This is an archive of past discussions with User:Gehenna1510. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi Gehenna1510! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
In your recent edits to Independent set (graph theory), you added a citeseerx link to the Luby reference that looks like a case of WP:ELNEVER to me. Citeseerx links are ok when citeseer says that the link came from a copy provided by the author (as is true for the other ones in that article) but not where someone other than the author made a copy available (for instance as fair use for a class, or perhaps as an outright copyright violation) and then citeseerx copied it, which is what appears to have happened in the Luby case. You need to carefully hand-check every link of this form that you add, to ensure that you do not commit a copyright violation yourself. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:13, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Gehenna1510. 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.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
Hello, Gehenna1510/Archive 1. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there! Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Nick Moyes (talk) 23:39, 29 July 2019 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.
A cup of coffee for you!
I was curious about what you were doing so I checked out about 10 of your edits. You seem to use an automated tool to fix references. Just curious - in special:diff/908098250, did you do this with a tool or manually? Thanks for your patrol. Blue Rasberry (talk)18:31, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Blue Rasberry : Thank you. I do the vast majority of the edits manually. While bots would fix the line feed characters, it's faster when I do it myself. Errors like the one in the link, where a template is inside another template, have to be done manually. Bots don't understand these constructs. Gehenna1510 (talk) 19:41, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Wow, very interesting. It looks like the kind of thing people wish could be automated but I doubted that it was possible. You do a lot of good patrol. Thanks for that. Blue Rasberry (talk)19:49, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Blue Rasberry : Yes, it is a rather repetitive task. On the other side, I see articles on a lot of topics I wouldn't see otherwise. So my general knowledge profits from this work. ;) Gehenna1510 (talk)
Your thread has been archived
Hi Gehenna1510! You created a thread called URL in citation contains malware now at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
If 18 Tamils dead give me supporting articles why are you giving false information where is the proof that 18 tamils dead? Actually 16 kannadigas died in police firing during protest. Karnataka police confirmed that why kannadigas should take un-necessary allegations? Your citation articles doesn't support Tamils dead. Lakshmism (talk) 12:56, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
Lakshmism The NYT article already states in it's headline that Tamils are the victims. NYT is a reliable, secondary and indepent source in this case. Unless you provide a equal source which backs up your claim that the deads are Kannadigas (shouldn't be that difficult if the police confirmed it), the statement will come back. Btw. see Wikipedia:Tendentious_editing#Righting_great_wrongs, wiki-articles are not about setting the record straight. Gehenna1510 (talk) 14:30, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
About victims :
People just tried to attack there is no proper clarification in your articles. They left town because of fear check out videos of Kannada medias is saying that Kannada protestors died in police firing during protest. Recently Tamil nadu & k'rntaka people attacked each other but nobody died. Why people trust only Tamil media? Lakshmism (talk) 15:57, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
People trust the New York Times in this case. You can present the other site (Kannada media) or create a controversy section in the article, that would be no problem for me. The problem is you delete content. Please stop with that! Gehenna1510 (talk) 16:17, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
About NYT :
Why can't we see that New York Times paper properly & clearly? why don't you publish old original paper which is you attached in your article ? Lakshmism (talk) 16:05, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
First it is not my article! I just came across it after you had fun vandalizing it. I only repaired the damage you caust.
Second the article in the archive is absolutly clear. You just don't like it. There is absolutely no need to scan an old paper or send an physical exemplar to your house.
Third what you try is known as disruptive editioning. You shouldn't do that.
Hi Gehenna1510! You created a thread called Help with vandalized article at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
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.
Hi there - I don't mind exactly, but given that the comment was put there by an IP roughly six weeks ago, I don't really think it was necessary. You're welcome on my talk page any time if you ever have a problem or need some advice, but please don't make edits like that there. Cheers GirthSummit (blether)16:42, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
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.
The Wikimedia LGBTQ+ User Group is holding online working days in May. As a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, editing on LGBTQ+ issues or if you identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, come help us set goals, develop our organisation and structures, consider how to respond to issues faced by Queer editors, and plan for the next 12 months.
We will be meeting online for 3 half-days, 14–16 May at 1400–1730 UTC. While our working language is English, we are looking to accommodate users who would prefer to participate in other languages, including translation facilities.
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.
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.
.jpg){kind=logo}
