User talk:Ng.j

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Talkback}} on my talk. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback}} on your talk.

Welcome!

Hello Ng.j, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
  
• How to edit a page
  
• Help pages
  
• Tutorial
  
• How to write a great article
  
• What Wikipedia is not
  

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --Fang Aili ^talk 20:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Capbadge2.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fang Aili ^talk 20:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's is completely fine to report that there may be a Fit Hybrid that is being released. It's not ok report it as a fact when the source you supply clearly says it's completely unconfirmed and that Honda has not announced anything yet. Please keep this in mind when writing anything. Do not revert edits that removed unsourced material. This is all explain very clearly in the policy WP:RS. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Also please feel encouraged to start a discussion on the subject in the talk page of the article. Thanks. Roguegeek (talk) 22:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't about what is going to satisfy me. It's about what satisfies Wikipedia policy. Unsourced or poorly sources material is always subject to be deleted. If you want the information you add to stick, make sure you bring sources, that you accurately report what the sources are saying, and that you properly cite those sources in the article. If you have a problem with this, I encourage you to seek help from administration. I would also suggest you look into the policies which I've listed at the top of the Fit talk page. Roguegeek (talk) 01:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 16:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to the referencing system of [Incandescent light bulb] caused major inconsistencies. This was because you added brackets "[ & ]" for several references, when they shouldn't have any so that one can view the whole address of the link.

Please keep that in mind. Thanks for contributing. --Ng.j 18:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for trying to enlighten me, but I think I know better on this issue. Since 2005 I've been formatting references as laid out by the manual of style WP:REF. What you should have done, if you wanted to improve the article after my edits, is add the title of each link's destination page within the square brackets. I appreciate that I probably should have done it myself, but I'd already done half the tedious work and I hoped a considerate and knowledgeable editor might finish up for me. Rather than revert it.

If you genuinely want to help a lot, try learning how to use the {{cite web}} template. It comes in very handy when citing internet webpages. — Jack · talk · 18:59, Monday, 12 March 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits, such as those you made to Domestic_sheep, have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Geez, a little quick on the delete button there. I was still editing the article when you put it up for speedy deletion.
--Ng.j 16:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the impression that Ovis ammon gmelini was an Armenian Sheep. Woodsstock 16:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 04:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for voting in my RfA. I've decided to withdraw my acceptance because of real WP:CIVIL concerns. I will try again later when I've proven to myself and others that my anger will no longer interfere with my abilities as a Wikipedia editor. Thanks again, and I'll see you around here shortly. :) JuJube 04:45, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is the only thing on the internet that has information on those monster. If they delete that, no one will know info on them and their pictures will be orphaned. Rtkat3 (talk) 2:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Job and ranks should be capitalized only when used in front of a person's name and used a title; otherwise, when sitting in isolation, they are lowercase.

Right: The lieutenant got a promotion; Captain Smith is now company commander.

Wrong: The Lieutenant got a promotion; Captain Smith is now and Company Commander.

Wikipedia:Manual_of_style#Titles

--EEMeltonIV 21:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any source able information that may help to establish notability? Navou 12:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I started the page as part of the Canadian Military History Project. I am currently adding links and adding more detail.--Ng.j 12:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you might be, I had declined removed a speedy deletion tag placed on it. Navou 12:41, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that, thanks for the help. Too many people are too quick to delete. --Ng.j 12:51, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated this page for speedy deleltion because it was just a three line article, several days ago. and it hasn't changed since then, apart from the addition of the template. it still doesn't look notable to me--Jac16888 11:15, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:VentureOne.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Canter Eco Hybrid.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Capbadge2.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page of the article instead of my talk page, rather than both, is a more polite place to give your comments, but thank you for the clarification nonetheless. Your point is well-taken. Bsherr 20:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia naming convention is that "The" should only be used in an article title if it would commonly (not officially) be capitalised in running text. With regimental names this is not the case. Just because regiments (or any other organisation) may have "The" in their official title does not mean this convention should be broken. -- Necrothesp 09:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would generally agree with you in regards to "The" with regimental names. However, in the case of unit's which begin with "Queen's Own" or such, "The" is being used with the royal title. As such, it has always been "The Queen's Own" as it is a title and not a name. Ng.j 11:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the rule of thumb from Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name) states "If the definite or indefinite article would be capitalized in running text, then include it at the beginning of the page name. Otherwise, do not include it at the beginning of the page name."

From what I know, all of the units use "The Queen's Own". Ng.j 11:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that "The" wouldn't be capitalised by anyone commonly referring to it. The regiments might use it in official documents, but the BBC (for instance) wouldn't use it. See here and here for instance. I know what you're saying, but I think the rule still stands for regiments as for anything else. Generally there is no need to add "The" to article titles - the rule is "use common name". And even the regiments don't do it consistently. See here for instance. The Queen's Own Yeomanry quite happily use the (lower case) Queen's Own Yeomanry on their own website! A Google search will reveal many other examples. Also, the official abbreviations don't have a T at the beginning - if it was a compulsory part of the title it would be TQOY not QOY, TQOH not QOH. -- Necrothesp 12:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since XTAR is copied word for word from the "About XTAR" page, it will be almost certainly be tagged for deletion shortly. This would be a very good time to change it drastically. :-)--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 21:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm already working on it. Copied the wrong version from Notepad and lost my version by mistake. Ng.j 21:46, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hate when that happens... random question, have you ever looked at Notepad++? Once you try it, you'll never go back. :-)--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 21:47, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can't install at work, unfortunately. Ng.j 21:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It looks like you are in the process of building this informative article. However, I noticed there are no sources listed. Please cite some reliable sources for this article. Otherwise, there's a chance someone may tag the article as a candidate for deletion at some point in the future. A full list of citation templates is available here. If you are already in the process of adding sources now, please continue to do so and ignore this message. Cheers. ++Arx Fortis 06:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Automatic Target Recognition requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. KurtRaschke (talk) 06:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 11:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FSW was invented long before the Eclipse 500 jet program got started. I am reverting this section you added in. Please be more careful with attributing things like this. Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 06:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Future canal has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Kildor (talk) 16:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of John Hasek, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.lib.unb.ca/archives/finding/hasek/bio.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on John Hasek requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Gosox5555 (talk) 21:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. - Trevor MacInnis ^contribs 03:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ng.j! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 317 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Nicholas J. Pritzker - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 17:43, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Copy/edit from my talk page: I think you are a bit confused as to the intent when it says that "variants should have their own article". There is no separate article for the WC-130J, but it is included in the box because there is a WC-130 article. Similarly, the KC-130J, MC-130J, and HC-130J should also be listed. The EC-130J should particularly be in there because it is the ONLY Commando Solo still flying. Ng.j (talk) 22:59, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct in saying that the WC-130J is not the subject of a separate article and it is now removed as well. The "J" is a variant and any variants of the J should be listed if there is a specific article on that variant, otherwise, the listing of the versions/variants appears in the "Variants" section of the Lockheed Martin C-130J Super Hercules article. You can link to the general article on the Lockheed Martin WC-130 in order for the reader to find more information about the WC-130J version, but that's about it. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 23:06, 2 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

How dare you call me a spammer as my only intent was to help you understand where you were going wrong. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 23:09, 2 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

:::We are done here, any further incivility and you will be treated to a visit by an admin. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 23:15, 2 October 2010 (UTC). Let's get back to an even keel, my only intention was to instruct, guide and assist, not to cajole or badger anyone. I used the infobox "invisible" note as a shortcut, and never intended what was such a minor issue to be elevated to a bruhaha. Cheers. I'll get back to you later. Bzuk (talk) 23:32, 2 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

• (Per this last edit of yours...) Logically speaking, any past pages you've made out to be a redirect page shouldn't count towards you creating them, that is equivalent to a very misleading/dishonest statement which is dubious to be included in your user page, if assuming that you had wanted to make such a claim in the first place. FWiW. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 02:41, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I only list it so that I can see if it is deleted or changed for some reason. I didn't think anybody read it but me. Ng.j (talk) 02:51, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• You'll be surprised if you googled yourself and see the result(s), you have no idea how many search engine spiders are out there on the internet. An example would be an old handle (dating back to 1996) I used to go by before coming to Wikipedia, still haunts me to this day. Do me a favour and change the misleading title of that section, or better yet, move those dubious claims into another section that's more appropriately named, will you? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 03:06, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for this, I reverted my edit and will add WP Uruguay separately. Thanks for letting me know. Hoverfish Talk 19:38, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, after you message I tagged these hospitals' talk pages using AWB, but it seems I substituted your templates without noticing, so now there are some missing parameters you had placed. I'm new to AWB, sorry. Hoverfish Talk 19:01, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a new one: Italian Hospital of Montevideo, tagged and all, which you might care to take a look at. It has been translated from the spanish wiki and may need some copyedit, so I assessed it as stub. The problem is that the text states there is a maternity (something) which I don't find in its official site there is a "DEPARTAMENTO DE GENETICA MEDICA" which might be maternity related but not what I would call maternity clinic. Hoverfish Talk 19:32, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've replied to you there. My answer's still no for the minute, I'm afraid, but I've expanded on my rationale. While I'm here, would you find something like this useful? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:00, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. My concern was primarily over the work involved in fighting vandalism, and how sometimes minor vandalism goes undetected for months, if not years. I am pretty active in reverting vandalism, and would appreciate any and all tools possible. Ng.j (talk) 02:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Those two below should help. Like I say, I'll keep an eye on the article and you're welcome to request protection again if things flare up. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:34, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

• Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
• You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
• You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How come some edits don't show up in the infobox like if you wanted to add something yo like say an address.TucsonDavid (talk) 05:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added some hospital infoboxes after I got photos for them. Much info for them is still missing as the articles are stubs. I did take the liberty of removing the request fields from the WP template after all items were completed (infobox, coords and photos). I also created a List of hospitals in Uruguay to follow suit with other countries. It might be good if you check on the ready ones, like Hospital Vilardebó & Hospital Pereira Rossell and let me know if they are done correctly before I do more. Hoverfish Talk 20:22, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder! I had chosen in my settings to mark all edits as minor by default (in a time I was doing mostly WP work) and never gave it much thought thereafter. I unchecked it now. Hoverfish Talk 02:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you've now twice reverted my edits at Template:Infobox hospital/doc. The website section is incorrect as the code currently does not add the word homepage, it just displays the URL. Also |website= does not give Unknown and also what is the purpose of using adding the word None for hospitals which do not have a website? Since it is now an optional parameter surely its best to leave it blank if there isn't a website? The same applies for the |Affiliation= and |Patron= parameters. I see you've also readded the <!-- optional --> sections to the blank syntax. This is currently inconsistent, as the |latitude=, |longitude=, |Location=, |Region=, |Country=, |HealthCare=, |Funding=, |Type=, |Speciality=, |Emergency=, |Affiliation= |Patron=, |Beds=, |Founded=, and |Website= parameters are optional too. Since all of the parameters are equal I thought it would be better just to have one sentence stating this. If you do want it to state in the blank syntax that the fields are optional I was thinking you could instead add a sentence to the "Instructions" section you've added instead, stating that all of them are optional. What do you think? Mhiji (talk) 03:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for contributing this article. Could you please consider explaining where it is and which country it's in. There are at least 200 places around the world called Washington. Thanks.--Kudpung (talk) 08:03, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Infboxes are intended as a quick overview. The information in them should be covered in detail in the body of the article. It's short sighted to believe that the Wikipedia is only read in the USA ;) --Kudpung (talk) 08:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You removed the picture of it. The picture has the wrong name, it actually is Cane Run G.S. There is a Mill Creek that runs both power plants, I used to get their names mixed up.

For the future should I upload the pic with the correct name?

Censusdata (talk) 21:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please change the name of the picture and relink it. I removed it because it appeared to be the wrong picture due to the name. Ng.j (talk) 22:04, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I doubt I will be able to talk with you on this article, your clearly very posessive of your article, so much you revert edits to fix incorrectly placed refs or any thing else I do, so I think Third opinion is going to be brought in real soon. The page looks nothing like the other pages for motor companies, nissan, chrysler, gm, and such.

To your message: Read the discussion, I am not the first to think this is an advert or that it is a Musk biography.

• Wikipedia:Be bold
• WP:IGNORE
• WP:BIAS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Passionless (talk • contribs) 08:44, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not my article, I have added a bit to it recently but I have made no claims about ownership. On the other hand, you have come in and started making changes without considerations to Civility. Cutting portions out of an article because you think it is "garbage" (sic) is not a valid reason. The current status has been reached by consensus, whether you agree with it or not. Ng.j (talk) 08:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to address your points: 1) Nissan does have an electric car in production, but only in Japan. The plant in Smryna will not beging LEAF production until 2012. 2) All of the information regarding Elon Musk which you removed has been properly referenced. I am not his biggest fan, but he has done a lot and it has been cited properly. 3) Most electric car articles on Wikipedia list the base price and the price after tax rebates, credits, and incentives. Ng.j (talk) 09:01, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The musk autobiography stuff - south african born, founder of paypal, and so forth are just not needed on the tesla motors page. the history section is much too indepth, only the most important points are notable enough. See WP:SPIP, the sources for "Martin Eberhard was replaced by an interim CEO, Michael Marks." the next line I was to remove, its way too indepth is sourced by a blog on tesla motors website, and its not even accesible without an account on the website.

If the price after tax rebates is posted elsewhere than I will go and remove it there too.

Oh, and I'm not just deleting, I was going to add, such as to the size of the tiny introPassionless (talk) 09:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Musk is a big part of the company as its primary spokesperson and promoter. His source of funds is directly relevant. The history is relevant to the development of the company and how it has managed to survive where so many other failed. The price after tax rebates is very relevant, despite your personal opinion.

If you want to add more, I'm fine with that as long as it is properly referenced and cited. The lead is a good size, but if it adds to the article and appropriate I will support it.

Ng.j (talk) 09:15, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually articles aren't supposed to be placed into stub categories via the direct addition of a [[Category:XXX stubs]] category link; we add the stub template (i.e. {{XXX-stub}} instead, and that automatically transcludes the stub category (though the article itself is still uncategorized, since the stub category is classifying by characteristics of the article rather than characteristics of the topic.) So it's not really a HotCat issue, so much as a "use the template instead of the category link" issue. Bearcat (talk) 00:36, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ng.j, I realize that you are a bit new to this website, and for that I welcome you. Regarding the bolded (top) placed at the end of any edit summary to a page, the mark is used to designate that the user's contributions to the page represents the most recent revision of that page. For example, at the time of this post, and if you look at my contributions, you will see the bolded (top) mark on the page User talk:Ng.j. And if you decide to respond to me, this same page User talk:Ng.j will be marked the same in your contributions. Or if another user decides to post to your talkpage, they will receive the mark in their contribs. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 06:00, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking over the Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital Wiki Page. I am still very new to Wikipedia so please be patient with me while I am still learning. I apologize if my edits violated any rules of being "a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion" (a claim made by one of Wikipedia's moderator, Wuhwuzdat). Those were not my intentions nor will they ever be. I tried my best to compose a page within Wikipedia's standards by linking and sourcing as much as possible to prove verifiability. I guess I over did it. I am also not totally clear about the rules, as I see many similar organizations on Wikipedia posting similar type of information as I did for SRH. Wuhwuzdat)recently deleted all the edits I made. I am sure not all of my edits violated the rules. I thought it was unnecessary for that to happen.

You have been very helpful with editing the page in the past. It would be greatly appreciated if you could look over my edits and make specific edits of your own, so it the page will comply with Wikipedia standards and be informational to the general public as well. Thank you for your time and consideration! PaintingOfViolets (talk) 19:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I guess your right I'm probaly alittle bias anyway.TucsonDavid (talk) 07:44, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...which is why I restored it when I saw your edit history.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:07, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saw you uncategorized a few articles for some reason. Ng.j (talk) 13:48, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NVM, saw it was overcat. Ng.j (talk) 13:52, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, cool! Yes, I hate over cat - but it occurs regularly, and sometimes/often how catA relates to CatB can be quite confusing, and hence (personally) why overcat occurs. Look after yourself! Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 14:01, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've created a collaboration page, which includes an element of competition. Please review and make any changes as you see fit. Please also notify your members and place a notice on the project page, I will be doing the same. Thanks, Acather96 (talk) 16:42, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bump Acather96 (talk) 11:45, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have no idea what you are babbling about... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.129.139 (talk) 08:53, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wikisanta-no motto.png

Merry Christmas At this festive time, I would like to say a very special thank you to my fellow editors, and take the time to wish you and your loved ones a very Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year. And, in case you can't wait until the big day, I've left you each three special presents, click to unwrap :) Acather96 (talk) 10:10, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Green and Yellow Present.gif

File:Yellow and Red present.gif

File:Blue and Red Present.gif

The article Shane McKay is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane McKay until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JJ98 (Talk) 08:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am looking into forming a Wiki project about electric vehicles and hybrid vehicles. Any thoughts? Are you interested? Do you know other editors that may be interested? Feel free to drop a line at my talk page.(I hope by putting discussions of the proposed project in one place would make it easier for every interested editor to keep up to date.) ---North wiki (talk) 13:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would just like to inform you the Green vehicle task force is formed under WP:Project Environment. ---North wiki (talk) 04:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed that you fixed the Template:Infobox hospital to allow the helipad line. Would it be possible to adjust the {{Airport codes}} so that the parenthesis "()" could be turned off when used in hospital articles? I was thinking of something like "|p=n". Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 22:45, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

• This permission does not give you any special status or authority
• Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
• You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
• If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 11:42, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		For your work on the Datari Turner article. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 18:34, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you pls ask for help if you with to move Portal:Canadian Armed Forces ...I have reverted the move - as it was not done properly - pls see Wikipedia:Requested moves if you wish to move the page and all its sub pages and its portal links. Moxy (talk) 05:10, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you voted on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kommissar Hjuler, but you didn't seem to take part in the discussion that followed. Would you care to have a look if your concerns have been addressed, even if only partially (because there will be issues with WP:COI left)? Thanks. -- Nczempin (talk) 13:12, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, your statement to DELETE the artcile was absolutely correct at that time! I am new at wikipedia, I saw the artcile on me for a long period, there were no changes at this about the current situation in music, in performance, in art. I changed it and I now see, that it was the wrong way. That a user called KOMMISSAR HJULER chnages an article called KOMMISSAR HJULER is for sure a CIO-Conflict - everyone can see this. Nczempin taught me the most important rules here at wikipedia, and I am learning more every day. Intersting that a User takes this time to teach a new editor here. Possibly he rcognized that I was doing changes in good will, not to harm anyone. I refer to CIO conflict at my User Page (Discussion), I also changed a lot at the article and I think it now is a better view from a distant point, as the articles was before, and shows more notability. Possibly the discussion leads to the end, that Kommissar Hjuler is not notable to eb.wiki, I shall live with this result then. Possibly Users see, that we are notable, and help me to set up the references needed or will do it, it ids not my article, it is an article on me, anyone can do changes. the information presented is the truth, and is only a small view on our activities, only some examples named.

If I look at several artists, I think, that a lot of articles were writen or co-written by the subjects, wikipedia too easily alloowes people to become a User. And I think, a lot of other articles would not be kept from deletion, if a discussion would become started. And I am supposed now, thatthe formerly written article on me did not show enioght information for stating a notabilty and was by far i a more subjective view as it is now, due to the help and explanation of rules by Nczempin.

I will not ask you to state, that the article shall not become deleted. I will ask you to see, if the artcile really shall become deleted or if I only need help, possibly your help, to save it from deletion. Kommissar Hjuler (talk) 08:36, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 19:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

noclador (talk) 23:46, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mar4d (talk) 05:53, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, United States military units don't conform to WP:COMMONNAME. All the renaming you've done has made the names of those units factually incorrect. Perhaps you should have asked before you did it. Bwmoll3 (talk) 21:21, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the emblems. You're creating a tremendous amount of work. Please stop what you are doing. Bwmoll3 (talk) 21:25, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking for the PDF versions of three references from the Air Force Historical Research Agency. I have them here in pdf form but I want to share them with you with a web version so you can see for yourself. These are the authoritative research documents for Air Force unit lineage and history. They are the following:

• Maurer, Maurer (1983). Air Force Combat Units Of World War II. Maxwell AFB, Alabama: Office of Air Force History. ISBN 0892010924.
• Ravenstein, Charles A. Air Force Combat Wings Lineage and Honors Histories, 1947–1977. Maxwell AFB, Alabama: Office of Air Force History, 1984. ISBN 0-912799-12-9.
• Mauer, Mauer (1969), Combat Squadrons of the Air Force, World War II, Air Force Historical Studies Office, Maxwell AFB, Alabama. ISBN 0-89201-097-5

Already did that last week and no one bothered to comment on it. Looking for the PDF's of those documents now on the AFHRA site where I got them origionally Bwmoll3 (talk) 21:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Found the pdfs...

• Combat Units World War II
• World War II Combat Squadrons
• Combat Wings

On those documents you can see none use the "nd" or "rd" suffix for 2d and 3d units.... Those are the official unit names. I use those for research quite a bit and they are quite handy to have. Bwmoll3 (talk) 21:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• AFHRA Document download indes This is also a useful page Bwmoll3 (talk) 22:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Current units have no suffix after the numerical designator. The USAF has removed ALL suffixes as the Canadian Forces do. If you want to change them, then remove them all for all units. Either way, the "nd" and "rd" are incorrect. Bwmoll3 (talk) 22:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• AFHRA Wings Groups and Centers Page

• See Talk:BRICS#Continued discussion. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:02, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, sorry I did not realize that the information that I added was incorrect as I DID cite references at the bottom of the page which was linked directly to the article. Therefore, I do not beleive that my the edit I made was vandalism because I cited references at the bottom of the page, which someone has deleted. If you disagree with me, please explain how it is considered vandalism if I cited references. Thank you. Undescribed ^talk 18:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, and thank you for your help, and next time I add any time of information I will make sure that I cite it properly, and use a reliable source that corresponds to the information in the article. Thanks again. Undescribed ^talk 8:07, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

You know it is a major commuter bus terminal. You know that and yet you have chosen the lazy way out by tagging the article rather than fixing what you perceive to be a problem. Although your petty bureaucratic actions fit the "rules", they are not really very constructive. I hope you have derived some small pleasure from this. Martin Morin (talk) 21:41, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I ask that you respect the standard scheme for subsections for Toronto subway station articles. It took a lot of effort to standardize every single article with the goal of making it as efficient as possible to find specific information. Such a system means predictability over the ~70 articles there are. With Runnymede (TTC), you simply rolled different types of information into a "Overview" section you created which doesn't seem to improve things. I'm open to a discussion towards improving the plan for subsections, but no more article reorganizations until then. I don't think it's necessary though, as the scheme of subsections seems to be functional and efficient. A.Roz (talk) 17:00, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm all for sections, but not when there are a half-dozen sections with only one or two sentences. Per WP:LAYOUT: "Very short or very long sections and subsections in an article look cluttered and inhibit the flow of the prose." I can understand you want to organize things, but for most of these articles there isn't very much to organize.

You proposed your standardization scheme several years ago to a very weak response, and I don't see that there was any consensus on adopting it. However, I am open to working with you on improving the articles to the point where we can use more sections. But for now, one or two sections will do, especially when most of these articles don't even have references. Ng.j (talk) 17:13, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the station articles are exceptions to standard wiki conventions because different readers look for much different information. The person looking for information on architecture may have absolutely no interest in reading information about the positioning of the tunnels and other subway infrastructure in the vicinity. It's so much easier with the subsections. Even if there's not much information in a subsection now, they are likely to be better developed in the future. With the subsections as they are now, the articles work effectively as profiles of the stations, with the information neatly and consistently arranged. So what if there was no major consensus originally? That no one spoke out in those years indicates that I provided a simple and functional solution that needed little discussion. It was an arduous task to overhaul so many articles, one I completed. To change a few sparse articles now would ruin the functional consistency in the group. A.Roz (talk) 17:34, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't totally agree with "standard" sections with minimum content, althouh they do create some structure. Articles should be written using prose, not a series of one-liners like an Infobox. Since you have chosen to maintain control of the TTC station articles, you must therefore keep them up to date and not squabble with those who add information in a perfectly reasonable manner. Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:54, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I respect everyone's constructive edits and hence maintained the content changes, albeit within the present structuring. Maybe we can eliminate some sections that can't be expanded much like "Nearby landmarks", but first we should agree upon a specific and consistent place to move the information to; otherwise, the merits of the present situation will be lost. A.Roz (talk) 19:03, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your comments at WT:WikiProject Canada Roads/Ontario#City roads, there is a separate project now that deals with street articls, WP:WikiProject Canada Streets. Feel free to do with those articles as you and that project wish as WP:CRWP/WP:ONRD no longer deals with them. Imzadi 1979 → 17:18, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. Thanks for your work regarding the ARL, much appreciated. I have an issue with the statement in the Transit section that says "A future extension could eventually reach the airport, completing the line as envisioned." I originally removed this because it was unsourced, and seemed to violate WP:CRYSTAL. Has the city of Toronto actually left this open as an option? If so I would cite it, and if not remove it. Cheers, hit me up on my talk page with any questions/requests. --Natural R_X 17:54, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You created Buttonville airport -> Buttonville Airport -> Toronto/Buttonville Municipal Airport -> Buttonville Municipal Airport. Why would you do that? Why would you claim it as something you magnificently created. It's a misdirected redirect. 70.48.66.249 (talk) 15:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What happened is when you made the moves you forgot about all the double redirects. I think I fixed them all. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 16:04, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your efforts at new page patrolling. Just to let you know, I've declined your speedy deletion nomination of Leveraging DRAM technology node in saving power under the WP:G1 criteria because it is clearly not patent nonsense. This tag should only be used for "incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history". If you can understand some, if not all of the page then it doesn't meet G1. --Mrmatiko (talk) 09:11, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've also declined your speedy deletion nomination of Jain Institute of Technology, Leeds International School and Leeds Campus of Business and Technology Sri Lanka because schools are not able to be speedy deleted under the importance criteria. You may still propose these for deletion, or take them to Articles for Deletion but please don't tag schools using WP:A7.

I suggest that you re-read the entire speedy deletion criteria page again to ensure that you tag articles within the guidelines. Thank you. --Mrmatiko (talk) 10:56, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I came to give the same message, as I just declined your speedy deletion of Hanalala--as a book/comic series, it does not fall under A7, which only allows for deletion of individual people or animals, organizations (including companies, clubs, and music groups), and web content. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:28, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Ng.j! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Hi,

I noticed you listed yourself as a participant of the Energy WikiProject.

There are 2 new outlines in this area that attempt to consolidate Wikipedia's coverage of their respective subjects, gathering and organizing the articles about them into one place and including descriptions for convenience. The purposes of these outlines are to make it easier for readers to survey or review a whole subject, and to choose from Wikipedia's many articles about it.

The new energy outlines are:

• Outline of solar energy
• Outline of wind energy

Please take a look at them, and....

if you spot missing topics, add them in.

if you can, improve the descriptions.

add missing descriptions.

show parent-offspring relationships (with indents).

fix errors.

For more information about the format and functions of outlines, see Wikipedia:Outlines.

Building outlines of existing material (such as Wikipedia) is called "reverse outlining". Reverse outlines are useful as a revision tool, for identifying gaps in coverage and for spotting poor structuring.

Revising a work with multiple articles (such as Wikipedia) is a little different than revising a paper. But the general principles are the same...

As you develop these outlines, you may notice things about the articles they organize. Like what topics are not adequately covered, better ways to structure and present the material, awkward titles, articles that need splitting, article sections lacking {{Main}} links, etc.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Outlines.

Thank you. Sincerely, The Transhumanist 00:51, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: see also Outline of energy

Hi. When you recently edited A1B reactor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daily News (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:21, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ng.j, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Un soir au club, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The former redlinks in this disambiguation page are now live articles. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:10, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found a New York Times review of a film by Bruno Gantillon, and added the reviuew as a reference to the article about him. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my speedy nomination as vandalism. Could you please explain, why do you think it was vandalism? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The page was previously a redirect, and your nomination resulted in Talk:Ted Frank being categorized as a CSD. The rationale given was "Whatever happened here, it wasn't reassessment". Ng.j (talk) 18:08, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But why did you simply not remove transclusion for the talk page? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The rationale made it seem like a joke. I didn't understand the nomination rationale, so I deleted the tag. If you were to renominate, please write a more specific reason. Ng.j (talk) 18:16, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I now believe that the page was incorrectly blanked, and the discussion should be preserved per the rejection of your CSD. Ng.j (talk) 06:54, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm neutral towards this resolution. It may be kept with text or deleted, but it can't be blank or redirected — this goes against the purpose of GAn pages. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 07:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed Ng.j (talk) 07:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you try to delete this page : 2011 PSA World Series Finals. Why ? Where is the problem ? Which places are missing quotes ?
If this article lacks sources, why not help us rather than delete this page and my work ? I must confess not to understand. Please, tell me what's wrong. Tc1591 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did do a search. The only mentions I was able to find were on the event website itself, and wikipedia clones. I noticed that you're a big fan of squash, and you've been creating a lot of squash pages. However, these events must be WP:NOTABLE. I'm not a deletionist, and in hindsight I should've tagged it rather than PRODed, but someone else is probably going to come along anyway with the same idea. I would love to help you improve the article, but I don't see how it is really salvagable or notable. Ng.j (talk) 06:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks to keep these pages as is. I would like to grow as much as possible everything about squash on wikipedia, but as my English is not very good, I prefer to let other users continue to add other elements in these articles. In addition, I am new on Wikipedia, so I expected more aid from the others (because I don't understand very well the adjectives salvagable and notable). Certainly, these articles are very concise, but now if someone wants to add elements he can do it. Tc1591 (talk • contribs) 09:49, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you can read WP:NOTABILITY in your native language version of Wikipedia. If you can only find a source in another language, please add it. That would be better than nothing, and others may come along and delete it. You need to find more WP:References. Ng.j (talk) 07:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I'll try to do my best. But I must admit that, like what I do is new, he is still impossible to find other pages in other languages​​. I feel I have to fight to know my sport. Again thank you. Tc1591 (talk • contribs) 10:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that you restored a {{Persondata}} comment which I had removed. In case you were wondering why I removed it, it was because of a discussion on the template's talk page (pointed to on the Village pump) in which the consensus was to stop adding the comment, and to remove existing comments if the removal also includes a more substantive edit (as mine did). MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explaination, wasn't sure why you removed it in the first place. Ng.j (talk) 06:43, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/entertainment/04/16/12/nicole-schmitz-wins-bb-pilipinas-international-crown ^ http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/sunday-times/the-sunday-times-magazines/21911-nicole-schmitz-binibining-pilipinas-international-2012 ^ http://www.modelmayhem.com/1040146

What's the point of this? Ng.j (talk) 07:28, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

someone blew up the page i created on Anthony Hayne, and you replaced it with a 7 word stub [1] please explain how this was an improvement over the article i was in the process of writing when it was deleted 12 minutes later. Darkstar1st (talk) 12:43, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anthony Hayne is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Hayne until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.. TFD (talk) 13:43, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 19:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Anthony Hayne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page C-4 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 04:25, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I saw that you edited the Malta page! How did you get to be involved? Would you want to do more? I'm editing the Schuylkill Navy page for a Cornell University class project, and would love some added input! Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jyp25 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	A Tesla Roadster for you!
	Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! Gg53000 (talk) 14:10, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/The 10,000 Challenge is up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge for the UK which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. If you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Canada like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1600 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for Canada but fuelled by a contest such as The North America Destubathon to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. I would like some support from Canadian wikipedians here to get the Challenge off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile! Cheers. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article St. Elizabeth Hospital (Enumclaw, Washington) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Elizabeth Hospital (Enumclaw, Washington) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DocumentError (talk) 20:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Members of WikiProject Hospitals requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:05, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you solve the Cite errors in SpaceX CRS-23, SpaceX CRS-24, SpaceX CRS-25 and SpaceX CRS-26, who you made. Thanks. Barny22 (talk) 17:25, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ng.j, You have demonstrated bias and consistently undermined the neutral point of view in order to demote Dogecoin. For example, your "criticism" section is by definition biased.

Your focus to attempt to delegitimize this cryptocurrency leads me to believe you have a vested financial conflict of interest with other coins who have not performed as well. You have failed to adhere to the rules of Wikipedia, despite being provided a reference to the policy.

You have been warned. MazRx (talk) 17:43, 13 May 2021 (UTC) MazRx — Preceding unsigned comment added by MazRx (talk • contribs) 17:34, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am considering this copy-paste of a warning previously posted on your own talk page to be malicious vandalism.

You have already been blocked from editing Dogecoin for deleting content and references and violating WP policy. Don’t make it worse by harassing editors. Ng.j (talk) 17:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC) Ng.j (talk) 17:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ng.j. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

• Wikipedia:Requested moves
• Category:Requested moves, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Primefac (talk) 15:14, 11 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) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]