Ushio01
RE: Wonderswan edit
Oh, OK, sorry about that then. To get it back just click the "View History" button at the top right of the page and click your last revision. Then, when you click edit, it will be editing that version of the page.
However, I will not be giving out my email address to randoms on Wikipedia for any reason, especially not so that you can "give me an earful". I'm fairly sure there is some policy about not asking for other's personal information (there's certainly a very strict policy about not releasing other peoples' info, which can lead to an immediate ban WP:OUTING). I would also highly recommend you not release your contact information either as it is very easy for malevolent users to use it against you. You may want to consider getting that edit redacted so as to protect yourself from potential problems in future (see Wikipedia:Oversight).
Regardless, I reverted your edits because you didn't include a source, nothing more. If you have a source then you are free to re-add it including the source. You have to bear in mind that people add false info to articles all the time, and also make mistakes when adding information, so on articles like that (which deal solely with figures) there has to be a certain level of proactivity when dealing with unsourced info. If you wish, I can aid you in re-adding it if you are having any problems or anything.
Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 16:00, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, and sorry to revert your edits again, but VG Chartz is not considered a reliable source for Wikipedia. Consensus has been found that their figures are little better than educated guesses, that their methods are fairly tenuous and that their figures often do not agree with those from reliable sources. It's difficult to explain if you're new to Wikipedia and don't have a good understanding of our verifiability policy, but for more info, please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources#Unreliable sources and WP:RS. I have left your Atari 7800 additions though, since Gamasutra is a fine source (although that particular post is debatable - the figures come from a forum post and/or a fansite, which aren't considered reliable sources). Please don't take this the wrong way - no one is allowed to use VG Chartz as a source for sales figures (it can sometimes be used for other things depending on the context). Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 17:22, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oh, I understand how frustrating it is, but a lack of good sources doesn't mean you can use bad ones. I'll put it another way - we have no idea if VG Chartz's figures are accurate and given their methods and track record, we have to assume they are incorrect. As such, if it is used for sales figures, you might as well just be making up the numbers and not source it. The fact we don't have a figure doesn't mean we can make one up, and likewise doesn't mean we can use VG Chartz as the source. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 17:33, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
- P.S. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 17:37, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
- P.S. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
RE: Colecovision edit
Looks good to me; IGN (of which Gamespy is a subsidiary) is usually considered reliable. Also, it's on the list of known reliable sources. 
Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Repeat refs edit
Hi, just a quick note regarding re-using refs. If you have used a ref already within an article, you can simply re-use it rather than writing out everything again. This is why refs have names (they don't have to unless they are used more than once). Basically, on the first occurrence, write the ref out normally, e.g. <ref name="example">{{cite web|url=example.com|title=example ref}}</ref>, but on subsequent ones all you have to do it write <ref name="example"/>, and it will link to the ref titled "example". This means you don't end up with a reflist full of duplicates and makes the article easier to edit. If you want examples, List of best-selling game consoles is actually a prime example; just take a look at the without handhelds section and you should see that none of the refs actually have their own content, and simply link to the refs in the first section. Hope this is useful to you, Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 16:45, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 14 edit
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Automotive industry in the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BAC (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) 10:54, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
List of video game publishers edit
Hi, Ushio01. I noticed your recent edits to the List of video game publishers. Thank you for your edits, but unfortunately they broke some of the anchors in the article that the table of contents uses. I had to revert your changes. If you want help on editing tables--the wikimarkup syntax is complex and sometimes finicky--please leave me a comment on my talk page or a comment on the List of video game publishers talk page. Thank you! — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 15:32, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 24 edit
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of video game publishers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ARMA. 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) 09:21, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Ebola edit
HI Ushio01 , the numbers are being done as per consensus reached on a previous dispute resolution. The Sierra Leone number are wrong in the WHO report. Hence we correlate them with government reports and calculate the total. Please don't revert without knowing the full history why it is done in this fashion. Kind Regards Brian...BrianGroen (talk) 18:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open! edit
Hello, Ushio01. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Survey Invite edit
I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they effect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take 5 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.
I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.
Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 20:45, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message edit
Hello, Ushio01. 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)
HMS Incomparable edit
I've deleted this section yet again. It wasn't anywhere near a serious design proposal and doesn't meet the standards for inclusion in the list.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:38, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message edit
Hello, Ushio01. 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)
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 |