This is an archive of past discussions with User:Lihaas. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
why you keep removing the electoral votes for the presidential election 2012 india
DO you know how the system works~?.Individual mps\mlas are not counted.Only the electoral votes are counted.IF you see all the previous results,only electoral votes are present.
manchurian candidate 14:30, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Please stop putting useless tables with redlinks to articles that will not (and can not) be created until early 2016. These pages look like a joke with empty tables. At this point, in mid-2012, they should be simple stubs, perhaps with comments about changes to the program or comments about the venue under construction. The alternative would be to nominate them for deletion, which has happened in the past when editors get over-zealous about new article creation years in advance (WP:CRYSTAL). Thanks — Andrwsc (talk·contribs) 22:53, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
What is the purpose the 2016 calendar when the event schedule has not been announced? For the next few years, it will just be an empty table with only row headers for the sports. The list of sports appears immediately above where you want to place that big table, so the links to the sport articles are redundant. And what is the purpose of a "Participants" section that lists only Brazil? Again, there is no value of having that section in the article for the next few years as most if not all entries would have zero sources. It's a classic example of WP:CRYSTAL. — Andrwsc (talk·contribs) 04:50, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Lihaas. I do not mean to be a nuisance or annoyance, and do forgive me if I am of offense. However, I wanted to let you know I reverted this edit because I don't think you read the deleted paragraph through; only approximately half of that paragraph actually involves a summary of what Jamaica is and can be considered redundant to the actual Jamaica article. When I wrote the paragraph, my intent was to provide an introduction towards what each country is. I've attempted to standardize this across other articles of this kind, including this one, this one, and this one; I am aware that the characteristics that make understanding the context of each country useful are not readily known to the general public, although known information obviously varies with each situation. Additionally, I know how easy it is for readers to become distracted when they are missing aspects of background information that makes each article helpful and understandable. I would like to minimize the number of readers who become distracted early because they are missing useful information. Let me know if you still object to my action, and we can discuss it further. --Starstriker7(Talk)09:22, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
I think I understand what you mean in that the information would be redundant if the Jamaica at the Summer Olympics article was ever expanded. It would be effective to "see also" the national Olympic pages of the country (it is already linked inside the infobox at the upper-right hand side, but it isn't very obvious). However, to remove the information still would not address my concern that the Jamaica at the 2008 Summer Olympics article would be less complete. --Starstriker7(Talk)22:28, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
The edit in question also condenses the information so it acts as a quick summary. As I said before, I feel that removing the information may make the article less complete. A quick summary as such, while not directly related to the article's content, also makes it simpler for readers. If they need specifics on how the country did at other Games, then they can go to other pages. The example I will use is the Belarus at the Olympics article, which I did not help to write, that expands on how each Byelorussian team did at each of its Games (except for the 2012 games, which have not yet been added). It additionally lists a summary of Belarus' participation as a constituent under the Soviet banner. If Belarus at the 2008 Summer Olympics were expanded to include the background section, you are right in that it would not be inherently necessary. However, it would give readers easier access to the information. They would not have to navigate off the page in order to look for context.
In other words, I agree that the edited information is not inherently necessary on the Jamaica at the 2008 Summer Olympics article. However, I still do feel that it is more expedient for readers to have this information on that page. The Jamaica at the Olympics article, when expanded, will go into this background information in much greater detail. --Starstriker7(Talk)23:53, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
I have been thinking, and I am inclined to believe that you are right. I was looking back on other possibilities, and I think the background section can be filled with information about that specific delegation's preparations. However, the issue is that not only every place pays great attention to their specific delegation, that languages do serve as a barrier in translations (especially for countries like Mongolia or Laos), and that past Olympics will be difficult to study. Geez, though; that is a lot of fixing to do. I will have to tackle the ones I have already done, but with time.
I would be glad to help with updating the 2012 Olympic nations articles. I apologize for the late reply, so hopefully I haven't fallen to far behind. --Starstriker7(Talk)06:06, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Why you keep deleting the results.I beg you to see the previous results.The electoral votes are given in a breakup format.Individual mps votes dont count.I am adding the electoral results
manchurian candidate 07:17, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
This is silly. You added cn tags after simple statements that can be verified by watching the actual video, which I assume you never did. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 14:20, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Lihaas! I just had a fascinating talk with a researcher named Heather Ford about what it was like to edit the 2011 Egyptian Revolution article during the heat of the protests and overthrow of Mubarak. She's very interested in hearing from other editors who were heavily involved in writing and discussing that page. I don't know if you've read her report Wikipedia Sources: Managing sources in rapidly evolving global news articles on the English Wikipedia but it mentions you and Silverseren and Abrazame and Egyptian Liberal, and goes into some detail about the debates we had and decisions we made. I think you'd really enjoy talking to her. If you're interested, she'd love you to contact her at your convenience at hfordsa@gmail.com. Hope you're doing well! Ocaasit | c20:25, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Lihaas. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi. I am part of an effort to get Wikimedians access to the 2016 Summer Olympics as accredited reporters and photographers. Part of this effort includes covering the 2012 Summer Paralympics. Two Wikimedians have credentials to attend these games as reporters through Wikimedia Australia. As English Wikipedia does not allow original reporting, this is largely through Wikinews with a project page found at Wikinews:Paralympic Games. If you are interested in helping to get Wikimedians to the next Summer Olympics,I'd encourage you to assist with Wikinews efforts, and also to work on all language 2012 Summer Paralympic Wikipedia articles before, during and after the Games to demonstrate a track record of success. Thank you. --LauraHale (talk) 04:36, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
If you can comment back again on my talk page. :) Anyway, Wikinews categorically allows for original reporting. I've done a fair amount of it. Wikinews interviews Great Britain men's national wheelchair basketball player Joni Pollock is an example of one story I wrote that featured original reporting. China women's national wheelchair basketball team tops Japan for third place at Rollers & Gliders World Challenge is another. Intellectual disability is back in the Paralympics for the first time since I think 2000, so some of the World Games for people with intellectual disabilities will be there. (Special Olympics would be possible but it would still require getting past the notability hurdle.) Television coverage will be limited but there should be plenty of print for some things. http://abc.net.au is the Australian broadcaster and they do a pretty good job. Getting something for the two missing events would be fantastic. Leveraging the Paralympics for the Olympics in this case will ultimately come down to the Wikinews part. (To a degree, in an Australian context, the Wikipedia part is done. We got articles we needed created about the Australian Paralympians. We took a good crack at getting some of the classification articles created and worked on. We have pictures of almost all the Australian Paralympians, pictures of the Japanese men, Japanese women, Australian men, Australian women, Chinese women and Chinese men, and German women national wheelchair basketball teams in advance. Thus, some pictures of athletes to illustrate for articles if they get mentioned. This helps on a national level, as Olympic coverage will be contingent on getting a national committee to recognise WMF or a chapter as a media organisation. It is doable, but they need track record of success.) babbling. But yay! :D Paralympic help. :D --LauraHale (talk) 07:15, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
There is no much information about the Rio 2016 Organizing Committee currently available. I can recall from some press release that the official name of the organizing committee is just Rio 2016TM, not ROCOG. I'll take a look at this article in another time... Cheers; Felipe Menegaz08:43, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
That file was already deleted. It just features the previous logo of the bid during the Applicant phase, without the Olympic Rings. Felipe Menegaz15:51, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Would you mind dropping by the talk page to explain the article-level tag you added? I don't mind it, but without an explanation, it'll be hard to correct the underlying problem and remove it. Khazar2 (talk) 18:30, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:01, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Credo article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Credo pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Credo accounts/Citations.
Re this edit Prime Minister and President are proper nouns in this context so should be capitalised. And re this edit, it's not only the western media that describe him as a strongman, unless the India, Saudi Arabia, Libya and several other countries whose media are reporting him to be such are western now? And re this edit, the expression neé is only used when women have changed their surname due to marriage. You should have just written "born"). Number5721:40, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Even if they're orphans, redirects that're several months old may have incoming links from outside Wikipedia, but that still misses the fundamental point. It's entirely plausible someone will enter March 8 block into the search bar (or write it in an article and wikilink it) when they're searching for March 8 Alliance. Part of being a good encyclopaedia is helping readers find what they're looking for. WilyD07:55, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
I see that you've been keeping an eye on the India and state terrorism article that was deleted. In case you are planning to work on it, you are free to use content on this page - however much (or little) you like. There are some sources related to allegations which may come in relevant. If you think something is POV, let me know. Maybe we can work together and create an article that will discuss this subject in great detail and yet also comply with NPOV as much as possible. Mar4d (talk) 04:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
We have directives to make sure a userified page, like User:Lihaas/India and state sponsored terrorism, isn't crawled by search engine robots, so it can be indexed, and returned as a result in web searches. Placing a __NOINDEX__ directive on it is one way. But placing a
{{userspace draft}} or {{userspace notes}} tag at the top is probably better, as it shows the page is protected.
On 21 August 2012, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article FARC and Juan Manuel Santos, which you recently nominated and substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
Hi, Lihaas. I think that you should read WP:Weaseal words, which has been updated since you probably last looked at it. My reason is because you often add "who," "whom," "which" and other such tags to articles (as seen in these cases[1][2][3]), even when the uses of "most," "many," "others" or some variation thereof, etc. are needed. And I've seen you reverted plenty of times because of that. Sometimes...the sources themselves are using these words, as WP:Weasel words points out, and it's often that not every name can be mentioned, such as the majority of scientists believing in the Big Bang. We can't list every scientist who believes in the Big Bang. We have to state "most," "majority" or "scientific consensus." And in a lot of the cases where we can name everyone, it looks messy, creating a WP:LINKFARM, with names that don't even have Wikipedia articles (sometimes because they are non-notable). This is exactly why Template:By whom states: Do not use this tag for material that is already supported by an inline citation. Do not use this tag if naming the individuals who hold a position would be silly because of the number. Facts that are widely held should be asserted as simple facts. Do not use in-text attribution to imply that a widely held view is a minority position. Thus, we write simply that "The Earth is round", not "Scientists like Suren Ayvazyan, Teki Biçoku, Donald Canfield, Ricardo Cirera, Hartley T. Ferrar, Nicolae Frolov, Khandaker Mosharraf Hossain, Manuel Santillán (and about a million others) say that the Earth is round.
I feel that Template:Who should state similar to Template:By whom, and I will be proposing such at the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch talk page.
In that third diff, you state that "we dont blindly go on the source, thats why we find out which ones (there are 9, btw)." But we do go blindly on the source, per WP:Verifiability. And there often isn't any information on just how many; sometimes, there is no source for the exact number of people who believe whatever, for example, as in the case of "most scientists."
Oh, and if you reply, I'd prefer that you reply here at your talk page or at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch to keep the discussion in one place. 134.255.247.88 (talk) 15:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Yep, I've already added a reference - it took me literally 2 seconds to Google 'Kyle Bartley Swansea' and find a multitude of news reports. Like I said, it was unreferenced, not original research - do you understand the difference? GiantSnowman08:45, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.
Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow
In this issue:
Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
Research: The most recent DR data
Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
Your Credo account access has been sent to your email!
All editors who were approved for a Credo account and filled out the survey giving their username and email address were emailed Credo account access information. Please check your email.
If you didn't receive an email, or didn't fill out the survey, please email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com
If you tried out Credo and no longer want access, email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!
Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).
If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Hi Lihaas. I'm leaving you this message because you have previously been involved as an adopter with Wikipedia's Adopt-a-user program. A clean-up of this program is currently underway, and as part of the process I am trying to find out who is and isn't still interested in remaining an adopter.
If you would prefer not to be part of the adoption program anymore, you need do nothing; when the overhaul of the project is completed your name will be removed from the list of active adopters. However, if you have current adoptees, an active adoption school or an interest in adopting in the near future, then please let us know by signing here.
If you want to remain in the project and can currently take on more adoptees, there is a serious backlog at Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user; it would be enormously helpful if you could take on one or two of the users there. Please do keep an eye on the project for upcoming changes, we could use your opinions and your help! Yunshui雲水09:08, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Lihaas. Thanks for agreeing to stay on at Adopt-a-user. I've recently updated the list of adopters and I have included you, per your original comments on that page and your comments at User:Yunshui/Overhaul/Adopters staying on. You can see your new profile at the list of adopters. Why not update your profile with an image and maybe have another look at your description? You can also include a list of any adoptees you currently have. If you are also willing to mentor problematic users, possibly as part of a conditional unblock, please include "mentorship=yes" in your profile. Thanks again for all your help. WormTT(talk) 13:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Czech presidential election, 2013
This is possibly one of your worst. Did you even check what I did? Just to give you a summary of the mistakes you reintroduced to the article, they included "Parliamentary elections were be held", "protestswere", "President Alexander Lukashenko reacted in saying" and "state security police broke up gathering of activists".
As for your claims of change by consensus, where is the consensus for your change? The article was originally written with bold text (not by me), yet you were the one to remove it.
Sorry, I've had to revert this set of changes. As I've already pointed out to you the fact that you are reintroducing several errors by reverting like that, yet you continue to do it, I think it's reached the point where it's effectively vandalism.
As a brief summary, your set of edits introduced/reintroduced the following errors:
"Parliamentary elections were be held" (despite being warned about this one before!)
"Political parties with registered candidates were: The election was contested by"
"In turn, oppositions activists"
"threat of losing subsidies in accommodation"
"state security police broke up gathering of activists"
Removing the vacant seat section from the results table even though one seat remains vacant at present (did you even read the source for the table?)
Lihass, I'm really confused by this. Why do you keep adding those sentences about opposition parties, and then tag it with the weasel word tag? I see where this idea comes from in one of the references you added, and you could use that to source this sentence if you wanted, but better would be just to name the opposition party its referring to, which is why I added a sentence about the ČSSD. The other thing that baffles me is that you keep changing the wording to say "constitutional amendment". Now all the sources I saw, including the ones you added, note that the president doesn't have to sign a "constitutional amendment", but he did have to sign the "implementation bill" in August, which is what I keep seeing in sources like this one, which also references the June and July dates. I don't want to revert your edits, but it seems like they're preventing us from getting the article on WP:DYK, which can be a great way to get a new article attention.-- Patrick, oѺ∞15:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi again, just letting you know that I should now have the article fixed of errors, my own included. If you have a chance perhaps you can look it over, and if it meets standards, let the folks at the DYK nom know. Thanks!-- Patrick, oѺ∞22:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello Lihaas! Thank you for your contributions.
If you would be interested in joining a group of editors dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history, please take a look at the Military history WikiProject—we would be delighted to have you! If you like what you see, please sign your name here, and a project coordinator will soon be along with a formal welcome. Regards, Anotherclown (talk) 22:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would ask that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on User talk:86.40.104.255. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. —Preceding undated comment added 19:36, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Great Britain-Scotland relations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Act of Union (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.
There are two US women's doubles teams in the semi-finals. At least one of them HAS to win a medal, bringing the medal count for US to at least 3. This is a simple concept.
EFLI season
For your question:
Where did you get the data? The official site is showing a 404 error and ten sports doesnt show anythign either.
Refer this link for the score update for East division and for West division. This is not giving error. The match was played today, so I (User:Ak2431989) updated the scores.
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
I tried both first episode and season to be merged, but everyone opposed. As for the fourth season opener, if there is reception about episode itself, well... try. Otherwise, ask for deletion. Then later I can create Cheers (season 3) and Cheers (season 4) --George Ho (talk) 06:33, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International sports calendar 2012 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 template from the top of the article. Kevin McE (talk) 10:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Lihaas, I noticed you tagged this article OR way back in April.[5] Could you please explain your reasoning for this here or on article talk page? The article is sourced rather well (with both official and secondary sources) and does not seem to push any POV or agenda. There is some analysis present but it does not go beyond the referenced sources (as far as I remember). I admit I wrote parts of it so I might not be the best judge here. Thank you. Pethr (talk) 02:53, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
List of terrorist incidents
OK, a few things quickly - please before editing and restoring, check what's been done. I regularly find missing stuff after you've been through the article - when referencing, the dates are always written 05-11-2012 for example, not 5-11-2012 like you tend to do. Also, when writing in the little box, always mention city and country, not province or autonomous republic or whatever. The rest, if important, you can note in the description. Moving on, the description should be short and precise, no unnecessary information - there's other articles for that and you can always link to them. Next, the article is about terrorist incidents, not tribal warfare for example - that goes better within one of the articles on the Sudanese nomadic conflicts or the Sudan\South Sudan conflict. Notable terrorist incidents are either high-casualty, occurring in a country where terrorism is rare (as such they might be low-casualty), occurring in a specific context that makes the notable, or an assassination (attempt) against an important person. Please, before editing next time take a look and browse a bit to see how me and a few other people who regularly edit these lists do it, and then decide what is notable and what not. As always, this is all in a good spirit, and in the pursuit of knowledge :) Hope all this helps, please let me know what you think... Skycycle (talk) 14:14, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
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. Robofish (talk) 12:15, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
I occasionally check the older reviews as sometimes reviewers disappear. It is great that you are still able to review Bahrain Bloody Thursday. It appears the nominator is waiting on you, so you might need to discuss what else needs to be done for it to meet the GA standard. AIRcorn(talk)12:37, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
One of the captions isn't quite right. Are you trying to say that the house was attacked and that he was arrested? Other than that we are good to go. AIRcorn(talk)08:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
to High 
.
Hello! Your submission of Czech presidential election, 2013 at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that 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! Yazan (talk) 13:47, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would ask that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on User talk:86.40.104.255. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. —Preceding undated comment added 19:36, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
