User talk:Grammarxxx

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello, Grammarxxx, I'm Kafziel. I noticed you were new, or at least that nobody has officially welcomed you yet, so let me be the first to say hello, give you some tips, and share a few useful links.

Here are some links you might find helpful:

I know they're a little boring (okay... a lot boring) but they may come in handy someday.

I give every newcomer two tips for adding content: cite references whenever possible, and try to set aside any personal points of view. Aside from that, just be patient and receptive, ask questions whenever you need to, and have a good time. If you want to experiment with coding or see how articles will look before you post them, you can use your own private sandbox at User:Grammarxxx/sandbox for any tests you want to do. (The link will turn blue after you start the page.)

Now that you have your own user name, you can sign your comments on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically stamp your user name, the time, and the date. That will help other users reply to your posts. You may also want to fill out your user page to tell others a bit about yourself.

I hope this information is useful to you, and I'm looking forward to seeing your contributions. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me for help. Good luck, and happy editing! Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 06:40, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regular edis versus minor edits

Marking this as a minor edit isn't actually the best use of the minor edit feature. Minor edits - which change nothing of another user's words or intent - are typically reserved for correcting spelling, indenting and typographical or formatting sorts of mistakes. No harm done this time, but you need to be very cautious about marking significant edits as minor. Some users have the feature enabled in their wiki which overlooks minor edits. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 14:36, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Grammarxxx. You have new messages at Jack Sebastian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Grammarxxx. You have new messages at Talk:List of Metalocalypse episodes.
Message added 13:35, 22 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

OlYeller21^Talktome 13:35, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Grammarxxx. You have new messages at Jack Sebastian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi!

		The Cleanup Barnstar
		Your recent edit on Martin O'Malley's article was a great facelift. You taught me something I will use in the future! Appreciate it! – ツ Teammm ^{(talk · email)}

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:16, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Georgia State University

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Georgia State University. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:16, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of Tea Party politicians

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Tea Party politicians. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Young Justice revert

While uncited (and therefore unusable in the article), I would not classify this edit as vandalism. I know that the new users making these sorts of changes are frustrating, but this sort of stereotyping tends to scare off potentially useful, productive editors. Just a thought. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 12:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand where you're coming from Jack, but this "MetaGene" issue has gotten out of hand; I've looked for it on the internet, and I believe it started here, and it just keeps popping up from IP's. They may mean well, but these well-meant edits are bringing down the article as a whole; and other IP's need to know why it doesn't belong. Vandalism may be harsh, so I'll just rollback and talk on the IP's page for uncited content. Grammarxxx

(talk) 22:12, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Verga

Hello, Grammarxxx. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Verga.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 10:57, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Bride burning

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bride burning. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Kosovo

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kosovo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GAN Jon Huntsman, Jr.

I will be reviewing the article shortly. Right now I slapped a template on the review page as a place holder but I will probably not being using that one for the review. In general the article looks clean, well written and orderly. References, at a glance look fine and the one claim I checked used primary and secondary sourcing, placing the primary behind the secondary. There will probably be a few issues but nothing major from what I see. One thing you may wish to fix before the review begins are the images. The last one has an issue. While the license, author, date, etc seem fine (flickr upload confirmed) the summary is a propbelm and contains promotional linking to a website that is neither the source (it is a flicker source) or the author itself. (as the author is the account at flicker) and appears to only promote the webiste itself. Also, for some off reason someone wrote Copyright of this website which puts a bit of a questionmark on it visualy, even if not accurately.--Amadscientist (talk) 18:15, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, will start the review tomorrow. Been busy in RL.--Amadscientist (talk) 04:24, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am unable to return to Wikipedia for a length of time that would allow a thorough review. I will be removing yself from the reviews i have begun.--Amadscientist (talk) 03:07, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, can you at least ask another reviewer to take up this nomination? It has been up a while and I would really like to have this listed as a GA. Grammarxxx (talk) 03:14, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Defense of Marriage Act

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Defense of Marriage Act. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:List of Governors of Massachusetts

Hello, Grammarxxx. You have new messages at TheJJJunk's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please comment on Talk:California Proposition 8

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:California Proposition 8. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tip O'Neill

Hi Grammar, I see you have nominated Tip O'Neill for GA. I am not a reviewer but I see that much of the article is not referenced. Right off this bat this would mean it would not pass a GA. It may well be worth reading the GA criteria and working up the article accordingly. There are over 300 articles waiting for review, some going back to May, so my advice would be to withdraw your nomination for now until the article looks very likely to pass. I hope that is helpful. Best wishes and happy editing. Let me know if I can be of assistance. Span (talk) 23:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Span, thanks for your input, I have retracted the nomination. I was planning to cite more sources before the nomination, but I guess I was being anxious. Thanks again, Grammarxxx

It looks like it will be great. Good luck and happy editing. Span (talk) 10:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Fight OUT Loud

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Fight OUT Loud. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Quayle

I just saw how you classified my contribution to Ben Quayle's page as vandalism. Of course it was no such thing. To update the most recent election results from past tense to present tense is not the act of a 'vandal'. Then I looked at your history and saw that you use that term freely and often, and have been taken to task for it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YingYang2 (talk • contribs) 11:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well YingYang2 I hope you'd be able to see it from my point of view: someone updates a politicians electoral history without any citation, and looking at your contribution history, you're not a normal contributor either; and looking at your talk page, you're no stranger to accusations of vandalism. I'll just say this, whenever updating an article, a citation isn't such a bad idea; and when accused of vandalism, perhaps look back on why someone may have thought that, instead of running to their talk page to steam. --Grammarxxx

Again, not true. You're the first person to claim vandalism on my part. And I didn't come on here and 'steam'. You seem to prefer hyperbole to facts. I don't live on Wikipedia like some others, but my contributions are no less important than yours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YingYang2 (talk • contribs) 21:35, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sunni Islam

Hi, There is no religion called "Sunni Islam". Sunni Islam is a branch of Islam, it's not a religion. so please undo your change on Keith Ellison, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thexyster (talk • contribs) 11:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thexyster, whether or not Sunni Islam is a religion, it is the branch to which Keith Ellison belongs. I will not revert my change because it more clearly defines what his religious preference is, and as an encyclopedia, this information must be available. --Grammarxxx

OK

OK I made another change on Keith Ellison I hope we both agree on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thexyster (talk • contribs) 08:06, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is an excellent compromise. --Grammarxxx 18:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Greek landing at Smyrna

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Greek landing at Smyrna. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Gillibrand

Hello Gram, I don't really understand your quite important revert. < -- --> is I guess an entempt to do a < ! -- hidden comment or paragraph title -- >. It's a rare practice bu I already met it in other articles and use it myself too (sometimes) to give hidden indications to futurs editors. In short, I quite think there was no content to delete, just some copyedit to do. Cheer~ Yug (talk) 13:17, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yug, I know what they were for, but just reading them it felt to me that they were permanant sections. For instance, in the intro there was personal hist., electoral hist., viewpoints and so on; almost as if that those sectons could never be removed. Although I'm sure you are correct, that mainly new users would have abided by them, I hold that <-- -- > just meerly clutter up and confuse the process, except when conveying serious information. --User:Grammarxxx 17:07, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Answer viewed. I still favor a keep: aside the < -- --> issue, you also pruned a lot of content. I don't really understand the rational for that. The author of this content should have been contacted and asked to source it. And even unsourced, it's sound correct enough to simply add the template: ^{[citation needed]}. Yug (talk) 17:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:UK Independence Party

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:UK Independence Party. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

christopher Murphy

MPs are always notable. Evidence that they were an MP is sufficient, and the official source is enough. Of course it would be good to find newspaper articles as well. Why not look for them. DGG ( talk ) 05:46, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So simply being elected to Parliament secures him an eternal article on Wikipedia, even though his history isn't properly documented? What would it take to have it deleted, because it sounds like that to me. --Grammarxxx 4:04, 1 October 2012

Please comment on Talk:Lough Neagh

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Lough Neagh. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kirsten Gillibrand

Nice job on helping get Kirsten Gillibrand to GA status. I just noticed that I welcomed you here three years ago; glad to see you're still doing good work! All the best - Kafziel ^{Complaint Department: Please take a number} 03:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! You are the person to welcome me, talk about a small "world". I just started up "real" editing this year, and I'm happy with the work I'm doing. Thanks for reviewing Kirsten Gillibrand, I've also nominated Martin O'Malley, Cory Booker, Rahm Emanuel, Jon Huntsman's campaign, for GA and Jon Huntsman, Jr. for FA if you'd like to look at them. Thanks, Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 04:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John Lynch

Dear Grammarx,

Sorry about that. I shouldn't have made the Ovide changes, but couldn't resist. About John Lynch- I actually thought more links would be helpful! Sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hansye42 (talk • contribs) 20:52, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Grammarxxx. You have new messages at Glaucus's talk page.
Message added 01:45, 6 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Glaucus (talk) 01:45, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012
Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m.
Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104
Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand.
Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki.
Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration.

Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:30, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Martin O'Malley

I'm sorry, but where can one find mention of O'Malley's religious beliefs? I did 2 quick scans of the article, but I could find nothing at all. Could you perhaps give me a specific section to read? 69.121.17.200 (talk) 19:36, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the "Same-sex marriage" section, in the letter from Archbishop Edwin O'Brien, it reads "As advocates for the truths we are compelled to uphold, we speak with equal intensity and urgency in opposition to your promoting a goal that so deeply conflicts with your faith"; it also links to an article clarifying his religion. When deleting information from an article, it takes more than just a quick scan or two, to do a good job. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 19:45, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying this, and I'm sorry I made that edit in haste. Happy editing! :) 69.121.17.200 (talk) 23:49, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Statewide opinion polling for the Republican Party presidential primaries

Just a friendly request to look at the {{db-a10}} template that you applied to the April, May, and June articles — these are splits of the massive Statewide opinion polling for the Republican Party presidential primaries, 2012 article, and the template notes that splits of large articles aren't eligible for deletion under this criterion. As far as I can tell from his edit summaries, Jax 0677 created these pages with the explicit purpose of reducing the size of the yearlong article. Nyttend (talk) 15:09, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rahm Emanuel

Hi. A note off the review page. Thanks again for your work on this. The mayor section looks great. I've enjoyed collaborating with you. Sorry I have not had more time to put in, I've been distracted. Neither of us is the main editor of this, and there's a lot of refs, so the only thing I'm worried about is cv. What do you think? We'll wrap this up his week. Thanks again. Hugh (talk) 07:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For your quick action here. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 14:03, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox response

Bah, sorry for the tardiness. I'm about to nod off and I have a Christmas party to host when I awaken but I will try to respond sometime tomorrow and if not, try and prod me and I'll get get to you ASAP. Best regards! Therequiembellishere (talk) 08:19, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, yeah sorry. I get caught up and forgot about responding.... About the immediate edits I'm making right now with the "Formatting infobox" edit summary, all I'm doing is moving to the state/district sections in a way that they can be seen as members-elect without the office section mess. Now as to the previous edits you originally referred to, I'm fully aware that these are people but if our criteria for relevant information on persons' infoboxes is every possible facet of information we have on them, it would defeat the purpose of the box itself, which is to provide a quick summary of a person's offices and biographical information which have an impact in that daily, public life. Their families obviously impact decision-making in some way but on a private, unofficial basis and can be easily expressed in the prose of the private life section in the article itself. Particularly if their spouse and children fail notability themselves, then they lack necessity in the box. The residences are the same but even moreso, imo, because it's highly fluid for politicians and not easily supported by reputable citations. Therequiembellishere (talk) 00:48, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mart Laar

Giving undue weight to obscure events is a violation of BLP policy, perhaps you should get up to speed on this policy before mis-representing my revert as "Not adhering to neutral point of view on Mart Laar". 87.208.192.123 (talk) 09:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your first removal of the content you called it "Irrelevant," and now you say it's a BLP violation? The info is essential and will remain there. I suggest you recognize you have some bias, (it being the only article you've ever edited) and stop insulting the intelligences of users before you are blocked. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 09:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Things given undue weight generally are irrelevant by definition, so my position has been consistent from the start. How is this information in any way "essential" when English language sources do not deem it relevant enough to mention it? 87.208.192.123 (talk) 09:32, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you actually asking me why worldwide news isn't translated into English? Are you trying to say that news in foreign languages has no relevance in the English-speaking world? I could tell you it's essential because it gives insight into his attitude towards his opponents, but I seriously doubt anything will help you see reason. I'll just tell you that because that information it portrayed in a neutral way, it will remain in the article. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 09:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

87.208.192.123

87.208.192.123 continues his trolling on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mart_Laar He is editing just one article and all his edits are attempts to remove "bad" information and discredit me and my work on restoring NPOV there. Anything we can do to stop him? Tõnu Samuel (talk) 19:07, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing that can be done is to let it take its course. IP is a highly partisan "editor," with whom no one agrees with due to their inability to understand policy. IP is a liar or either from a blocked account (or both), and eventually all of their edits will be reverted. Thankfully there are editors like you to call out their BS, and keep Wikipedia the respectable and trustworthy encyclopedia it is. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 21:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IP decided to jump in our conversation, you can see it here. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 22:07, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He did same to me too and now complains. Also he is still pushing even when this topic was closed Tõnu Samuel (talk) 09:04, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising

Thanks for this, I was just getting ready to leave a similar message. Ghostwheel ʘ 05:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm TBrandley. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Agriculture in ancient Africa, and have un-reviewed it again. If you've got any questions, please ask me on my talk page. Thanks, TBrandley

Tammy Duckworth GA review

Hello! Just letting you know that I left a few comments on Talk:Tammy Duckworth/GA1. Edge3 (talk) 03:41, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article failed GAN, due to several issues I noted in the review page. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Edge3 (talk) 02:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Al Franken

Hey Grammarxxx,

I saw the correction you made regarding Al Franken's degree. The reason for my change from "Political Science" to "Government" is due to the fact that there is no BA in political science at Harvard. Government is the official degree title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.65.74.57 (talk) 20:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

mild disagreement

I certainly would not call my edit of the Al Franken article a "test". He has said on any number of occasions something to the effect of his seeking the "Paul Wellstone" seat in the Senate. Under those circumstances, the triple predecessor edit certainly seemed relevant.
LP-mn (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is not, the predecessor tab is to show whom a person succedded, an is the manual of style for every politician article; I suggest you gain more experience before changing articles like this. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 23:34, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please un-nominate Preston King

Dear Sir,

You have clearly not read the links given in the Preston King (academic) article, nor considered the breadth of those biographies. Nor have you apparently bothered to search news sources. I strongly suggest in a completely friendly way, that you un-nominate this article before you make yourself look rather silly. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User

While I like anyone else enjoy a good article, King's does not truly explain why he is notable (the reason I nominated it); and while it's commendable a editor such as yourself concerned on how others are perceived, I cannot in full conscience retract the nomination just yet. Don't fret though, as I've seen at his nomination page, there are many sources to establish him as notable. So if you take the information there and transfer it to his page and explain why he's important, I would gladly close the nomination. I might also suggest you read up on references before you do. Best, Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 21:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA nomination of Al Franken

I have made a few of my own fixes and finished the review. I have listed the article as GA. Thanks for the very hard work you put into the article!--Amadscientist (talk) 03:57, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Thanks

This user helped promote Rahm Emanuel to good article status.

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your editorial contributions to Rahm Emanuel, which has recently become a GA. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Barnstar

Cheers for the barnstar, Grammarxxx. It's much appreciated :) --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 00:17, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dead links

With regard to this edit... just know that it's better to mark dead links with {{dead link}} (or, better yet, find the right URL and fix it) than to just remove the citation. —Designate (talk) 04:51, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently working on getting the article up to GA status and I plan on replacing and improving links in the upcoming days, but thanks for your notice. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 05:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AIV report

Hi Grammarxxx,

Please be careful reporting editors to AIV; you described User:4idaho as a vandalism-only account, which is certainly not the case. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, I'm on my iPhone and I must've hit it by accident; but no block or even a warning? The user had recieved a final warning for their contributions, and they clearly vandalized Martin O'Malley's by removing sourced content for partisan reasons. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 00:55, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "final warning" was for edit warring, which they don't appear to have continued. As for the content removal, I'm following up on that, but "vandalism" has a specific meaning, and this isn't it. I'm got their talk page on my watchlist, so I'll know if they get further warnings. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Fifth Estate (coffeehouse)

Might want to notify Special:Contributions/76.114.37.228, who is the IP who originally added most of that content to Fifth Estate. Axem Titanium (talk) 07:20, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apparentally that user broke the article into two because that IP added all the promotional info. In the break edit summary they said "feel free to nom for deletion;" and seeing how all of the article is simply promotion, I feel good about its deletion. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 07:24, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Grammarxxx. You have new messages at Skamecrazy123's talk page.
Message added 07:50, 8 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Skamecrazy123 (talk) 07:50, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hey

	hey
	hey i just want to tell you that my page was deleted and i just want to know why plz i want a live person to read it Uu maati (talk) 10:53, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How?

How do I now contest the speedy deletion? Please discuss at my talk page. I found the first google hit on google news and said whatever it said. I created it because it was 4999 on WP:5000. Biosthmors (talk) 01:44, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well I guess it's a bit late now, but you can usually hit the contest speedy deletion button on the page. Although I may suggest in the future you create articles which you are interested in and you're knowledgeable on. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 22:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it's not to late, seeing how you've created the article again; but this time it's much better! Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 22:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

—Strachkvas (talk) 02:18, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For his name "Tommy Lee" is used instead of "Sparta", which is the manual of style; and perhaps move the info about his name change to the "personal life" section. This is a very good article, so just a few c/e's and I'd remove the tag. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 22:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response! I must respectfully disagree with you on the naming issue because I have found no indication that the artist has a "pseudonymous surname" as defined by WP:SURNAME, and the sources for the article use "Tommy Lee" or "Tommy Lee Sparta" consistently and interchangeably, but never "Lee" or "Sparta." Using the whole pseudonym each time would be awkward in my opinion, so I made a stylistic decision to use the shortened name just as the name "Snoop" is used in the Snoop Dogg article. I'm a new user, so let me know if I'm misguided here. I'll consider restructuring the article though as it is a bit lopsided at the moment. Thanks for the input.

—Strachkvas (talk) 05:15, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Montz

You tagged this article for being an autobiography and needing additional sources. I've replaced much of what was there with information I found in some newspaper articles. Could you please re-evaluate it? Rybec (talk) 10:13, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tags don't need to be removed by the users that placed them there; as long as you fixed the issues you can remove them yourself. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 22:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Villaraigosa

I've been advised by other editors that succession boxes are redundant when you have a drop-down list. Sorry, I am a bit sloppy when it comes to entering edit reasons.WQUlrich (talk) 19:43, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't understand why you feel his mayoral box should be removed. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 22:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Tyrant (antihero, film franchise and lifestyle brand)

Hi Grammarxxx

Please help me understand the specific grammar errors wit this page. I proofed it several times and had other review it as well. I appreciate your time and ongoing commitment to Wikipedia.

Thank you. KMWE (talk) 22:07, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The page was deleted because it was entirely promotional and copied from another website. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 22:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, I wrote the copy that was on the website that you referenced. That copy was a source for the news article that was included on the page that you deleted. The page you considered promotional is/was a history of The Tyrant character from the novel The Seven Sins: The Tyrant Ascending (2008). The information provided highlighted the different areas of character development including books, movies and comics. This page is similar to the Wikipedia page on Batman in scope, information and design. The Tyrant page also provided a complete section of references. All materials used and cited are the property of King Midas World Entertainment, which I have permission to use for Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KMWE (talk • contribs) 21:25, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Grammarxxx Follow Up

The page was deleted because it was entirely promotional and copied from another website. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 22:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, I wrote the copy that was on the website that you referenced. That copy was a source for the news article that was included on the page that you deleted. The page you considered promotional is/was a history of The Tyrant character from the novel The Seven Sins: The Tyrant Ascending (2008). The information provided highlighted the different areas of character development including books, movies and comics. This page is similar to the Wikipedia page on Batman in scope, information and design. The Tyrant page also provided a complete section of references. All materials used and cited are the property of King Midas World Entertainment, which I have permission to use for Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KMWE (talk • contribs) 21:25, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, what do you want me to say? Your article was deleted because of copyright violations, and complaining on my talk page won't bring it back. If you want to attempt to re-create it, I suggest you read this, this, and maybe this before you do. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 00:30, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Ulrich

I noticed that you had some involvement with him over a removed attack page. By accident "What Difference Does It Make? (quote)"? He announced that he wanted to recreate that article, now a similar article "What Difference Does It Make? (phrase)" is removed as attack page. I think he works with a sockpuppet or meatpuppet!

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mdandrea. The Banner talk 22:55, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Molinari's

Hello Grammarxxx. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Molinari's, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:53, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I checked in on the article up, and it still doesn't assert its significance. I saw you put up a notability tag saying it could be deleted, so in effect you kept the gun up, but didn't want to pull the trigger. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 23:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Droid Assault

Hello Grammarxxx, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Droid Assault, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's one sentence in the article and it only informs people what it is; not what it's about, not its history, not why it's significant; in effect, it's an ad, and it is unambiguously promotional. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 23:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gustaf-Otto Adelborg

Don't nominate articles for speedy deletions which you have no clue of. It is all for the best. Best regards --AddyFBG (talk) 21:37, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will suggest you read Wikipedia's policy on personal attacks; and questions on the CSD should be bright up on the articles talk page. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 21:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A personal attack requires more than that. Know the difference. I hope you better explain your nomination and give your arguments if you want to counter my arguments. Otherwise your nomination for a speedy deletion will be refused as fast as possible. Else you have the option to nominate the article for deletion with the advise of other users and administrators. Regards --AddyFBG (talk) 21:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gustaf-Otto Adelborg

Now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gustaf-Otto Adelborg. Peridon (talk) 22:11, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Hugh Newall

Do NOT delete this new article as it is now much improved from the stub it was first thing today!

2.30.195.242 (talk)

HELP please

Can this article : http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Oscar_Brink be re-instated onto U.K.?

I CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHY SUCH A SIGNIFICANT ARTICLE (IN ENGLISH) HAS BEEN DELETED IN ERROR?

Thanks,

Martin 2.30.215.6 (talk) 14:14, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: W.O. Saunders

Hello Grammarxxx. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of W.O. Saunders, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: sounds important enough to me. plenty of other sources out there. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 00:18, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, SmartSE. Grammarxxx, W.O. Saunders was a contemporary of H. L. Mencken. There are several printed books which bear reference to him [i.e. biography and accomplishments] I placed the article as a stub, and I am working on fleshing this out. Please advise if this is inappropriate. NENCGuy (talk) 14:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While there may be sources of him out there, the article still doesn't support his notability. The only thing that could assert this is his endorsement by Mencken, but still doesn't signify his work or anything. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 05:36, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Advent

The website "New Advent", though indicated as copyright 2009, is mainly devoted to an exact reprint of the text of the 1909-1913 Catholic Encyclopedia and is therefore public domain in the United States. The WP Elect (Christianity) article was so marked. From its earlies days, WP has used this material , and material from the similar vintage of the Encyclopedia Brittanica for articles on traditional subjects, .I personally consider it an error, for the articles in both are biased by the unstated cultural prejudices of their authors, and there is essentially no subject--even theology--where the current interpretation really hasn't changed at least a little in the last century. Nonetheless, it is used here, but current practice is to make it clear with quotation marks exactly what parts are copied, or even to indicate explicitly that the whole thing is copied, I did that. DGG ( talk ) 04:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

William Romaine Newbold

The article on the Voynich wikis which I put on WP is 'entirely my own summary', and I made the article here a stub so it could be developed. The copyvio occurred afterwards. WRN is probably significant enough to justify an article here. Jackiespeel (talk) 10:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

Glad to see you're continuing work on Cory Booker. Thanks for all you do! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:34, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note

It appears that editor was simply making all the links that appeared red on a previous version of List of people from Bijapur, Karnataka. Mkdw ^talk 04:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea on how to have them blocked for repeated creation of unencyclopedic articles? Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 05:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already blocked for a short period of time. Mkdw ^talk 05:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not very familiar with it but can WP:G5 be applied to the rest of their created articles? Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 05:10, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Only of articles created after their ban, block, or sanction. Mkdw ^talk 05:16, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

==Beastbox(console)== i did not advertise on this page i created i created it to show a new console by JGamingEnterprisesBeastbox_(console)04:31 UTC

Re...

hello u r suposed 2 tell someone wen u delete there page. thanx. Rererererererererere (talk) 20:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC) ps i am NOT a sock of charlie akew[reply]

Actually I don't have to do anything I don't want to, that's why it gives users the option of posting to users talk pages or not. Plus seeing how you ask users on your talk page "do not post oni t [sic]]," I didn't want to be rude. And I don't care if you're "charlie akew" or not, your articles aren't up to snuff and will be deleted accordingly. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 20:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Marriage Templates

Can you stop harassing me for something I didn't do edit marriage templates? This is a shared IP and for that matter you seem way more annoyed by that IP user's edits than anyone else. I looked and you are the only one that cares. It's not like they are vandalizing. I checked the marriage templates (after you commented) and they are redundant and any one who is above 5 knows spouse means people in a marriage. I don't know why its so important to you but if you don't like it, it doesn't mean you should bully everyone who uses this IP into obeying whatever suits your tastes. 50.37.147.15 (talk) 04:31, 3 April 2013 (UTC) ~~Eileen~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.37.147.15 (talk)

Wow, saying someone else did it yet supporting their position, sure it wasn't you? Well if it isn't you and you don't want to receive others messages I suggest you create an account. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 04:56, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How is saying that the template is redundant supporting that user's position? I was quoting from the Templates of Deletion "Unnecessary and over-complicated paired templates. Created in Feb 2009 as an ill-conceived and abortive attempt to emit microformats for marriages, which they have not done since July 2009." I did not understand why its so important to you even that it can be written in plain text and likely has been for a long time. I objected to you attempting to ban an IP I share with that user because I haven't even been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.166.47.97 (talk) 19:02, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I'm amazed I have to repeat myself but here I go. If you don't like the marriage template bring it up at Templates for discussion, not my talk page. And if you don't want to be blocked because of the edits of someone else, create an account! Now please stop harassing me over your opinions. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 22:32, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Nom reviews

Howdy- I have reviewed your GA nomination for Niki Tsongas. Feel free to ask if you have any questions about the review. I did not feel it met the good article criteria. PrairieKid (talk) 23:52, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance of you backing up your fail and letting me work on your comments. I'm a fast worker and I hate when this happens. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 00:16, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright... I'll check back.

I checked back in today. Most of the problems had been resolved. There were still a few, minor, issues with the grammar. A quick readover would probably solve that. I'l check back later on today to see if the problems were resolved. Thank you for all your work getting the article up to GA status! It is almost there! PrairieKid (talk) 15:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also wrote a review for Corey Booker and put that article on hold. It had a few minor errors that can easily be corrected. Please leave me a note on my talk page when I can reassess the two pages. Thanks! PrairieKid (talk) 01:13, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Grammarxxx. You have new messages at PrairieKid's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

PrairieKid (talk) 03:41, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a look at my FACs

My friend, User:DavidinNJ and I nominated Alcohol laws of New Jersey for Featured Article Status back in February. The nomination has been slow. As I see you've been involved with NJ-related articles (i.e. your recent GA of Cory Booker), would it be possible for you to take a look at the article and perhaps consider offering support to its FA candidacy, located here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Alcohol laws of New Jersey/archive1? I appreciate your time and attention to this cause.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:27, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, I would be happy to. In return, I hope you and some of your friends could comment on my on my peer review of Ned Lamont, located here: Wikipedia:Peer review/Ned Lamont/archive1. I'm trying to get it up to GA status, so I could use all the help you have to offer. Thanks, Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 01:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at it over the next day or two and see what I can do to help.--ColonelHenry (talk) 01:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Nom for Mile Capuano

Hey there! Been a while! I wrote a review for your GA nom of Mike Capuano. I had just a few small problems with the article as it stands. I have put it on hold for one week. You can find my review and suggestions here. Thank you so much for your contributions. Have a good one! PrairieKid (talk) 18:24, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy- I took another look at the article today. I don't think enough improvement has been made yet to make it a GA. Please continue to improve the article... I will finish my review and make a decision tomorrow. Thank you for your contribs. PrairieKid (talk) 17:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't get back sooner... I've had a busy couple of days. I will check now to see if Mike Capuano and Niki Tsongas meet the criteria. I will let you know soon. Thanks for your patience and hard work! PrairieKid (talk) 19:11, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(10 minutes later...) I reexamined the fine specimen and felt that they both met the GA criteria. I did leave a few suggestions for future improvement, mainly focusing on expanding the tenure sections for both politicians. Nice work! PrairieKid (talk) 19:21, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good work, both of you. It's appreciated. —Designate (talk) 19:24, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Feature Article Review

I replied to your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Alcohol laws of New Jersey/archive1. DavidinNJ (talk) 18:36, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Cortot

".. in its current form it serves only to promote an entity, person or product." ? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say it was "your responsibility" to re-write the article. What do you mean exactly by "it'll remain for now"? Martinevans123 (talk) 23:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is I feel it is too promotional to exist on Wikipedia, and can still be nominated for deletion, however it will not be by me. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 02:48, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article stub about a living French artist. It does not use WP:PEA; it does not link to any website created by the artist himself; it does not link to any website where the artist's work is, or has been, offered for sale; it does not parade any commercial valuations of this artist's work. Even if the tone of the article were regarded as "too promotional" (and I would strongly disagree with that suggestion), I don't see why that would be adequate reason to delete the article wholesale rather than to adjust its content. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:12, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your speedy at Insektofob

Remember that non-English pages are very rarely eligible for CSD. The process is to tag them with {{notenglish}} and report them to WP:PNT, where a determination can be made as to what to do with them. Some of them can be A2'ed, if you're sure about the topic. In this case though, the title is a clear direct translation from Swedish to an existing article, so a redirect also a valid outcome. Cheers! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the notification but not to be a dick, I have a banner at the top of my page saying I'll take the effort to find out about the result of all CSD's I place:I don't want my talk page to take up a lot of space. Thanks, Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 23:18, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Feature Article

Grammarxxx, alcohol laws of New Jersey was made a feature article. Thank you for your help. We are petitioning to have it placed on the main page for a day - Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests. DavidinNJ (talk) 12:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's great but could you please look at the peer review I have going on: Wikipedia:Peer review/Ned Lamont/archive1? It's been up for a while and has gone un-commented. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 23:14, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed your article, made some minor changes, and made comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Ned Lamont/archive1. DavidinNJ (talk) 16:59, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Marriage

As you perhaps saw, the TFD for {{Marriage}} got closed as "no consensus". After examining the way this template works, I've proposed removing many of the parameters that many of the TFD participants found unnecessary, problematic, objectionable, etc. The proposal is in the "Removing parameters" section of Template talk:Marriage; would you please go there and offer your opinions? I apologise for the boilerplate style of writing; I'm doing my best to notify all participants in the TFD equally, so I'm copy/pasting the same thing to everyone's talk page regardless of how they voted. Nyttend (talk) 02:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Giovanni Zanalda

Hello Grammarxxx, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Giovanni Zanalda, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not promotional, and whilst not every professor is notable it would need AFD to decide that. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ϣere SpielChequers 06:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Martin OMalley

You took away my edit to Martin OMalleys page why? I changed undocumented to illegal. I dont think thats a reason to block me. People who enter the US by illegal means are illegal immigrants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.184.231.94 (talk) 23:35, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you read what I warned you about, it was that you're continuing to add unsourced information which is against Wikipedia policy. An as for immigration, "illegal" is a biased and stigmatic characterization, which is also against Wikipedia's policy on neutrality. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 00:02, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Igaune Records

Hi, You stated that I had copyright infringement on the now AfD'd article on Igaune Records. I believe I had one sentence, in quotes, from the company website. I believe that using one sentence in quotes, and giving the source, falls under fair use, from a copyright perspective, in the same way that a book reviewer can quote a short excerpt of the book he/she is reviewing. Or does that "fair use" approach not apply here?OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 17:50, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement is never acceptable on Wikipedia, but using quotes to help the article is a different matter. Your (now deleted) article was entirely made up of direct quotes from the website, both copyright infringement and not a reliable source. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 18:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mo Cowan

You apparently reverted the deletion that I made to the entry on Mo Cowan. My edit deleted incorrect information that was included in the source (Boston Globe) which stated that Sen. Cowan was the first person from his high school to attend Duke University. There were a number of person from Forbush High School who attended Duke before Mo Cowan, including myself. I graduated from Forbush in 1972, and received undergraduate (1976) and law (1979) degrees from Duke. I am aware of two persons from Forbush High who attended and graduated from Duke before I did. I have corresponded with Sen. Cowan by email and he has graciously acknowledged the error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72Forbush (talk • contribs) 21:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter what Cowan says, the Globe wrote that article and unless you can get them to write a retraction the information will remain in the article. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 21:42, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mo Cowan

I do not know who you are or what your authority is, but I find your response and attitude more than a bit disturbing. I do know that your user page states that you want to dispel the notion that Wikipedia is unreliable. Just because something is published in a newspaper does not make it reliable or verified. By reverting my deletion of incorrect information from the Mo Cowan entry, you are allowing Wikipedia to perpetuate incorrect information and reinforcing the belief that Wikipedia cannot be fully trusted. To say that what Sen. Cowan says does not matter seems strange indeed. I have fully explained the reasons for the deletion. If you want further verification, shall I send you my high school and Duke diplomas? I am sure that this experience will enhance my skepticism of what I read in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72Forbush (talk • contribs) 13:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do want Wikipedia to be seen as a reliable source, and by citing a credible news source it is just that. What makes you think being solicited from an anonymous source online is credible? I'll say it again, if you want what you want, have a credible news source publish it or have the current one write a retraction, if you feel strongly enough about it. The information will remain up until it is proved incorrect and if you attempt to remove it again your editing rights may be blocked. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 18:28, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Marker Wadden

I really don't understand the speedy deletion of the article Marker Wadden. It's a project which, I understand, will start in 2014. Is it because of the lack of references ? That strange attitude is discouraging. --Io Herodotus (talk) 20:53, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mordecai

I see that you've nominated Mordecai Blue jay for deletion. You might as well nominate the other Regular Show character pages for deletion – they're not needed. — Confession0791 ^talk 04:08, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to, but only if this one results in delete (no need to if this one's kept, it'll be the same result). Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 05:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Leslye Headland

Totally understand and appreciate it. She's a pretty excellent playwright, and the Assistance NBC series has a strong production and cast. Bachelorette is an astringent, funny film; I was surprised there was no wiki entry when there are entries for many Headland projects. Thanks again. Mthwaite (talk) 20:47, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	I watch the Elizabeth Warren article and I want to let you know that your skillful editing has not gone unnoticed! Gandydancer (talk) 21:59, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you very much! Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 00:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of GA nomination

I wanted to let you know that your rejection of Haynes Academy without a review is under discussion at WT:GAN if you'd like to join the discussion. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:01, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sean Patrick Maloney may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sean Patrick Maloney

Please be civil. Read over what I posted on the talk page.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 01:07, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. I'm sorry about this, but I had to report you. I'm hoping that an administrator can inform you of incivility so that we can cordially find common ground to a possible solution.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 23:57, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

3RR Warning

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. I really hope we can find some common ground and end this war.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 23:55, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cory Booker (Again)

Howdy- Nice to talk to you again. I recently opened discussion on Cory Booker's talk page regarding your recent removal of his 2014 Senate candidacy. While I do see your reasoning behind the edit, I still felt that the information is beneficial to the article. I know you probably have the article on your watch list, but I wanted to make sure you knew. Have a good one. PrairieKid (talk) 01:26, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I still think there's a little bit of confusion here. You reverted my edit that removed his 2014 senate information. As we both agree, he hasn't announced his candidacy for 2014- JUST 2013. The source provided explicitly states that they are not talking about 2014. In the future, please open a talk page discussion (on mine or the article's) before reverting my edits. I will let your edit stand for now, until you reply and we can reach a consensus. PrairieKid (talk) 23:27, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Color me embaressed, sorry about that. The wording was confusing which led me to revert your edits, but I think I've fixed it appropriately. Thoughts?

Perfect... Just please be more careful. Have a good one. PrairieKid (talk) 06:47, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: SOTI Company Page Speedy Deletion Help

Hi Grammarxxx,

Thank you for visiting my SOTI Wiki page- I was hoping to connect with you regarding updating the article so that it is suitable for posting. I hope, with your help, we can get it in a place that is appropriate for the Wiki community!

Could you let me know which section was cited as copyright infringement? I can immediately remove that and update it with original content. I had no intention of copying content from another source- my apologies!

With regards to the article potentially being advertorial, I had been following the format of similar companies in the Mobile Device Management space such as: AirWatch and MobileIron.

Let me know what sections in particular caught your eye as advertorial and I'll either revise or eliminate them.

I noticed the SOTI page can not be recreated at this time- could you help me in getting them listed once again?

Thanks in advance, I appreciate any help you can offer!

Best, Michael

Msalmassian (talk) 02:17, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	Best. Signature. Ever. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 20:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dan Wolf, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Pilot and Conservation (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) 11:05, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Wolf Peer Review

Offered a few comments for your perusal. I hope they give you a few good ideas. Thanks for inviting me. --ColonelHenry (talk) 12:59, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a return favour, could use your comments and possible support at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of colonial governors of New Jersey/archive1--ColonelHenry (talk) 19:32, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Dan Wolf

Hello! Your submission of Dan Wolf at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tammy Duckworth RfC

Just letting you know that I initiated an RfC regarding Duckworth's DOB: Talk:Tammy_Duckworth#RfC_on_providing_full_date_of_birth. Cheers, Edge3 (talk) 15:18, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Thank you for the Barnstar for my edits! It's always nice to come into contact with fellow Wikipedians, as it seems like the only User on here who I ever come in contact with is BracketBot.

So thank you again, as I assume that you're not an Internet bot. ;D Bulba2036 (talk) 07:43, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Ned Lamont

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Ned Lamont you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Diannaa -- Diannaa (talk) 15:16, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Ned Lamont

The article Ned Lamont you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ned Lamont for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Diannaa -- Diannaa (talk) 17:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article Feedback Tool update

Hey Grammarxxx. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:40, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cory Booker

Your recent editing history at Cory Booker shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. PrairieKid (talk) 23:15, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping to stop you from breaking the 3RR before it happened. Nothing personal there. That was just the fastest thing I could write knowing you would get the message. PrairieKid (talk) 23:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate the concern, I am more than aware of the 3RR policy. If this does (and more than likely will) happen in the future, I would hope you would focus your attention on the vandal instead. As for right now we just need to wait for the admins to block him/her. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 23:28, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you understand that I am not a vandal nor do I mean anything personal by my aggressive language and actions (btw, wikipedia encourages people to be bold!). The opening of the CB article is not up to standards (there's an argument to be made that the entire article is of poor quality) and sooner or later it will be changed, whether through user pushback or Booker gaining more national recognition. Take care. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.162.18.52 (talk) 00:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Sean Patrick Maloney

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sean Patrick Maloney you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dana boomer -- Dana boomer (talk) 14:01, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Sean Patrick Maloney

The article Sean Patrick Maloney you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Sean Patrick Maloney for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dana boomer -- Dana boomer (talk) 15:21, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:An Introduction to Animals and Political Theory

I've reverted you. I agree that this doesn't slot into any groups that easily, but it's a work of academic political theory, certainly not a novel. Political theory is explicitly covered by the politics section. J Milburn (talk) 19:59, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Therequiembellishere

I think you and I may be experiencing a similar problem. I noticed the warning you left on Therequiembellishere's page, concerning his prolific infobox edits. I've had a similar dispute with him. He seems to have some fixation with removing orders from infoboxes. At first, I was curious as to his reasons more than anything else, but he's never actually even responded to any queries I've left on his talk page, and continue to remove the orders he does, quite contrary to established consensus. I've never really given much attention to his other infobox edits, but from my own issue and what you've said on his talk page, it wouldn't surprise me if they're a problem as well. Indeed, looking back across his talk page, it looks like concerns have been expressed about his editing for years. Perhaps we should knock heads together and think about putting his editing up to a higher level of scrutiny? Redverton (talk) 22:34, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It might interest you to know that I have started a discussion about him on ANI. Redverton (talk) 03:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Dan Wolf

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dan Wolf you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:54, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sean Patrick Maloney

I have locked down the Sean Patrick Maloney article as there is an unresolved edit war occurring there. You have violated 3RR with this, this, and this edit. Be aware that if another editor is making edits you disagree with, you are advised and encouraged to discuss the issue with that editor rather than engaging in an edit war. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:37, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you have made a terrible decision in this case. I am working to make this a Good Article and it will be near impossible with this. I did not violate 3RR, as my first edit I was simply tying to improve the article, something the other editor had an personal issue with. By locking down this article you are saying that because one disruptive editor won't quiet down with their unpopular edits, and whom was blocked by an admin, all must be punished. I centinally hope you'll roll back the protection, for the article's sake. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 00:20, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion has started: Talk:Sean_Patrick_Maloney#Moderate?. If you could put forward your view of the matter as soon as possible, that will assist in getting the article unlocked for editing. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 18:54, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a consensus on a proposed wording. If there's no objections after at least 24 hours, I will make the amendment to the article and unlock it. If you're able to agree that wording today, I may be able to unlock today. If you're keen to carry on with the good GA work on the article as soon as possible, you can email me here. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:10, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Dan Wolf

The article Dan Wolf you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Dan Wolf for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article.

Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:26, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cites in the lead

Per this edit see WP:LEADCITE for the actual guideline wording. As the statements are clearly contentious (you edit warred over them and got a fellow Wikipedian blocked, and then the article was locked down) it makes sense to cite them. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 13:56, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sean Patrick Maloney 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:

Shutdown|work=[[WMAC]]|author=Allison Dunn|date=October 3, 2013|accessdate=November 21, 2013}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:32, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Sean Patrick Maloney

The article Sean Patrick Maloney you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sean Patrick Maloney for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dana boomer -- Dana boomer (talk) 19:12, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Massachusetts

	Massachusetts Editor Award
	For tireless contributions on articles important to WP:MASS and other articles important to the Northeastern United States, I award you this barnstar bearing the flag of the state who's leaders owe you so much. Cheers! PrairieKid (talk) 23:24, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 22:11, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012

The article United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 05:51, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012

The article United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012 you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012 for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 02:42, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

JUST CUZ I <3 YOUR WORK KEEP IT UP !!!

Masinich (talk) 01:51, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012

The article United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2012 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Well done! Varnent (talk)^(COI) 00:04, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mark Udall may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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:

You Didn’t Know About Mark Udall|work=[[U.S. News]]|date=November 5, 2008|author=Carol S. Hook]]}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:34, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mark Udall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Golfer. 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) 09:15, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Huge reverts

Please do not make reverts of so many edits in one fell swoop. If you have an issue, please revert each edit one at a time with your specific rationale. The way you revert the whole thing doesn't show that you've reviewed each edit and weighed it on it's merits which demonstrates a severe amount of assuming bad faith about all of the other editors you are reverting. Thanks.--v/r - T P 22:51, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the head's up; I've never really been one for small edits, but if it's an issue I'll stop. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 22:53, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate it. Now get back to school!--v/r - T P 23:07, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mark Udall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Last Word. 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) 13:32, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Martin O'Malley GAR

Martin O'Malley, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:18, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Political positions of Bernie Sanders, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Farmer's Union. 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) 09:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Grammarxxx. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash.
Message added 11:48, 3 March 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:48, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash

Hello! Your submission of Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:34, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Grammarxxx, it's been over a week and a half, and you still haven't responded on the nomination template. We need to hear from you very soon if you wish to continue pursuing this DYK. I hope to see your reply there. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:21, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought we were waiting until after June 8. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 01:49, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, we need to get the hooks set and passed now; you will need to respond there to Yoninah's post's questions about the hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Done, I hope. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 02:04, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 20:03, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash

Hello! Your submission of Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 06:24, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash

On 1 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash, a Facebook group with over 400,000 members, inspired the creation of Bernie Singles, a dating website for supporters of US presidential candidate Bernie Sanders? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Grammarxxx. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Grammarxxx. 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]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Mordecai Blue jay" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Mordecai Blue jay. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 16#Mordecai Blue jay until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Dominicmgm (talk) 12:25, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Ned Lamont

Ned Lamont has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]