User talk:AioftheStorm

Welcome

Hello, AioftheStorm! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! PEarley (WMF) (talk) 01:11, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Organ donation in the United States prison population, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hypoxia (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) 11:29, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Mr. bot AioftheStorm (talk) 13:41, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Betty Hay, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (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) 08:49, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Categorization of plant articles

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia! The system for categorizing plant articles is not well documented so it's not surprising that mistakes get made. (I've been trying to explain it a bit better this morning.) There are separate category hierarchies for taxa and for taxa by rank. See the first two sections at WP:PLANTS/Categorization. So there should be a category Category:Podocarpaceae genera as well as a category Category:Podocarpaceae.

Whether this parallel system is necessary or desirable is open to debate, but it is widely used in plant articles. Peter coxhead (talk) 12:07, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thank you for letting me know. I hadn't noticed this being the case for most plant categories, so I thought Category:Podocarpaceae genera was the exception and not the norm. Does the same hold true for taxonomies for animal, fungi, etc?AioftheStorm (talk) 00:09, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See e.g. Category:Genera. Coverage over the tree of life is very patchy indeed (and quite often not correctly set up). For genera, birds seem to be covered well, other organisms generally not. Hence this category system doesn't seem useful to me for most groups of organisms because you can't actually use it for navigation. User:Hesperian did quite a bit of work at one time building it up for angiosperms, where the coverage is fairly good. I think that actually Category:Podocarpaceae genera was an exception for gymnosperms, and what I should have done was empty it and ask for it to be deleted, rather than populate it, fairly pointlessly. Sigh...
The important point, though, is that the "taxonomic category hierarchy" should always exist, and is distinct from the "taxonomic rank category hierarchy" in those groups where this latter exists. I don't at present see that it's worth creating the "rank" version if it doesn't exist. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:09, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect use of PROD

Please use WP:PROD tags only in article space. I noticed you PRODed several articles in the Wikipedia:Articles for Creation space. I dePRODed them and instead nominated most of them for speedy deletion as hoaxes. Thanks. Safiel (talk) 01:43, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will go ahead and do that then, thanks. I had actually consulted CSD about this and asked if they should be SD'ed or PRODed and while most agreed they could be SD'ed no one appeared to realize that they couldn't be PRODed and one editor told me it would probably be a gentler option to SD so I did that. Perhaps the PRODing guidelines should be updated since they were probably written before AFC was a thing and just never considered the possibility of large amounts of pseudo-article content existing in the WikiTalk space.AioftheStorm (talk) 02:00, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Integrating factor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Separable differential equation (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) 08:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Microbeads (research)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Microbeads (research), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://wpedia.goo.ne.jp/enwiki/Microbeads.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:24, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Microbeads, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Melting temperature. 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) 08:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Quercus lobata, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oaks. 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) 09:09, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Licenses

Multi-licensing means that someone who downloads one of your media for downstream use can choose one or other of the advertised licenses. The licenses do not typically have to be compatible with one another to allow this - an obvious example of an exception would be if the license stipulated its own invalidity when dual licensed. I'm not aware of any licenses that do any such thing.

As you may have noticed, CC0 is one of the available choices in the dropdown selector for licenses on Commons - there is no multi-licensing required.

HTH,

Samsara (FA • FP) 04:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response. I wish I could have responded as promptly as you did. Anyways, it is not immediately clear to me that multi-licensing with CC0 is compatible with Wikipedia's TOU, and user Moonriddengirl seems unsure of this as well and has contacted the WMF's copyright lawyers about this. I hope this is the case and will be keeping an eye out for their response.AioftheStorm (talk) 03:08, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Please read this notification carefully:
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Gamergate controversy.
The details of these sanctions are described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 06:48, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As much as I appreciate the tidbit at the end stating that this message is informational and does not imply misconduct, I fail to see how any reasonable person could see the posting of this as anything other than an implication of misconduct. In the future, please do not leave templates of this nature on my talkpage, I find them patronizing and low-effort.AioftheStorm (talk) 07:21, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

South African labour law

You deleted so much - please first seek consensus (see remark with my reversion). Good luck. Super48paul (talk) 08:11, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]