User talk:PuppyMonkey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
November 2025
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Mein Kampf. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. General Ization Talk 16:47, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- I would just like to mount an immediate defense, @General Ization. The edits were not unconstructive and any appearance of vandalism must have been an oversight. Furthermore, it was not experimentation: I was just fixing some punctuation and adding a link. PuppyMonkey (talk) 18:53, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- Please study the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Changing italics to bold for the title of a published work is unconstructive and not in keeping with the MOS. See MOS:TITLE and MOS:BOLD. Adding a <nowiki> template in the middle of a formatting directive is not constructive (and doesn't work). Linking "annotated" is not constructive; it is a commonly-understood word, and if someone doesn't know what that word means, they should consult a dictionary, not an encyclopedia. See MOS:OVERLINK. I accept that you did not intend to vandalize, but I suggest that you study the MOS and other references further before you attempt to make similar changes. General Ization Talk 19:36, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- @General Ization, I will review the Manual of Style, and work harder on not OVERLINKing. I did not change the title to bold on my side; the "<nowiki>" worked for me – it is what the Visual Editor added automatically when I attempted to put single quotes (') around the English translation. For me, it kept it as italics with single quotes. I will look at the documentation more, but I will explain my rationale: the importance of the annotations to the German republishing makes it critical to understand the precise functions of annotations in this context; the wiki link serves to highlight this importance, and prompt further clarification. PuppyMonkey (talk) 19:51, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- OK, I better understand your goal. However, I'm not sure why you would use single quotes in this way. (It is not a quote within a quote.) If anything, it should neither be italicized (it is not in fact the title of the work) or in bold, and it should be in double quotes. The construct you generated is likely to be misunderstood by other editors, and likely corrupted in the future. After reverting your edit, the sentence is still awkwardly formatted (nearly the entire sentence is italicized, and it need not be). Let me see if I can simplify it. As for a link to "annotated", I still think that is a very roundabout way to increase recognition and understanding of a commonly-understood word for both English- and German-speaking readers. General Ization Talk 20:06, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- @General Ization, I will review the Manual of Style, and work harder on not OVERLINKing. I did not change the title to bold on my side; the "<nowiki>" worked for me – it is what the Visual Editor added automatically when I attempted to put single quotes (') around the English translation. For me, it kept it as italics with single quotes. I will look at the documentation more, but I will explain my rationale: the importance of the annotations to the German republishing makes it critical to understand the precise functions of annotations in this context; the wiki link serves to highlight this importance, and prompt further clarification. PuppyMonkey (talk) 19:51, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- Please study the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Changing italics to bold for the title of a published work is unconstructive and not in keeping with the MOS. See MOS:TITLE and MOS:BOLD. Adding a <nowiki> template in the middle of a formatting directive is not constructive (and doesn't work). Linking "annotated" is not constructive; it is a commonly-understood word, and if someone doesn't know what that word means, they should consult a dictionary, not an encyclopedia. See MOS:OVERLINK. I accept that you did not intend to vandalize, but I suggest that you study the MOS and other references further before you attempt to make similar changes. General Ization Talk 19:36, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 25
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Second, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transition frequency was added.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 25 March 2026 (UTC)