User talk:Afterwriting: Difference between revisions

BrianBeahr socks

Commiserations on the grand final loss mate. It seems to have made poor Brian go on an edit frenzy so I've finally made the effort to create a sockpuppet investigation for Brian. I've listed three socks that I know of but if you know of more that you want to add, or just want to comment, please do. Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 08:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

On second thought don't bother. The investigation is already in the latter stages with at least six of his socks banned. I thought this would be a longer process but it only took ten minutes! Jevansen (talk) 09:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I have been hoping that Brian would learn to edit colloboratively - and also cease creating multiple sockpuppets. He has made some useful contributions to St Kilda articles but then ruins things by his obsession for unimportant details and ignoring the established style principles. I doubt that he is going to change but I hope that he is still capable of this and will seek to get himself unblocked in the established manner. And thanks for your "commiserations" about the grand final. I was at the game with a friend but we left early in the final quarter as we weren't in the mood to deal with rampaging feral Collingwood supporters - some of whom were already taunting Saints' supporters at that stage. Afterwriting (talk) 11:32, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggested changes at MOTD

Hello fellow motto contributor. Discussions arer still open on Wikipedia talk:Motto of the day/Nominations#Suggested changes and still require further input especially on ideas 10-17. Please could you voice your opinion as this is going to be closed in early November. Please help out or even make any new idea suggestions. Simply south (talk) 15:15, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

This is a last call. Any opinions should be suggested by and including November 5th. See Wikipedia talk:Motto of the day/Nominations/Archive 2#Suggested Changes Simply south (talk) 21:21, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello User:Afterwriting,
You and a number of others, are invited by User:Sp33dyphil to help him cleanup and significantly improve the articles that he’d edited and will edit. The articles involved are airline alliances, such as SkyTeam, Oneworld and Star Alliance. He will be improving and expanding shoe and clothes manufacturing companies, namely Puma AG, Addidas and Nike, Inc.. Airline articles will also be edited, along with Australian rules football and related clubs. You do not need to know these subjects; but you could help

• copyedit the articles, as well as improving the English in the involved further.
• format the references by inserting citation templates. Please go to WP:CITET, or go to his contributions page to see how he has been carrying out this job.
• add appropriate and relevant pictures and media deemed necessary.
• merge and tighten paragraphs. Since there are numerous one- and two-sentence paragraphs, merging these together helps editors afterwards add information.
• wikification.

*****Please disregard the following section if you are busy. Only concentrate on the jobs above.*****

If you have time, you could further help by:

• adding pictures/media of the involved subjects to Wiki Commons.
• bringing together quotes regarding those who direct or hold significant relationships with organisations such as Greenpeace, SkyTeam, Oneworld, Star Alliance, Puma AG, Adidas, Nike, Inc. and Australian rules football/soccer clubs.
• finding press releases, news articles, etc. for Star Alliance and Vietnam Airlines, which don’t have a lot of information during their early days.

Once you have embarked on the activities above, please drop User:Sp33dyphil a message at his user page.

And of course, if you have any jobs for Sp33dyphil, just drop him a message.

Please distribute this message among other Wikipedians
Sp33dyphil ^{(Talk) (Contributions)(Feed back needed @ Talk page)} 12:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

NLP

Lede summarises the article, there is more than enough material there to establish that it is controversial It is not normal to provide references in the ledes of articles --Snowded ^TALK 10:18, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Then you should leave out contentious POV statements as being factual and discuss them elsewhere. Afterwriting (talk) 12:31, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The material in the main body of the article makes it very clear that NLP is controversial. That material is referenced. You should maybe address facts. --Snowded ^TALK 13:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

There is no need to mention "controversial" in the introduction. All sorts of things are "controversial" - or have controversies associated with them - but this doesn't usually require a comment in the very first sentence of an article. This has nothing to do with "facts" - it is to do with appropriate encyclopedia style. Afterwriting (talk) 13:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} has sent you a Christmas cookie! May its sugary goodness fill you with warmth and love this holiday season. But don't eat too many!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:Wikipedia:CONTRIB/Holidays/General3}} to your friends' talk pages.

"US" vs. "United States"

I've seen that on at least a couple pages you've changed "US" to "United States". You should probably take a look at WP:ABBR, specifically the section "Initialisms that can be used without spelling out in full first, which includes "US". DKqwerty (talk) 15:07, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Maybe the policy has changed or I didn't fully understand it. Afterwriting (talk) 12:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Your help is needed!

You've got a message at this link. Please seriously consider the message because help is really needed; your experience as a copyeditor will be valuable to this collaboration. Whatever your decision is, please drop me a message. Sp33dyphil ^{(Talk) (Contributions)(Feed back needed @ Talk page)} 08:35, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

/* Christmas mottos and a note to self to spell determined correctly next time when acting like a bot */

The motto idea for those between 25th December and mid January needs consensus dtermined badly on which version should be used for which day or even whether the whole idea should be scrapped or postponed. Please help by discussion and determining consensus at WT:Motto of the day/Nominations#Christmas series and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/Specials. The deadline is Friday at 9pm UTC. Simply south (talk) and their tree 23:45, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

January 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. jps (talk) 17:27, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Notice

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose, at their own discretion, sanctions on any editor working on pages broadly related to pseudoscience if the editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. The committee's full decision can be read at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience#Final decision. T. Canens (talk) 03:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)