Jump to content

User talk:Callinus/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

MOS:PIPE

Originally, I linked audacious without piping, but it went to a disambiguation page. I found a definition for audacious in Wiktionary, but it looked like this "wikt:audacious" without piping.

What is the correct way to link to a sister project without piping?

I will look here for your response.Comfr (talk) 19:16, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Comfr The word "Audacious" is a common English word and Anglophone readers should be able to understand it.
WP:UNDERLINK "articles explaining words of technical terms, jargon or slang expressions/phrases—but you could also provide a concise definition instead of or in addition to a link. If there is no appropriate Wikipedia article, an interwiki link to Wiktionary could be used."
WP:OVERLINK states not to link "Everyday words understood by most readers in context" and "The function of links is to clarify, not emphasize; do not create links in order to draw attention to certain words or ideas, or as a mark of respect."
Audacious is an everyday word understood by most readers. -- Callinus (talk) 03:55, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
I thought you were concerned about my use of a piped link, because you referenced MOS:PIPE. The problem is actually WP:OVERLINK.
The word "Audacious" appeared in my source, so I used it in my edit to the article. After saving the page, I wondered what the word really meant. I have heard the word many times, but felt unsure of the meaning, and felt concerned about that other readers might have the same problem. After some consideration, I added the link to a definition.
Thank you for reviewing my edit. I accept your judgement. Thanks for your many contributions to Wikipedia. Comfr (talk) 20:34, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Female Suicide Bombers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chechen. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 January 2016

The Signpost: 13 January 2016

RfC announce: Religion in infoboxes

There is an RfC at Template talk:Infobox#RfC: Religion in infoboxes concerning what should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:08, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 January 2016

The Signpost: 27 January 2016

The Signpost: 03 February 2016

Sorry about my edit summaries.

I apologize for my edit summaries. I did that to be funny and I didn't think it was a problem but thank you for telling me this. I promise I won't do that anymore. WTCM47 (talk) 23:32, 11 February 2016 (UTC)WTCM47 WTCM47 (talk) 23:32, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 February 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:28, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 February 2016

The Signpost: 24 February 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:04, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language
The Cure Award
In 2015 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs, and we would love to collaborate further.

Thanks again :) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

March 2016

Stop icon

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in 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. STSC (talk) 08:39, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 March 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 March 2016

WP:TAGBOMB

Hi Callinus, I'm not sure what this edit summary is based on; per WP:TAGBOMB, "Tag bombing does not apply to the moderate use of tags that are self explanatory": I believe putting a notability tag on a seemingly non-notable page after failing to find sufficient sources, without opening a Talk thread, is standard procedure, not tag-bombing. Rolf H Nelson (talk) 07:20, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 March 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:12, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 March 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:24, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 April 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 April 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 April 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Asif Mohiuddin for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ~ Moheen (talk) 06:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:08, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 May 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Edit on Reputation.com page

Hi, you reverted one of my edits for reputation.com article. I've never seen the tag you included on the reversion. Can you explain to a newbie? I'm interested in start-up pages and have been contributing to other similar articles. Just want to make sure I'm following the rules. Thanks!

"WP:SOAP (possible conflict of interest or [[WP:PAID|undeclared paid editing) - MOS:TMRULES WP:PEACOCK)"

Tastelessoreo (talk) 19:24, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

@Tastelessoreo: Welcome to Wikpidedia. Please familiarise yourself with the five pillars of Wikipedia and what wikipedia is not. Specifically, the soapbox policy states that wikipedia is not for "Advertising, marketing or public relations".
Please look up the policy on paid editing by PR consultants, and conflict of interest editing by PR consultants. The Manual of Style policy on Trademarks says "Do not use the ™ and ® symbols". The Manual of Style policy on words to watch states not to use flowery prose to promote a product, like claiming there is a "flagship" product without attribution.
It's OK to use verbatim quotes of product reviews, so long as they are attributed properly and are properly cited.

If reviews of a product use exact statements, then the exact statement should be quoted verbatim to avoid changing the sentiment. -- Callinus (talk) 03:53, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 June 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Tesla Autopilot

Hi Callinus. I already replied to you in the talk page of Tesla Model S. Regarding the part of the last edit I removed, I think such detail belongs to the main section "Autopilot." The way you did it IMO goes against WP:NPOV, because it seems like arguments to defend Tesla that are not explicit in the sources, and Tesla's official statement is already there. However, when I did the short edits in the main Autopilot section the purpose was to provide background to the fatal accident, and I notice that this section is lacking a detailed explanation of the Autopilot technology. So I invite you to fill that gap, and look for reliable sources to explain how Autopilot works, its limitations, and Tesla's recommendations to owners. If you want to use bare references is OK, me or another editor will format them properly later. Cheers.--Mariordo (talk) 17:07, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 July 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:46, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 Ramadan attacks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Al-Shabab. 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) 09:55, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 July 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 August 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:32, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 August 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:40, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 September 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 September 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 October 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Callinus. 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)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:05, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 December 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Callinus/Archive_5&oldid=1139794514"