My apologies. The content I removed was from the deaths section where someone had placed a number of December births in the December deaths area. Those births remain in the birth section, didn't know why it was doubled up in deaths, so I simply removed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.115.112.152 (talk) 01:08, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, good call. Thanks for taking the time to explain that! I just saw an anonymous user deleting large amounts of text for no apparent reason, and so it looked like vandalism to me. I've gone ahead and removed that again. Cheers, -- Irn (talk) 02:55, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You may wish to comment at the Ariana Grande Talk page. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:50, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up. I don't have anything additional to add to the conversation at this moment, but I'll keep an eye on it. Cheers, -- Irn (talk) 18:29, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Re evaluate Alec Baldwin edits, not all bad? TXS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccawblake (talk • contribs) 19:40, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You're absolutely right – they weren't all bad. I mentioned that in my edit summary, and I tried to explain, but I got cut off. (Twinkle didn't stop me from writing more, but then when I published it, it just replaced what I had written with “...”) While most of the edits definitely suffered from WP:OVERLINK, (For example, there's no reason to link the word “coach” or “voicemail”.) I agree that some of the links added were useful. However, I tried to only undo the edits that were full of overlinking, but the software wouldn't let me – I had to either undo everything or go through and manually remove all of the excess links. Since there were so many excess links, undoing all of it seemed like a better option to me. I admit that that was lazy of me, and I apologize for completely undoing what you obviously spent time and energy working on. But in my opinion, the sum of the edits was more harmful to the article than beneficial, so it seemed like the best option to me.
And unrelated to that, are you using two accounts? Because you might want to check out the policy on that. Cheers, -- Irn (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
hey, you always delete my entries for no reasons. All my entries rely on true facts if you have any problems with that or don't believe me please use the internet to check my posts before deleting them. If this happens again we can also talk with an Admin. Greetings — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jugro (talk • contribs) 17:16, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've had to decline this, you may want to review the criteria for WP:BLPPROD, because they are persnickety. Pretty much any link, no matter how unreliable, is enough to preclude the use of that tag. No concerns about pursuing this via PROD or AfD, however. --joe deckertalk 14:28, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Revision jumper: Next to last editors button[edit]
Hey, re: the issues around revisionjumper. If you find any such link, it would be very nice forwarding them to me so that I can test if I can replicate and fix it. Thanks, —DerHexer(Talk) 15:36, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@DerHexer: Thank you so much for your interest in fixing this! It's been happening off and on, but every time it happens, I rollback the change, so I have no link to share with you. However, I finally had it happen again with a diff that I won't be rolling back: here. Cheers, -- Irn (talk) 13:07, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Irn! I wanted to update you on my progress in editing the Honduras page since you commented on my proposal to edit it. I've added some information under both Poverty and Economic Inequality pages that I've added. It's still a work in progress and I'll be adding information as I continue my research. Additionally I added sections for Gender and Racial and Ethnic Inequality. I still need to add information there. I was wondering what you thought of my edits. Let me know! Thanks so much for the help. GHumphrey97 (talk) 17:06, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Irn, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please be aware that your welcome template, such as you recently placed in User talk:Dreamer plox, is shy one closing </div>; see my change. —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:19, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Irn. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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.
Hello: thanks for your thoughts on this page. I too am wondering if Medium is sufficient as a source for a BLP and am concerned about the precedent that this creates for other BLPs. Plus, it seems like this is a case of someone whose own experiences and process had ended years before the firing, and is now commenting on the firing, in which case I'm not sure that it gives insight to the firing. Thoughts? Torren (talk) 01:46, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good call. You're right, I should have just left that out. While the source is good for for what its author experienced, that's not good enough for contentious material in a BLP. -- irn (talk) 16:02, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your consideration and work! Torren (talk) 03:12, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
Hi Irn I don't think we have spoken before. I see you have reverted my edit to removal to remove the promotional language from the Margot Robbie. Irn, when you see advertising you try and remove it. It does say promoting in the language of the text. It does reduce the Wikipedia in value when there is so much advertising, and there is plenty of place on web, where they can advertise until their hearts contents. If it is goes back, then i'm going to post it WP:COIN and they will deal with it. I have reverted it. scope_creep (talk) 17:26, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that it's advertising, as I said on the article's talk page. Please re-join that conversation. (And who has a conflict of interest here? That doesn't make sense.) -- irn (talk) 17:32, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My edits were made due to the repeated questions on the talk page such as [1][2]. It is very good to have the list of topics on the top. 91.124.117.29 (talk) 18:04, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
I wouldn't consider my editing to be unconstructive; I don't think the page defined 'systemic racism' or evidenced it. Also, all people may experience racism. Happy to discuss how best to treat a difficult topic.
Hi, could you explain if my edit was inaccurate, and if so, why? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoarefan (talk • contribs) 17:04, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You and MrX have been (Personal attack removed) If it continues, I will be going to AN/I with a complaint. This is the only polite warning you will receive. -- ψλ ● ✉✓ 18:28, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Removed personal attack per WP:TPG. Irn, please see history if you want to see the personal attack.- MrX 🖋 18:37, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Removal, due to you citing the notabilitiy policy which was placed by you @ 21:45, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[edit]
Dear Irn.
having Viewed the Notability Policy, I feel I do meet the criteria. it states that sufficient independent coverage must be achieve, i having had several already published independent newspapers, several local newspapers and also a national television appearance, as well as being written about on several websites, all of which have been done by other people, non of which have been done by myself, I will now list the independent coverage I have received with links where possible:
I have been mentioned in the following national newspaper:'
written about in the national british newspaper the daily express both in the paper and online, and I quote "In one case, Daniel Johnson, who was awarded a medal and a rosette by Princess Anne for his heroics during a bloody tour of Afghanistan, was refused housing because his needs were not considered urgent enough......."
given the fact that I have, as is demonstrated above, I indeed have received independent coverage that would be deemed as significant as defined in the Wikipedia notability policy, please can you reinstate my original edit to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_named_Daniel which was "Daniel Johnson (born 1986) English Actor and Former British Army Solider"
taking all of the above into account I would feel that if my name is not reinstated to the Wikipedia page this would be a blatant discrimination against myself made by Wikipedia and/or persons authorised to operate in a capacity for Wikipedia further newspaper coverage pertaining to myself
Yeah, no worries! You did revert some vandalism. There was just more before it that couldn't be rolled back. Cheers, -- irn (talk) 20:51, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Re: this, good catch and thanks for correcting it. -- ψλ ● ✉✓ 17:15, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, no worries! I wasn't sure why you reverted me on that aspect with just "wording" as a reason, so I thought I should explain it a little more thoroughly. Cheers, -- irn (talk) 18:10, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That IP is an ip-hopping ;long-term abuser who has been blocked dozens of times for spamming articles and talkpages with Macy's parade garbage. There are admins who block on sight. Just revert and leave a summary such as "Macy's parade LTA" Meters (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the welcome. I find it curious that you would comment about my undoing the contributions of other editors. In fact, the reason I've been editing the page is because their information is inaccurate. Greenwald and Miranda are partners, NOT spouses. I made the edits to reflect PARTNER and they kept changing it back to SPOUSE. Those editors were doing the exact same thing of which I'm being accused. Moreover, it's not my preferred version of Glenn Greenwald's page, it's correct and accurate and the information was easily searchable by doing one's due diligence. Before I responded to you I see, in fact, that someone DID change it to partner, exactly what I did, yet I'm being threatened with a block. A logical, feasible and intelligent reason would be welcome about WHY I'm being targeted when I made the edits to reflect "partner" in the first place. I can assure you, I will no longer be doing any edits on Wikipedia after being treated like this, most especially when I was right to begin with. I've also noticed that editors put false information about people on Wikipedia on a fairly consistent basis. For the most part, libelous content is costly and embarrassing. Thank you. DVMNYC (talk) 12:13, 14 May 2018 (UTC) DVMNYC[reply]
Hello Irn. I tried today my first Wikipedia edit, so I am a total beginner. I noticed my edit to the Virginia Raggi aticle was deleted and I am curios to learn why and how I could try again and see the text accepted. I saw a reference to my text being unsourced: can you elaborate a bit on what it means and how I could correct the problem?
@Pviglian: Wikipedia operates based on policies and guidelines. One of the most important is that everything needs to be verifiable in reliable sources. The information you added did not have any sources with it. We also have to take special care when dealing with living people. At this point, if you think the information is relevant and belongs in the article, the best thing to do would probably be to start a conversation on the article's talk page explaining why you think the information should be in the article. At the bare minimum, however, you should provide some sources when you argue your point. Cheers, -- irn (talk) 17:36, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bolívar has hit 27500% inflation already at May 31st 2018. Displaying information from beginning of 2018 is no longer accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.114.112 (talk) 09:10, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see you recently accepted a pending change to July 15. I looked for a source for this date of birth in the Christian Dornier that I could add to the DOY page and it was unsupported by any source there either.
You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.
Please do not accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that day of year page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 01:21, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Help for the last edition of JC Gonzalez Charitable Activity Paragraph[edit]
Hi Irn. Thank you for your last edition on the paragraph that I've added. I want my contribution to survive on the page as I believe I followed the Wikipedia rules with the idea of making a positive participation for the community by reflecting a neutral point of view as a fresh contributor. JC Gonzalez has volunteered to raise awareness about Domestic Violence through "Safe Passage" by creating and singing his song.(Please see the link provided: .[1]). Is it convenient to use a non-profit organization website as references ? I also found and added additional links about the movies that he appeared in order to have better reliable sources. ([2] , [3]) . I am aiming to improve my Wikipedia skills to have my own contribution so that I can make a difference through free encyclopedia. I would be glad If you could give me assistance to improve my skills and contribute to Wikipedia. Thank you in advance for your support. 13ibra13 (talk) 18:58, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Irn. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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.
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 2019 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) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm doing a story for Gizmodo on how editors monitor pronoun changes on Wikipedia. I've noticed you've contributed to a few pages by contributing the correct pronouns for folks who transitioned later in life/were known by their dead names during their professional lives. I'd love to set up a chat if you're interested in speaking. My email is henry.giardina@gmail.com. Please feel free to reach out, and keep up the great work!
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I did not make the edits that the page refers to. On my "user contributions" page, it said you reverted an edit I made in "To Your Eternity" - I actually have no idea what that is and no opinion on it. It seems to be a Movie or TV show.
All of the links on my "user contributions" page are not something I edited. Perhaps someone is using my IP address or the IP address is getting mixed up. - Or perhaps I have a split personality that likes to edit Wikipedia when i'm sleeping.... I think the first one is more likely...
Some ISPs use dynamic IP addresses, including AT&T. You haven't done anything wrong. dudhhrContribs 05:03, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Lists of The New York Times fiction best sellers[edit]
Is it possible you unintentionally removed all the content under the heading By year on the above named page? (I'm a very inexperienced editor and don't want to make any assumptions.) MxBuster (talk) 16:32, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for asking that question! I did in fact do it intentionally. The way I did it was a bit clunky as it took me three edits to get it right, but everything I deleted was duplicated in the infobox. So that section still has all of the same information and links, but now it has a cleaner look. Cheers, -- irn (talk) 18:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So sorry, I don't see an info box, just an empty heading. Where should I be looking? MxBuster (talk) 18:43, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's wild. I just pulled the page up on my phone, and I can't see it there, either. Only on desktop. If you're on mobile, you can go all the way down to the bottom of the page and click the link for "Desktop". Then you should be able to see the infobox, at least. I'm not sure where to take this, but I'm going to try Wikipedia:Teahouse and see if anyone there knows. Thank you for pointing it out! -- irn (talk) 17:26, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, glad I did. Yanno, I'd been wondering if it was a mobile view issue. Thanks for your help, and for your encouraging attitude! MxBuster (talk) 00:50, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good to know! Now that I can view the list I just need to backtrack to figure out why I was on the page in the first place. MxBuster (talk) 21:54, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Template:Peruvian presidential election, 2016 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:17, 5 August 2021 (UTC)