Thank you...Edit

...for adding information about the XM-2000 scooter and a link to BaseStationZero. Appreciated!

-A. Fox

Hyundai Elantra LPI HybridEdit

I though you might be interested in participating in this discussion to merge the hybrid version article.-Mariordo (talk)

CommonnameEdit

Hello Daniel,

The mistake was not explained.

  • My edit has been reverted, so instead I should explain your mistake as nobody below seems to have noticed it... There is no, "exception to this ... when an official name change has occurred".
  • The current guide seems to stress the phrase "extra weight", but in fact it is supposed to stress the word "after". Extra weight will be given if the new name is published widely enough, in reliable sources, to prove it is now the most commonly recognisable name. (<--this is the key, most commonly recognisable name)
  • The extra weight is never given to a new name because it is new.
  • If a name has been used for 100 years, and it has been changed last year, the number of resources using the 100 year old name will far outweigh the use of the new name, even after the new name has been proven to be accepted well enough, that it can now be assumed to be the most commonly recognisable name for the future.
  • Have you heard of the great artist Michelangelo? His official name is, Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni.
  • In the old day, this policy was based largely on the fact it would help search engines. Search engines would have to be configured to cope with names which are official but rarely recognised. Wikipedia is not a money making business, but it is a business in a way, an academic business. We want as much advertising as possible, as many hits as possible from search engines.
  • It does not affect quality to prefer most commonly recognisable before official. It rejects tradition. Tradition is not reason. Apologies. ~ R.T.G 18:07, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter messageEdit

 Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

January 2020Edit

  You currently appear to be 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. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 18:47, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

I see the pot calling the kettle black. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 20:38, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak countriesEdit

I think you might have cut a bit hard here when making 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak countries, and there should be a summary in 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak. Also I hop you are going to fix the references that are now split between articles! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:46, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Here is the relevant section on the talk page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2019%E2%80%9320_Wuhan_coronavirus_outbreak#Page_size Feel free to revert if you don't think it was the right thing to do. Yes, I'll work on those issues. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 21:49, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
I have fixed lost refs in 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak now. I am not complaining about the split, so I won't revert. But we do need a bit more text there beyond the lead summary. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:55, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing the refs. That was fast.
I wrote this for summary:
The virus is spreading widely on the planet. The unknown cases maybe 10 times the number of confirmed cases. With children and young adults being less strongly affected than elder's, they maybe carriers of the disease. Countries have invoked measures to screen incoming passengers from China.
Now I need to find references. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Daniel there is nothing gramatically wrong with "a dozen deaths in each of Iran, South Korea, and Italy". It is communicating that each of the three countries had a dozen deaths. "A dozen deaths particularly in Iran, South Korea, and Italy" has a different meaning, it's implying other countries also had a dozen deaths. "A dozen deaths in Iran, South Korea, and Italy" is ambiguous but implies a dozen deaths total for the three countries. Cheers! Captainllama (talk) 17:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Yep, just read poorly. "in each of Iran". Got a mental block on that one. To be more clear if that was the goal versus succinct, one could have says in each country of ....   Thanks, Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 00:16, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020Edit

  Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data, you may be blocked from editing. You should self-revert and engage in consensus building at the talk page. Ncmvocalist (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2020 (UTC)