User talk:Freeman1856

Welcome!

Hello, Freeman1856, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Fiddle Faddle 09:17, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

November 1913 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to National Geographic, Strand and Devonport Dockyard
December 1913 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Reichstag

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:49, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

November 1913 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Washington, Brute Force, Oakleigh, Dauphin, Ecstasy, The Rebel, Haus, A Streetcar Named Desire, They Shoot Horses, Don't They?, Brighton Rock, Arys, Hamilton, Victoria and Prey Veng

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: January 1914 (May 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!
  • Please remember to link to the submission!
Fiddle Faddle 09:17, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! Freeman1856, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

Your submission at Articles for creation: January 1914

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!
  • Please remember to link to the submission!
Freeman1856 (talk) 22:01, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is intended to be a in-depth article to the heading page. This was done for other articles such as all the calendar months for 1913 and previous years leading all the way back to 1901.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited December 1913, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Richmond Hill and South Pacific (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) 08:56, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited December 1913, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sunderland, Tests and Fools Rush In (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) 08:53, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

I can't thank you enough for completing the rest of the Category: Months in the 1900s articles for 1913, following the same spirit of putting in citations for everything. I got as far as October 1913 and had to abandon the rest of it a year ago because of a massive work project. I had been working on November 1913 (User:Mandsford/1906) and three others (October 1943, October 1950, and October 1963) at the time.

Quick question-- in the rest of these, we had been using past tense to refer to the events, rather than present tense. My rationale on this has always been that present tense is used in newspaper headlines, and sometimes in sections of history books ("Man Lands on the Moon") but that the past tense is used in the narrative that follows the news ("At 10:56 pm on July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong became the first man to walk on the Moon after Apollo 11 landed.") Would you object if I were to quietly revise the articles to past tense, in order to be consistent with the rest of the project?

If you do have objections, then I respect your decision, because you've done all the work. My hope, however, is that there would eventually be a WikiBook for the articles about the years 1910-1919, and for 1960-1969, as well as other decades as they get completed. User:Deb had made great strides in getting the framework for 1962, 1963 and 1964 started (and had also made an important change in the presentation of births and deaths within the sections for each day, rather than at the end of the page). She found it easier to write those in the present tense; As I got to each of those articles to give them the citations and documentation, these were changed to past tense. I hope that you'll give me the okay to do the rewording for the sake of consistency. If you say no, then, as I say, I'll respect that and will keep hands off. Regardless of what your decision is, though, thank you for continuing the mission of getting in something for every single day, along with the verifiable citations. Mandsford 16:26, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

1914 articles

  • Freeman, the best rule of thumb I've gone by is to work on the article in user space and then, after it looks complete enough that you can deem it "finished", to post it. That would be the point where you undo the redirect on January 1914, and replace it with complete text and the label "Category: Months in the 1900s". I'm sorry that you ran into a troublemaker among administrators, but it's harder for the zealots to win the fight if you've got the citations already in place. I'll be more than happy to help out in any way that I can.

One of my favorite ways of starting (again, in user space), is to glance at the front page from that day's newspaper (the Milwaukee Sentinel in 1914 was great for this because it had "summary of the news" on each page). http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=wZJMF1LD7PcC It's the next best thing to taking a time machine to 1914 and buying a newspaper for once cent. If you're reading this on Monday, August 4, check out the morning Milwaukee Journal for Tuesday, 8-4-14 http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=jvrRlaHg2sAC&dat=19140804&printsec=frontpage&hl=en While you're writing this in user space, even the most anal retentive control freak can't interfere with your work.

The next good way to get interesting content, before posting, is to go to Google Books and type in the date in the form of the phrase "on January 1, 1914"-- if you just write "January 1, 1914", you'll get way too much stuff to sort through. If you google the phrase, make sure it doesn't catch birthdays (" 'on January 1, 1914' - born" is what you would type in the searchbox, but the most reliable info is on the pages of published books. I've learned all sorts of things that way. I have some user pages that have been sitting dormant, like User:Mandsford/1909 which might someday be the article "October 1950". I haven't touched it in a long time, but none of the Wiki-busi-bodi people have either.

My suggestion is that you create an untouchable page starting with something like this User:Freeman1856/1914. I can rescue whatever content you might have started with that got deleted, if you want something to work on in spare time. Again, I appreciate your work on the project, and I'll be happy to back you up. Mandsford 02:32, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/January 1914 concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/January 1914, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: February 1914 has been accepted

February 1914, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

North America1000 21:56, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited March 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RMS. 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, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited March 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page River Don. 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) 08:56, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited March 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Broadway. 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) 09:41, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:April 1914 has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:April 1914. Thanks! Onel5969 TT me 18:18, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: April 1914 has been accepted

April 1914, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 TT me 13:27, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Messages

Your messages from Talk:April 1914 belong here, so I have moved them to here. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 19:51, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited January 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Ward. 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) 09:07, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your questions at AfC Help Desk

To move the draft, go to the "Move" tab at the top right of the page in edit mode. It'll prompt you. Select "Article" from the pull down menu and retitle the article (for example, May 1914). It will ask for the reason for the move, which, in this case, is that you're moving from a draft to the mainspace. (I haven't actually looked at the articles, although I'm amazed by the amount of work you've done -- so no opinion on moving them - just answering your question.) Julie JSFarman (talk) 19:56, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 23 August

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

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) 00:14, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 25 August

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

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, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited April 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 1st Marine Brigade. 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) 08:59, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: May 1914 has been accepted

May 1914, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 TT me 21:44, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Freeman1856 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect User:Freeman1856. Since you had some involvement with the User:Freeman1856 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 21:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Drafting new articles

FYI, you can create new articles at DRAFT:newarticlenamehere. It would save on problems you're having with your userpage redirects. Or you can do User:Freeman1856/newarticlenamehere as a subpage of your userspace -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 07:06, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You can also draft articles in your sandbox, which comes with a "submit your draft for review" function in the sandbox template. It looks like you've done that already for Draft:June 1914 but you moved the page to the new location, which leaves a redirect behind in your sandbox. I've restored the sandbox template for you. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

May 1914
added links pointing to Karluk and Robert Bartlett
January 1914
added a link pointing to Broadway

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited June 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Collier. 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) 11:46, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 7 October

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

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) 00:25, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, having trouble moving my Draft article (Draft:July 1914) to active Wiki article. Always a bit unclear of the process. Please advise.Freeman1856

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited August 1914, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Posen and Thorn. 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, 18 November 2015 (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) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

August 1914
added links pointing to Péronne and Siege of Antwerp
September 1914
added a link pointing to Siege of Antwerp

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Drafting new articles - December 9

I continually run into this problem and still haven't got the hang of solving. I'm creating main articles of specific months for historic years, in this case 1914. When the article is ready to public viewing, I continually run into the older month article, which is usually a redirect to the 1914 landing page. I can initially solve it adding a comma between the month and year to activate the article, but obviously is doesn't link up properly with established links, such as in the header. I think the solution is to merge with a redirect but I'm still not 100% sure how to do that properly. Would someone mind walking through the steps? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freeman1856 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Freeman1856: Use {{db-move}} on the redirect without the comma. Then an administrator will complete the move. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:15, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October, 1914 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect October, 1914. Since you had some involvement with the October, 1914 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 14:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: December 1914 has been accepted

December 1914, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Naraht (talk) 18:22, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited September 1914, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Consistory and Vatican. 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) 12:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Praise for your work on the 1914 articles

  • I wanted to say "good work!" and thanks for your great job on the articles from January 1914 through December 1914. It's well-documented, and I'm glad you've kept with the philosophy I've always tried to go with-- while headlines are written in the present tense, history was, and always will be, written in the past tense. Mandsford 02:06, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Appreciate it Mandsford. A lot of work went into it. Any further assistance to add or improve the entries is appreciated. Freeman1856 8:12, 27 February 2016 (MST)

wrong days of the week

August 1914 : August 1 was a Saturday (al also the calendar sheet on the right shows), August 2 a Sunday and so on. --Neun-x (talk) 15:34, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Neun-x: Thanks, I have now fixed the days of the week in the section headers with this edit. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 15:43, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
September 1914 also showed wrong days of the week in the section headers, which I have now corrected with this edit. Freeman1856 probably confused 1914 with 1913. By the way, the pages in Category:Months in the 1900s are all articles except the months in 1997, 1998, and 1999, which are now in the Portal namespace per discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years/Archive 11#Using archives of Portal:Current events for month articles. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 15:56, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Page Move Request

  • Requested move|January 1915|reason=Page is now as level that is satisfactory to be seen by the public as a main article and linked to the 1915 main page.

Your submission at Articles for creation: January 1915 (May 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Music1201 was:
There is not a single page on Wikipedia devoted to just one single month. This article should be merged into 1915. Additionally, the article contains events that aren't notable in general.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
— Music1201 talk 22:01, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited November 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sahil. 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) 10:51, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Freeman1856. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge.
Message added 02:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 02:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited November 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mercury. 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) 09:42, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: March 1915

The article you submitted to Articles for creation has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Naraht (talk) 14:55, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: April 1915

The article you submitted to Articles for creation has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Naraht (talk) 14:56, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

April 1915
added a link pointing to Monitor
May 1915
added a link pointing to Battle of Hill 60

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:34, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited May 1915, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Port of New York. 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) 09:57, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

September 1915
added links pointing to Cardinal, Western, Union, Symbolism, Loos and Tigres

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited October 1915, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gradec. 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) 09:10, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 20 July

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

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) 00:20, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited December 1915, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mount Hope. 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) 09:39, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Freeman1856. 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)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: December 1917 (November 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by ToThAc was:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at 1917 instead.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
ToThAc (talk) 18:44, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: December 1917 has been accepted

December 1917, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Primefac (talk) 12:58, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please note the link create articles yourself does not actually lead to an articles creation page independent of Articles for Creation. In fact, it actually links you back to it. There was a separate article creation stream for experienced article creators that seems to have disappeared. Sorry I can't be more specific as I didn't bother to screenshot or copy the link at the time, since I assumed it would always be there. Any idea what happened to it? Freeman1856 11:24, 20 November 2017 (MST)

Userpage categories

Userpages do not belong to article categories. Categories must be formatted as [[:Category:Name]] on pages intended to become articles. The categories have now been fixed on your userpage, and they should stay like that. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 17:01, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I think I unintentionally classified it as a article when it's been my draft page for any articles I'm creating. Freeman1856 11:24, 20 November 2017 (MST)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Freeman1856. 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)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited December 1917, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halifax (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) 20:14, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: January 1918 (February 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gbawden was:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at January 1918 instead.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Already exists in mainspace
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Gbawden (talk) 06:55, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:January 1918

Draft:January 1918, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:January 1918 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:January 1918 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Gbawden (talk) 06:55, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

February 1918 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Palestine, Chelsea, New York, Jordan Valley and Thomas Savage

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

August 1915 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Texas Rangers
July 1915 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Texas Rangers
March 1918 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Jussy

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

April 1914 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Rosemary's Baby
November 1914 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Vatican

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to February 1915, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 09:03, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

March 1914 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Junta
November 1914 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Ballooning
October 1914 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Tackle
September 1914 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Communist China

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

August 1915 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Forward and Texas Rangers
March 1914 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Junta

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

April 1915 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Boston Braves
October 1915 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bronze Cross

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited June 1918, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ganja (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

August 1918 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Rouvroy, Fresnes and Dovecot
June 1918 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Macedonia

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited September 1918, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Defender and Camp Cody (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited October 1918, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Palestine and Washington Declaration (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited November 1918, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Pacific Theatre, Galicia and German Republic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Freeman1856. 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)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

January 1919 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Basque, New York, Rose Bowl and Robin Boyd

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited February 1919, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages German and Shane (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:43, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited August 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boston Braves (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) 09:02, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited January 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Regina (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited May 1919, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Wizard of Oz (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciation for work on articles

I used the February 1914 list of dates to make it easier for me on an article on February 1970 (which, being 56 years after 1914, began on a Sunday and ended on a Saturday, and just wanted to say that I'm very impressed with the depth and the sourcing of your work. Thanks for adding to Wikipedia's legacy as the #1 online reference source Mandsford 22:52, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited April 1914, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Parr (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:40, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited May 1916, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romani (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited January 1915, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Collier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited July 1915, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:03, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited April 1915, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited November 1915, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ed Edmondson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:13, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

September 1913 (month) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Romanian, Macedonia and Georgia
June 1913 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Reichstag

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:27, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited June 1913, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sedgwick County (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited October 1913, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Broadway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:52, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited May 1919, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Avenue U station (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:19, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interested in hearing your thoughts

  • Freeman, we ought to compare notes sometime. You know, I've long respected that your articles, like mine, serve the purpose that I was aiming for in having well-researched, efficiently-written summaries of the months of the 1900s, with citations to reliable and verifiable sources. While the individual year articles were an inspiration for doing the individual month articles, like January 1900 (first one I ever did) or October 1913, I consider articles like 1900 or 1913 to be everything Wikipedia shouldn't be-- unsourced claims written in the present tense manner of headlines. I think the project has worked because it's a collaborative effort from a lot of people with the same overall goals. Certainly, I don't want it to become a competition where we're in an edit war of some sort.

It occurs to me that, perhaps, you've completed the months of the 1910s. I know you created the pages from 1914 onward, a fantastic job considering that war was a daily story 52 of those months (from August 1914 to November 1918). Since December 1919 closing the decade that started with January 1910, it's possible that that you may be working on a uniform style of those 120 articles uniform in order to create a print-on-demand Wikibook published by the Wikimedia Foundation. If that's the case, then you would have my full support. One suggestion that I would make for your project is that you might reconsider placing all birthdates or all dates of death in one sentence, which is less readable than individual entries. While that's the style in, say, the "today's almanac" section of the newspaper, it isn't the format used in necrologies or birth announcements, because the deaths and births were usually separate, unrelated events. In any event, the "months project" has been one that's been developed and patrolled by good people. I'm sincerely interested in hearing your thoughts on the project. Mandsford 15:08, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Okay, I see that part of the problem seems to be that I started an article on January 1920 and that you were independently preparing to do the same thing. Sorry, I didn't realize that you were going for 1920 as well. I can see where that would look like an aggressive act on my part. Believe me when I say that it was coincidental and not a deliberate attempt to compete against you. As January 2020 approaches, it's natural that more than one person would think of the idea. Not sure whether you subscribe to newspapers.com, but in case you don't, it's got access to a lot of newspapers from back in the day, and I'm fine with letting you use my account to take a look at what's out there. Mandsford 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi, Mandsford, sorry for the late reply. Real-life had gotten a bit busy. My thoughts right now having done nearly an entire decade of calendar posts, and World War I to boot, is that I retrospectively drilled too deep and made some of those date entries way too detailed. At the time, as I was starting, I was worried some dates would have nothing but as I went on, the opposite happened and some things could be argued are not as noteworthy. Granted, it's always subjective. I could argue there are bunch of rail lines, sports clubs, organizations and companies, as well as persons, who could be left off the lists, so people who want to read have an easier time scrolling through. This is especially the case if you want to go and give each birth and death its own bullet point; some of days it will get quite long. It is subjective who stays and who goes. Some articles are very extensive for people that may objectively do not have a big an impact on history, while others with shorter ones may not have had as mucch biographical but do have pretty noteworthy accomplishments. You're right, I do have some 1920 draft on hand but still away far behind but if you want to discuss and firm up some guidelines, we could re-edit the the earlier years and make sure the subsequent articles are little more consistent with each other.
      • Sorry not to respond to you sooner, Freeman, and I appreciate the opportunity to exchange thoughts. It had been awhile since I'd checked your talk page, and of course our real life obligations take first priority. I think we have the same views on a lot of things. It's a tough call on who to include on births and deaths, because Wikipedia has "inherent notability" for a lot of people, including any person who ever played professional sports, any person whoever was ever elected to office at the state or provincial level, and almost any person who ever appeared on film or on television. At a minimum, I tend to go with any head of state or head of government, any Olympic gold medalist or "world champion" at something (outside of pro wrestling) or an actor or actress who won an award or who had numerous appearances; for anyone else, I think we're free to use our best judgment on these things.

Display images are a tough call as well-- they're a good, eye-catching, addition to the big blank space up at the top where the table of contents box is. Over the course of time, I've learned to try to keep images on the right side of the page rather than the left so that the text isn't "squeezed". Since things in an info-box are somewhat protected from squeezing (unless the images on both sides of the box are unnecessarily large), I try to keep images at the top in a reasonable range, usually no wider than 250px or 300px, and images on the text at 100px or 150px tops. Anyway, although we disagree on the display of births and deaths (I go by the theory that they're separate events, but agree that they should be kept at a small number) I won't undo your changes along that line in the 1910s category, but hope that you'll reconsider your view. Anyway, best wishes to you for the rest of the year and the upcoming holidays, I'm going to be doing Christmas shopping and bill paying for awhile. As I've said, I think you've done a great job in researching and choosing interesting items on the articles that you've worked on, and that we agree upon more things than we disagree upon. Mandsford 19:03, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited December 1919, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Immunity and Epic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:36, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited January 1916, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blue Max (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:08, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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) 02:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited July 1916, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Glamorgan County.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited September 1912, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Broadway.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:05, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited April 1912, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cork and Halifax.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited August 1916, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rugby.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited August 1900, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Manhattan State Hospital.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited April 1901, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Collier.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited June 1901, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reitz.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:JamesLucas-A

I'm already reverting the bizarre (and unnecessary) edits by JamesLucas-A on articles, and recommend that you do the same, as with October 1912. If we don't stand up to him now, he's eventually going to be doing this to everything else in this project. Mandsford 17:55, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

February 1917
added a link pointing to Pioneer
July 1900
added a link pointing to Queen

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:53, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Group discussion on Category:Months in the 20th century articles

  • Freeman, following up from last week, since you've created a and contributed to a large number of pages in the Category:Months in the 20th century articles, I'm giving notice that we're having a discussion among the contributors about a basic framework. You're invited to participate at [1]. Mandsford 15:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, although even from the talk I read from the link, it's not clear to me what the specific edits that are causing the issue. It is the addition of the "For similar dates" that are popping up under each day. Could you provide specific examples on what has been happening?"
  • Sure; some of this may be resolved soon, but as an example, in April 1930, "April 1, 1930 (Tuesday)" was changed (along with the other 30 days) and the addition was made saying "For the same date in other years, see April 1", with 29 other entries after the other 29 days in April. This had been done in the pages you had created, from January 1914 to December 1919, and my reversal of the edits to your previous version (on these pages and the rest up to December 1925) was what prompted the discussion. You can click on an article to see what it looked like before and after the changes. We've called a ceasefire on mass changes and mass reversals pending a group discussion, but I think it's time that contributors like you and me (and User:Deb and others who have contributed to the success of this project) need get group status. Mandsford 16:21, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I admit I'm still tinkering with some of the Category:Months in the 20th century articles to ensure they are consistent throughout. I don't have too much to say one way or the other, but will go with the consensus of what the standard is. Generally, I support any style that makes it easier for viewers to read and links to specific references that improve understanding of the content.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited September 1901, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transvaal.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Indigenous peoples, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page First Nations.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Please stop changing redirected links into piped links (and please do not just revert other editors who disagree with your changes, e.g. [2], [3], [4]). As explained at WP:NOTBROKEN, this is generally not useful and not wanted, and it produces unnecessary noise on the watchpages of other editors. – Tea2min (talk) 08:33, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, but I'm updating outdated links with the current articles without changing the original front wording, so if the editors wish to do it themselves, please do. It actually cleans up the articles and bit and makes them more professional, in my opinion. And I am happy to discuss it with them too.

Please stop changing empirical science to empiricism in the Quantification (science) article. The former refers to fields of science, where quantification is actually used, while the latter refers to a school of philosophy that emphasizes the importance of doing empirical science, but doesn't use quantification. Currently, both links redirect to the same page - this will hopefully be changed in future, then, only empirical science will be an appropriate link.
As a general comment, if you are reverted, and redo your edit, please indicate in your edit summary (or on the talk page) your reason; cf. the WP:BRD policy.
I also urge you to consider WP:NOTBROKEN again; you should have good reason when you change a redirect link, and you should tell it to other editors in your edit summary. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 14:33, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

Please do not change links to redirected article titles into piped links to the article. See WP:NOTBROKEN for why. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:11, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Freeman1856, as others have said, please desist from this behavior. --Trovatore (talk) 02:50, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Freeman1856, my man, please, for the love of all that is true and good, you have got to stop changing redirects into piped links to sections, as others have already said above. (Examples: this horror and another horror.) In addition to all the reasons that are listed at WP:NOTBROKEN, redirects are extremely useful for using Special:WhatLinksHere to see which pages link to a particular redirect term. Be a good wiki citizen and stop your mass annihilation of redirects! Biogeographist (talk) 13:55, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, even after reading the article WP: NOTBROKEN, I still fundamentally disagree with this position. Unfortunately, I sense this is a general consensus for the Wiki community, and I am in the minority. I can only state from my view most redirects convey a professional sloppiness in the work and in the site that extra care from the writers and editors can significantly reduce if not eliminate (e.g., spelling mistakes, noun plurals, not updating links should articles titles change, or vice-versa, changing the linked article constantly and not getting consensus on what it should be). That being said, I think we are at an impasse, and it will be very hard for the community to persuade me to change my mind. At this time, it would be better to set my user profile to retired, which I will do shortly after this article. Freeman1856 (talk) 18:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]