Please help.197.238.156.92 (talk) 23:28, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Freud's Last Session, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:03, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Freud's Last Session".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:22, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Ksi has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 15 § Ksi until a consensus is reached. Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:21, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you reverted my entire edit because you objected to one small part of it, please don't do this. See WP:REVONLY. Mibblepedia (talk) 20:35, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2024 July regarding a requested move in which you participated. The thread is ABC News (United States). Thank you. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgia guy. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Five: The Parody Musical, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:05, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]