About me
I've been contributing since December 2003.
Please keep the mansplaining to a minimum.
Messages from other users
Hi there
Melbourne is the second largest city in Australi according to the official ABS data. This has been discussed on the Talk page. Please see this discussion and add your comments if you wish. Also please discuss your other proposed changes and seek consensus. Please note wikipedia policy: WP:BRD
Thanks Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 07:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- My apologies, the discussion was on the Melbourne and Sydney talk pages. I have opened another one on the Victoria page. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 07:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Victoria is on a list of pages in need of work. I only updated the page because it appeared to be out of date.
- But if you guys are having a debate over which is the largest city, I'll leave you to it. ash (talk) 07:57, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That's fine, I agree it needs a lot of work but please make sure your changes accord with policy and you get consensus for factual changes. For example, the lead in supposed to have a maximum of four paragraphs: WP:LEAD. Unless there is an obvious problem with the lead, it's often more useful to update the main part of the article first, and if no other editors object to this then incorporate the changed information into the lead. Also please note that when you use "and" in a sentence with the same subject BOTH parts of the predicate must be true. Eg "Victoria is one of Australia's six states and two territories" means: a) it is one of the six states; and b) it is one of the two territories. I apologise for not explaining my reasons for reverting your contribution more fully in the first place. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 08:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Who do you think you're talking to?! ash (talk) 08:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm ItsPugle. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Please refrain from making direct or indirect comments about other users' intellect, from behaving in a standoffish manner, or any other way that doesn't positively contribute to the community. Editorial discussions should be held on the article talk page and be focused on the edit, rather than the editor. Tim (Talk) 09:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, who are you? ash (talk) 10:02, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ashlar. Thank you for your work on New York Infant Asylum. Another editor, Ingratis, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Thanks for creating this interesting article. It could be further improved by the addition of more sources to the two already given. Best wishes!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Ingratis}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Ingratis (talk) 09:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Spot on - thanks! Ingratis (talk) 14:38, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop editing my comment [1][2], this is changing the meaning of what I've written, per WP:TPO. The response you left wouldn't make much sense if you changed it at this point. Please respect my request to not to modify it. Bridget (talk) 15:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Your comment is misleading. You did not make any changes "alongside" me. You kept interrupting my edits with conflicting edits in a rabid attempt to edit the page, moreover, with the aim of doing the exact opposite of what I was doing.
- It is not at all surprising that you are more concerned with the meaning of what you wrote than your unnecessary and misleading reference to me, which I clearly object to.
- Delete my name and feel free to delete the responses. ash (talk) 15:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Not sure why you keep making personal attacks. I don't appreciate being called "paternalistic" and having my editing on the article characterized as a "rabid attempt". Initially, I was genuinely curious about why you removed some of the content I added, using this edit summary, on your first edit to the article. I would have appreciated some elaboration on the edit summary. Best, Bridget (talk) 15:43, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- rabɪd,ˈreɪbɪd/ adjective having or proceeding from an extreme or fanatical support of or belief in something - I'd say that's pretty accurate.
- No, you're not interested - you're trying to get me to engage so that you can win an argument. Suggest you visit a famous author's page and compare it. Here's one Margaret Atwood.
- This isn't a relationship. Please stop writing on my page. I've asked you nicely and, failing that, bluntly to delete two words from your comment unnecessarily including me in your post. That deletion does not materially affect your comment unless your intention is to deliberately mislead. So the only reason for their continued inclusion seems to be a need to continue this interaction.
- ash (talk) 15:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- You don't get to make the decision of modifying my comment, just because you disagree with it. Bridget (talk) 16:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Editor modifying comment. Thank you. Bridget (talk) 16:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article
Mathis Touré is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to
Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be
deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mathis Touré until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
