2sc945

June 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page FFA has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Becky Sayles (talk) 12:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

November 2010

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Windsor Castle. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:45, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikiwelcome

Welcome!

Hello, 2sc945, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

In regards to talkpages, please place all new sections on the bottom of the talkpages, for chronological reasons. I see you had a rocky start on the wiki, but I think if you learn to discuss these problems will not arise. Regards, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 01:42, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Coding

It's useless and pointless to change things like "[[East Africa]]ns" to "[[East Africa|East Africans]]", as they both produce the same result, East Africans and East Africans. It does however creates a small amount more bytes of information, which over a whole article can add up. In other words, it's probably detrimental to make changes like that for users with slow internet speed. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 09:04, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I was just coming here to say the same thing. Nightw 17:29, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

It seems like quite a few of your edits have caused other editors to post warnings on your talk page. Please remember that, ideally, you should familiarise yourself with editing guidelines as soon as possible. Start with the links in the greeting message posted in the thread below. If you're new to editing on here, you'll get less of a harsh response from other editors by identifying when you've made a mistake, and trying to learn from them. Follow a BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. If you don't understand why you're edit has been reverted, go to the article's talk page or contact the user directly to pose the question. Repeating the edit over and over will get you those "edit warring" warnings like the one at the top, which will eventually end in a block of your account if you persist. Nightw 18:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, compare to the contributions I made, especially in those basketball-related articles, what did I do wrong to deserve a block in Wiki? I mean, WTH is the difference between "[[East Africa]]ns" and "[[East Africa|East Africans]]"? Willl they make any real difference? It's just different ways of coding, some people prefer method A, some don't. Honestly, some people in this site need to get over their life. If they want to be real contributors, please spend some time to write some quality articles. If they can't write, try to partrol the site and chase down some of the real vandalists instead of spying or stalking other proper users and making hundreds of small reverts (most of them nonsense) per day without making any meaningful contributions. If I do get blocked because I write [[East Africa|East Africans]], it will be the Wiki's loss, not my loss. Cheers, 2sc945 (talk) 23:31, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

"It's just different ways of coding ... If they want to be real contributors, please spend some time to write some quality articles." Don't you think your advice applies more to you than anyone you might be directing it toward? ...You being the one that's making random changes to other people's style of editing...? As Chip said, a shortened markup saves kilobytes, which helps people with slow download speeds. It's not a personal preference, but a community one: "Given the option to pipe a link or to 'blend' an affix, preferred style is to use a blended affix. Write simply [[Public transport]]ation instead of complicated [[Public transport|Public transportation]]."

All I'm saying is that when you come into a community without accepting its guidelines, you're bound to get backlash—it shouldn't come as a surprise. And it's not your editing style that will get you blocked, as I said, it's edit warring (repeating the same edit over and over after repeatedly being reverted by other editors), as you've been doing on this page, for example. Nightw 05:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

First of all, the so-called [[Public transport]]ation will save kilobytes is purely bull crap, stop treating other people like they are all idiots. Who invented all this crap? I can't believe that there are people who actually believe this kind of nonsense. If my style of coding is harmful to the system, I will stop, but it's not. So I won't care, I will continue coding with my style, you are welcomed to revert every link of mine if you really feel there's nothing better to do in life. I normally won't bother to revert them back but will do so if I am feeling unhappy.

As for the edit war thing, why should I get blocked first? It wasn't me who started all these crap. Since both codings made the same effects don't you think it's the one who started the revertings should get blocked first? Geez, as I said before, I won't bother to revert everything I wrote cause I don't have time for this stupidity, but I can't guarantee I won't revert some of them for venting. End of discussion. 2sc945 (talk) 07:39, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Just trying to make sure you understood why you were getting all of these warnings and reverts. I'll back off, but please cut the tantrum editing. Nightw 08:57, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I am getting these warnings and reverts because there are just too many bored people who tried to make up some silly rules. 2sc945 (talk) 09:06, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

...Bored people who got bored of bored people making minor coding changes to their work... Nightw 09:18, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Your work? Which one? The [[East Africa|East Africans]]"? I don't think that article was written by you or any of those people who stalked me. 2sc945 (talk) 04:26, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

<- 2sc945, please stop. Have a break. Do some different kinds of edits for a while. You will get yourself blocked if you carry on like this. Sean.hoyland - talk 09:24, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Are you serious? Are you saying that I will get blocked for writing "[[East Africa|East Africans]]"? Come on man, if you want to get respect from other people you should respect them first. I didn't get the respect I deserve here, I got forced by some people to follow some stupid rules such as you have to write "[[East Africa]]ns" instead of [[East Africa|East Africans]]" for the sake of so-called saving kilobytes. WTF? So, does that means we have to change all the United States, United Kingdoms and New Zealands to US, UK and NZ respectively to save the kilobytes? Jesus, if you like to write "[[East Africa]]ns", go head, I don't mind cause it's not my business. Why on bloody Earth searching around the web and pick someone like me who enjoys another style of coding and spying and then stalking me by modifying every link I wrote? This is so disgusting, those people really need to get over their life. We're living in a diverse world, nobody is the same, we need to learn how to cope with that and respect that. Do not trying to enforce other people to follow silly rules that you believe have a meaning, but do not make sense to the others. Thank you.

P.S. I noticed that the guy who started all of this crap has already shut his mouth up since I brought in a strong counter argument. 2sc945 (talk) 04:22, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I'm serious because you've edit warred over things that don't matter. You've introduced whitespace etc and then edit warred over it. Please just see this as friendly advice. I'm not criticizing you, I'm just trying to make sure you don't get yourself into trouble over things that aren't important. Why have I picked on you ? Because I can see that you are trying to make useful contributions, fix things, make things better in your view but you aren't quite going about it the best way because you are coming into conflict and not handling the conflict very well. Don't worry about it. Sean.hoyland - talk 04:57, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I haven't seen a strong counterargument, but have decided to let you take the advice of Sean Hoyland. No matter what, edit warring is wrong, and you will be sanctioned for it. WP:3RR is a good thing to look over, although even less than 3 reverts if disruptive can result in a block. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 08:34, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I can't believe you guys are still going at it. The reason there were edit conflicts is simply because some of you cannot accept different ways of doing things. As I said before, it wasn't me who started all these nonsense. I normally won't bother to revert them back but I just can't absolutely guarantee that I won't do anything if they are doing this way over the line.

As for Chip, maybe you couldn't see a strong counter argument from me but so far I can't even see a point from you. If you want me to follow your way of doing things you need to convince me with some strong evidences, not bullcraps that come straight out of the mouth. So far you've just been barking mad at me and trying to scare me off like I were a 3 year old kid. How can you rape someone and still order her to shut her mouth up??? Do you really think you can stop her? I tell you what, the only way to stop her is to kill her. To be honest, I ain't afraid of people like you. I don't care how high your level are in Wiki, cause this is the cyber world, being a higher level administraor or moderator here doesn't necessary mean you are successful in real life. Sometimes, people who struggle in real life tend to spend a sh!tload of time on the internet to get some sort of recognitions that they don't have in real life. Since you brought in that WP:3RR rule (which I think it is a good rule), I will tell you my WP:3RR rule:

From now on I will be checking my contribution history constantly. If I saw someone who spying and stalking me around the web and did 3 or more meaningless revertings within 24 hours (a reverting of "[[East Africa|East Africans]]" to "[[East Africa]]ns" will count as one meaningless reverting), I will start going at it. If he is a high level administrator and inappropriately uses his power to block me, LET IT BE. I quit this immoral site once for all.

P.S. I am serious. 2sc945 (talk) 11:35, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Great. Looking forward to it. Nightw 18:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. — Fourthords | =/\= | 05:24, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Editing other editors' user pages

In view of the above discussion, I can only assume that this edit was an attempt to make a point. It is not considered appropriate behavior to modify other editors' user pages unless there are really compelling reasons to do so, like copyright violations, advertisements or personal attacks. Please don't do this again. Favonian (talk) 08:55, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Final warning

In spite of the above message, you chose to do this. For the last time, do not make WP:POINTy edits to other editors' user pages. If you do so again, you will be blocked from editing. Favonian (talk) 08:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Formatting

I am not going to edit-war over this, but please understand, that per WP:MOS policies, compact wikilinks are built in all our bots, such as WP:AWB, thus fighting it is literally the same as fighting windmills. Sooner or later some bot will revert your changes (as part of routine site maintenance), wasting your time and nerves. It would be more productive if you focused on content rather than formatting. Materialscientist (talk) 01:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Blocked

I don't know what the HELL are you talking about.

Since I wasn't online during the period you have blocked me, it didn't really annoyed me that much.

Just want to tell you that, I am a polytech student, the comp here are all PUBLIC. Almost every time I have to log in to edit because the computers here are almost always blocked by Wiki due to constant vandalism. In fact, the computer I am using right now just got its ban (by Materialscientist) lifted yesterday I think. 2sc945 (talk) 03:28, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

China names

In accordance with WP:NC-TW, I've had to revert all of your edits (and those of your puppets) that change [[People's Republic of China]] to [[People's Republic of China|China]]. Apologies for the inconvenience! Night w2 (talk) 09:42, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Why all of them? I do implement a reasonable and neutral point of view when editing China-related articles. If the articles are relating to Chinese history, that is, before and including the Qing Dynasty, I'd use [[China]]. See Tai people for example, I use China when talking about the Tai people were originated from China in the Qing Dynasty. I use [[People's Republic of China|China]] when talking about regions with significant Tai populations because they are meant to be the current political entities. I use [[Republic of China]] when talking about events relating to the current Republic of China (aka Taiwan) or China from 1912 to 1949.

As I've said before, I got an unfair ban. I really can't edit as IP users because all the computers in my TAFE got blocked by Wiki until 2012 and I can't register as a new user neither. The room I am renting near my TAFE doesn't have internet access, that's why you won't see me editing during night time (my time). I really don't know what has happened until I saw the investigation report. It was Chipmunkdavis, who has taken a personal confrontation attitude towards me tried his best in banning me. What he has done is linking someone (start with the letter Z, I can't even spell his name) to an IP user (which could be Mr. Z) and then link that IP user to another IP user (because both IP users edit basketball articles), then link that 2nd IP user to me (because we both using a similar style of coding) and I can't believe that some admins actually rationalised Chipmunkdavis' attempt to link someone who has different interests and a totally different coding style with me to ban me (he really can't think of another way to get me banned because I've always edited with good faith). If I were an admin, Chipmunkdavis's request will be rejected due to his questionable motivation.

I really can't explain why Mr. Z posted a warning which is similar to Sean.hoyland's comment on my talk page. The only would-be scenario I could think of is that Mr. Z is the same type of person as Chipmunkdavis, who likes to spy on other people. That is, reading other people's contributions or talk pages. He spyed on Chipmunkdavis after having a personal confrontation with him, when he tries to post a warning on someone's talk page he just copy and pastes something from the page he was spying on (in this case, my talk page) to save time in typing. Unfortunately for me, my talk page is an open source, I really can't stop someone copying something from my talk page. I have to congratulate Chipmunkdavis for spending a sh!tload of time spying around the web just to grab an opportunity to ban me (he knows all too well this is the only chance he can make me banned). In real life, I will fight but Wiki is only part of the cyberworld, so I've decided to let go of this incident so no one else needs to get involved in this matter any more.

In the future, I hope you can take a more respectful manner when dealing with editors who always edit with good faith. It would be nice if you could discuss with me in my talk page first, that way you can prevent the possibility of messing up a good work. I am always happy to listen to other people and correct my edits if they are wrong. Currently, Chipmunkdavis is the only Wiki user unwelcomed in my talk page because he has raised his attitude towards me from discussion to personal confrontation level which is really unacceptable and disgusting. I believe total ignoring is the best answer to a troller. From now on, all the comments make by Chipmunkdavis on my talk page will be ignored. Okay, it's time for me to go home now. I guarantee that you won't see me editing untill at least tomorrow. 2sc945 (talk) 11:21, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Replied on my talk page. Night w2 (talk) 03:02, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Your RfA

Hi there. I appreciate your enthusiasm to want to be an admin, but as you have not been able to follow the simple instructions for applying, I really don't think you are ready for this yet. Generally candidates will need to have far more than 1,500 edits, and have done a lot of work in semi admin areas. Perhaps you would like to consider reverting your edit to WP:RFA and reading Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship and WP:Advice for RfA candidates - you could perhaps try again in a few more months. Don't hesitate to ask me if you would like any help or advice, or you would like me to revert the page for you. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:34, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I know I only have a slim chance to be admitted. The main purpose of my application, however, is that I would like to grab the attention of the admins so that my requests for those articles to be modified would not go unnoticed. Could you help me to modify those articles? You are welcomed to revert my application for adminship once you have finished the modifications. Thanks. 2sc945 (talk) 09:57, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

See the below note... I've already reverted as malformed and looked at thost articles Worm^TT · (talk) 09:59, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks WormTT. Mountain Airs are definitely more official. It is used formally by Basketball NZ and australiabasket.com. The official site of Taranaki Basketball used Mountain Airs in the article titles, however, they did use Mountainairs in some of the paragraphs, but that looks somewhat unofficial.

As for National Basketball League, I have a better idea now. I reckon we can refer to NSL and National Soccer League (disambiguation) as an example, by deleting the detail of the leagues in NBL and rename National Basketball League to National Basketball League (disambiguation). 2sc945 (talk) 10:14, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Possibly, but NBL is a much more common acronym than NSL (original research alert!). Again, the best thing to do here is start a move request or a request for comment on the matter, to get community consensus. Worm^TT · (talk) 10:26, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

All right, I will wait for a community consensus on those two. Thanks anyway. 2sc945 (talk) 05:53, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Your Rfa

Hi 2sc945. I see you recently nominated yourself for adminship. As it happens, there is a procedure for the requests, which you didn't actually follow, it involved creating a request page and transcluding it across. However, I'd recommend against trying at the moment editors generally have experience in administrative areas and many thousands of edits before they pass, perhaps have a read of Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship for an overview of why. I see you made a number of requests though should it not be successful, and I'll have a look at them now. Worm^TT · (talk) 09:36, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I've redirected the first two. Regarding NBL and National Basketball League, I think the two are both required. If you type National Basketball League, we need to disambiguate on the country, but don't care about the other NBL options, however if you type NBL, there are additional things you could be looking for. Finally, I'm unsure about the Mountainairs/Mountain Airs, as their official site calls them both. Perhaps you could set up a requested move to promote some discussion in the matter? Worm^TT · (talk) 09:44, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited 2011 FIBA Asia Championship, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aleksandr Kozlov (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) 10:37, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Minor edits

Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. --John (talk) 16:08, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Again, please don't mark non-minor edits as minor. If in doubt, don't mark as minor. --John (talk) 14:39, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Land mass (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Land

Landmass (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Land

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 03:19, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

China province edit

Just wondering Why?. Cheers. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Fixing redirects outside of templates does not help any more than leaving the redirect in place and is not the best use of your time. Also, using the flag template in the infoboxes of articles for mainland Chinese locations is strictly forbidden. GotR ^Talk 21:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually it can be unhelpful. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Links to disambiguation pages

Hi. I'm wondering why you made this edit. The links were already there, but you linked the acronyms in parentheses anyway, and they go to disambiguation pages. I just don't quite understand. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:26, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

That's a question I couldn't answer, my friend. Anyways, I've reverted those links in the parentheses as a compromise just to please follow wikipedians like you. After all, I am the author and creator of that article. I hope we can reach mutual respect so you won't chase me around and question every edits made by me. ;0) 2sc945 (talk) 11:50, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

That should be a question that you can answer. After all, you made the edit and it was not constructive.

Please don't revert those links to please me. Revert them because they link to disambiguation pages. Do it for the visitors.

Being the author of an article doesn't give you any special ownership over it.

I am not chasing you around. You made a questionable edit a while ago (see section "China province edit" above) and I posted asking why. You did not reply. Then today, you edited Victor (mascot), an article on my watchlist. That drew my attention. My aim is not to bug you. It is to help the project. Thank you. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

There was nothing questionable in that edit and there's no need to reply or explain anything. The link you've mentioned used an old name which is quite controversial, I just changed it to its current name. You seem to be the only one who thinks it is "questionable". You've even questioned whether I've linked to the correct article (without even just simply click and check the link yourself) in your very first, immediate reply. 2sc945 (talk) 17:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

October 2012

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Renee Flavell, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 17:41, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Roster template updates

Hello 2sc945.

When you update templates like Template:2012 Summer Olympics Australia men's basketball team roster, please bear in mind that they are supposed to reflect the players' club affiliation at the time of the Olympics.

Thanks.

HandsomeFella (talk) 18:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Copying and Pasting (Can Xue)

I saw that you created a new article called Can Xue. This was a good idea as now Wikipedia has a useable article about this notable author. There was a small problem with the process though. I'm not here to punish your or anything, everything is just fine. I'm here to feed you a link to information about wikipedia guidelines that you might find useful in the future. Copyright is an important thing to pay attention to when editing wikipedia and attribution is an important aspect of copyright. Basically, when you copied material from my userspace draft article into your new article you failed to provide attribution. Normally this would be done by simply moving or renaming the original article to the new name "Can Xue". This way the edit history moves with the article. The edit history has been fixed so there is nothing for you to worry about, but you might find the brief articles Wikipedia:Copy-paste and Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Whoever says they know and understand ALL of wikipedia's policies and guidelines is lying. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 10:49, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jeremiah Trueman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Taranaki (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) 10:43, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Comment on National Basketball League (Australasia) talk page

I would much appreciate your input in this discussion: Talk:National Basketball League (Australasia)#Clean-up of content. --2nyte (talk) 22:45, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Liaoning Flying Leopards

Hey, could you please provide me a source that states the name change to Flying Leopards? I can't find anything with Flying Leopards. For the Liaoning team, there are so many names going around: Jaguars [1], Hunters [2] [3], and Dinosaurs (not sure where Dinosaurs comes from; again, I can't find anything for Dinosaurs either). At Eurobasket.com, the history has nothing about any of these names except for "Hunters": [4]. Do you know much about the CBA? Could you share some light on this issue? Cheers. DaHuzyBru (talk) 05:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Dinosaurs does seem to be the name frequently used i.e. Li Xiaoxu or Josh Akognon. Where does Hunters, Leopards and Jaguars come from? Are they all the same team, just different names over the years? DaHuzyBru (talk) 05:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Alex Len

The linking of nationalities is not common practice and falls under WP:OVERLINK in that it is a form of linking "major geographic features and locations." The intent is clear - people know countries and nationality is another form of country. Also, the edit you reverted had removed place of birth from the parenthetical DOB statement in the lead, which was correct per MOS. The place of birth appears a bit later in the article. I have reverted both and am leaving you this message because it seems like you are edit warring over this. Rikster2 (talk) 12:57, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for your comment. I've been editing wikipedia articles for many years now and I have seen many bio articles being written in that format. Since you have reverted my edits several times, I reckon I should take this opportunity to clearify my edits in a bit more detail so we won't engage in an edit war.

First of all, wikipedia does allow links in the infobox to be exempted from the main article. The reason is pretty obvious as some readers only read the infobox and will only read the article if they want to gather more information.

Secondly, countries and nationalities are two different concepts and they do not link to the same article to be considered as overlinks. For example, Ukrainians do not have to live in the country of Ukraine to be recognised as Ukrainians. Vice versa, a Chinese can live in Ukraine and become a Chinese Ukrainian. As long we don't link them more than once we should be fine.

In most bio articles you will find the place of birth appears straight after the DOB statement in the bracket. That's because not every bio article has enough information to contain an "Early life" section. We try to squeeze as many information in the introduction as possible because a lot of people will only read the intro. You should also notice that only the City/Region of Birth appears in the bracket and that's because the Country of Birth is always linked straight after the bracket and there is no need to repeat that information.

Take Alex Len for example, he is a living person and has an "Early life" section, but we should still include the POB statement in the bracket for the above-mentioned reasons. I just noticed that the POB statement in the "Early life" section is linked, those should be delinked as they would be considered overlinks.

I am going to re-edit the article carefully again and hopefully we can reach a consensus on this one. Cheers. 2sc945 (talk) 09:56, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I have also been editing Wikipedia articles for many years. To be clear, I have at no time suggested that a link in the infobox cannot repeated in the article. I would like to draw your attention to several Wikipedia MOS guidelines that apply to this case:

• First, if you look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies#Opening paragraph, it reads:
• "The opening paragraph should have:
  • Name(s) and title(s), if any (see, for instance, also Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility));
  • Dates of birth and death, if known (but for dates of birth see WP:BLPPRIVACY, which takes precedence); for how to write these dates, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Dates of birth and death;
  • Context (location, nationality, or ethnicity);
  • In most modern-day cases this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen, national or permanent resident, or if notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national or permanent resident when the person became notable.
  • Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability.
  • The notable positions the person held, activities they took part in or roles they played;
  • Why the person is significant."
• Notice that there is no mention of place of birth in the birth/death dates section. Place of birth is certainly notable, which is why it is mentioned early on in the article.

• Second, as I mentioned, WP:OVERLINK reads (in the "what should generally not be linked" section):
  • the names of major geographic features and locations; languages; religions; common occupations; and pre- and post-nominals;
• This definitely includes Ukraine (which is what you linked the phrase "Ukranian" in the lead to - not "Ukrainains"). Also, though not a "law," it is pretty widespread convention not to link nationalities as well. Now, the guideline does not expressly forbid it, but the spirit should be clear and you should take note of my #3:

• Third, and this is important, please read the following from Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers (though similar words are repeated all over MOS):
  • The Arbitration Committee has ruled that editors should not change an article from one guideline-defined style to another without a substantial reason unrelated to mere choice of style, and that revert-warring over optional styles is unacceptable.[1] If discussion cannot determine which style to use in an article, defer to the style used by the first major contributor.

Now, 2sc945, you have been doing exactly this on this article and Chris Goulding. Even if there is latitude, you have engaged in edit warring on these topics when at a minimum it is the choice between two acceptable practices and at worst it is against MOS (without any opposing consensus to back you). Look, I am assuming good faith here, I am sure you have good intentions. But so do I.

Now I am going to re-edit the article - though leaving the nationality linked where that is actually what is happening - and I trust that we can reach a consensus on this. Rikster2 (talk) 13:17, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely for abusing multiple accounts per the findings of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2sc945. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:49, 3 January 2014 (UTC)