| Revision as of 04:14, 10 August 2011 editHoverfish (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers48,018 edits →3RR: try← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:59, 10 August 2011 edit undoQwyrxian (talk | contribs)57,186 edits →3RR: helped: you didn't break 3RRNext edit → | ||
| Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
| == 3RR == | == 3RR == | ||
| {{Help me-helped}} | |||
| I just 3rr'd Don E Stevens. Miscounted my R's. Somebody block me. --] (]) 03:56, 10 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
| Well, I reverted your edit, if this is any way to help you from getting blocked for 3RR. I could have also reverted it, but the point is we should be discussing it instead of reverting. Given tha absence of any good will to discuss, I am at a loss too. I usually don't revert, but here it's a massive attack involved. In my years here I have never seen such a thing. This shouldn't be allowed by any standards, not between wikipedians at least. ] <small>]</small> 04:14, 10 August 2011 (UTC) | Well, I reverted your edit, if this is any way to help you from getting blocked for 3RR. I could have also reverted it, but the point is we should be discussing it instead of reverting. Given tha absence of any good will to discuss, I am at a loss too. I usually don't revert, but here it's a massive attack involved. In my years here I have never seen such a thing. This shouldn't be allowed by any standards, not between wikipedians at least. ] <small>]</small> 04:14, 10 August 2011 (UTC) | ||
| :Actually, you didn't violate 3RR. There is a 24 hour period where you made 4 reverts (19:21, 9 August 2011; 21:44, 9 August 2011; 21:47, 9 August 2011; and 03:52, 10 August 2011), the second and third edits were consecutive, and thus count as a single revert for the purposes of counting 3RR. Thus, you have reverted 3 times in 24 hours, not 4, and so didn't break 3RR. That being said, clearly something is going on at that article; I don't know what, but everyone needs to stop reverting and start talking. I'm going to see if protection or some other fix is temporarily necessary. ] (]) 05:59, 10 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:59, 10 August 2011
 | Nemonoman is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon. |
 Archives |
Archive 1 Archive 2 |
When I remember why I enjoyed editing wikipedia, I'll be back
This could take a while. --Nemonoman (talk) 01:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Have a refreshing break. You deserve it! • Astynax 07:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
LGBT themes in Hindu mythology
The article was recently moved to "Gender to Hindu mythology". You passed this article as GA. Do you endorse the change? Discussion at Talk:Gender_in_Hindu_mythology#Requested move. --Redtigerxyz 04:26, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
- Important enough for me to come out of my cave and comment. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. It is not likely that I'll be participating in further discussion in a timely fashion...so I'll wish you good luck and cross my fingers for a favorable outcome. --Nemonoman (talk) 05:11, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Anahata Yoga
Thank you.You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.
A tag has been placed on Anahata Yoga, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.
If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Anahata Yoga and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Bhuto (Talk | Contribs) 10:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Taj and minar.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Taj and minar.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 08:11, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Once you decide to test the waters again...
Platine War is an article which I have been helping to edit. It was put up for GA review, and got one of those no-notification quick-fail reviews by a drive-by viewer. He/she did leave behind a tag indicating issues with PoV, and I was wondering if you could put on your NPoV spectacles and give it a once-over? The article may have other issues and not have been ready for a GA review, but it would be good to have another set of eyes to look at it for PoV wording. • Astynax 21:55, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
- I should have struck this earlier. The allegations of PoV weren't that compelling and the article passed GA. • Astynax 20:25, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Congratulations Astynax. "Persistence in a righteous course brings reward!" --Nemonoman (talk) 12:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
For the guideline on reviewing, see Misplaced Pages:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added SBC-YPR (talk) 19:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.
On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.
For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.
Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 21:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Free Credo accounts
I do not know you already have an account or even if it would be useful to you when researching articles or verifying references, but you may want to sign up for one of the free Credo accounts. They filled up within hours when they were last offered, but this time it is taking longer for the available accounts to be filled. • Astynax 17:32, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks Astynax. I edit so infrequently these days that I didn't feel that I should take a slot. Best to you! --Nemonoman (talk) 13:33, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Nomination of Tulāsana for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tulāsana is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Tulāsana 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 good 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 template from the top of the article.
Factual addendum to above template notification: The AfD discussion concerns a total of 58 asana articles. MarB4 •ɯɒɹ• 12:28, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
August 2011
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Bhau Kalchuri. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Well cited alternative views are not vandalism. In fact, not having the alternative view included can be construed as the article not having a neutral point of view. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:28, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Misplaced Pages, as you did to Eruch Jessawala, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Also, please do not remove maintenance tags without addressing the underlying issue. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Greetings
I am attempting to settle with reasonably with you. Take it to the editors talk page. Stop edit-warring. Content disputes rarely end well for any party. The editor seems to reasonably asserting, through reliable sourcing, that he was indeed a noted cult leader. The point is, we now discuss things not act childishly. - 4twenty42o (talk) 21:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
3RR
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
I just 3rr'd Don E Stevens. Miscounted my R's. Somebody block me. --Nemonoman (talk) 03:56, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Well, I reverted your edit, if this is any way to help you from getting blocked for 3RR. I could have also reverted it, but the point is we should be discussing it instead of reverting. Given tha absence of any good will to discuss, I am at a loss too. I usually don't revert, but here it's a massive attack involved. In my years here I have never seen such a thing. This shouldn't be allowed by any standards, not between wikipedians at least. Hoverfish Talk 04:14, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, you didn't violate 3RR. There is a 24 hour period where you made 4 reverts (19:21, 9 August 2011; 21:44, 9 August 2011; 21:47, 9 August 2011; and 03:52, 10 August 2011), the second and third edits were consecutive, and thus count as a single revert for the purposes of counting 3RR. Thus, you have reverted 3 times in 24 hours, not 4, and so didn't break 3RR. That being said, clearly something is going on at that article; I don't know what, but everyone needs to stop reverting and start talking. I'm going to see if protection or some other fix is temporarily necessary. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:59, 10 August 2011 (UTC)