VKing

Hair

[Content blanked as a BLP violation: unverified information about "natural" hair colors in the framework of racialist theorizing. This may be a BLP violation according to the author, who has mused on a relationship between hair dyeing and mental illness, Talk:Hair_coloring#Psychological_consequences. Drmies (talk) 14:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)]

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Delft 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:

• * scientific research; (a.o. "TNO" ( [[Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research]]), Stichting GeoDelft,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:29, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Date format

Your edits are generally constructive and do add positively to Wikipedia. I would like to bring attention to the Manual of Style regarding dates: MOS:DATEFORMAT. In particular only the date formats "8 September 2001" and "September 8, 2001" are seen as "acceptable" on the English Wikipedia. I use the first for all Dutch articles. Keep up the good work! CRwikiCA talk 14:36, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Utrecht (province), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vecht (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) 09:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gelderland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scherpenzeel (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) 09:06, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Clickable map

Your latest edit to Gelderland seems to have included the Dutch article names into the clickable map. These are not always the same for the English Wikipedia, so several of the links seems to broken. CRwikiCA talk 14:34, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Noordwijk

Hi, VKing. The image you placed on article Noordwijk is only a part of Noordwijk aan Zee. The photo is taken by me (I forgot my password for en.wikipedia, so i'm not logged in) and is taken from the water tower. Noordwijk Binnen is on the other side of the water tower and lays a lot lower. Noordwijk aan Zee is partly build on dunes. I already changed the information. Kind regards, - 84.86.104.45 (talk) 00:24, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Various

VKing, I have blocked your alternate account (Natubico) for violating our user name policy. In addition, of course, you are to play with one registered account at a time. But what is more worrisome than that is the stuff on your user page, now deleted by Writ Keeper (an administrator and bureaucrat here), which had a distinct racialist, even neo-Nazi flavor to it. If you stick to edits to places and things like that, you will not run into trouble. But if you use your user page as a soap box, een openbaar podium, for your political philosophies, especially if they are as repugnant as what's found on this website, you will find yourself blocked stante pede. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:39, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

How many lists are there of black persons and of jews in this Wp-edition? ( [[1]][[2]])

But if somebody proposes to add a list of blond persons, than it is removed from his user page because there would be a "distinct racialist, even neo-Nazi flavor to it".

Why not also remove all first mentioned lists, because there's a Stalinist flavor to it? VKing (talk) 01:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

It has been over 6 months since the comment you are responding to. If you want an answer, pinging the involved admins (like this: Writ Keeper, Drmies) is the way to do it. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Summer.

Not much use arguing with a racialist. A list of black people (which here means a list of people who are "certifiably" black since these articles should have reliable sources) is quite different from a homemade list of people with blond hair (not a category of the same kind) that's placed in the context of race theory and the threat of extinction of the blond-haired race. At Talk:Hair_coloring#Psychological_consequences you seem to suggest that women who dye their hair blond are mentally disturbed--and that makes your list of people a BLP violation. If you can't understand that you shouldn't be editing here.

En dan nog iets: dat ik zoiets van een Nederlander moet horen, waarvan je zou zeggen dat ze toch beter zouden moeten weten, dat is toch wel erg droevig. Drmies (talk) 04:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Well Summer, maybe now it's clear, why the undersigned prefers not contacting the user in question.

There was not a word in that proposed list about any race theory or about the threat of the blond race to become extinct. The last mentioned item is on a Nature Protection Foundation site and evidently the user in question has read that site but lost sight of the fact that sites of the NPF are not part of the Wp-project. Further more he or she is challenged hereby to mention one clause in the mentioned site that must be qualified as "racialistic".

As for the certifiability of the mentioned list of persons with natural blond hair: there are relatively little persons on it, that the undersigned has ever seen in the flesh. He saw their pictures in many kinds of sources among which quite a few are known as reliable. But he cannot imagine that there's one article about a person on a list of black persons in which is posed that this person really belongs to the black race and definitely is not a Zwarte Piet.

As for the hair-dying item it has to be said that this in the first place is not relevant in the context of the proposed list. Further more has to be noted that the assertion that the undersigned "seems to suggest that women who dye their hair blond are mentally disturbed" is seriously defamatory, as all that has been suggested (and in the mean time started to source) is that using hairdye (no matter which color) might cause psychic damage. Think that doing this is a token of responsability and charity, so that it shouldn't be used to vilify the user who brought up this item.

VKing (talk) 01:50, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

List of blondes

Quote: "A common characteristic of all varieties of blond is, that the colour of the eyes is blue."

You could mention that sometimes people with hazel or amber eyes have blond hair in their childhood and adolescence -> Beethoven [3], -> Monika Hohlmeier [4], and few also in adulthood -> Beatrice von Weizsäcker [5].

--Markklößlesupp (talk) 19:57, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

That's right, there seem to be sporadic exeptions to this rule; when the opportunity to do so arises, mention of this certainly can be made on the relevant page.

VKing (talk) 01:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

I am a natural blonde as well, and I think this is a super cool article on blondes. #amaz! Dab it grl. Magic02lcwiki (talk) 20:19, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, VKing. 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)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, VKing. 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)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, VKing. 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)