User talk:L3X1/Archive 1

Hey there. I was wondering if you could explain to me why you accepted this edit? Unless I'm reading the source wrong (which does happen, I'm only human :) ), it pretty clearly indicates his net worth is, in fact, 23 billion. Thanks! bojo | talk | contribs 16:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Sure, a quick Google search brings up $23B, which I assume is rounding, and Forbes said on September of 2016 that his NW is $22.7B I quote: "SINGAPORE (September 22, 2016) – Oil and gas tycoon Mukesh Ambani is once again India’s richest person with a net worth of US$22.7 billion."^[1] I felt the edit made Wikipedia more precise. L3X1 (talk) 17:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

I see what you are saying, but it seems that the linked page indicates his "Real Time Net Worth" is $23B, where it was $22.7B in september, when that article is from. Other profiles from forbes (like Jeff Bezos) have a decimal with them, so I'm pretty sure it isn't rounded. Thanks! --bojo | talk | contribs 17:10, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

No problem.L3X1 (talk) 17:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

I can verify that those edits made on Marcellus High School were GFE and perfectly acceptable. Mrs. Wall, Spencer both got married and thus their names changed. Jennifer Carnes has retired. (Apologies if I'm talking wrong, new to it)

Sorry about that. L3X1 (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

No worries, you had good intentions. Honest mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tacoman3005 (talk • contribs) 13:59, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Please do not accept changes on biographies of living persons, such as this edit, if no source is provided for the change and the article does not support the content added. If you're not sure, it's perfectly reasonable to leave the edit to be reviewed by somebody else. Cheers. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:45, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ivanvector, Sorry about that. I recall accepting that edit, but I don't see it on the revision history. The only entry the revision history has is from . Where did it go? Next time I'll leave it to be reviewed. L3X1 (talk) 17:14, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

I had unreviewed the edit, so it's still in the history but no longer has a "reviewed by ..." note next to it. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

lets try this: x2[User:L3X1|L3X1]x2 (x2[User talk:L3X1|Complaints Desk]x2) L3X1 (Complaints Desk) 16:31, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

• Got rid of the parantheses, L3X1 Complaints Desk 16:32, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• Still trying to link talk page, addes UnderScore L3X1 Complaint Desk 16:33, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• Paranthese on inside of brackets L3X1 Complaint Desk 16:34, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• Parantheses on the outside of bracket L3X1 (Complaint Desk) 16:35, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• swapped link and words, maybe that the problem L3X1 User_talk:L3X1 16:36, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• no underscore, no paranthese, changed back to proper linking L3X1 Complaint Desk 16:37, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• got rid of the space L3X1 Complaint Desk 16:38, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• added some space, and now admins and RCP probably think I'm a lunatic L3X1 Complaint Desk 16:39, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• tried the VE template to see what is wrong L3X1 Complaint Desk 16:42, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• maybe 2 words is bad L3X1 Complaints 16:42, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• troubleshooting: removed pipe and rename for link L3X1 User talk:L3X1 16:43, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• TS removed brakcets L3X1 User talk:L3X1 16:44, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• One bracket pair to rule them all! L3X1 User talk:L3X1 16:44, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• Can I double link them?? L3X1 User talk:L3X1|Complaint Desk 16:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• Down with brackets, so I added 2 L3X1] [User talk:L3X1|Complaint Desk 16:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• maybe I have to specify 2 links? [[User:L3X1|L3X1 Complaint Desk 16:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• back to the Chopin block L3X1 Complaint Desk 16:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• time 20, unchecked box [[User:L3X1|L3X1]] [[User talk:L3X1|Complaint Desk]] (talk) 16:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• if no longer markup, get rid of markup! right? L3X1 vandal police (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• 22 for section22! Now I have soemthing useable at least :( vandal cop L3X1 (talk) 16:50, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• 23, next time read the tutorial first before looking like a fool! L3X1 Complaints Desk 16:53, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• and now I'm back where I was L3X1 Complaints Desk 16:54, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• WP:HD sugegsted this L3X1 Complaints Desk 17:17, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• now it works L3X1 Complaints Desk 17:20, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• so i have to press L3X1 Complaints Desk instead of jsut typing it ? weird L3X1 Complaints Desk 17:21, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• L3X1 Complaints Desk
• Improved L3X1 My Complaint Desk 16:48, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
• V3.2 per AN/I suggestion L3X1 (distant write) 16:38, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
• V4, based off one pence and Lady Di wedding coin d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 01:07, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Saudi Arabia. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

OK, but I won't be able to !vote till the 20th. L3X1 Complaints Desk 15:12, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kfar Ahim. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

As another admin has explained above, it is extremely important that you do not approve pending changes to biography articles that add unsourced content to the page. Shruti Kanwar was protected due to "persistent addition of unsourced personal info in a BLP" and the edits you approved added the exact content that the protection is enabled to prevent. I've undone your approvals and reverted the additions. Please be more careful when reviewing pending changes. Thank you, --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:59, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Ponyo Sorry about that, I will be more careful. L3X1 Complaints Desk 22:59, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

I really liked your favorite wikipedia policies. Hadn't seen either of them. I hope there's a version of WP:URMOM somewhere, it's a third one that you have as a favorite but that seems to have since been deleted. Anyway cheers!--User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk 21:08, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Dwarf Kirlston Thanks! :) WP:URMOM is not/was not a policy as far as I can tell, I thought of when I was familiarizing myself with WP and was disappointed to see that there was no essay titled that. Have a nice day, and thanks for the kind words. L3X1 Complaints Desk 21:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I have granted the "rollbacker" permission to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:21, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Juliancolton Thanks so much! L3X1 Complaints Desk 00:29, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, can I ask what the rationale behind calling your talk page 'Complaint Desk' in your signature is? I appreciate we all like quirky twists where we can to avoid a rather sterile environment, however I came across this in a welcome message to a new user, an activity you seem to be heavily engaged in tonight, and for those not too familiar with the intricacies of signatures (i.e. the very newbies you are addressing), it is easy to mistake this for an official complaint desk. Although you may not be required to change it, I would suggest you look at the sig and consider modifying for this reason. Rayman60 (talk) 05:17, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Rayman60, I added the "Complaints Desk" portion because my anti-vandalism work inevitably makes a mistake. I see where you are coming from, thanks for pointing this out! I would not want to be mistaken for an Official complaint desk! I have modified it to "My Complaints Desk" as I think that is more positive than "Rant @ Me" :) L3X1 My Complaint Desk 16:46, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, it does look better now and removes the ambiguity. Rayman60 (talk) 03:13, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Atrocities in the Congo Free State. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:13, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't recall reviewing this page. Could you explain further? Thanks Qaei ☎ 20:47, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Qaei This []edit says in the [] log that is was accepted by you before I unaccepted it pending this conversation. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 20:52, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

L3X1 Yes, that was a mistake on my behalf. Thanks for informing me. Qaei ☎ 20:58, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

No problem! Happy editing. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 21:57, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Please take a look at the sources provided by the other ip editors. A vote wouldn't be fair since the real facts cannot be "voted for," just like you cannot vote for the validity of theory of gravity or the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The facts are here, please read these:

1.) http://defencenews.in/article/At-Mach-10,-Taiwans-Hsiung-Feng-III-Anti-China-Missiles-could-be-faster-than-the-BrahMos-18873

2.) http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/taiwanese-navy-accidentally-fires-nuclear-8730387

3.) https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1718956/taiwanese-navy-accidentally-fires-hypersonic-missile-at-fishing-vessel-as-tensions-with-enemies-china-ratcheted-up/

Thanks! 27.100.20.252 (talk) 21:46, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I will certainly look at the above refs. Please note that the RFC is not a majority vote*, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. *Unless we absolutely have to, and the world will probably end before that happens. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 22:30, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello. I'm not sure whether to be more concerned about someone calling themselves a member of the anti-vandal police, or reverts of half-decent edits without explanation. That aside I feel compelled to point out that "appear to constitute vandalism" is clearly wrong. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:50, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi zzuuzz, I'm not sure I understand your first sentence. And sorry for not providing an ES on that diff, I user TW Rollback:Vandalism which doesn't allow an ES to be given, and I didn't really think it was a GFE. Calling the BLP familiarly by a version of his first name "Dom", and adding some unsourced changes doesn't really cut it for GFE. While it isn't obnoxious vandalism, (like: sandwwiches awr porn), it's not following any policies, and was disruptive. What do you think is "clearly wrong" about it? L3X1 My Complaint Desk 00:49, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

There's something inherently aggressive about references to "fighters", "police" and other militaristic terms (please browse these). Simply put, it was a good faith edit, and good faith is not vandalism. It doesn't take a few seconds to notice that the article being referenced is already in the article, and that reliable sources exist to support the edit. Using both Dominic and Dom (Dom - a really common name for this person) instead of the surname is breaching a really obscure convention. Let me put it this way: If I revert your revert, link to Beat the burglar and replace Dom with Littlewood, would you revert it and accuse me of vandalism? I'd hope not. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:52, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@L3X1: I sympathise with {{ping|zzuuzz}. S/he added unsourced BLP content, and wasn't apparently aware that we always refer to individuals by their surname (hint: look at the existing article and follow the style), but if you'd checked Beat the Burglar you'd have seen that the information there confirms what they added. Please take care not to label good faith edits as vandalism. It would have been more appropriate to fix the name format, link the programme, and add a {{cn}}; if you hadn't the enthusiasm to do all that, then at least revert it as a good faith edit. New page patrol should involve careful thought, not just hitting the "Vandalism" button. PamD 09:14, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

PamD & zzuuzz thanks for the explanation, sorry about the wrong edit. I take full responsibility for it per TW rules, and will make sure it won't happen again in the near future. As for the term "vandal fighter", all I will say is that I am aware of the debate regarding what RCP and CVU call themselves, and that militaristic terms are sanctioned by the CVU userboxes. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 13:40, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

You should immediately withdraw your nomination of Get Out. That is not a serious nomination, the article is clearly notable. You should seriously read the criteria for nominating articles for deletion before you do it again. Koala15 (talk) 02:04, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello Koala15. I beg to differ. In fact, I differ.

• Not a serious nomination Well, I nominated, and I'm not some vandal IP, so I call that serious.
• article is clearly notable based on what??? This discussion should be happening on the AfD page.L3X1 My Complaint Desk 02:08, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

You are obviously not a serious editor if you think this is OK. You clearly have no idea what the criteria is for nominating articles for deletion. Koala15 (talk) 02:14, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Koala15 please enlighten me, (as you ought to on the AfD page), what parts of WP:NFOE does it pass. 16 reviews does not a " has received full-length reviews by two or more nationally known critics. "make. The film is widely distributed it isn't even released. Totally flunks #2. And #3 and #4 and #5. And as for the next 3 alternative criteria, nope, maybe, and nope. And what part of NFF does it fall under. You may be an admin, but personal attacks and lack of form don't give credence to your "case".L3X1 My Complaint Desk 02:27, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

• I have to agree with Koala15 here. The film passes NFILM quite cleanly. Prior to its screening at Sundance the casting and film process got quite a bit of coverage because of the star power behind the film, but especially because it was such a change in genre for Peele. Per NFF a film can pass notability guidelines prior to release if there has been a lot of coverage for the casting and filming process, and we have confirmation that principal photography has begun.

However that's a moot point when you look at the reviews the movie has received. You say that the 16 reviews at Rotten Tomatoes do not count, however you didn't look to see who has reviewed this movie. Several well known, well respected outlets such as the AV Club, Variety, RogerEbert.com, The Hollywood Reporter, and Consequence of Sound have reviewed this film - and they are all considered to be outlets that would qualify as reliable sources per review criteria. This isn't even taking into consideration the reviews by well known horror outlets like Bloody Disgusting, JoBlo, and Daily Dead. Reviews and coverage by these sites undergo editorial oversight and are almost always written by a staff member. Even when you have guest pieces, the work is edited unless otherwise posted on the work in question. You also posted at the AfD and stated that the plot synopsis section was too promotional, however you did nothing to fix this issue and instead took it to AfD. AfD is not meant to be a cleanup process for things that can be easily fixed.

I don't normally ask things like this, but I'd like to ask that you refrain from nominating anything for deletion until you are more familiar with Wikipedia's guidelines on notability and sourcing. This film very clearly passes notability guidelines and there wasn't a chance of deletion, so I closed the AfD per WP:SNOW. The AfD process requires that you have a good working knowledge of the subject matter at hand, in this case which media outlets are considered to be reliable sources and which are not when it comes to reviews and what would be enough coverage to pass any of the criteria at NFILM. I just don't see where you really understand NFILM. Now don't take that badly. It's easy to get caught up in things when you first start editing and then end up making mistakes because you're new - we've all been there. However the important thing is to take these mistakes in stride and use them as a learning experience. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:30, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

• It actually looks like you're going into several different areas of Wikipedia without really being aware of guidelines and the proper course of action - I see immediately above that you were dinged for incorrectly labeling something as vandalism. Please be careful because while you might mean well, this sort of thing can be seen as disruptive, especially if your actions can be seen as a bit too gruff or even hostile and drive other users away. If you make a mistake once, that's fine, but repeating these actions and behaviors can actually lead to you getting brought to WP:ANI and getting banned from performing certain actions or even getting blocked outright, either temporarily or permanently. You're a new user and there's nothing wrong with you getting excited about editing, but you're just not ready to edit in the areas that you're dabbling in right now. I'd recommend sticking to basic editing and improving articles so you can get a better understanding of policy and guidelines. There's nothing wrong with taking your time - many of us waited a good year before we started taking things to AfD or doing vandalism patrol, as there's a very specific process that you have to go by in these situations. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation Tokyogirl79. I'm sorry about, this I will be more careful in the future what I send to AfD. I don't suppose I can ask Koala15 to read WP:BITE? L3X1 My Complaint Desk 13:28, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

There is no way that a political operator like Hitler would have issued this order against a decorated hero like Rommel and anyway the change was not sourced. Britmax (talk) 17:40, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

??? Britmax Either Hitler or the SS gave the order, I can't remember. What do you mean, "there is no way". L3X1 My Complaint Desk 17:42, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Pretty self explanatory.I'd have thought. Britmax (talk) 12:47, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Thankyou for your message. I am sure you sent the same message to J man708 as was warranted. It is regretful that hostility arose between myself and J man708. I asked J man708 to explain why they had completely erased my contribution to the Expanding the A-League page and his reply was hostile which led to my equally hostile reply. I did not demand anyone make a new map - I requested it because I do not have that skill. I did not fail to add references because the changes that I made were purely cut and paste and retained the existing references and lastly it did not look like a "pig's breakfast" as J man708 stated. J man708 could have stated something like "I disagreed with your change and this was the reason why" or even better could have sent me a message when making the change rather than just deleting everything and putting "Reverted back to pre-2017 edits" in the edit summary. After I had taken the time to try and improve what is a very message page how on earth did he expect me not to ask for an explanation after his rude actions. So in summary, It is regrettable that there was hostility between myself and J man708, however I don't take anymore than half the responsibility. I will make no further changes to the Expansion of the A-League page as clearly there is no point wasting time attempting to improve a page when it will likely only result in deletion. Kind Regards. 144.138.164.191 (talk) 03:55, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

That doesn't justify making personal attacks. - J man708 (talk) 23:23, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

What, like describing my edits as a "pig's breakfast"? Or how about deleting my edits without even having the decency to tell me that you were doing it, or taking the time to explain why you disagreed with them or even recommending I make changes to them? You deleted what I did without the least bit of civility and in doing so treated my edits as if they were vandalism which they certainly were not. That is why people get sick of wikipedia. But by all means - keep the A-League page for yourself. I will edit elsewhere if you insist on being territorial. Oh - and stalking my contributions to see what I am contributing or posting is a little bit childish. Please discontinue stalking me J man708 or I will lodge a complaint against you. 144.138.164.191 (talk) 13:20, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

A complaint on the basis of what? You're bad mouthing my name. I'm within my right to defend myself. Simply put, your edits were formatted in a way that I saw as severely hindering progress on the page, therefore I went back to a previous edit and made adjustments in order to update the info on it. That's not breaking protocol. But, calling someone a "dickhead" on here? Well, that's not only childish, but also slander. So, go ahead. Continue threatening me with lodging complaints. You'll cop the punishments from it, not me. BTW - Sorry L3X1 about this. - J man708 (talk) 18:23, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Note to both of you — having this discussion/chat/argument/fight/whatever on L3X1's talk page is inappropriate, simply because it gets in his way to keep getting the "You have a new message" notification when it's not at all addressed to him. Each of you has a talk page; please use one or both of them, rather than this page. Please don't respond to me here; if you do, I'll ignore the response. Nyttend (talk) 02:22, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Referring to my Joe Rogan edit, what if I can prove there isn't an open weight category at the US open Taekwondo championship? Thanks. Nothingbutideas (talk) 11:02, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello Nothingbutideas, If you can prove that the "open weight category" doesn't exist, then I will be happy to accept an edit. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 15:06, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Sry if I've resent anything. I wanted to add that there are eight weight classes in Olympic competition within wtf style tournaments, four for men and women each, but this was revised in 2000 and Joe of course would have made this apparent accomplishment in 1987. Thanks Nothingbutideas (talk) 10:19, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Citation number 9 from the Boston Globe has no more information than the original article, it even seems to quote it directly, so this can't be a reasonable citation. It's surprising that no more detailed information is available about this claim. What style of Taekwondo is one necessary detail. This regarding my Joe Rogan edit. Thank you. Nothingbutideas (talk) 15:09, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

L3X1 ( sry forgot before) Nothingbutideas (talk) 15:11, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Nothingbutideas If any information can't be found, that's okay. Thanks for your work. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 15:18, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

L3X1 I sent you other links with the rules about weight classes did you receive them? And does this justify an edit? Thank you. Nothingbutideas (talk) 17:57, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Nothingbutideas Yes I did, and I accepted your edit on Joe Rogan. Sorry about the delay. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 18:22, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

L3X1 hi, my edit was changed back on joe rogan's page, though with my last link sent I think that more detailed information to make the claim about winning the us open as a lightweight is needed. At least a reasonable explaination is needed. Thank you Nothingbutideas (talk) 10:18, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Nothingbutideas I looked at the diffs, and then did some Googling, and Joe Rogan's own website says that he won the championship at the age of 19, so I think I am misunderstanding you?L3X1 My Complaint Desk 13:25, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Germany. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello myself. Regarding the recent RvV I made: I already know about them, but I might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know I considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Oops L3X1 My Complaint Desk 02:45, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Government of the Republic of China. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm wondering why you think it contradicts WP:POSS. It actually agrees with it, unless I'm misreading something. SarahSV ^(talk) 00:32, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi SlimVirgin To quote the WP:GUH Use only apostrophe, not apostrophe and s, to form the possessive of any word ending in s: "my boss' boss". When MOS:POSS specifically states " the boss's office, Glass's books "and the rest of that sentence. Also, the page heading merely states it as opinion, not a humorous essay, which means sooner or later some editors are going to try and hold it up a Law over the MOS, which will result in confusion. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 01:07, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

The essay lists misconceptions. Some people believe that you can't write apostrophe s after a word ending in s. So they write St James' Palace, rather than St James's. The essay is in agreement with the MoS. SarahSV ^(talk) 01:17, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

• LX, the page's history shows that five longtime editors (with collectively 100 times your editing experience) had contributed to it, yet you nominated it as G1 (gibberish/nonsense). OK, that was one mistake. But now you've doubled down by nominating for MfD, apparently because you don't know what a hobbyhorse is, causing you to interpret everything the page says backwards. This is beginning to get tiresome. You're out of your depth. As Tokyogirl79 has tried to get you to see, you need to slow down and get more experience before you go around templating and nominating stuff. EEng 01:50, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

EEng#sSho then, I'll stick to CVU, improving articles, and taking Koala15's shtick. And no, I don't know what a hobbyhorse is, it's not a WP that I can find via searching. Can you enlighten me? the page's history shows that five longtime editors (with collectively 100 times your editing experience) had contributed to it, yet you nominated it as G1 (gibberish/nonsense) neither are mutually exclusive.that was one mistake. But now you've doubled down I believe I have stamped my user and talk page with "I make mistakes" several times. This is beginning to get tiresome. You're out of your depth. Sorry, I don't do these for either my entertainment or to wear you out. templating Templates have saved me from embarrassment numerous times. I'm gonna close the MfD as Snow Keep for obvious reasons, plus the general poisonous atmosphere that appears to pertain all my AfDs. Tryptofish's explanation was better than all the other !votes combined. Sincerly, L3X1 My Complaint Desk 02:40, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

• FYI, a ping doesn't work if you add it to an existing comment -- it's hard to explain exactly, but unless the {{U}} template and the ~~~~ are added in the same post, nothing happens.
• Yes it's true that many highly experienced editors have worked on it and it's gibberish aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, but it's a very strong clue. After someone (an admin!) removed the CSD template, you probably should have just asked someone (e.g. me, the creator) to explain what we apparently all saw but you didn't, before rushing on to MfD.
• A hobbyhorse is a tiresome subject someone won't let go of, with the connotation (though not denotation ) that the ideas being pressed are wrongheaded. WP:SNODGRASS lists such hobbyhorses -- non-rules that some people think are rules.
• I suggest you withdraw at WP:Requests_for_adminship/Optional_RfA_candidate_poll instantly before you get some very unpleasant rebukes about wasting community time. Have you read WP:Advice_for_RfA_candidates?
• Many new editors have run into trouble such as you have by trying to do too many new things too quickly. My advice is to keep doing content work -- creating new articles (as I see you've already done at least once), adding material to existing ones, improving text. You learn a huge amount that way which will prepare you to better participate in XfD, distinguish vandalism from mere ineptitude, etc.

Good luck! EEng 03:50, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, L3X1. First, as to your question at Requested Biographies: if an article page has been created for a person on the list, then go ahead and remove the request from the list. Second, I appreciate you've jumped in and created a page for a requested biography. That's great. However, I see that you began the article on Robert E. Valett by copy-pasting text from obituary columns that you found online. That's a very big problem. It's an absolute violation of Wikipedia rules to copy text from a copyrighted source. Please read Wikipedia:Copyright violations to understand this policy. Also, even though you then altered the text by spreading it around the article and changing a few words, it still remained a copyright violation because it closely paraphrased the source and was fundamentally the same. Please read WP:Close paraphrasing for a broader explanation about this -- and how to avoid it. I have gone ahead and rewritten the text and rev/del'ed the copyright violation. So the problem is now removed. In the future, when you add text to an article or when you create your next article, please write it from scratch using your won words. Develop that habit. And never copy paste non-free text into Wikipedia -- even into draft or userpage spaces. Wikipedia takes copyright violation very seriously and habitual offenders are always blocked from editing. If you have any questions, please ask. Or seek help from experienced editors. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:20, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

• Hello L3X1 & CactusWriter. Thank you for creating and editing this entry - it looks good! I've been following the conversation and appreciate the kind efforts - Rekha N. 12 February 2017 RekhaNuovo (talk • contribs) 00:10, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

RekhaNuovo You are certainly welcome! L3X1 My Complaint Desk 01:13, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Buffalo–Niagara Falls metropolitan area. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Did you check the TP before accepting the revision which I had already unaccepted? Reviewers are supposed to be carefully watching the trend before going on with edits. Thanks. --Mhhossein ^talk 05:45, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Mhhossein No, I did not. I did check the ref, but was unaware of any talk page discussion regarding the edits. I will let you guys accept the reviews on the article. Sorry about that. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 13:11, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome. The source actually did not support the disputed material. --Mhhossein ^talk 13:26, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi L3X1 (can I call you L3, the X1 seems so formal?).

Thanks for your support for the AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cycloidal vibration technology. I see that you've also tagged it for CSD as G11. I removed a lot of text and sources that did not comply with WP:MEDRS, so I felt that AfD was more appropriate than a straight G11 on what was left, but you may well be right that it's really a CSD candidate.

My only reservation about using CSD rather than letting the AfD take its course is that it's much easier for a promotional editor to get a WP:REFUND from an admin following a CSD (even if G11 is supposed to be an exclusion from REFUND, not all admins will necessarily know that). Just something to think about. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 16:04, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi RexxS You can call me L3 or Lex or Lexi. Thanks for explaining this to me, I have often wondered why more AfD weren't CSD instead. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 17:19, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Katherine Johnson. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sirius. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

When you close a RFC, please do not change the title of the section.(The archive box serves as a reminder that the RFC has closed!)Also, remove the RFC template.Cheers!Winged Blades ^Godric 15:59, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Winged Blades of Godric Sorry about that, and thank you for cleaning that up, I appreciate it. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 01:04, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

No problem, I know the day of the year articles attract all kinds of weird edits. -165.234.252.11 (talk) 17:12, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Willie and Joe. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello L3X1, why did I get a warning for vandalism when I only clarified a title which would otherwise mislead the reader into thinking otherwise? Please explain to me why you did that on the Houri page. - AbdullahwaMuhsin Talk 01:29, 27 February 2017

If you give be about an hour I will. Sorry about that. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 01:33, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

AbdullahwaMuhsin, ah yes. I reverted it because I did not feel it matched the styling of Wikipedia, and the current Title of the section is better at catching the eye and describing what the section is about. Hope this helps. If you want, a Request for Consensus can be held to determine which version is better. Best, L3X1 My Complaint Desk 02:08, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

L3X1 I strongly believe my version is more fitting. A request for consensus is not necessary for such a trivial matter. The current title may be eye-catching, but at the expense of possibly misleading the reader to think otherwise. The misleading title itself is self explanatory, why would they need to read more? This coincidence in the similarity of pronunciation will mislead them by making them feel as if they are related. It distracts from the main purpose - to inform what a Houri is. If you do not see the reasoning behind my change, then please do a request for consensus. AbdullahwaMuhsin 02:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

AbdullahwaMuhsin I see your reasoning, so I reverted my edit on Houri. Again, my apologies. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 12:36, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

L3X1 Thank you for doing the right thing. Your apology is accepted. :)

There are multiple chronologies of exactly when events occurred in the Middle East long ago. The "middle chronology" is currently the most favored; the "short chronology" was favored in the the quite recent past and is still used in many reference works from recent decades. I was adding the information you "helpfully" removed to clarify that an event addressed in the first and second paragraphs of one section were actually the SAME EVENT: one paragraph gives the middle chronology date and the other gives the short chronology date. (The two chronologies are separated by 64 years, which is the exact difference here!) It would be helpful to everone if you would be please revert your undoing of my helpful additions. Thank you, L3X1! 68.11.145.60 (talk) 02:13, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I will use the Pass button on STiki more often when I am not sure of the diff. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 12:39, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for directing me here.

I would appreciate some help in this situation. Of course, if the issue is seen as the cursory removal of a large criticism section, I agree that good faith should be called into question. However, context is all-important here. A concerted disinformation campaign has been raised against the organisation in question, as described on page 54 of this report.^[1] This is not to make an accusation against the people who have been editing the Wikipedia page. Certainly, though, the directions they are taking and the sources they are quoting are directly in line with the talking points of that campaign. On the 8th of February, the page was protected in order to try to resolve the dispute, and it seemed as though we had managed to come to a neutral conclusion - until last night, there had only been a couple of edits. All of a sudden, though - coinciding with the Academy Award (Oscar) won by the White Helmets documentary and just before the resulting increase in public interest with the organisation - a large number of edits were made again, repeating the same points that have been refuted in the past and expanding the criticism section to be completely out of proportion to the number of references cited (some of which are duds).

I am looking into making a complaint on Wikipedia, and haven't yet partly because I haven't had time, and partly because I'm not sure where to take the complaint. In the meantime, I reverted the edits on the grounds that they have been refuted before and that their reappearance at this time seems deeply suspect.

Thanks IbnBattuta2000 (talk) 16:37, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

IbnBattuta2000 Hello, I am glad to be of help to you. I am not sure how to go about this, except to perhaps hold a Request for Consensus, seeing as multiple editors are now using various sources to back up a certain point of view (regardless of it being neutral or not).L3X1 My Complaint Desk 20:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Operation Léa. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

So I should use user warnings? . You mean like this one: . Placed before your snarky comment. Edit history exists for a reason. Use em. It was a vandalism only account anyway. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:35, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Niteshift36 I am sorry for being snarky in that comment. I had noticed that the offending user had an empty talk page, so wrote my comment, which I should have written in a nicer manner. I have a kind of agenda when it comes to placing UW on vandal's pages, so that in the event they aren't indeffed, and vandalise again it easier to determine motives/purpose or go to AIV again. I know that when I AIV vandals w/o warning them, the report is usually overruled "User insufficiently warned." Again, I apologise for my short tempered comment. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 12:58, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

• It's all good. I appreciate your concern for the project. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:45, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for your offer of use of the sandbox, but no need: check out the quote from the book:

Thanks for now,

The Bloodbottler

Suddenly, a tremendous thumping noise came from outside the cave entrance and a voice like thunder shouted, ‘Runt! Is you there, Runt? I is hearing you jabbeling! Who is you jabbeling to, Runt?’

‘Look out!’ cried the BFG. ‘It’s the Bloodbottler!’ But before he had finished speaking, the stone was rolled aside and a fifty-foot giant, more than twice as tall and wide as the BFG, came striding into the cave. He was naked except for a dirty little piece of cloth around his bottom.

Sophie was on the table-top. The enormous partly eaten snozzcumber was lying near her. She ducked behind it.

The creature came clumping into the cave and stood towering over the BFG. ‘Who was you jabbeling to in here just now?’ he boomed.

‘I is jabbeling to myself,’ the BFG answered.

‘Pilfflefizz!’ shouted the Bloodbottler. ‘Bugswallop!’ he boomed. ‘You is talking to a human bean, that’s what I is thinking!’

‘No no!’ cried the BFG.

‘Yus yus!’ boomed the Bloodbottler...

2001:569:71BC:7100:84B8:D1EC:77D2:4FED (talk) 05:00, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Just fyi, this revert of yours was correct, but the reasoning was incorrect: this was not vandalism, but the addition of an honorific, which is an unfortunately common problem in South Asian articles, but which is still different from intentional disruption. Something to keep in mind, that's all. Vanamonde (talk) 06:26, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Vanamonde93 for pointing that out. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 13:37, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

You reverted a change to an WP:EL. However when I checked the links, I found that the new version (provided by Sheepherd2k) worked, and the one you reverted to did not, not completely. Clearly it is supposed to reach the "Serial cables" subpage at allpinouts.org, and it does not do that. (It goes to the allpinouts.org home page.) But the one provided by Sheepherd2k - the one you removed with your revert - works.

Please do not assume that all changes to ELs are "test/vandalism". Check the links before reverting, especially if the new one looks like a plausible link. I suggest that you apologize to Sheepherd2k - this was their first edit, it was obviously made in GF and was furthermore correct, and you slapped them down for it. Not good for editor retention. Jeh (talk) 23:51, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Buffalo–Niagara Falls metropolitan area. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

There appears to be a certain amoumt of revisionist opinion, posted as fact on this page.

This concerns Scott's written orders about the dog transport being dicovered more recently.

I have a copy of South with Scott and the revisionist opinion put forward about his orders to meet him at "82 or 82,30" are enirely out of context and are a tuncated passage from his wider instructions that make it clear that this was not an essential requirement for the support party but a matter of convienience. Taking into accoumt Meares refusal to carry out any more work that might cause him to miss the ship home and the condition of Lt Evans, it is understandable that this 3rd non essential journey was not given theultimate priority. It seems to me the historian May is more interested in creating name name for thhemselves than presenting the evidence witin the propoer context. I have in fromt of me a copy of South with Scott edition 1953. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have concerning the information I have added from that publication.

Scott was a typical Naval Officer of the time, he rarely consulted others about his desions and he was constantly changing his orders without taking others into his confidence.

In Huntford's book (which I don't have to hand) He issued conermanding orders to both Atkinson and Meares regarding the relief supplies. In military protocol it is always required to obey the last orders given.

When he was on his outward march, long after he left those orders at his base, he fundamentaly altered the role of Mears and his dog team. He took Mears far further South than he originally planned, so far that Mears and his assistant had to forgo one meal a day in order to get back to their base. The orders he gave to Mears, contradicted the orders he left at the base and were unclear. The essence of these orders was that the Dogs should not be risked in providing further support but that extra rations should be brought to One ton depot "in any case"

The sickness of Edgar Evans was rightly treated as a priority because Scott had not intended that the extra food brought beyond One Ton Camp was essential. He miscalculeted and he left no margin for error.

It seems many people, including contemporary historians misunderstand the nature of One Ton Depot.

This depot was not "a food store" Scott has advance a ton of stores 51 miles from his base in order to provide his poinis with a light load at the beginning of the journey over some of the most difficult ground. The bulk of "food" at One Ton Depot was heavy cases of dog biscuits and bales of compressed pony fodder.

Edgar Evens book South with Scott (Collins 1921 edition 1953) contains many details regarding the movement of supplies both in advance and during the Polar journey.

Page 152

Instructions for Motor party

(ii) carry forward from One Ton Camp ALL MAN FOOD AND FUEL IN DEPOT viz: 7 units bagged provisions, 4 boxes biscuit, 8 gallons parrafin but see that PROVISION FOR PONIES is left intact viz: 5 sacks oats; and deposit second bag of oilcake brought from corner camp (this was clearly to be used as imeadiate food for the ponies on arrival.

If motors break down (they did) take 5 weeks provision and 3 gallons extra summit oil on 10 foot sledge and continue South on easy marches.

Advance as much weight (man food) as you can convieniently carry from One Ton Camp but I do not wish you to tire any of party.

Scott arriving with his ponies was to pick up the remainder of the consumable stores left at One Ton Depot.

Therefore it is a myth that Scott died 11 miles from a large supply of food.

Evans motor party had depoted a significant amount of back up rations before even reaching One Ton Depot.

He set out with 3 motor sledges carrying 3 tons of stores, again to save the ponies work over the more difficult terrain. As each motor broke down stores were left to be picked up by the following poines.

After leaving One Ton Depot Evans proceeded about 7 days South man hauling supplies. They made a depot at around 80.50 degrees where they waited 6 days for the ponies to catch up.

During this time they made a depot of food for the returning parties. This would be the last depot that Scott reached. What is significant is that they busied themseleves for 6 days in constructing a large landmark.

page 183: I proposed to build an enormous cairn here to mark 80 1/2 degrees depot... to employ our time we worked hours at the cairn, which soon assumed giagantic proportions We called it Mount Hooper after our youngest member.

There has long been criticism aimed at Atkinson for sending Cherry Garrard forward with the extra rations as he was short sighted and had no experiencce at navigating. Yet he managed to find his way to One Ton Depot. 2 or 3 days dog ride would have taken him to this "Cairn of giagantic proportions" around about the same time as Scott was struggling to reach it.

Cherry Garrand reached One Ton Depot on 4th March and remained there until 10th March, had he proceeded to Mouint Hooper he would have met Scott there on 8th March, right at the limit of his own supplies. The problem with this scenario was Cherry Garrand was stranded at One Ton Depot by blizzard conditions and would not have been able to make Mount Hooper after even one days delay.

Thje idea that Scott's orders for the dogs were discovered in recent times is suprising to me because they are set out clearly in Evans book.

Page 169:

4. Instructions for Dog Teams

October 2o

Dear Mears, In order that there be no mistake concerning the important help which it is hoped the dog teams will give the Southern Party, I have thought it best to set out my wishes asset under:

Assumimg you carry to bags of oilcake to hut point, I want to to take these with five bags of forage to Corner Camp before the end of the month. This will leave two bags of forage at Hut Point....

Page 170:

Under favourable conditions you should be back at Hut Point by December 19 at the latest.

After sufficient rest I should like you to transport to Hut Point such emergency stores that have not yet been sent from Cape Evans. At this time you should see that the Discovery hut is provisioned to support the Southern Party and yourself in the Autumn in case the ship does not arrive.

At some point during this month or early January you should make your second journey to One Ton Camp ans leave there.

5 Units X.S. ration 3 Cases of biscuit 5 Gallons of oil As much dog food as you can convieniently carry (for third journey)

This depot should be laid not later than January 19th in case of rapid return of first unit of Southern Party.

Supposing that you have returned to hut point by January 13th, there will be nothing for you to do on the southern road for at least three weeks. In this case, and suppossing the ice conditions are favourable, I should like you to go to hut point and await the arrival of the ship.

The ship will be short-handed and may have difficulty landing stores. I should like you to give such assistance as you can without tiring the dogs.

About the first week of February I should like you to start your third journey to the South, the object being to hasten the return of the Southern unit and give it a chance to catch the ship.

The date of yor departure must depend on news recieved from returning units, the extent of the depot of dog food you have been able to leave at One Ton Camp, the state of the dogs, etc.

Assuming the ship will have to leave the Sound soon after the Middle of March, it look as though at present you should aim at meeting the returning party about March 1st in Latitude 82 or 82.30

If you are then in a position to advance a few short marches or 'mark time' for five or six days on food brought, or ponies killed, you should have a good chance of effecdting your object.

You will carry with you beyond One Ton Camp, one X.S. ration, including biscuit and one gallon of parrafin, and of course you will not wait beyond the time when you can safely return on back depots.

You will of course understand that whilst the object of the third journey is important that of the second is vital At all hazards three X.S. units of provision must be got to One Tom Camp by the date named, and if the dogs are unable to perfom this service, a man party must be organised

These orders make it clear that the journey taken by Cherry Garrard was merely to allow the returning party to meet the ship (and therefore get the news of their success or failure back to civilisation a year earlier.)

The problem with Scott's written orders was that he kept Meares on the outward journey longer than originally planned, so long that Meares and his groom had to forgo one meal a day on the return journey. Not only delaying Meares return for further work but infuriating him, that his life was placed in jeapordy by Scott's casual treatment. Meares would not under any circumstances risk missing the departure of the ship.

However the vital rations were put in place on the earlier journies as when Cherry Garrand left One Ton Depot there were 5 units of X.S. rations in storage. 3 left on the "2nd journey" and 2 he had depoted himself on the "3rd Journey".

South with Scott page 244

Concerning the attempts to support the Southern Party Scott's instruction were quite clear, and they were certainly obeyed. As a matter of fact there was never any axiety for the Southern Party until after March 10th. They themselves never imagined they would reach Hut Point before that time.

page 245

What actually happened was this, Stores were landed by those at the base station on the re-arrival of the Terra Nova, and Atkinson, who was the senior member of those now not returning to civilisation, took over the dogs according to Scott's directions. He proceeded to Hut Point with Dimitri and the 2 dog teams on 13th February but was kept in camp by bad weather until 19th, when Crean reached the Hut and brought news of my breakdown and collapse at Corner Camp. A blizzard precluded a start for the purpose of relieving me, but this expedition was undertaken immedeately the weather abated. It was only during a temporary clear that Lashley and I were rescued.

Considering my condition, Atkinson judged that if any help could be obtained from Cape Evans, his duty was to stay with me and save my life if possible, and to depute Cherry-Garrard or Wright to take the dog teams out to One Ton Depot with Dimitri.

Scott would have preferred Wright to remain at Cape Evans, because he had now relieved Simpson as Physicist.. So it was decided that Cherry-Garrard should take out the teams, which he did, with 24 days' food for his own unit and Two Weeks surplus stores for the Southern Party, with all kinds of special delicacies

The real object of this trip was to hasten the Southern Parties' return rather than to succour them

The reality of Scott's situation is that his rations were insufficient to maintain the health of his men.

Evans himself succumbed to scurvy after 14 weeks on sledging rations. Even the addition of pony meat to their diet was not enough to prevent the onset of scurvy. Scott made his depot at Mount Hooper on 8th March, being delayed by the condition of Oates. They were further delayed by Oates worstening conidtion until 17th March, by which time they should have made One Ton Depot. With little food or fuel the remainder of the group were weakened by both frostbite and scurvey as their stregnth reduced their daily travel by up to 75%. They only averaged 4 miles a day after the death of Oates. It should also be realised that after the death of PO Evans on February 17th the four remaining men had an extra ration of food to share between them. After Oates died a month later they had 40% extra rations, although had were short handed in the pulling of the sledge for much of that time. The death of PO Evans provided 5 weeks rations for one man, The death of Oates another week.

That is almost as much as the extra rations Cherry-Garrand was carrying as "surplus".

In an alternative universe, Cherry-Garrard (or Wright) undelayed by bad weather could have met Scott on March 7th at Mount Hooper, althogh this was not considered to be a priority.

Seeing the condition of Oates, he would have been put onto one of the sledges and returned in haste to Hut Point but who would have returned with him?

Would Cherry-Garrard (or Wright) swapped places with one of the weaker Polar Party and help them pull home? If so more likely Bowers (as a navigator and the weakest of the remaining three) would have taken Oates in.

Undoubtably with a fresh man in the team and with extra rations One Ton Camp would have been made before the blizzard that stranded them without sufficient food on the 21st. A further effort was made to place a weeks rations at Corner Camp on March 28th. (by which time Scott had perished) So enough food was in place if the men had enough stregnth to pull themselves home.

It seems they enered a robotic state at some point in their exhuastion, merely pulling and resting witout thinking.

Their sledge was weighed down with all kinds of broken, useless equipment and many Kilos of rock samples they had stopped to collect not long before their position became hasardous. They made no attempt to carry extra pony meat from the 10 carcesses spread over the route although they did lack the fuel to melt and cook it. On the other hand Evans, Lashly and Crean, quickly realized that their 3 man team was involved in a race for life from the onset and stole as much milage as they could, even to the extent of Evans moving his watch forward every evening to get an hour's earlier start.86.172.112.238 (talk) 16:07, 4 March 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.172.112.238 (talk)

I also feel that given the time between when I made my post and when you deleted it you did not have time to even read what I had written rather more consider it's validity. It appears that posting a link to a news article about an opinion is amore supportive of a fact than quoting the original publication. This is the danger of Wikipedia "History" people quote the reporting of facts, rather than the facts themselves, therefore opinion becomes fact and that opinion is quoted as fact across the entire world.

This is the actual text you deleted as "unconstructive" this text follows on directly from the truncated quote of Scott's instructions and clearly puts into context the priority he placed upon being met "at 82'00 or 82.30 south"

The full passage in this book contains further details which put this instruction into a clearer context.

1) Under favourable circumstances you should be back at Hut Point by December 19th at the Latest. After sufficient rest I should like you to transport to Hut Point such emergency stores as have not been sent from Cape Evans (This can be referred to as Journey one for clarity)

2) At some time during this month or early January you should make your second journey to One Ton Camp and leave there:

5 Units X.S. ration 3 cases biscuit. 5 Gallons of Oil As much Dog food as you can convieniently carry (for third journey)

This depot should be laid not later than 19th January in case of rapid return of first Polar Party.

3) Text as above "About the first week of february ...etc.

4) You will carry with you beyond One Ton Camp one X.S. ration, including biscuit and one gallon of parrafin, and of course you will not wait beyond the time when you can safely return on back depots.

You will of course understand that while your third journey is important, that of the second is viatl. At aall hazards three X.S. units of provision must be got to One Ton Camp by the date named, and if the dogs are unable to perform this service, a man party must be orgainised.

The essence of these orders is clear. The essential supplies must be placed at One Ton Camp by January 19th on the second journey

The Third journey to meet the returning Polar party was important but not essential. If the Polar party returned before the ship sailed, the news of the conquest of the Pole would reach the outside world 12 months earlier and could prevent any dispute with a counter claim by Amundsen.

Evans covers this in more detail when describing the events after his own breakdown on the return journey in Chapter 17

Concerning the attempts to support the Southern Party, Scott's instructions were quite clear, and they were certainly obeyed. As a matter of fact there was never any anxiety felt for the Southern Party until after March 10th. They themselves never imagined they would reach Hut Point before that time and as the last supporting party has won through short-handed , and after pulling in harness for 1,500 miles (Scott's team covered 30% of that distance with ponies), it was not concidered likely that the Southern Party would fail - unless overtaken by scurvy.

What actually happened was this. Atkinson, who was the senior member of those not returning to civilization took over the dogs according to Scott's directions. He proceeded to Hut Point with Dimitri and the two dog teams on 13th February, and was kept in camp by bad weather until 19th, when Crean reached the hut (after walking for 18 hours through a blizzard) and brought in news of my breakdown and collapse at Corner Camp. A blizzard precluded a start for the purpose of relieving me, but this expedition was undertaken when the weather abated. It was only during a temporary clear that Lashly and I were rescued.

Considering my condition, Atkinson judged that if help could be obtained from Cape Evans, his duty was to stay with me and save my life if possible, and to depute Cherry-Garrard or Wright to take the dog teams to One Ton Camp with Dimitri.

Scott would have preferred Wright to remain at Cape Evans, because he had now relieved Simpson as Physicist. So it was decided that Cherry-Garrard should take out the teams which he did, with twenty four days' food for his own unit and Two weeks surplus stores for the Southern Party with all kinds of special delicacies

The real object of this trip was to hasten the Southern Pary's return rather than to succour them

Cherry-Garrard arrived at One Ton Camp with enough dog food to travel another 6 days.... 3 days out and 3 days back. enough to reach the next depot and return if he was not to kill the dogs one by one to feed the others.

Quoting from South with Scott again: They however, reached One Ton Camp on March 4th and were held there by blizzard weather which made travelling impossible. Temperatures of -40 below zero and lower were experienced and the dogs were suffering acutely, and Cherry Garrard had to decide on the better course - to remain at One Ton Camp, which Scott would surely make, if thus far North, or to scout and risk missing the returning party while using up the dogs' remaining strength. He very properly remained at One Ton Camp and after satisying himself that over a month's supply of travelling rations were in the depot, Cherry-Garrard started homeward.

After 6 days travel through closing weather, with the ravenous dogs out of control and a groom who could barely speak English

"Late on March 16th they won through to Hut Point in exceedingly bad condition, Atkinson was seriously alarmed and had two more sick men to nurse back to stregnth. The dogs were frost-bitten and gaunt and quite unfit for further work that season."

Taken in context Scott's orders and how his men carried them out does not only follow to the letter his instructions but also illustates the extreme effort of everyone involved. Both Crean and Lashly were awarded the Albert Medal for saving Lt Evans and Atkinson quite rightly prioritised saying his life over hastening the news of the Polar attempt back to the outside world.

Cherry-Garrard arrived later at One Ton Camp than would Atkinson if he had not rushed out to save Evans but it is inconcievable that Evans and Lashly would have been left to die just a few hours from safety to follow a non essesntial instruction.

I have no wish to "sandbox" anything nor do I wish to get involved in the politics of who decides what our history should be ALA 1984. If the historian May wishes to Quote Edgar Evans book, It should be done in context as not as a whitewash to put Scott back on a pedestal at the expense of other men. Just because someone who sounds important says something it does not follow that it is above further examination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.172.112.238 (talk) 18:54, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I reverted this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Falcon_Scott&type=revision&diff=768583440&oldid=768572091 because the only thing you wrote (which supposedly "I didn't read") was (disputed see talk page.) the correct tag would have been {{Disputed inline|}}. Because you do not appear to be a regular editor, I didn't expect you to know this. But, the reason I didn't just reformat the edit was because there is nothing on the talk page concerning the lead except a SEMI protection notice due to IP socking by a banned editor. If you would like to resolve this with other editors who know more than I do on the subject of Scott, A Request for Consensus (RfC) can be held. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 19:51, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello L3X1! Fire 003 here.I don't know how to talk so I'm printing it here. I'm sure about my editings in Diya Aur Baati Hum. I have seen its trailer so I request you to undo your editing as it would be vandalism by you, sir. Fire003 Talk 07:24, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello Fire003, I will reinstate your edit. Due to all the editing afterwards, I will have to do it by hand. Thanks for helping with the project. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 14:51, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

About your comment at ANI. When Artinpl used the word a******ery, he was only quoting what Poeticbent had previously said in his edit comment reverting Artinpl's edit. He wasn't using it as an insult, he was asking why Poeticbent was getting away with saying it. It was that edit, and the following one, that lead to this ANI. Sorry to raise it here instead of at ANI, but I've already taken a lot of flak recently about the way I phrase things at ANI, so I'm trying to avoid commenting on anything controversial there. Nfitz (talk) 18:52, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Nfitz for pointing that out, I didn't connect the two comments, I look like such an idiot. SMH. I suppose I should reread BITE again, as its been a month. To me, Bishonen's comment derailed the ANI, and provided a cover for Poeticbent to get out of punishment for their awful ES. I dunno why they think you hand out too much advice (the aphabet soup comment). I learn a lot about how Wikipedia operates off the AN/ and ANI pages. Should I retract or strikethrough my little rant at Artipl? Thanks again for helping me. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 19:17, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm no expert (apparently!). But I'd put another entry noting the error, and strikeout the relevant text. Nfitz (talk) 23:07, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

User talk:101.161.174.12

User talk:101.175.20.105

User talk:58.166.91.10

User talk:121.217.215.56

User.42

58.164.3.68

Possibles:

101.175.134.41

Note from 2-6-17 performed WHOIS, all of the above source from Canberra or Melbourne.

120.155.57.155

1.144.97.90

Hello, L3X1, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (talk) 15:48, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.

Generally, there is no reason to report usernames with no edits whatsoever. Per WP:UAAI :"Wait until the user edits. Do not report a user that hasn't edited unless they are clearly a vandal. We do not want to welcome productive editors with a report at UAA, nor do we want to waste our time dealing with accounts that may never be used." The exceptions are obvious hate speech or names that attack a living person/Wikipedia editor, those are blockable even without any edits, but other run-of-the-mill violations need not be reported unless and until they at least attempt to edit, and you should be able to clearly explain what the problem is if it is not immediately evident.

For whatever reason, every day dozens, if not hundreds of accounts are created that never make one single edit. It is our reposnibility as admins to conscientiously review every report a user makes at UAA, so we have to check for contribs, deleted contribs, and tripping of the edit filter for every one of these reports, only to find out there's nothing there and therefore no problem to be solved. So we add the {{wait}} tag to the report, it goes to WP:UAA/HP for a week or more, and must then be reviewed again to see if the account has since become active before removing it. That's time that could be spent doing more productive things, but you basically obligate admins to do it by making such reports. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:35, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Beeblebrox I just reread UAAI, and I apologise for making a mess of UAA and wasting admins time, I will be more selective when monitoring the log.L3X1 My Complaint Desk 22:45, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Great, I have to tell you that even if they had edited, many of these would still be declined. There is no requirement that a username be "serious" or even make sense. See WP:UNCONF. Be sure what you are reporting really is primarily a username issue and not more of a behavioral one. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:49, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello. You recently undid my GFE to Jason Morgan (General Hospital). The edit was to the name of a newborn child who, during the course of her mother's pregnancy, has been consistently referred to by her family as "Scout." The character was previously shown only as Baby Girl Morgan. The addition is meant to provide clarity through specificity. Thank you. Drpantaloons (talk • contribs) 00:13, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Drpantaloons Thanks for contacting me about, sorry for the error. Because of the edits that have since occurred, I didn't revert it, but you can add the info in if it is lacking. Thanks for helping out, and sorry for the calling your edit vandalism. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 03:40, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey und Guten Abend, L3X1. Did you recently undid my GFE to Michael Ledeen? --87.156.238.47 (talk) 17:21, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Ja. I am looking into the matter now. L3X1 (distant write) 17:24, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

I reverted my edit, sorry about that. Can't even remember why I thought that was a bad edit. L3X1 (distant write) 17:26, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Vielen Dank! Irren ist menschlich ;-) Küsschen --87.156.238.47 (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cold War II. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

...either or both my Bertrand Russell quote or, given some of the plurals you use, my "battleaxen."

The Tesla automobile and the very ambitious Elon Musk both seem to me very fine. Tesla himself, by contrast, strikes me as a jerk.

He was quite right about alternating current, or perhaps he hitched his wagon to the right star in Westinghouse. His sparky machine was nice for the movies, particularly before the talkies came in. Everything else about the man seems to me part of a very silly 19th-Century strain of thought that infected a number of cults, universalism, pantheism, Orientalism, All That Stuff... One of those dips said "I accept the Universe," apparently to some acclaim. The event was salient enough for George Bernard Shaw to reply "She'd better."

Cheers,

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 17:26, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:George Wylde. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Dear L3X1,

Quantum Shape Dynamics is an emerging field of research that is baby stepping at the moment. I created it as a stub article for future reference other to contribute. It is not an advertisement of the quantum shape dynamics webpage. I request you not to delete it.

Hope my comment is useful. Best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hezarfen.Ceragi (talk • contribs) 21:56, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

 Done Hezarfen.Geragi I removed the deletion tag, but admins will have to decide whether it will stay or not (I'm not an admin). I did stub class it, and added some categories. Thanks for contributing. L3X1 (distant write) 22:03, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Forest Lawn Memorial Park (Glendale). Legobot (talk) 04:23, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Saying that De Niro has been in 5 of the top 100 greatest american films of all time according to AFI is not an act of vandalism,so please stop removing this edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.13.191.4 (talk) 22:17, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Does it have to go in the lead? L3X1 (distant write) 22:22, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of violent incidents in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, January–June 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello L3X1. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog (around 15,000 pages) down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 19:52, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sean Spicer. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (people). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

i made a mistake when i edited george hw bush on the international democrat union wikipedia page, i quickly changed it back. i was not trying to vandalise or cause any disruption. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Ok. L3X1 (distant write) 16:40, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey L3X1. Thanks for the heads up on the deletion. I am really trying to figure this whole thing out. 135 IQ and get on here and I am half braindead. Any video links or ideas to help me get rocking on this?

Film Fanatical10069 (talk) 04:03, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Maksim Chmerkovskiy. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Natalie Portman. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

	The Anti-Vandalism + STiki Barnstar
	Congratulations, L3X1! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (talk) 23:52, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

West.andrew.g Thanks for the award and for making this awesome tool! I look forward to using it more. L3X1 (distant write) 00:47, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for beating me to the vandalism in Lehigh_Blue_Mountain_and_Northern_Railroad! I had it in an open edit and was exploring the matter when I got sidetracked.

But, Wow! Returning to my open edit tab... You are really tough to hang so many controversial tags at once. You think that's wise for stub class article? You also ignored the fact it is uncatted. Do compare to Reading, Blue Mountain, and Northern Railroad... I'm trying to figure if this is a name change by the RBMN corporation, since the Lehigh Valley seems to have become more central to its newer operations. Know anyone in the Coal Region who may know local news coverage? // FrankB 17:08, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Fabartus I totally forgot to add uncat to the tags! I had configured the new page feed to show me all uncategorised articles, and then forgot to add the very tag I meant to. Oh well.I don't know anyone in the region, having never been to Pennslyvania, so sorry about that. L3X1 (distant write) 18:59, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

I took care of it, here with some time to research the name and puruse the article closer, letting me have some insights you might not. I've been specializing lately a lot in the geography and industrial history of the region, and am a railfan which has walked the corporate yard at Duryea. A closer read states this was a previous name for the company I know, which leaves the question as to whether it existed long enough to be given a short article, and its contents. Railroad history is filled with predecessor corporations (e.g. the several consolidation/acquisition steps from a Quakake Railroad to a Class I Railroad such as the Lehigh Valley Railroad) so I best study a couple of good progressions and fix that up. // FrankB 21:44, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: No real reason... other than I saw this wonderful looking fish at the top of your page and it told me to do this. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 22:48, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Please go a bit easier on the tagging. Yes, there was a lot wrong with Pawing, Leyte, but:

• no evidence of COI (if living in a place counted as a COI then practically every town or village article would be so labelled);
• "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for academics."??? it's a place, not a person - and populated places get a free pass on notability anyway;

And while you're page-curating an article, why not stop and clean it up a bit, rather than just slamming on a load of tags and moving on? You could remove the glaringly inappropriate author info, format the lead, and even link the location. It didn't take long. PamD 22:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, PamD. I will follow DIY more instead of just drive-by tag bombing. L3X1 (distant write) 22:46, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Mabalu. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, The End of Time (short film), and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Mabalu (talk) 00:49, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I see User:PamD has already commented on this, but I have been doing some page curating myself, and I regularly do a search for reviewed pages without categories so that I can tidy them up. This also pulls up some poor articles that should never have been passed as they currently stand. In many cases, this is because a speedy delete or request for deletion was removed, but the page remains marked as reviewed - but in other cases, when I look at the page history, I see nothing to indicate this, which means that SOMEONE approved the article as it stood. I have noticed that that someone almost always seems to be you. While it's great that you are curating articles, please be very careful when approving them. For example, The End of Time (short film) was approved by you in its current state, but has so many issues that it should never have been passed without at least some tagging and/or cleanup, or at least a nomination for deletion. The referencing is messy and seems to be primary sourcing (no reliable third-party sources to show notability, the article reads a bit press-releasey/promotional or at least copied from press releases, and the film hasn't even been released yet. I am marking it as unreviewed, but I thought I should also come here and ask you to be more careful with your page-curating. Remember, it is OKAY to leave a page for someone else to review/tackle if you are in doubt about whether or not to approve it. Thanks so much - we do need page curators, so your assistance is appreciated, but we do also need them to do a good job, so please aim to do so in future. Mabalu (talk) 00:55, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Ooops my bad. At least now I know how I got onto Milcho Manchevski… I'll explain in the morning L3X1 (distant write) 01:52, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

• Mabalu How the events of yesterday came to pass. I am not attempting to evade responsibility for my actions, just providing background.

A couple days ago I changed my Feed options to display orphaned and uncatergorised pages, newest to oldest. I usually add necessary tags, check for plagiarism and copyvios, and move on. Several I tagged for CSD, but most of them were declined because they didn't line up with the criteria I tagged them for, so I had to AfD them. Yesterday The End of Time showed up, and instantly raised some red flags due to the style of writing. I Googled the film and found that the title is quite common, and that Wikipedia has articles on a film from 2013 or 2012. This made me concerned regarding its ability to pass Nfilm, but I refrained from nominating it for the time being. In a secondary check for notability, I clicked on Milcho Manchevski, and in the shock and rebound from that nasty surprise, I guess I forgot all about The End of Time and must have pressed the accept button, which is my mistake, as the article in it's then state was totally unacceptable, and I had even forgotten to do my usual taggings of Uncat, unref, notability disputed, and rewrite. I hope my record reflects the fact that is was a mistake, not my modus operandi. As for This also pulls up some poor articles that should never have been passed as they currently stand. for some reason, when I use Page Curationt to tag something, it automatically accepts the page (same with nominating for deletion). I used to undo this automatically acceptance, but then I figured that this was so the same articles weren't shown over and over again to page curators, kinda like the Pass notice in STiki, so I stopped un-accepting this. Should I make sure to un-accept poor article after tagging them? L3X1 (distant write) 16:29, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello! I know exactly what you mean about the automated reviewing - it is a PAIN in the proverbial, I usually try to un-accept articles I have tagged if I feel that they need a second pair of eyes to look at them. If the tags are sufficent to cover the issues, and the article itself isn't excruciatingly bad, then I may let it slide. But I do understand what you are saying. Just a little bit more care in future, eh? (something I should try for myself too...) Mabalu (talk) 16:34, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello L3X1, I came across the article for Milcho Manchevski today, and I was a bit shocked at what I found in the edit history there. It looks that first you added a notability tag and a unreferenced tag. Granted, it needed an unreffed tag, but Notability? Then shortly thereafter that, you gutted and BLP prodded the article. Again, granted the BLP prod was reasonable, but did you think of possibly looking the guy up on google or something before gutting 17K of information and material from the article? I have to show good faith and think, well maybe this guy might live in a country that doesn't allow access to google or something.

Inside of 45 minutes after I clicked the article subjects name in google, I easily found five good reliable sources for one citation needed tag, some of the films, and including an academy award nomination for one of the films. There must be some sort of explanation. Notability? Just curious. Happy editing. Antonioatrylia (talk) 04:02, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Antonioatrylia I guessed he passed Ndirector from his works but wasn't sure After conducting a Google search and confirming with another editor, I was satisfied that he met Notability guidelines and so removed the PROD. I added the prod notice in the beginning, because I had no idea the scope of the problem (possible sockpuppetry, COI) and had not yet decided to actively resolve the problem, which involved taking it to AN/I for more help. Thanks for helping fix the article. L3X1 (distant write) 14:43, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

If you try Bing.com you will uncover other sources. Searches not coextensive with google.com. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:45, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Reza Aslan. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Greetings! You recently reverted an addition I made to Pakistan Armed Forces pertaining to their perpetration of the 1971 Bangladesh genocide. I am not an experienced editor so if their was something wrong with my edit I would be grateful if you could explain it to me. My edits were properly sourced and contained information on a vital point in the history of the Pakistan Armed Forces. Hotchpotcher (talk) 09:32, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Ok so I just realized that I made a huge typo and put the death toll at up to 3 000 000 000 and am mortified! Thanks for catching it. I have made another edit now pending approval with the correct death toll. I think the article needs to contain some mention of the genocide. Check out the talk page if you are interested in contributing further, and thanks for your patience with this inexrepienced editor! Hotchpotcher (talk) 12:23, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ernest Hemingway. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

L3X1 (distant write)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

More information Views/Day, Quality ...

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
5		Macedonia Timeless (talk)	Add sources
79		The Strangers (American band) (talk)	Add sources
819		Places in Harry Potter (talk)	Add sources
345		Semi-major and semi-minor axes (talk)	Add sources
5,149		Republic of Macedonia (talk)	Add sources
146		John Fante (talk)	Add sources
260		The Silkworm (talk)	Cleanup
96		West Liberty University (talk)	Cleanup
26		Lehigh Line (Norfolk Southern) (talk)	Cleanup
13		Amber Waves of Grain (talk)	Expand
9		Walking the Line (Merle Haggard, George Jones and Willie Nelson album) (talk)	Expand
775		Peoria, Illinois (talk)	Expand
1,858		Jay Mohr (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
1,190		Jimmy Kimmel Live! (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
152		PATCO Speedline (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
232		China Telecom (talk)	Merge
37		Munishswaran (talk)	Merge
66		Billion years (talk)	Merge
128		ExxonMobil climate change controversy (talk)	Wikify
593		Jonah Ray (talk)	Wikify
210		Macrotis (talk)	Wikify
5		Daripara Zaher Uddin Model Girls School (talk)	Orphan
3		Jaguli B. L. High School (talk)	Orphan
3		Riding Into History (talk)	Orphan
4		Duke Bojadziev (talk)	Stub
7		Near-equatorial orbit (talk)	Stub
8		Two Old Friends (talk)	Stub
23		Cruiser yacht (talk)	Stub
20		Ngila Dickson (talk)	Stub
666		Frankie Adams (talk)	Stub

Close

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:06, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm kidding! You raise a good point though - given they made that edit a a little while earlier today, and haven't edited again they don't need blocking in my opinion. If they pipe up again with something similar then they'll get blocked straight off the bat. As for the super speedy archive, RevDel-able material should ideally have as little attention as possible. Happy editing -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 19:03, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Riding Into History, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yamaha TZR. 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) 10:21, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Such links are almost always unintended… says who? Did you run a survey or something? I always mean to direct to a DAB, or is it illegal? Now look at me, talking to a Bot who can't hear or speak, and who must be carried hither and thither upon the backs of men. Ahab never had this problem. :) L3X1 (distant write) 13:58, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Robert Plant. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ann Thetis Blacker. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

The reason I removed the categories in Interstate 24 in Illinois was because the article was merged back into the parent article. Therefore, it might be better if you refrained from giving me immediate warnings for the moment. ToThAc (talk) 02:28, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

ToThAc My apologies. L3X1 (distant write) 14:12, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Erik Prince. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 31 March 2017 (UTC)