Revision as of 00:14, 12 January 2016 editKingofthedead (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers53,354 edits →Reflist: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:00, 12 January 2016 edit undoParsley Man (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users17,847 edits →ReflistNext edit → | ||
Line 122: | Line 122: | ||
I think six or seven is enough for columns, what's your standard? ] (]) 00:14, 12 January 2016 (UTC) | I think six or seven is enough for columns, what's your standard? ] (]) 00:14, 12 January 2016 (UTC) | ||
:Around 10-15. ] (]) 02:00, 12 January 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:00, 12 January 2016
Welcome!
|
OrphanReferenceFixer: Help on reversion
Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to 2014 Isla Vista killings.
If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref>
and one or more <ref name="foo"/>
referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref>
but left the <ref name="foo"/>
, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/>
with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>
; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.
If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 02:16, 3 January 2016 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}}
to your talk page.
Recent edit to Brady Campaign
<!-He is, but no need to mention it here I suppose..--> Thank you! Super48paul (talk) 07:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
January 2016
Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages.
When editing Misplaced Pages, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
I noticed your recent edit to Qantas Flight 32 does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Edit summary content is visible in:
- User contributions
- Recent changes
- Watchlists
- Revision differences
- IRC channels
- Related changes
- New pages list and
- Article editing history
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Jetstreamer 02:20, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
article
thanks. I was looking for one, and couldn't locate it. Which is really the only reason I decided to create one. I couldn't find anything specifically on this, on Misplaced Pages yet. But there is one already, made a little before I started mine. So it's fine. Thank you. Redzemp (talk) 01:33, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
edit warring
keep it up, and you'll get reported. For edit-warring and violation of WP:Civil. You gave no rationale for your removal of sourced edit, and modifications. Just blatant rude undoing and removing. I warned you already. What's with you? You don't communicate. You're just trolling and warring it seems, against WP policy. You're skating on thin ice. You'll be on ANI, with links showing what you're doing. Regards. Redzemp (talk) 01:35, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
- I have been giving rationale. What're you talking about? Parsley Man (talk) 01:37, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
- Not really. I didn't see any explanation given for your deleting of the "amazing he survived" quote (that was right in the cited source) of the police commissioner. Also, you gave no reason for the other things. The perp did NOT say "I pledge allegiance to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant", but simply "I pledge allegiance to ISIS". And also, no one really says "police department officer" but simply "police officer". Can't have things sounding too wordy, awkward, and unnecessary, especially in the lede. I see that you have done some good work on the article, but you tend to get a bit into ownership tendencies, and suppressing of sourced material sometimes for various reasons. We gotta be careful with that. Regards. Redzemp (talk) 01:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
- It's not we have to exactly quote it word for word from the source, otherwise that's plagiarizing if it lacks the quotation marks. If you've noticed, I've also tried to leave the abbreviation in. Parsley Man (talk) 01:51, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
- Ok, Parsley Man, but you still didn't answer why you initially removed the "amazing he survived" from the Commissioner, that was in the cited source, with no explanation given. (Later it's there modified, ok, but at first you REMOVED it completely, with no rationale or reason given.) Was just curious as to why you deleted that at first. What problem exactly did you have with that edit that you removed that in one swoop along with everything else? Redzemp (talk) 22:22, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
- It's not we have to exactly quote it word for word from the source, otherwise that's plagiarizing if it lacks the quotation marks. If you've noticed, I've also tried to leave the abbreviation in. Parsley Man (talk) 01:51, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
- Not really. I didn't see any explanation given for your deleting of the "amazing he survived" quote (that was right in the cited source) of the police commissioner. Also, you gave no reason for the other things. The perp did NOT say "I pledge allegiance to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant", but simply "I pledge allegiance to ISIS". And also, no one really says "police department officer" but simply "police officer". Can't have things sounding too wordy, awkward, and unnecessary, especially in the lede. I see that you have done some good work on the article, but you tend to get a bit into ownership tendencies, and suppressing of sourced material sometimes for various reasons. We gotta be careful with that. Regards. Redzemp (talk) 01:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Previous accounts
What name/s did you edit under before your recent appearance as Parsley Man? E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Then I don't have any, I guess. I'm using a bit of an old computer, just so you know. Parsley Man (talk) 01:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Reflist
I think six or seven is enough for columns, what's your standard? MB298 (talk) 00:14, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- Around 10-15. Parsley Man (talk) 02:00, 12 January 2016 (UTC)