Arthur Baelde

Welcome!

Hello, Arthur Baelde, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Decagon. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Longhair\^talk 12:01, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Other accounts

Just in case you are the same person as Aughost and 109.6.129.249, you should mention that on your user page. The same for other accounts that you may have used. Watchduck (quack) 20:13, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

WT:WPM

There is a discussion of some of your recent-ish edits at the talk-page of the math WikiProject; you may wish to contribute there. 100.36.106.199 (talk) 12:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

:[

did you really have to call it nasty. was that necessary

Nucg5040 (talk) 00:20, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Non-breaking spaces in your edits

Hi there! I've come here after noticing some odd spacing in the article "Wallpaper group" that was introduced by some of your edits. I see now that it's also present in other edits you've made, to articles and talk pages, and in edit summaries.

What I mean by "odd spacing" is the use of non-breaking spaces, either alone or mixed in with regular spaces. I don't know what method you use to type these spaces, but I can't imagine that it's an accident! Can I ask why you employ them so often in your writing?

Unless there's some reason that I have missed, I would also suggest that you shouldn't use them. They cause formatting issues, such as inconsistent or excessive spacing between words, or lines that are too wide for narrow screens.

Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia! -- Perey (talk) 15:36, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Pleas stop introducing superfluous spaces into text as you did in this edit.—Anita5192 (talk) 14:37, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello again. I see now that it is indeed an intentional choice on your part, as indicated by edit summaries such as these:

• No specific presentation for small screens. And no matter the width of your screen or your window, you cannot change this iMaGe size when you are reading, so enjoy this careful presentation thanks some noN‑breAkinG spaces
• Here or elsewhere you may be reading on a faulty screen, too bad … my caption is intended without problem for users of appropriate digital devices

It seems you have misunderstood the issue here. It is not the image size that is problematic (although that will, in fact, vary on different screens). It is the text size. Different users, with different devices and browsers (and with different visual needs), will have Wikipedia articles appear in different font faces and sizes. Your use of manual breaks and non-breaking spaces is very likely to cause issues for anyone who does not share your exact combination of font face and size. For example, in your "careful presentation", I see line breaks in the middle of a line, and double-spaced words. This is a poor substitute for justified text, if that is your intention.

You say that there is "no specific presentation for small screens". That is true, at least as far as editing article text goes. But it is you that has introduced "specific presentation", not for small screens or large screens, but for your screen specifically.

This needs to stop. You cannot dictate what is an "appropriate" device. -- Perey (talk) 05:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

September 2024

Your recent editing history at Modulo 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; read about 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. MrOllie (talk) 13:52, 4 September 2024 (UTC)