User talk:Hermionedidallthework

You may have updated the Polona Hercog singles performance table, but you removed all her non-major events. Why? Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:15, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are many players who only have the small Grand Slam section in their performance timelines. I assume it's a judgment call whether or not a player's Premier Mandatory and Premier 5 results are notable enough to fit in the table, the same way that some top players have their results broken out by surface. Hercog has not made it to a QF in any Premier Mandatory or Premier 5 events, so it seemed like excessive information.

If you have a difference of opinion, I would be happy to hear it. I have all of Hercog's information in Excel so that I could easily add the other tournaments, but I don't want to do it simply because I can. Let me know what you think. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 07:27, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, On a main page it is a judgement call on whether to include more than just the majors. Usually when a player has enough info to have a career stats article, that stats article would contain the extra tournaments and the main page probably just the Majors. In this case there is not a career stats page and I think most players have the full chart in that case. All her opponents in WTA events seem to have the larger chart, even if they've done poorly. But two things. One, there would also be no reason to include the lesser Olympic first round loss. It would only be the Majors if you have the smaller chart. Two, and more importantly, many others have already added those extra events and you just wiped their efforts away on your own judgement without consulting them. At the very least I would have said that in the edit summary and mentioned what I did on the talk page, just in case others disagree with your information removal. I think the best choice is to leave the extra events in there. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:56, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think your points about being consistent with her opponents and the Olympics are fair, and based on those I will re-introduce the Premier Mandatory and P5 tournaments to her singles timeline, and add it to the new doubles timeline. I will certainly add a section to the talk page and make more of a point to do that in the future, however I would dispute the characterization of "wiping away" others' efforts. If you were to look at the most previous version timeline before my edits, you will see numerous issues besides the obvious formatting mishaps. The minor tournaments and career statistics appear not to have been updated since the end of the 2013 WTA Tour. For an active player, that constitutes abandonment. In addition, the totals seem to be wrong in almost every year. This happens often due to qualification matches, fed cup matches, and walkovers being counted when the standard on Wikipedia is to only count WTA, Olympic, and Grand Slam main draws. There were also some rows that seemed to count ITF matches, which is just too much information and not consistent with other performance timelines. With all that in mind, I don't feel the need to preserve that data, because it's grossly inaccurate. As you said though, the right thing would have been for me to post something to the talk page. Please don't take my instinct to defend my work the wrong way. I appreciate you holding me accountable for my edits. –Hermionedidallthework (talk) 14:16, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Hermionedidallthework. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! ~Liance^{talk/contribs} 05:40, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated! It's nice to be around such a great team! —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 05:43, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The information that was included was correctly sourced. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.205.191.19 (talk) 16:20, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I saw exactly the same behavior on Albertus_Seba the day before. HalfShadow 18:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SD? I'm assuming you don't mean speedy deletion. Sorry for my lingo ignorance. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 18:20, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry; meant SP. HalfShadow 18:21, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yep! I requested one earlier, and it looks like User:MusikAnimal came through with the protection. Thanks for the advice! —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 18:25, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weirdest thing, though, is it was exactly the same: concentrated attack by both named accounts and random IPs. Wonder if it's something that can be looked into... HalfShadow 18:33, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Were they from Sri Lanka though? All the IPs I happened to look up came from the same provider in Sri Lanka. I don't know how proxies work, so maybe that's not significant. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 18:37, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly enough, in my case they were all from Austrailia. So we have two examples of concentrated vandal-attacks on an article of no apparent significance,both originating from the same country. This is weird. HalfShadow 18:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry about removing the filogrthy do you think you can fix it for me Karah kenze (talk) 18:24, 21 October 2015 (UTC)karah kenzeKarah kenze (talk) 18:24, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No worries; everyone has to start somewhere. Sure, I can try to come up with something. Do you know about your sandbox? It's a place where you can test things that aren't quite ready to go live yet, without the risk. Look, I'll put the old version of the table there so you can play around with it: User:Karah kenze/sandbox. Hopefully you don't mind. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 18:36, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you foe being so niceKarah kenze (talk) 18:52, 21 October 2015 (UTC)karah kenzeKarah kenze (talk) 18:52, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Karah kenze: No problem at all. Have you tried turning on WP:VisualEditor yet? You can edit the tables a lot more easily that way, without all the weird code. Just go here to turn it on: Preferences. Then go to your sandbox and click "edit". You'll see what I mean. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 18:59, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

how can I possibly thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karah kenze (talk • contribs) 19:01, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Karah kenze:Saying thanks is plenty enough for me. =) —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 19:11, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

With this ever dramatic world and winter coming, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day! This e-tea's remains have been e-composted SwisterTwister talk 06:28, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have granted the "rollbacker" permission to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. – Gilliam (talk) 13:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gilliam. I'll read up on the feature to make sure I use it correctly. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 13:30, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

paul simon had a record contract. the person involved with that record label wrote a book that included discussion of his time working with paul simon the book was written about in the new york times i posted a small sentence about it reference the new york times how is that non neutral? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.139.48.22 (talk) 03:14, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It just struck me as something vauge and negative to insert into the middle of an encyclopedia article about someone's music career. If you were reading about John Lennon and the Beatles in India, you might expect to read about some specific, verifiable shitty things Lennon did while in India, but you wouldn't see, "The Beatles were in India, and oh yeah, someone who was there says Lennon acted like a total dick." So, if the author had anything specific and of encyclopdic value to say about what Paul Simon did at the time, it might merit inclusion in that section of the article. Do you see where I'm coming from? I don't mean to remove content just because it isn't favorable to the subject, but at the same time it needs to meet a certain criteria to be neutral. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 03:30, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hey i respect what you are meaning and have respectfully removed the inflammatory quotes and have simply stated that a book was written that has critical remarks in it and btw i am a big paul simon fan and am simply trying to include information i found from a news article that i found interesting and relevant to his career i hope we can reach a compromise here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.139.48.22 (talk) 03:39, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just read it, and it certainly seems more neutral now. Thanks for using edit summaries and reaching out to me rather than just edit warring. I hope that you consider making an account and sticking around. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 03:48, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed from K6ka and/or Nthep.

I was patrolling some recent changes and trying to revert some disruptive edits. I am normally proficient at those sorts of things, but I saw something that really confused me. A user named Nusrat Imrose Tisha edited an article named Nusrat Imrose Tisha (red flag number one), and I saw that they were making purely vandalous redirects elsewhere. So when I went to see what they did at Nusrat Imrose Tisha, I saw that they had changed what used to be a redirect to Tanjin Tisha into a copy of the content at (slightly different spelling) Nusrat Imroz Tisha. So, after mistakenly requesting a speedy deletion, I reverted to the original redirect. However, if there is a legitimate article called Nusrat Imroz Tisha, why wouldn't the page Nusrat Imrose Tisha redirect there rather than Tanjin Tisha. Something just doesn't smell right to me, but I'm too confused to do anything about it. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 19:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm not 100% certain about this but googling the two names and they appear to be two different people so I've removed your redirect. I quite understand why you did make a redirect because the edit history and the way the second article was created from a move of the first is extremely unhelpful. The subsequent vandalism by User:Nusrat Imrose Tisha is just a further confusing factor and I've now blocked that user for having a username that is the name of an article subject. Nthep (talk) 19:45, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Nthep for dealing with the situation. I was Huggling when I saw the user blanking Nusrat Imrose Tisha and redirecting Tanjin Tisha to Pornography and Pornographic film actor. The latter was clear-cut vandalism, and I initially thought the same of the former, as page blanking is seldom appropriate (only for attack pages). However, when I saw the username, I thought the user was affiliated with (or is) the subject. They blanked the page again, and this time I wasn't so sure about reverting them. I was thinking about leaving them a note about their username, but I had class to run to. I didn't think of the issue again (even though I was working on Wikipedia behind my teacher's back) until I got pinged. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 20:08, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help, Nthep and K6ka. Coincidentally, my REALLIFE boss just saw me typing this reply and asked if I was "hacking". The only issue I see now is that both Nusrat Imroz Tisha and Nusrat Imrose Tisha have 100% identical content. And actually, I can't find any evidence online of a separate, notable person with that name. Considering there is an IMDB page for the former spelling and not the latter, I am actually thinking that Nusrat Imrose Tisha should redirect to Nusrat Imroz Tisha. Either that or deletion, but I don't see a need for two identical pages to exist. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 20:25, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't picked up the duplicated Imroz Tisha articles - with the username I was confused as it was :-) Yes, Nusrat Imrose Tisha needs redirecting to Nusrat Imroz Tisha with an {{R from alternative name}} clarifier. Nthep (talk) 21:05, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I tried to do exactly that and be WP:BOLD, but now I've been reverted again. It seems like a clear cut case to me, but maybe I'm missing something. So I'm going to step out rather than put myself up against the 3RR. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 21:20, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry for those mistakes. I'll do my best not to make another one. I'm new at this and I was just trying to help but looks like I was trying to much and forgot my abilities in editing wikipedia pages. Sorry once again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1306-rob (talk • contribs) 21:43, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1306-rob: I didn't mean for you to get down on yourself. I have seen your edits in other tennis articles, and I can tell you've been putting out a lot of quality effort. So by all means, don't let me discourage you from editing. I was just making sure you knew about that particular issue. If you ever feel like there's anything I can help you with, feel free to message me. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 22:02, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The French frigate Hermione (2014) was here in Philadelphia, and I did get to go on board.--DThomsen8 (talk) 01:20, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly related: when I was a kid, I went aboard the Bounty (1960 ship), which was a replica of the famous Bounty. That replica itself became famous when it was wrecked during Hurricane Sandy. I didn't appreciate your the whole thing until I bothered to figure out which wooden ship I toured when I was a in elementary school, but there ya go. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 02:39, 14 November 2015 (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) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, seems you are right, thank you for correcting me. TheLightBlue (talk) 11:52, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Draft:2016 Fed Cup Europe/Africa Zone, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: 2015 Fed Cup Europe/Africa Zone. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:24, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Draft:2016 Fed Cup Europe/Africa Zone Group I – Pool A, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: 2015 Fed Cup Europe/Africa Zone Group I – Pool A. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:42, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Draft:2016 Fed Cup Asia/Oceania Zone, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://digplanet.com/wiki/2015_Fed_Cup_Americas_Zone.

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:57, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged user:Tyrann Mathieu thinks he can stop me. As a sock. Regards, --166.172.59.174 (talk) 17:28, 14 January 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]

Hello, Hermionedidallthework. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "2016 Victoria Azarenka tennis season".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Zupotachyon Ping me (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:43, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya, please stop making revisions to my D3O page. I have emailed the company directly with my edits and they approve of the changes. Here are the reasons for my edits:

· The Silly Putty reference is completely wrong - D3O is not also known as Silly Putty and the two have no connection at all

· The phrase “The commercial material known as D3O is in essence polyurethane foam with traces of polyborodimenthylsiloxane” is far too simplistic and not really accurate. I appreciate that some of the info comes from the US Patent, but how it’s described on the article isn’t really accurate. I’d prefer to remove reference to Polyborodimethylsiloxane – for clarity and accuracy.

· The article talks of one material called D3O – which is incorrect. In reality, D3O is the company and they have more than 25 different types of material that we’re using. This opening section, which you uploaded is entirely accurate: D3O is a British company specialising in impact protection and shock absorption technology. It became well known for its use of non-Newtonian liquids, particularly dilatants, which help soft and flexible materials to temporarily increase stiffness during impact. D3O® patented and proprietary technologies are now being used on more than 25 different energy-absorbing materials that are used in impact protection products. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilaryjoyce (talk • contribs) 14:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Entrance - Book of Changes (2017) album front cover.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2017 BB&T Atlanta Open – Singles QF has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Wolbo (talk) 11:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2017 Bank of the West Classic – Singles QF has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Wolbo (talk) 11:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hermionedidallthework. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Arantxa Sánchez Vicario career statistics".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. TKK! bark with me! 14:29, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]