User talk:1995hoo/Archive 2

High Hopes Tour

Hey, thanks for your message. I agree with everything you said. The tour has been mentioned by some media as HH Tour (I'll search the link for it later). So for the moment I think it's okay to keep it as 'High Hopes Tour'. The Merchandise in RSA just says "South African Tour", which doesn't really help either way. I agree with the excessive information he keeps adding. The page for the Wrecking Ball Tour is a mess IMO in that regard. I prefer something like I've done with the Old Ideas World Tour by Leonard Cohen. It's detailed but keeps everything to a few lines. In any case, I will keep an eye on the HH page as well and make sure it stays on course. I will keep editing and re-editing until he gets the point. I'm sure he will at some point. Anyways, thanks for taking time to write me ... appreciate it. Keep up the good work! Zwirnie (talk) 17:16, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Just went through your edits on the WB Tour page ... some worth-noting things are missing (e.g. Prove it with the extended intro was played during Euro leg one, after 34 years and the return to Aussie should be extended a bit). Feels a bit too much like a stub at the moment. But I'm with you - it was way to convoluted with unnecessary detail. Zwirnie (talk) 17:30, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree, it's a fine line. But I really think that a bit of expansion would not harm the overall tone of the article. Otherwise, where do you draw the line ... there has got to be a little room to bend the lines. But I will leave it up to you, I'm not gonna change anything in the WB article.Zwirnie (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wrecking Ball World Tour, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Magic Tour (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) 08:54, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

attack

I gave a source and quoted from the article. By removing this, you have attacked me. I want to know who to report you to. It is obvious you do not want this fact to be associate with uva. I asked for help in improving the article. This was not given to me, instead it was completely deleted. It is obvious from your name that you are affiliated with uva. I would like to know who to report your clear inappropriate agenda pushing behavior to — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.188.167.150 (talk) 18:29, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Springsteen songs not performed section

You had asked: "do not understand how songs that were not performed during a concert can be relevant here. Also, what is a reliable source for verifying "on setlist not performed"?

Springsteen always has a wrtitten out setlist for his shows but some songs on the setlist tend to be dropped in favor of fan requests or other reasons. He also will do acoustic performances prior to the show which are open to the media and for fans who were able to get in early. An example being his most recent show on Feb 5 where he performed four songs including "Dream Baby Dream", which hasn't been added to the full setlist yet. Most sites that have his setlists will list these songs including http://brucebase.wikispaces.com/2014#050214Jason1978 (talk) 05:44, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liván Hernández, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Patterson. 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) 09:18, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

I believe and usually try to comply with the 17-word-rule for sentence length. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:30, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, 1995hoo. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Martal v. Tam

I wanted to reach out to you since you reverted an edit I made on the Washington Redskins#Name and logo controversy a month ago. After reviewing several other voting histories of the Supreme Court, I have discovered that your interpretation of a vote is not correct. A vote (correctly known as a ruling, decision, or a judgement) and an opinion of the justices are not mutually inclusive. A Supreme Court's decision is unanimous if all members decide in favor of a result, with no abstentions, regardless if not all of the justices' options are the same. In the case of Matal v. Tam, it was a unanimous decision off all 8 justices (Neil Gorsuch was not a justice at the time), with 3 justices having a "majority opinion," and 5 justices with separate "concurring opinions" or they agreed, only in part, of the majority opinion. I have since re-added my edit with the correction of adding a "unanimous decision." Neovu79 (talk) 16:36, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

OR ELSE

I was the OR ELSE guy from the Washington Football Team. lucky for you they changed the page name, you won't find out what that OR ELSE was.... 23:47, 23 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ATG305 (talk • contribs)