LoveEverybodyUnconditionally

apology

It has come to my attention that my often overzealous approach to sources has offended you. Sorry about that, and I mean that sincerely. Never mean to purposely upset anyone. Will try harder to not do it again, and hope you will accept my apologySimply-the-truth (talk) 21:29, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Accepted, now let's move on with consideration for all other users here. LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 22:31, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Cheggers Drinks Pop

Hi LoveEverybodyUnconditionally. Your edit summary says "Not encyclopaedic." Does that just apply to the lede, or also in the main body of the article, where it is sourced to his own 1995 autobiography? He also spoke about it openly on television? So I wasn't sure why it should be deemed "unencyclopaedic". It's just a fact. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:11, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. The mention of this further down makes clear they are his own words/opinion but the first one in the lede did not. The lede simply said "But his career waned in the late 1980s and 1990s, due to his alcoholism." This is not encyclopaedic and cannot be regarded as factual, in my opinion, because it was simply his own belief or interpretation of why his career took a down turn. For example, his career may have waned for entirely different reasons, such as TV producers not having opportunities for him, or having other presenters better suited to the role. Do you know what I mean? Cheers. LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 19:22, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I can just about see the very strained and counter-intuitive logic there, I guess. I've got no AA axe to grind, so am happy to leave it out. But we often rely on short, unsourced statements in the lede that are only fully explained and supported lower down. That's pretty normal. "Cheers". Martinevans123 (talk) 19:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

"strained and counter-intuitive logic"? This is an encyclopaedia, not a collection of biographies. I removed the text because it is biographical, not encyclopaedic. If you disagree, present an argument instead of thinly veiled insults. Cheers. LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 19:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Ouch. I'm not sure what you mean by "not a collection of biographies". We're just discussing what's appropriate for Keith Chegwin, which is a biography. And one that's supported by an autobiography. I was just trying to agree with you. (Not unconditionally, however). Martinevans123 (talk) 20:06, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I am not objecting to noting the fact that Chegwin had alcohol issues, but in cannot be stated as a fact that his career waned because of it. I also do not object to saying something like "It was Chegwin's belief that his career waned in the 80s/90s due to his alcoholism". Wikiepdia is not a biography, it is an encyclopaedia concerned with facts (as opposed to opinion or commentary). Cheers. LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 20:19, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Cheers. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:02, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017

Your recent edits to User talk:Drchriswilliams could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:08, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

No Chrissymad, thank you. I am now enlightened and see the errors of my ways. No longer will I use humour on another member's Wikipedia talk page, no matter how self-entitled or conceited they are. I was going down a dangerous road and am grateful to you for redirecting me. You are a true friend and ambassador for all that is good in this world. I will probably write a song about this one day. LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 16:21, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

You stated No longer will I use humour on another member's Wikipedia talk page, no matter how self-entitled or conceited they are. - what do you call this, this, or this? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:02, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Have you heard of sarcasm? I promise not to be naughty in the future....really, I do! LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 17:24, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

And I suppose you are also waiting to hear my song about it? LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 17:28, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Could I please get your input on this page?

Hi, LoveEverybodyUnconditionally. I was wondering if I could please get your input on this page Talk:List of left-wing publications in the United Kingdom? Under the section The Guardian. I'm sorry its quite a long read. Unfortunately I've been struggling to get other editors input from many of those I have pinged. Your input would be really appreciated. Thank you for your time. Helper201 (talk) 21:26, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorry but that is too much for me to read. Also, I am blind which doesn't help things. Kind regards. LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 14:15, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there

Please don't Vandalized my talk page.In wikipedia vandalism is prohibited!!!So if have something to reply please reply in my talk page.(@NARUTO FAN) NARUTO FAN (talk) 18:30, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes I agree vandalism is prohibited. Even you can't vandalise outside of Wikipedia for example if you project a brick into a bus shelter or even someones face it is prohibited in most countries. Please tell me, what is Naruto? Is it the same as Doritos but in Japan? Thank you and Peace be Upon You. LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 02:32, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, For your reference NARUTO is a common Japanese manga series.Thank you!Pls if you want to reply,reply in my talk page. NARUTO FAN (talk) 07:05, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, LoveEverybodyUnconditionally. 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)