User talk:ChamithN/Archive 18

• Hello ChamithN:

This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaboration has begun at Week 19 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

This is regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maithripala_Sirisena.
This is the statement in question. "Sirsena was the winner in 12, 6 of which consisted of predominantly Tamil or Muslim minorities whilst Rajapaksa was victorious in the remaining 10 where the majority was the Sinhalese."
Your justification on reverting this statement was that "Other than your own words do you have a reliable source which explicitly says he won due to tamils?". Now could you kindly point out which of my phrases suggest that Mr.Sirisena won due to Tamils? I have just indicated the ethnic demographics of the electoral districts. Please answer this question directly, otherwise I will have to revert the changes you made.
Thanks
--Sadeera (talk) 21:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Sadeera Read messages on your talk page please.--Chamith (talk) 02:04, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello ChamithN,

Just got your message and thanks very much for your prompt reply !

I thought it would be a good idea to include this website : it seems to be a website which consolidates one's online presence. It seems to be a kind of dictionnary / address book of social networks for a specific person - hence the link to the true encyclopedia meaning. Since social network is a very current issue, I thought it would be useful to include it to help wikipedia users like me find our way quickly and in an efficient way.

What do you think ?

bob traf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobtraf (talk • contribs) 12:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bobtraf, I had to remove the link you added because of the Wikipedia guidelines. Specifically according to this one. If you read that you will understand why I had to remove that link. Also you used a template that doesn't exist. Which means you link wasn't shown. As {{Pharrell Williams' Social Media|....link....}} is not in Wikimedia foundation databases it rejected your addition. Hope you will understand. Regards --Chamith (talk) 13:00, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

• Hello ChamithN:

This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaboration has begun at Week 21 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

Hi there,

So I recently noticed you removed the edits I recently made on Spec Ops The Line. I completely understand why you would, I just wanted to inform you that it wasn't a test edit. I just wanted to clean up a few things in that section. I was the gta v page as an example, and added in some other stuff like publisher, fixed some broken and downright wrong links, and added in what the metacritic was in the written part of reception. My apologies, I realized that I kind of came out of nowhere and made what seemed to be a bunch of random edits. Won't happen again :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Famous Hobo (talk • contribs) 18:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

@Famous Hobo: I'm really sorry. I didn't know your intention was to improve that article. It seemed like a test edit to me so I reverted it. By reading your message I can feel that your motive was to improve Wikipedia. Please provide an edit summary next time so that your edits wont be hastily reverted again. Cheers!--Chamith (talk) 20:18, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

• Hello ChamithN:

This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaboration has begun at Week 22 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

I'm sorry, but Wikipedia guidelines and policies override what the source says on this matter. MOS:SEASONS explicitly states that we do not make direct references to seasons in scenarios such as this. ViperSnake151  Talk  17:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151: No problem. I wasn't aware of this. Well, you learn something new everyday right? Thank you for leaving me a message. Cheers--Chamith (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

The second round one has all wrapped up, and round three has now begun! Congratulations to the 34 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our second round. Leading the way overall was Cas Liber (submissions) in Group B with a total of 777 points for a variety of contributions including Good Articles on Corona Borealis and Microscopium - both of which received the maximum bonus.

Special credit must be given to a number of high importance articles improved during the second round.

• Coemgenus (submissions) was one of several users who worked on improving Ulysses S. Grant. Remember, you do not need to work on an article on your own - as long as each person has completed significant work on the article during 2015, multiple competitors can claim the same article.
• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) took Dragonfly to Good Article for a 3x bonus - and if that wasn't enough, they also took Damselfly there as well for a 2x bonus.
• LeftAire (submissions) worked up Alexander Hamilton to Good Article for the maximum bonus. Hamilton was one of the founding fathers of the United States and is a level 4 vital article.

The points varied across groups, with the lowest score required to gain automatic qualification was 68 in Group A - meanwhile the second place score in Group H was 404, which would have been high enough to win all but one of the other Groups! As well as the top two of each group automatically going through to the third round, a minimum score of 55 was required for a wildcard competitor to go through. We had a three-way tie at 55 points and all three have qualified for the next round, in the spirit of fairness. The third round ends on June 28, with the top two in each group progressing automatically while the remaining 16 highest scorers across all four groups go through as wildcards. Good luck to all competitors for the third round! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) 16:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)