Trurle
|
Proposed deletion of Shift resistor edit
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Shift resistor, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- No such animal. Common misspelling of shift register, yes, but that's not notable enough to make an article out of.
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Dicklyon (talk) 06:31, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of UBV Photoelectric Photometry Catalogue edit
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article UBV Photoelectric Photometry Catalogue, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- Seems very vague... only ref is a zipped, compressed file...
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. flaminglawyer 03:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
July 2009 edit
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Electrical resistance, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Mark Chung (talk) 12:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Associated with al Qaida listed at Redirects for discussion edit
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Associated with al Qaida. Since you had some involvement with the Associated with al Qaida redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Geo Swan (talk) 18:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC) Geo Swan (talk) 18:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Associated with the Taliban listed at Redirects for discussion edit
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Associated with the Taliban. Since you had some involvement with the Associated with the Taliban redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Geo Swan (talk) 18:33, 31 August 2009 (UTC) Geo Swan (talk) 18:33, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi edit
I redirected your article to router since it seemed appropriate. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 07:42, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
You have a message! edit
Message added 12:32, 5 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- 117.199.191.196 (talk) 14:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
List of refrigerants edit
I am leaving this message with you as you had previously edited List of refrigerants. I noticed that an edit 'scrambled' the column position of a significant amount of data. The scrambling would be tedious to remedy by hand. I reverted to this version by 5 July 2012 EmausBot which is previous to the problem edits. This may have undid one of your edits. Please consider reapplying your edit, if necessary. You may want to discuss changes on talk:List of refrigerants#Reverted to 5 July 2012 EmausBot edit. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 04:38, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 5 February edit
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the List of military equipment of the Canadian Army during the Second World War page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help) and a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Re: The format of historical military equpment lists edit
Message added 23:29, 22 March 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Templates edit
When creating new pages, please can you use {{Infobox spaceflight}} instead of {{Infobox spacecraft}}. Infobox spacecraft is an old template which is only retained because we haven't converted all of the pages to the new format yet. Thanks --W. D. Graham 21:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Nomination of EM simulation software for deletion edit
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article EM simulation software 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/EM simulation software 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. MopSeeker (talk) 04:35, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
January 2015 edit
Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with EM simulation software. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. B E C K Y S A Y L E S 06:11, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
EM simulation software edit
Please could you read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Stand-alone lists before giving more unjust and incorrect warnings regarding EM simulation software? And please, be aware of the guidelines regarding editwarring. The Banner talk 06:44, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
"Comparison of satellite buses" claims by The Banner edit
Ow, and while you at it, could you take a look at Comparison of satellite buses. Same problems... The Banner talk 02:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
I looked. Nothing sinister. Page just need updating because i let it free for several months. Please be more specific.--Trurle (talk) 03:09, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- Too many items without own article. They should be reliable sourced or removed. The Banner talk 11:22, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
In this case, wait. I will add references in few months.--Trurle (talk) 23:11, 14 January 2015 (UTC) Mendokusai..
- Ehm, I was asking for reliable sources. Not for the company website. The Banner talk 23:34, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
For ATK-100 bus (example) The rules citation:
Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim; (passed, nothing fantastic in the "specs" from maker)
it does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities); (passed, maker white paper do not contain denigration of 3rd parties)
it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; (passed, maker white paper scope is ATK 100 bus)
there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; (passed, taken from authentic maker site)
the article is not based primarily on such sources. (passed, reviewed magazine link present as well as maker site)
--Trurle (talk) 23:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
January 2015 edit
Your recent editing history at EM simulation software shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. The Banner talk 06:56, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Pending changes edit
As Imran Abbas (actor) has been protected in order to prevent the addition of unsourced and poorly sourced edits contrary to WP:BLP, why did you approve this edit? --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 05:50, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
The changes (added birth date) are not contentious and likely correct, as i checked by google. No need to block.--Trurle (talk) 06:10, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
- You have a very flawed understanding of WP:BLP and WP:RS and should not be reviewing pending changes for biography articles. The article was protected because editors were introducing unsourced personal information, such as the contested and contentious birth date, contrary to policy. You accepting the edit because it was "likely correct" is not acceptable. If you choose to do your own research and are able to verify the content is correct then you need to include your source when accepting the edit.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:44, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Grants:IEG/Wikipedia likes Galactic Exploration for Posterity 2015 edit
Dear Fellow Wikipedians,
I JethroBT (WMF) suggested that I consult with fellow Wikipedians to get feedback and help to improve my idea about "As an unparalleled way to raise awareness of the Wikimedia projects, I propose to create a tremendous media opportunity presented by launching Wikipedia via space travel."
Please see the idea at meta
Thank you for your time and attention in this matter. I appreciate it.
My best regards, Geraldshields11 (talk) 22:07, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
- Dear @Trurle: Thank you for your support and assisting in this matter. I appreciate it. Please, if you have any influence in micro-sat, AMSAT, or other spacecraft builders, help create a buzz about this project. Please promote this on twitter or other social media. Geraldshields11 (talk) 20:58, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
I still strongly object against Friendship 1 mode. I.m.h.o., such mission with lifetime measured in weeks or months look too silly to be useful for promotion. We will be chastised by spacecraft community. And the rest of people will follow. On the other side, Friendship 1 hardware is simple. SD card as you previosly mentioned is ok. No hardware design needed. Survival is automatic if within re-entry capsule of hosting spacecraft or impossible if host spacecraft is not designed for re-entry.
To make a Friendship 2, we need to piggy-back to some mission with at least 25 years lifetime (i.e. ~800km altitude or above) Approximate Friendship 2 mission profile: 1) Launch 2) Survive in orbit for 25 years 3) Survive a destructive re-entry of host spacecraft. 4) Survive undamaged a landing in water or soft soil (75% survival probability)
Approximate hardware for Friendship 2: 1) 1.8-inch HDD (320 GBytes) 2) Flotation device and water-activated gas generator (from lifejacket or car safety bag) 2) Radiation shielding&heat soak (machined aluminium) 3) Ablative (2x1.6mm PCBs are good enough) 4) Ferro-lanthanum beads (from lighers) and boric and/or acid between ablative PCBs to increase visibility and distinctiveness of re-entry 5) Suspension&fixture (will burn up during re-entry)
I estimate the size is below 100x100x30mm (Cubesat PC-104 slot (double thickness)). Mass <0.7kg. Terminal velocity ~14m/s. This mean survival without parachute with decent probability. Re-entry casualty probability is ~3ppm, well below NASA-recommended 100ppm. Possible hosts are 2U Cubesats or larger. I will try to contact some satellite makers after compiling a list in few days.--Trurle (talk) 00:50, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
- Dear @Trurle: Thank you for the feedback on the project talk page at Grants:IEG/Wikipedia likes Galactic Exploration for Posterity 2015. I left a comment on that page. Geraldshields11 (talk) 13:56, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
vojska.net etc edit
G'day Trurle, I've been watching your work on the WWII Italian division articles with interest. I don't want to discourage you, as they are a bit neglected. However, I did want to point out that vojska.net is used in some of those articles, as is axishistory, both of which are essentially gaming/fanboi websites, and not reliable sources because they don't indicate where they get their information from. I use them myself occasionally, just to get clues about a subject so I can find reliable sources for information. However, niehorster.org is OK. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 20:25, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
I do not rememeber putting vojska.net reference in my recent edits. Could you point out the exact article in question? As about niehorster.org, i agree it is a great resource. It just concentrate more on time-slices (momentary "screenshots" of entire armed force) rather than timelines. So niehorster.org is less usable for describing individual units and therefore rarely cited here.--Trurle (talk) 00:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
- I wasn't suggesting you were using them, just thought you could remove them as you go. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 03:04, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
10th Indian Brigade edit
Trurle, just to say thay I have undone your edit on 10th Indian Brigade. I intend to grow this to an article in due course and will be about the First World War formation. 10th Indian Infantry Brigade was a Second World War formation and linearly distinct. See 20th Indian Brigade / 20th Indian Infantry Brigade for a comparitive example. Hamish59 (talk) 08:45, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Name calling edit
Careful with your name calling. That is not acceptable. Bgwhite (talk) 08:01, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Your comments are hasty and lack contents. To be exact, could you point out the color difficult to reproduce on your (presumably mobile) device?--Trurle (talk) 08:13, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
P.S. I noticed you are very busy mass-deleting wikipedia pages. In case you forgot, the page in question is List of mines in Japan--Trurle (talk) 08:35, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Ok, i commented on "Take Wikipedia to the Moon" project page. Seems no need to worry much though - the SD card option for data archive was already thoroughly discredited by numerous other editors.
May 2016 edit
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Battle of Iwo Jima may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- sufficient for one engagement by one division, and food and forage enough for four months.<ref>[http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Japan/Monos/JM-45/ History of Imperial General Headquarters Army
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:43, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Battle of Admin Box edits edit
I hope I haven't caused offence by reverting your edit to this article. You have been doing a lot of good work updating the Burma Campaign articles and Pacific War articles generally by adding links to Japanese units and creating articles based presumably on translations from Japanese Wikipedia. However, these sources do appear to contain some errors. For the Admin. Box article the Japanese formation principally involved was the 55th Division. There are good sources for this, principally Allen ("Burma: the longest War") which itself draws heavily on Japanese primary sources. 54th Division was assigned to Arakan but only involved outside the time scale and geographical area covered by this article. Note that in December 1944, it was defending Arakan but withdrew when outflanked by amphibious landings. It was still defending positions around An and Taungup, blocking passes across the Arakan Yomas, and even launching counter-attacks, when the Allies captured Rangoon, making Japanese efforts in Arakan irrelevant. HLGallon (talk) 09:56, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
No offence. I admit an error. Basically, it happened because Japanese term for "2nd Arakan Campaign" is somewhat broader than the English term for "Battle of Admin Box", so aggregating did not work properly.--Trurle (talk) 04:20, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
June 2016 edit
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Battle of Shanghai may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- edu/CARL/nafziger/937JIAF.PDF Reinforcements Sent to Japanese Expeditionary Army, 11 September 1937]</ref>
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:13, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Stellan Skarsgard edit
Regarding your edit here. They are not tests. The vandal comes back every time the page is unprotected. I've asked for more protection but the vandal isn't so active that admins will lock the article down further. Thanks for your patrolling. Dismas|(talk) 11:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
article on Tonghua incident edit
Hello, Trurle. I have created a brief English-language article for the Tonghua Incident, the Japanese one which you mentioned in the article on the 125th IJA Division. Zee money (talk) 07:59, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Use of macrons edit
Thanks for creating all those articles on Japanese imperial army divisions. As you might have noticed, however, I have had to go through most of them to correct the romanization in the lede. While you use macrons elsewhere in many of the articles, for some reason you don't in the romanization of the title, where they are necessary. If you don't know Japanese, I can at least suggest that you use "jū" instead of "ju" in the romanization (this is the tens column in the number). Thanks. Michitaro (talk) 13:32, 14 July 2016 (UTC) You are correct. This copy-paste error went unnoticed for a while. I`ll fix.--Trurle (talk) 22:39, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution edit
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from 45 mm anti-tank gun M1937 (53-K) into 45 mm anti-tank gun M1932 (19-K). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:19, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Pending changes again edit
Could you please show me which source meeting our criteria for reliable sources was solid enough for you to accept this edit? Given that I have raised concerned regarding your pending change reviewer status previously it's very important that you explain why you accepted this edit.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 04:56, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, have overlooked the fact what extended name was mentioned not in body but in comments section of the news article https://www.tvfanatic.com/2016/06/major-crimes-season-5-episode-1-review-present-tense/
Unaccepted.
By the way, Ponyo, i find your desire to enforce unenforceable (accuracy of the biographies) pitiful. You`d better to put more efforts in writing actual contents. --Trurle (talk) 05:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- tvfrantic.com does not meet reliable sourcing criteria for BLPs regardless of whether the information was found in the body of the blog post or in the comments section. That you find my admin actions of ensuring editors comply with one of the English Wikipedia's most important and fundamental policies "pitiful", and believe that maintaining accuracy in BLPs is "unenforceable", I don't believe you should be reviewing pending changes on BLPs. If the acceptance of unsourced or poorly material to BLPs that have been semi-protected to prevent such edits continues you will likely have the pending changes permission revoked.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:31, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Image without license edit
Unspecified source/license for File:Geological map Japan basement.png edit
Thanks for uploading File:Geological map Japan basement.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 04:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Jan Pieterszoon Coen not notable?!? edit
Dear Oleg,
I noticed you removed Jan Pieterszoon Coen from DOY page September 21. I strongly object to this removal. Coen is one of the most significant (and controversial) exponents of the Dutch East India Company in Indonesia (VOC). Please read up on your history. Also, I just don't add anyone to Year- and DOY-pages; I am well aware of the notable criteria. If you have a minute read this this update or consult my User-page. Regards, Mill 1 (talk) 08:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
- No, that entry was notable. Unfortunately it was bundled with some obscure rapper (don something). You can re-create Jan Pieterszoon Coen, no problem.Trurle (talk) 08:20, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Your name edit
Hi this sounds more like a personal interpretation to me. If you are going to add it back, could you please provide reliable sources that explicitly mention what you added? Make sure not to synthesize multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources
either. Since you seemed like an experienced editor, I didn't want to leave a templated message. Best, -- ChamithN (talk) 07:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
May be. Japanese forums has some speculations on the topic, but nothing appears to be really reliable. May be i will re-create chapter when more notable sources will appear.Trurle (talk) 23:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Trurle, I happened to photograph a Praga Lady recently which led me to make some edits to the article. I was wondering about the mention of an automatic transmission being available - I cannot find any mention of this anywhere else, do you know if it is a translation error or something else? Was it maybe a reference to the automatic lubrication system? Best, Mr.choppers | ✎ 03:08, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
The automatic transmission claim is copied from Hungarian wiki who in order cite now defunct and seemingly not archived Praga site page back in 2008. Given the state of art of tech Praga in 1937, i think your concerns are justified and "automatic" was likely meant to be a sort of "preselector gearbox" (Wilson gearbox) known to be used in other Praga designs. If you wish, please find the suitable references and fix an article - because my area of competence and interest is only very peripherally related to interwar machinery.Trurle (talk) 05:09, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message edit
Hello, Trurle. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
2018 lower Puna eruption edit
I reverted your edit declaring the 2018 lower Puna eruption over. The source you provided does not state anywhere that the eruption is finished; it only repeats assertions by the US Geological Survey that the eruption is "paused". When making edits like these, please be sure that the assertions you are making are actually supported by the sources you are providing. Also, be aware that WP:RS/P notes there is a consensus that the Daily Express is not a reliable source and should not be used when citing sources. Thank you, Aoi (青い) (talk) 19:17, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Image without license edit
Unspecified source/license for File:Lunar Clementine UVVIS 750nm Global Mosaic 1.2km LQ02crop.png edit
Thanks for uploading File:Lunar Clementine UVVIS 750nm Global Mosaic 1.2km LQ02crop.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 08:01, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message edit
Hello, Trurle. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
The article Cable/DSL gateway has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Dictionary definition-type stub. WP:NOT#DICT
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DannyS712 (talk) 05:08, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 13 edit
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of brown dwarfs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sagittarius (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:35, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message edit
| | 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 |
Hi there, you moved a ref on this article to the start of the article. I see you were trying to fix someone else's edit, but then your edit made a bare footnote show up on its own line before any article content. I fixed this. What you want to do is move the ref to the first instance it's used in the article. No big deal; just being helpful. Have a good day! --47.146.63.87 (talk) 09:09, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Trurle
Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Lithopsian and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, HD 95338, should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HD 95338.
You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Lithopsian}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Lithopsian (talk) 19:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Trurle, just a quick FYI that I've userfied this article to User:Trurle/HD 95338 after closing the AFD. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
What reference is this supposed to be? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Ways to improve WASP-26 edit
Hello, Trurle,
Thank you for creating WASP-26.
I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
Inconsistencies in the article, such as whether it is a subgiant or not. There are also a number of pieces of information without obvious sources.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Lithopsian}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Lithopsian (talk) 19:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Yes, copy-editing was definitely needed. Regarding the WASP-26 being subgiant or not, i made a mistake (messed radius with diameter). Fixing.Trurle (talk) 21:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Ways to improve HD 1690 edit
Hello, Trurle,
Thank you for creating HD 1690.
I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
Some sections have no references at all, some of the starbox entries have no references. The grammar needs touching up.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Lithopsian}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Lithopsian (talk) 14:50, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Minor edits edit
Could you please mark minor edits, especially when you are making hundreds of them in a day. This makes it easier for page reviewers to filter them out if necessary to find things that really need to be looked at. There is a limit of 250 recent edits being shown in a watchlist and a couple of hundred from one person pushes older edits out of sight. Thank you. Lithopsian (talk) 20:35, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Trurle, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Lithopsian, and I thank you for your contributions.
I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, HD 204941, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HD 204941 .
You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Lithopsian}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Lithopsian (talk) 14:04, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Arbitrary and excessive usage of Wikipedia:Notability (astronomical objects) by Lithopsian edit
You have started in past deletion discussion for
I must point out what your practice is not helpful in improving wikipedia, instead resulting in disruption. Applying selectively and arbitrarily a vague criteria of "subject of multiple, non-trivial published works" is a troublesome behavior. The two pages in question have a referencing quality above hundreds of similar star system pages, therefore your motivation for singling out these particular ones is under suspicion. Could you explain?Trurle (talk) 04:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
WikiProject Spaceflight newsletter notification edit
|
The Downlink | The WikiProject Spaceflight Newsletter |
|---|---|---|
| WikiProject Notification |
| This is a one-time notification to all active WikiProject Spaceflight members. |
|---|
| The Downlink project page |
| I am notifying you, that thep The Downlink newsletter is starting up again, the first new issue will be published on the 1 November 2020. |
|
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Ways to improve HD 22781 edit
Hello, Trurle,
Thank you for creating HD 22781.
I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
This article reads like a poor translation. The grammar needs to be fixed up.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Lithopsian}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Lithopsian (talk) 21:04, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
In regards to this revert, how is it that The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) falls within the scope of "self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves" when IPT is describing an entirely different organization, Hamas? Snuish2 (talk) 05:43, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
The topic is lawsuit on Bank of China written by people associated with plaintiffs or plaintiff themselves. The reference you try to remove complements data in next reference "The China bank is not the issue here, dude". Without both the narrative would be difficult to understand. Trurle (talk) 06:14, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- OK, so the rationale you're providing to keep the source has now changed from (and I'm paraphrasing) "it's okay to use this questionable source since its describing itself" to "the narrative would be difficult to understand without the source." I don't agree at all that the narrative would be difficult to understand. Even if that's true, however, how does that make The Investigative Project on Terrorism a reliable source that's acceptable for use?
- Also, the topic isn't a lawsuit. The sources are being used to assert that China does not consider Hamas a terrorist organization. The Times of Israel article ("The China bank is not the issue here, dude") does that perfectly adequately since it states "...the Chinese, who do not consider Hamas a terror group..." Snuish2 (talk) 06:36, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
I.m.h.o., the arguments above are not useful. Topic or article can be defined in multiple ways, and reasons may be multi-factor. I prefer to see you making constructive edits rather than fight over questionable definitions.Trurle (talk) 06:46, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Yes, i understand your point.Trurle (talk) 07:05, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- Does this mean you no longer object to the removal of that source? Thanks. Snuish2 (talk) 07:11, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
More details on your talk page.Trurle (talk) 07:21, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message edit
| | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
Ways to improve WASP-52 edit
Hello, Trurle,
Thank you for creating WASP-52.
I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
Grammar and punctuation still needs some work
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Lithopsian}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Lithopsian (talk) 20:04, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Ways to improve WASP-41 edit
Hello, Trurle,
Thank you for creating WASP-41.
I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
I can't fix the grammar, I can't even work out what some of it is supposed to say
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Lithopsian}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Lithopsian (talk) 19:48, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Gliese 752 edit
A tag has been placed on Category:Gliese 752 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
Non-notable system.
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 21:17, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Category:Gliese 752 has been nominated for deletion edit
Category:Gliese 752 has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. 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. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 21:26, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you! edit
|
The Space Barnstar | |
| For your contributions and article creations for exoplanets and stars. Nrco0e (talk · contribs) 23:07, 8 March 2021 (UTC) |
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BD-21 784 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.
Lithopsian (talk) 13:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Ways to improve HD 203949 edit
Hello, Trurle,
Thank you for creating HD 203949.
I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
You need to work on your grammar. If you're not proficient in English, perhaps write for the Wikipedia of your first language.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Lithopsian}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Lithopsian (talk) 13:54, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 6 edit
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of exoplanets discovered in 2015, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hyades.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Planet 9 edit
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.Slatersteven (talk) 11:22, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message edit
| | 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 |
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message edit
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
List of Exoplanets discovered in 2023 edit
Some of the recent planets that you have added were first discovered in 2022 but detailed in 2023. Would they be more suitable in List of exoplanets discovered in 2022? Wikieditor019 (talk) 11:01, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
May be. Please pinpoint the planets in question and i will re-check. Standard procedure at moment is to add planets from publications claiming "validation" or "confirmation", but ignoring "planetary candidate discovery" category.Trurle (talk) 01:17, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message edit
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Anti-aircraft guns of Spain edit
A tag has been placed on Category:Anti-aircraft guns of Spain 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. Liz Read! Talk! 03:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC)