User talk:Ascidian

Welcome

Hi Ascidian! welcome to Wikipedia!

Be bold in editing pages and don't let others scare you off! To sign your posts (for eg. on talk pages) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp.

Here are some links that you might find useful:   Wikipedia:How to edit a page   Tutorial   Sandbox, the place where you can experiment   Wikipedia:Where to ask a question.   Wikipedia:Five pillars   Wikipedia:Manual of Style

You can contribute in many ways   write an article   fight vandalism   Be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome   Improve illustrations and upload new images   perform maintenance tasks   Become member of a project that interests you

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at Wikipedia:New user log. If you need help, you can drop a note on my talk page or use Wikipedia:New contributors' help page. You can also type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia! utcursch | talk 07:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be someone who is tagging other users as sockpuppets. Bearian (talk) 23:16, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Constitution of Belarus has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 10:33, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, you were absolutely correct. Thanks for the assist. +1 for my vandal count. Tnxman307 (talk) 12:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Ascidian! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Ale_Jrb^talk 15:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to {{refimprove}}, that is what I generally do in such cases. Thanks for finding the references! (Another common replacement is {{primarysources}} if you plan on tackling more.) It's likely to languish there for a while, but I try to focus on that fact that it at least now has some leads towards further referencing. You will get overwhelmed if you worry about too much. The key is either to focus on making one article at a time as good as possible, like FA writers. Or else to make a small but significant change to many articles. Or clearing out a maintenance category of clutter so the appropriate articles can receive attention (this step was already done for June 06)--BirgitteSB 22:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your application to use AWB has been approved. Please take care as you are getting used to it as it is a powerful tool and can cause serious problems if used incorrectly. Good luck with it. Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

for this revert. Wonder how I got on the IP's radar! TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 04:08, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, it is a bit strange- they've only ever edited your user page. ascidian | talk-to-me 04:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

and half the IP vandals I get tend to leave a hint as to the article they're pissed off about (if I speedied or some such) but this one doesn't ring any bells. I guess I'm just that special ;) TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 04:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that I can't be of much direct help to you as I don't know anything about those particular topics or know of any good references. In general, however, if you've got a source which provides a different name for something than the name of the Wikipedia article and can't confirm the current name you'd be fully justified in moving the article to the name which matches your reference. This is especially the case for institutions in non-English speaking countries as the name may have been wrongly translated or an incorrect translation used. User:Cla68 may be worth contacting as he specialises in the WW2 Pacific Theatre. --Nick Dowling (talk) 11:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm no expert, but it looks like you identified correct sources. I also responded at the Japan MilHist page. Cla68 (talk) 12:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We are almost done, Category:Articles lacking sources from June 2006 is down to less the 400 articles to find references for. I would like to thank you for listing yourself as a volunteer at Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles and would like to take this opportunity to invite you to visit the project again and work on getting the last few articles referenced. We started with 5,572 and we are in the home stretch, please come and try to do a couple a day and we can finish it up in no time. Jeepday (talk) 02:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Invisible Barnstar
		Thank you for your continued work and assistance on Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles, referencing and generally cleaning up articles that have needed attention for a long time. Your good work goes unseen unless someone disagrees ;) Jeepday (talk) 12:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The huge set of unreferenced articles from June of 2006 is finally completed. Thank you for your contributions. The new focus at Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles is Category:Articles lacking sources from July 2006 which as of May 28 is only 1,322 articles and should go much quicker. Thank you to everyone who has contributed and listed themselves as a volunteer. Jeepday (talk) 12:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Asudem. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Sebastian scha. (talk) 10:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC) PS oh how unpersonal. hm I think the movie is notable plz help to improve ;-) why did you delete ASUDEM?! it is a listed, award winner, and distributed movie with many articles about it. i just dont get it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.187.67.248 (talk) 16:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

for the help with the AfD nom in Lightsaber combat. How exactly did I cock up the nom? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As well, what am I doing wrong with the page-specific deletion discussion page? I think I need to note the archived discussion (collapsing it might even be better) before continuing with new reasoning for deletion. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the fix, but could you help me to avoid making the same mistake again by telling me what I did wrong? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 19:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 21:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i suggested whoever wrote about shokof.s Yekishim is probably moved by it. it was not me. i did not place that article in wikipedia. i would also like to add that wikipedia would do much justice to publish the facts rather than making a judgement about them. even if you would DISLIKE thought of YEKISHIM, i would suggest you would be most free-minded in supporting the proper space for it and let the world decide for themselves. not every Moslem feels the same for Christianity as Christians do and or Zartoshtis about the Jewish people. and or......... these grand thoughts are there for people to read about them, and not to be blocked by anyone, less by such a most prominent, major data source searching magnet like wikipedia. thank youSadilla (talk) 17:30, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think you are missing the point, I am not, neither is wikipedia, making a judgement about the merits of Yekishim. It is just that Yekishim is not able to be verified in reliable sources. For example, see the results of these google books searches: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Taoism, Yekishim. You will see that Yekishim has no results, whilst the others have thousands of results. If you look at the articles of those religions you will see that they have many references to the above sources at the bottom, which readers can check and verify that the information they are being given is correct. If an article or section of an article cannot be verified via these means it is likely to be removed or deleted. If you would like the material to stay on wikipedia you should read the following:

• Verifiability policy
• No original research

If you have any questions please ask me, regards ascidian | talk-to-me 00:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much. now i understood. i guess that will have to be done through the web pages about shokof and his maximalism. i will try to collect all the info. i can. thank you dearly again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadilla (talk • contribs) 12:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [2]and thanks for cleaning it up! I'll try to actually use my eyes next time I do a close... Beeblebrox (talk) 20:14, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:DoctorGumby has been up to his old tricks again. His talk page shows a warning from you, can we get him blocked? Thanks sparkl_!sm ^hey! 07:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you could try reporting this user at WP:AIV as a vandalism-only account but I suspect it may be declined as he's not actively vandalising at the moment and is not very prolific. I've reverted another one of his edits and given him another warning and considering the last one put him off for 6 months it may do the job. It may be worth watchlisting the Tim Vincent article and the Candidate article to monitor possible vandal changes to the articles. regards, ascidian | talk-to-me 22:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you quite recently mentioned (perhaps in passing) the ancient and neglected Tl abt which i said today

The guidelines specify listing a primary topic (i.e., the primary topic when one exists) in a sentence as the first line of text. {{Primary}} is inconsistent with this, and should not be used on Dab pages. Expect to see it on TfD this week.

I would of course be interested in any thots you want to offer, to me or on TfD. Reply on this tk pg if you prefer.
--Jerzy•t 20:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. regards, ascidian | talk-to-me 21:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Tnx, i'm perhaps overcautious, but in any case, no harm done.
  --Jerzy•t 21:29, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  

You, together with User:Whpq, just cleared out the backlog of unsourced BLPs from June 2006 (articles changed from refimprove June 2006 because they did not have any articles). I don't think I have ever seen an article emptied so fast in such a constructive way, so thank you both very much! Fram (talk) 15:26, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! but I think most of the credit should go to User:Whpq. ascidian | talk-to-me 17:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for helping WikiProject Gastropods save the articles that may have had CopyVio in them. Without the help of people like you, many of our articles might have had to have been deleted. We greatly appreciate your help. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 12:15, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		I just wanted to thank you, as phase 1 of this cleanup seems to be done, for your stellar contributions to the massive cleanup here. Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:10, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I was thinking we might need a copyright cleanup project, I had no idea the need was going to be so immediately urgent! Thank you so much for rising to the challenge and putting so much time and effort into this one. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:10, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! It's always nice to be appreciated. ascidian | talk-to-me 16:45, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for removing copyvio from Athoracophoridae article. Please be more careful. You accidentaly removed also interwiki, commons, reflist, image and even a referenced species Triboniophorus brisbanensis! Have a nice day. --Snek01 (talk) 15:00, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, I was comparing old revisions of the article to see which material could be a potential copyvio. I must have edited an old revision by accident and thus removed anything added since. I've put back everything I accidently removed. I will pay more attention in future. regards, ascidian | talk-to-me 15:14, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The comment I made about moxibustion is related to my experience in Acupuncture business. After more than ten years I graduated from South Baylo, I have helped different patients with the related problems and they got well. Hectorso (talk) 07:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am having problems with the deletion template, in that the template does not show up in preview mode, and I am hesitant to make a stupid edit on a common page. I will see if I can get it right shortly, but I would be grateful for any assistance you wish to provide.Jarhed (talk) 07:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, first you need to click on the preloaded debate link on the template you have already put on the Poperratic article. (for convenience you can just click here). That opens a preview of the discussion page, you just need to replace "reason" with your nomination. You can use preview until you are happy and then save it. (Note that this will not be visible on any AFD page yet)

Then you need to list the discussion on todays log at AFD. (click here for the May 23 log) and add {{subst:afd3|pg=Poperratic}} to the top of the list there. Use something like "Adding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poperratic" as your edit summary, and then you are done. Hope that helps, feel free to ask if you have any more questions. ascidian | talk-to-me 10:08, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

... for that. :) Amalthea 11:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! ascidian | talk-to-me 20:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This began as a result of a discussion found here.

Again, this template contains the best of {{deadend}} and {{internal links}} and new section support. The two competing templates have different categories and are generally confusing to new editors as they work towards precisely the same goal. I believe this merger to be a non-controversial proposal, but please give us feedback below, if at all necessary. Thanks, MrZaius^talk 02:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC) PS: Please note that I really don't care where this ends up. I'm pushing the merge, not the new location of this demo template.[reply]

A merge is fine with me as long as the template contains a link to the Can We Link It tool and the article ends up in the monthly deadend category.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And it would, with the proposed text. The biggest problem that this fixes is that Internal Links just dumps it into the {{wikify}} cat at the moment. MrZaius^talk 01:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There don't seem to be a whole lot of people watching these templates, but the only feedback so far has been positive (seen both here and at Wikipedia_talk:Template_messages/Cleanup#What.27s_the_difference_between_these_two_templates.3F). Submitted {{editprotected}} requests at both affected templates. MrZaius^talk 13:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support No objections/complaints. OlEnglish (talk) 17:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

---

That's it. Rich Farmbrough, 12:08, 6 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

.. about the Talk:White_Amur_Tiger#Merge_Proposal. I merged the two articles in the first place as an attempt to get through some of the To-Do backlog on the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cats page.

I'll weigh in (yes) on the Merge proposal... Seduisant (talk) 18:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for resolving the copyright issue at Durgapur Steel Plant. Sincerely, Guoguo12 (talk) 23:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comments at WT:SHIPS re your flagging this as a copyvio. Mjroots (talk) 09:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, replied there. ascidian | talk-to-me 10:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles improved, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Any idea why edits done by me are not viewable in the History section? I am in the process of trying to get copyright access to the article and what I see is that the reverted edits are not comparable in the History of page Maratha War of Independence at all! This is pathetic - show me standards where reverted History can not be viewed. In case I get copyright access, I will have to spend my time again typing things out because of edits done in such ugly manner that is kept hidden.

I am note sure also why changes done in this fashion were allowed without consent and notification. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 19:54, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. regards, ascidian | talk-to-me 05:54, 17 June 2011 (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) 17:33, 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]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you've done some work on Action Deafness. Just to let you know, I've nominated it for deletion. You can see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/December 2018#Action DeafnessCircleGirl (talk) 02:01, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Genetic material. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 15#Genetic material until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:31, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Articles improved by WikiProject Unreferenced articles indicating that it is currently empty, 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 it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 13:01, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]