User talk:Puisque

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Outta My Head, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
• The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Outta My Head was changed by Puisque (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.865321 on 2012-07-25T07:20:39+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 07:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

this edit summary is completely inappropriate. As you note, we are an encyclopaedia, and we expect more from our editors than calling article subjects "dumb b****s" on a publicly accessible page. I have deleted your edit summary. In the future, behave with more propriety. Ironholds (talk) 13:05, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, After some experimenting, I was able to move your article! What I did was click on the 'move' button, delete the incubator portion of the title, and then pick (article) from the drop-down list. Wiki then let me move the article out of the incubator. Hergilei (talk) 00:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. :) -- Puisque (talk) 00:51, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that per WP:RM instructions, you're supposed to start a new section with a header for the requested move. This functions as the link target the bot uses to list requested moves. If you don't provide a proper header, then the linkages go weird. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 03:50, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn't have the nerves to read the manual properly, my laptop keeps crashing... -- Puisque (talk) 03:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All requested moves are supposed to have a header attached, so that people can properly access the discussion. As with this discussion area on your talk page, requested moves should begin with a new section header

== new discussion header ==

The two requested moves you recently filed where missing them. So, for future references, when you next file a requested move, please remember to either add a title in the "subject/headline" area when you press "new section", or manually add one in directly with the above code just above where you had the requested move material you used in the two recently filed move requests. (obviously, it shouldn't say "new discussion header", but something appropriate instead, like for example "move article to Baltic Seafloor" or something) -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 06:10, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks! -- Puisque (talk) 09:33, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Might I suggest reading Serial comma and WP:ENGVAR, which should explain this misunderstanding? WJBscribe (talk) 17:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks! :) -- Puisque (talk) 17:59, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 2013–14 synchronized skating season may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:42, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I noticed your alterations to Eurovision Song Contest 2013 in which you decapitalised the word "contest". You may wish to know that the "Eurovision Song Contest" is a brand name, and therefore is a proper noun. Proper noun's are capitalised, and so any references to the term "contest" needs to use a capital C. Wesley♦^Mouse 21:08, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So...."Eurovision Song Contest is blablabla...this and that...The Contest is held every year."? Sorry, but could you link me to some WP guideline page for that assertion? "Eurovision Song Contest" is brand name, "contest" is not a brand name, even if refers to the ESC. -- Puisque (talk) 21:32, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is grammatical context, and I did provide a link to proper nouns in this very thread title. English is my native language, and if a brand is being referred to then it needs to maintain capitalisation. Eurovision Song Contest is a brand name that has been around since 1956. So when one refers to the "contest" in retrospect of "Eurovision Song Contest" then contest would be capitalised. For example if someone was to say "it is just a contest of who is best", then contest is not a brand and therefore does not need to be capitalised. The same would go if one was to say "The Eurovision Song Contest is one of the biggest contests in the world". The latter use of the word contest is in a different grammatical context. But if you were to say "The last time Sweden won was at the 1999 Contest", then we're shortening the term 1999 Eurovision Song Contest, therefore "Contest" is capitalised. Its all about grammar and the context a word is being used, which would determine whether a word is a proper noun or not. Wesley♦^Mouse 21:43, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you did link to a Wikipedia article, but the article says nothing about these kinds of cases (ESC ... the contest/Contest). An aside: you don't have to mention English is your native language, I can see that by checking your page, and besides it doesn't make your assertion about the subject any more reliable: I still would like to have the proper links to WP guidelines or reliable non-WP sources (renowned style guides for British English, etc.). Thank you! -- Puisque (talk) 22:01, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Did you miss the part about 'proper names'? I merely mentioned English about being my native language, as not everyone checks a user's page to verify their known languages. So please, assume good in that referencing to my native tongue. And there doesn't need to be WP guidelines in regards to grammatical correctness. Grammatical correctness is common logic in English linguistics. It would be like saying we need WP guidelines to capitalise people's names - you just wouldn't ask for such guidelines, as it is a known factor that we would capitalise a name. Proper nouns/proper names become capitalised in English linguistics. The fact that we're using the word "contest" on its own and in the context referral to the Eurovision Song Contest (which is the proper name) means we would capitalise it, as we've shortened the term Eurovision Song Contest, to merely "The Contest". It is an easy error to make for people unfamiliar with grammatical correctness. Wesley♦^Mouse 22:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I read through the article and I couldn't see any passage where it takes stance on whether to capitalise a single common noun (contest), picked out of a proper name (Eurovision Song Contest) and still referring to the proper name. Please, let me know if you think this kind of a case is mentioned somewhere in the article.

A "known factor"? There are loads of WP guidelines about grammar, so apparently all grammar rules are not "known factors". I understand your point (the "Contest" refers to the "Eurovision Song Contest" because "Contest" is capitalised in the proper name, ESC), but I still consider it unnecessary capitalisation (it is perfectly visible from the context what "Contest" refers to: if making sure the reader knows that it refers to the specific contest is the whole point of that rule), unless I see some rules in WP or renowned non-WP sources. -- Puisque (talk) 22:44, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I feel you might be failing to grasp the concept of this issue here, and what I am trying to explain. I know I can get very complexed with my explanations, which I sincerely apologise if that has occurred on this occasion. Although you have actually hit the nail on the head yourself when you mention ESC. The C is capitalised, as is its full version 'Eurovision Song Contest'. Because we are using the word 'contest' elsewhere in the article in reference to the actual Eurovision Song Contest, means we also need to capitalise the C, as we've just shortened the whole brand to "Contest" for simplicity. We could easily extend the word so that the whole brand name is used, but as the words are linking to the Eurovision Song Contest articles (which again are capitalised) then we have shortened the word and whilst maintaining the capital C. Anyhow, I have asked another editor to come along here and explain things a little better, just in case the complexity of my explanations are becoming overly confusing. Wesley♦^Mouse 22:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I get your point perfectly: ES Contest -> Contest, because the letter C is capped in the actual trademark. Just the fact that the actual word "contest" in itself is not a trademark, it makes me doubtful about the necessity of the capital letter. Do you happen to know anyone who might own, e.g., The Oxford Style Manual? I would assume they have rules (or guidelines) for these cases as well. -- Puisque (talk) 23:20, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To put it more simplistically the article uses context for example: 2011 Contest, or 1980 Contest. The word contest is capitalised because we are referring to the context of 2011 Eurovision Song Contest or 1980 Eurovision Song Contest, and thus the contextual meaning of 'contest' maintains the trademark version, we've just chosen to omit the words 'Eurovision Song' and opted for a simplistic word 'Contest'. If we were to merely say "it was just a contest to see who was best", then the contextual meaning changes as there is no reference to which contest we're talking about, and thus it becomes a common noun. Basically the context in what we are meaning can change how a word is stylised. Wesley♦^Mouse 23:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this will help http://www.k12reader.com/proper-nouns/ which states

• The rules for capitalizing proper nouns are pretty simple. Proper nouns always begin with a capital letter.

However there are times when a word can be used as either a common noun or proper noun and you might get confused as to when you should use the capitalized form. For example, “father” can either be common or proper.

• One rule for thumb is that if you are using the word as a title and name it should be capitalized.

• “I had dinner with my father last night.”
• “Would you like to have dinner with me, Father?”

• See the difference? In the first example the word was used more generally as a common noun. In the second example, the word was used like a name. In this instance the term “father” took the place of the actual name, such as “Bob.”

The same rule would apply for contest. If the word was used more generally, then it becomes a decapitalised word. However, as we are using the word for an actual name/entity (in this case Eurovision Song Contest) then capitalisation is used to stipulate that we are referring to an entity and not a common word. Wesley♦^Mouse 23:55, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your edit to the list of Finnish number-one singles in 2013. There are often unbroken ties in the Finnish charts, see this week's download chart for example. [1] There are ties for numbers 8, 16, 22 (three songs sharing this position), 25, 27 and 30. In these cases, the following number is not given to any song (e.g. if there are two number one songs, the next best selling song is number three). Therefore, the information for week 9 is not erroneous. The same applies to the Finnish album and singles charts; in most weeks there are at least two records with the same chart position. While I do not like tied positions in charts (especially charts with low sales such as the Finnish chart, resulting in this happening almost weekly), the chart compilers have made the decision not to break ties, and I believe this should be respected in order to provide the correct information. There has been one other case where two songs tied for number one on the download chart, i.e. week 48 in 2011. [2] YuckieDuck (talk) 20:21, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay. The edit I made changed it to the songs template, such as Template: Jennifer Lopez songs, Rihanna songs, Katy Perry songs, etc. Since Gaga has a wide discography, and with many of her songs having articles, it looks much more organized, since the amount "other songs" is roughy bigger than the amount of her actual singles. (CA)Giacobbe (talk) 04:02, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Ketchup Song (Aserejé) 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:

• {| class="wikitable sortable"
• {{singlechart|Finland|1|artist=Las Ketchup|song=The Ketchup Song|accessdate=2013-08-27)}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:49, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Cheek (rapper) Kuka muu muka cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 20:26, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Finnish Synchronized Skating Championships, Puisque!

Wikipedia editor Missionedit just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks!

To reply, leave a comment on Missionedit's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013 Finlandia Trophy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sergei Voronov (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) 09:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All rulings are pending for 30 days and then become final. That allows time for typos to be found and, once upon a time, for the printer to do the work. The difference with KY is that the judge issued no "order". It's the fact that he has not ordered anyone to do anything that makes it different. He's going to hold a hearing first and decide what to do.

In other cases -- cases without an idiosyncratic judge -- there's a decision followed promptly by an order that may or not be stayed. In SSM cases the order is usually stayed as in VA last night. KY is one of a kind.

Calling the KY decision a "memorandum opinion" doesn't change this. It's a decision. A decision that hasn't been formally published. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 18:52, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty. Thanks for that explanation! :) -- Puisque (talk) 12:37, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the LGBT rights in Finland page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 01:02, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that some edits performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. They are as follows:

• On the Finnish Synchronized Skating Championships page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help) and a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
• On the Rockettes (synchronized skating team) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help) and a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check these pages and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 01:08, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Number-one albums in the United States requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's discussion directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of recreating the page. Thank you.

Here are links to various discussions over the years in which consensus is to have lists of number-one albums not categories for them due to category clutter amongst other reasons.

• Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 July 15#Number-one album categories
• Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 November 4#Category:Number-one albums in Canada
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 June 27#Category:Number one albums in the United States
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 May 12#Category:Billboard 200 number-one albums
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 March 7#Category:Number-one albums in Finland
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 December 30#Category:Oricon weekly number-one albums
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 February 22#Category:Billboard Top R&B/Hip-Hop number-one albums
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 March 4#Category:Billboard number-one Tropical Albums

Of course, consensus can change but that should be brought up for a broader discussion at the appropriate WikiProjects. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 01:01, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of number-one singles of 2014 (Finland), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Newman. 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) 08:51, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Albums certified by Musiikkituottajat, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 15:05, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Albums by gold certification, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:52, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Team Unique page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Puisque. I stumbled across a template you made several years ago, {{year-end single chart}}, and created some documentation for it. If you have time (or interest) you may want to review my work to make sure everything is correct - I only have a very basic understanding of template coding. In particular, there are 2 issues that could be better explained:

1. What is going on with the UK chart for the year 2012?
2. How is the third (unnamed) parameter being used in the US chart? I couldn't seem to get any results when testing it.

I also wondered if you would consider adding more supported charts for other countries. Hoof Hearted (talk) 16:30, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Terve! Huomasin, että olet muokannut Suomen koronaviruspandemian artikkelia. Olisi kivaa, jos haluaisit kääntää lisää ja parantaa artikkelia! Meillä on nimittäin tänä viikonloppuna hackathon, jossa meillä on yhtenä tavoitteena englanninkielisen Wikipedian artikkelin parantaminen. Hackathonia varten meillä on sivut suomenkielisessä Wikipediassa. -Yupik (talk) 13:49, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I noticed that you edited the historical data for the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data in Finland. What source are you using for the 14 March figure? I can't seem to find historical numbers on the THL website, and the Helsingin Sanomat Open Data gives 70 new cases that day, for a total of 227.

Thanks for the help! —Rutlandbaconsouthamptonshakespeare (talk) 12:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This site[3] which was previously used for the template and uses the same source (this) as the GitHUB. The GitHUB page[4] gives no figures. -- Puisque (talk) 16:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I also use these sources; I'm the one who added the HS Open Data to the template. In the edit that I linked, you changed the figure for 2020-03-14 from 227 to 225, even though both of these sources give the figure as 227. I now see that you later added two cases to this date and several dates afterwards, throwing the figures off. Why is that? Are you saying that the data at korona.kans.io incorrect? —Rutlandbaconsouthamptonshakespeare (talk) 18:24, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If you check "tartuntaloki", you can see that the last case dated on 14 March 2020 is the case number 225. Below the list, it says "some ID might not have been used", meaning, there's for example ID no. 60 is not used, so the IDs upwards from 59 are 61, 62 etc. So, for 14 March 2020 the figure is 225 cases. -- Puisque (talk) 17:05, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The numbers used by korona.kans.io are not based on the ID-numbers of the individual cases. They are automated counts of the amount of cases for a specific day. I highly encourage you to download the raw data and count them to see for yourself, if you do not believe me. You can do this with an Excel COUNTIF function, for instance.

This means that your adjustments to the numbers are incorrect; for example, 2020-03-14 has a total 70 new cases, raising the total from 157 to 227. The number for said day should be 227. —Rutlandbaconsouthamptonshakespeare (talk) 16:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You speak Finnish, right? The first column "Jär.nro" means "number of order". (I can't come up with a better translation, it means the number that indicates the item's position relative to others.) That is the cumulative number. The last Järj.nro for 14 March 2020 is 225. Correct me if I'm not getting you, but I think we're not talking about the same column here. -- Puisque (talk) 17:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And to make sure we're talking about the same list as well: I'm talking about the list under the header Tartuntaloki (Kaikki sairaanhoitopiirit) ("Infections log (All healthcare districts)"). Under that header, the first column "Jär.nro". It lists all cases in chronological order. -- Puisque (talk) 17:59, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The "Jär.nro" does not list the cases in chronological order, it lists them in the order that Helsingin Sanomat received the data. If the data was received at a later date, the Jär.nro figure is thrown off. For example, items Jär.nro 239 & 238 are for infections that were recorded 2020-03-13, even though these datapoints reached Helsingin Sanomat later (15 March). This means that two datapoints for 13 March were added after 14 March, so the Järj.nro is (chronologically speaking) off.

If you want the specific number of additional cases each day, just press Ctrl+F on your browser and type the date in, e.g. "14.03.2020" → this gives a total of 70 results, so the chart on Wikipedia should show an increase of 157 to 227 for this day. If there's anything that I can clarify further, please let me know. —Rutlandbaconsouthamptonshakespeare (talk) 19:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm you are absolutely correct, thank you! :D Somehow I just missed those details while scrolling through the list. I will edit the chart accordingly. -- Puisque (talk) 19:14, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

...but there's another question that arises from that: is it a policy across all COVID-19 pandemic articles to retroactively change the figures for past dates? If so, I'll edit the template back to what it used to be. -- Puisque (talk) 19:16, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Surely, the policy is to use data that is as accurate as possible, even if that requires changing past figures. Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19 has set WP:MEDRS as its content guideline, which includes WP:MEDDATE, i.e. always use up-to-date sources, even if they contradict historical ones. —Rutlandbaconsouthamptonshakespeare (talk) 19:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pop songs by nationality has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zombie (cocktail), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Lime and Angostura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:19, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Planter's punch, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Lime and Zest (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:35, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Table addition 22 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:59, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit summary, I add/update all new peaks from charts each week. I am not going to go through and cite each individual artist's page on the websites that have them (in this case, Finland and Norway). It would take longer, be more laborious, and I don't see what the difference is when both have exactly the same information on them. What does it matter if we cite the week that the peak was achieved or the artist's page that lists (in these Eurovision artists' instances) only that chart position on it? As long as it's verifiable, it's merely preference. So I don't get what you mean by there is "no point" in citing the week over the artist page when it's preference and there's no additional or more correct information being imparted in one or the other. Ss112 14:37, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Ok, I should have verbalised my idea more clearly, and that wording was kind of rude. I am sorry. Ofc, it's a mere preference. My idea is that one doesn't have to update the URL every week if a higher chart position comes up in the future, just the number. -- Puisque (talk) 14:58, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Michael Monroe Horns and Halos album cover.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]