This is an archive of past discussions with User:MB. 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, I'm Qwerfjkl. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Chanda dynasty, and have marked it as unreviewed. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Your message on my talk page about ELs on Eric Zemmour article
Hello,
Thank you for your message. If the links I added are misplaced and/and should be placed in a more appropriate section, may I suggest you move them to the appropriate section you would then create for this purpose?
I may indeed not be familiar with all edit rules, and I apologise for that.
But in so doing, you would keep the quality of sourcing I have tried to introduce in this article, which was really lacking before, as well as a balanced and neutral approach.
Thank you for your understanding and support in my effort to improve greatly this article, which is now taking more importance for the encyclopaedia, as the person involved is most likely not only to be candidate to the presidential election in 2022, but also elected, as rising polls now show as much as high visibility in French media. Cheers, --Emigré55 (talk) 16:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
MB, Hello again, Thanks for the tool added with the template. I used it and it fixed a lot of the red links, I think. However, for some reason, others still appear red. Can you check what I did? hopefully nothing wrong? thank you in advance.--Emigré55 (talk) 17:19, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Emigré55, That looks like a big improvement. I see only two bare urls in the references now (I'm not sure why you said "red link"). I'm not sure if the tool couldn't make citations for those links; I don't use the tool myself. The links seem to work for me, so you could try the tool again or add citation templates manually. MB17:27, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
MarnetteD, I noticed you took care of this. Coincidence, or did you see this discussion? Or were you working through the October list? I was wondering if you gave up on fixing these after the 10k+ got tagged this spring. Just curious. MB00:42, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi MB. It was a coincidence :-) I did stop formatting refs for awhile but a couple weeks ago I started doing five or ten a day. Just for grins I start at Z and work my way backwards through the alphabet. I'm on the W's now but I do check each day for any that have been added for X,Y and Z thus Éric Zemmour's article received my attention. Further to other points in this thread I start with Refill2 as it formats most refs. After that I use reflinks as it gets most of the rest. Those left I have to do manually and that was the case for both of the ones in this article. I know this is probably too much info but I thought I'd fill you in anyway. Best regards to you both and have a great week. MarnetteD|Talk02:32, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Looks like MB took care of things Emigré55. You should consider changing refs 121 and 122 into footnotes as neither of them is actually a reference. Just a suggestion though. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk14:54, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
I went ahead and made the conversionEmigré55. It is possible that these should just be regular sentences in that paragraph rather than footnotes but I am not conversant enough about the subject to be sure. Maybe you can take a look when you have the time MB. MarnetteD|Talk16:59, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks MarnetteD, I now know how to do it in the future, thanks to you. And on your remark, I have no doubt that these minor infos belong to a footnote, as in both cases they concern mentions of additional minor costs indemnities following and added to a judgment. cheers, --Emigré55 (talk) 18:24, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Just out of curiousity is there any difference, or just personal preference? Also thanks for catching dated where it should have been date, apparently I've type that so many times I'm going blind. 89.241.33.89 (talk) 22:58, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
89.241.33.89, full names are preferred but other versions are fine. If fact, template names shouldn't be changed without a more substantive (non-cosmetic) change. See [[1]]. MB23:03, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello sir MB,
Sir I see the massage you noted in Talk:Nuwandika Senarathna, Sir it should be included a reference to prove it but sir her official facebook page is the only one reference we can take as reliable, but we can't add it to Wikipedia as a reliable source, that's why sir I didn't add that reference there. May be I am saying this with my lack of experience, so that sir I expect you will teach me to get more experiences in Wikipedia. Sir could you please say me that can we add a Facebook link under Basic Citation? Thank you sir.—Superatp( 💬 )04:55, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 11
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sanela Knezović, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Croatian.
Just a heads up...when the user removed the orphan tag, Helen Pauldid link to the Jekins article. It no longer does because in my reverting back to before a copyright violation (made by another user), the link, which was promotional anyway, was removed.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:49, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi MB. I've just added back the wikilinks you removed from the notes in this article. The links are circular (e.g. Line 2 (Shanghai Metro), but without them {{rcr}} throws a cite error when it's called breaking the table data. ActivelyDisinterested (talk) 13:21, 20 October 2021 (UTC) previously 89.241.33.89
ActivelyDisinterested, I looked into this further. {{rcr}} merely returns a color. Text should not be colored in the first place; it violates MOS:COLOR. I'm not colorblind and had trouble reading some of those colors due to the poor contrast. I've removed all the colored text and the circular redirects and it's all good now. Probably needs to be done in more of these articles also. MB17:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
On 23 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Railroad and Bank Building, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Railroad and Bank Building was built with six miles (9.7 km) of pneumatic tubes used to send items anywhere within the building in under ten seconds? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Railroad and Bank Building. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Railroad and Bank Building), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I got conned by the Articles Alert in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Singapore. It displayed that it was you who requested for the split, but upon completing the split article (sorta, I have spent the entire Sunday on it) and checking on the page history, it was an IP editor! – robertsky (talk) 11:53, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Robertsky, yeah, all I did was fix a date on the split request. I didn't even glance at the article itself. I asked at WP:VPT if this could be fixed. But unless you are sure splitting a article is a good idea (regardless of who proposed it), I would suggest waiting longer to see if any discussion develops. MB20:04, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Good morning, I wrote an article about (Ali Tajdari), the article had problems, I fixed them, I added the appropriate links and removed the duplicate links, one of the administrators reviewed it before I edited it, and He said he could not comment on it and was not sure about it, could you review it? Hoseinkandovan (talk) 11:01, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
This is not an area in which I am knowledgeable of the subject, another reviewer will get to it eventually. MB14:49, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Schools at War you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 18:01, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Wikitikitengo2, it looks like that section may be removed again. You should add one to MICA; that will be more stable as notably alumni are standard components of school articles. MB01:16, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
A cup of coffee for you!
Thanks for dealing with that certain page. It was mentioned on another page and I noticed it was blank so I figured I'd put something there. You took care of it better. AlphaWolf294 (talk) 02:11, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Alert
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
I work for Warner Music Group. I see you have contributed in the past to the Warner Music Group article. There’s a brand new logo for WMG. I uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons as the representative of the company, but I know I’m not supposed to directly edit Wikipedia articles when I have a conflict of interest. Would you be able to take a look at the request to swap out the old logo and logo caption at Talk:Warner Music Group/Archives/2021#Help switching to new logo ? Thank you so much for your consideration.Music2022 (talk) 00:05, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Anagha Bhosale
Why are you repeatedly deleting her date of birth. I even added source to it. Does dob even needs a proof on articles also like birth certificate?? Pri2000 (talk) 02:48, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Ok. I understood it. I read it. But please don't remove DOB now. As now in the video segment which I added now as a reference she herself is revealing her DOB. Now what reliable resource will you go through when the person about whom the article is herself revealed her DOB. It's the biggest reliable and trustworthy resource. Pri2000 (talk) 03:36, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
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.
Sorry, but there's nothing to enforce the deadlinks links format you show, as opposed to the one I used. No errors are displayed so how could I know? Is the right format documented anywhere? - Dough34 (talk) 16:48, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Dough34, like any template, you go to the template page to see its documentation - [4] and it says there under common form {{Dead link|date=November 2021}}. The errors show up in the maintenance categories, but those are hidden by default and you may not see them. MB16:57, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
The coords that you reverted to is incorrect, if you check it on maps it points to a place near Chelsea and Westminster, 12 miles away from Borehamwood. I have corrected it, you can check to verify it. --Jf81 (talk) 15:26, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Jf81, the ones you added were not even formatted properly and did not display. I did not revert to the old coords, I went to a map and verified the correct coordinates. If you click on the coords on the top of the page, then click on google maps - it brings you right to the park in Borehamwood. The coords I put in are correct. I now see that you have changed them again, to the same ones I used but without DMS format. There was no need for that as I had already corrected the problem.MB 15:30, 25 November 2021 (UTC) MB15:34, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Jf81, I put in {{Coord|51|49|33|N|0|16|20|W|region:GB|display=title}} instead of {{Coord|51|39|43|N|0|16|20|W|region:GB|display=title}} - made a typo myself. MB15:45, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
DYK for Ruby Tower
On 25 November 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ruby Tower, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1968 Ruby Tower collapse was caused by an earthquake centered more than 200 km (120 mi) away? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ruby Tower. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ruby Tower), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
DYK-worthy topic: recycled stained glass from churches bombed in WWII, used in ND Episcopal church completed in 1949
Hi there, I haven't been very conversant, and not super-active, for quite a while, and particularly not in DYK area. But the topic of Draft:St. George's Episcopal Memorial Church seems pretty interesting, and I wonder if you'd like to develop it and submit it to DYK, either by yourself or with me too? It is mildly newsworthy/timely for DYK in that the church was just now (October 5, 2021) listed in the NRHP. But the interesting stuff is the windows. The source from around its 75th anniversary details which stained glass window derives from, or at least includes fragments from, which (bombed out) church in Kent, etc. I am hopeful we could link to the specific English churches/parishes whose buildings contributed. I think I saw one window was from 400 a.d. or 800 a.d. or the church was from that time. It is asserted this is only church in the US with windows like this; I have not ever heard of anything like this myself. Not sure if the stained glass designs copy the original churches' designs or not, or if they just include fragments. There is also assertion this is the "first building in the northern U.S. to use pumice concrete", whatever that is. Have a lot of sourcing, though have not found the NRHP registration document for it, but that could be requested, old-style from NPS, and/or found by contacting people in Bismarck, e.g. the named news reporter(s) or the church itself or the Bismarck Historical Society (about to have its annual mtg Nov 10). I would be happy to make those calls if we can't find it online somewhere first. --Doncram (talk) 03:11, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Doncram, here is the form (or at least a preliminary version, but in glancing at it there are two churches in England that "donated" glass. [5]. I don't have a lot of time right now, but can work on it as time permits. MB04:04, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
I just found that too. I could email the author to confirm it is final or obtain the final version. So with the old source from 75th anniversary, there is a lot available. Seems like there are no photos at Commons; it is not in Media related to Churches in Burleigh County, North Dakota at Wikimedia Commons. Thanks for taking a look and responding so quickly. No rush at all. DYK clock has not started as it is in Draftspace. Okay by me if you want to copy it over later and leave edit history behind, by the way. --Doncram (talk) 04:12, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Doncram Done with first pass. Take a look, fix any problems, give feedback, etc. Took some info from the draft nom form, assuming there weren't significant changes made before it was finalized. Took hours of tedious searching to find the links for all the English churches that "donated" glass. Now that I have done that, I'm not sure they will survive - someone else might remove them as overly-detailed???? It looks like the architect is worthy of an article (there is a lot on him in the nom form). There are two links in See also section to things related to the architect - but there isn't really much there to see. Would be nice to expand those articles before we sent this to DYK (and maybe write one on the architect). Help out any way you can. MB06:50, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Obviously well-researched, well-written by you; you do great work. IMO the biggest remaining need is to assert importance/uniqueness of church in incorporating stained glass from bombed out English churches into the lede, and I just took a shot at adding that. But I don't recall, and I think it needs to be explained, what is symbolized by this. I expect it has to do with expressing solidarity with church-going people of southeast England, who had just suffered. Or something about assertion of strength and longevity and we shall overcome, about sweep and solidarity of Christianity in English empire and English-speaking Christian world, I dunno. Or is it explicitly or implicitly about common sacrifice in our "beating back the Hun" (loosely, as that was a WWI term), overcoming anti-Jewish, anti-Christian, anti-religion Nazism. But what was said at time and later? I think the intended meaning needs to be expressed in the lede, as well as in the stained glass section.
And mentioning in the lede that the churches dated as early as 1100 A.D. would add, and/or how many were thereby represented, would help. Basically what is the most "newsworthy" or significant/unusual like in terms of what would be said in a DYK nomination, should be in the lede. I rather expect you planned to expand the lede along these lines, but were focused properly on developing the well-documented body of the article. But you/we do want readers to be excited to read through the article to get to the stained glass stuff. Not that that is the only subtopic of interest here. The lede should be longer than it is now; this is a significant article with multiple good sections and more of the ideas should be introduced or at least hinted at in the lede, IMHO.
Relatedly, I think the booklet/pamphlet/whatever it should be called, titled "St. George's Episcopal Memorial Church: A Memorial to the Pioneers of the Dakotas, 1873-1949", could/should be explicitly mentioned. Besides being used as a source, its writing and its publication and presumably wide distribution (was it sent to all the English church parishes, by the way?) seem likely of importance, as part and parcel of creating the church and communicating something to England and to the U.S. and everywhere.
I also wonder what acknowledgement/reaction from Kent/southwest England might have been, or what note was taken from any of the churches. Was this understood as a respectful gesture, or could it be just crazy American whatever not sanctioned or recognized at all, or worse actually scorned? If the point was to recognize the bombings / the suffering/damage there, was the point received there? Sorry this may be asking for something difficult to ascertain, but I would think that the local newspapers in England around 1949 or before would have covered the glass collection effort and the building and dedication of the North Dakota church. Basically, whatever was intended, how was the gesture received?
Minor thing: this is an Episcopal church, but it took glass from non-Episcopal churches mainly, I suppose. Did it take any glass from any Episcopal churches? Maybe/probably this is covered in effect by your coverage of the churches, but IIRC you did not comment explicitly about this.
I wonder, will a small see also type note be appropriate in all of the English church articles? The importance of an AD 1000 church in England derives hardly at all from some of its fragments being memorialized in North Dakota. But maybe it can be useful to communicate something about world-wide acknowledgment of the loss of the given church. And in Wikipedia we do include memorial type sections in bio articles, about what schools were named after a person, etc.
I suspect the pumice concrete thing is not really important, and perhaps the claim is not true, as, like for many other assertions of first or oldest surviving or whatever made by NRHP nominations, how would the authors know about all other churches ever constructed in U.S. history (or whatever exactly is in the claim), given that they did not have an internet and a Wikipedia to be able to know things like that. I think your coverage mentioning the assertion but not making much of it is fine. I dunno if pumice concrete should be mentioned in the lede or not; it is not what interests me anyhow.
A minor thing is that I prefer in lede to state this is North Dakota's capital and to drop Burleigh County mention, and i edited to that effect, IMO slightly better for the hopefully wide audience to this article as a DYK item and otherwise. --Doncram (talk) 05:17, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for Contributing to the Miranda Brawn Article!
Hello, thanks for your contribution to the Miranda Brawn article from last week! I contact you for two reasons:
I was pretty sure that I remember right, that being a Non-Executive Director is rather a business relationship than an employee/employer connection so I googled it and found the following: "A non-executive director (NED) is a member of the board who is not part of the executive management team. They are not an employee of the company and a NED typically does not engage in the day-to-day management of the company." Founders and presidents of charities are usually also not employees of the organisations. Would you mind, if I take out the "Employer" section of the infobox? Or should we change the title "employer" to something else?
<be> Another thing, I would like to ask for your thoughts and opinion, about what do you think if I should improve the article in case of neutrality? I think I have written it from a completely neutral point of view, also referred to reliable sources and verified every single statement of the page, but today the article has been tagged as "written like an advertisement". I asked the editor who placed the tag to tell me which part of the page is wrong in their opinion, as I am happy to improve it, but also happy to hear the opinion of others. Thanks, DillonPalm (talk) 21:14, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
DillonPalm, The infobox can only use the fields that are defined in the template. In addition to |employer=, there are |boards= and |organization=. I've made use of those instead of employer since they do seem to be more appropriate. As far as the tone, the one thing that stands out to me is "is an expert media contributor" unless a source describes her as an expert, that should just say "a media contributor". Otherwise, it does appear factual. However, it only contains info that you would expect to see on a resume, which is probably why it is tagged as promotional. It would help to add more background info that you would expect to see in a biography (birth place, undergrad education, etc), but that may be unavailable. Perhaps the editor that placed the tag will respond with more. MB22:06, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
MB, thanks for your contribution again. I agree, |boards= and |organization= are more accurate. Thanks for your review, agreed and took out the word "expert". I have no information about birthplace, exact birth time and early education, otherwise, of course, I would be happy to add them. I'm looking forward for their response too. Thanks again, DillonPalm (talk) 01:20, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Please help with an edit request for Dahua Technology
Hi MB. I am Caitlyn, and I work for Dahua Technology. I noticed that you recently edited on the Dahua Technology article, and I was hoping that you would not mind taking a look at Talk:Dahua Technology, where I placed an edit request. The request is a simple addition, including a reliable source, which adds useful information to the article. If you agree, I would be much obliged if you can make that edit. Thanks so much. Caitlyn23 (talk) 18:17, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello @MB:, I thank you for editing, but I have a question for you.
What do you mean by setting an orphan pattern? More than 10 related articles are linked.
Why did you delete some external links, what were their problems?
P@yam (talk) 21:48, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
Payamkermanshahi, the article is an orphan because there are no links TO it FROM other articles, so no one will ever find this article by reading another article (they can of course search for it directly). The tag can be removed if links to the article are added in other articles if there are places where such links are appropriate.I removed the social media links because of the policy WP:NOSOCIAL. They are considered promotional - there is already one link to this person's website. Someone looking for this information could go to that website. WP does not consider a list of social media links to be encyclopedic. MB22:19, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
Jonesey95, Sorry, it never occurred to me that IB US county would want a bare url. That is different than most other geo-type templates. I know that there are a bunch of sports-related and TV/radio templates that work like that too - so I always preview with those. I wish there were more consistency. Same with module=, embed=, embedded= child=; image=, Image=; image_size=, image size=; etc. We could all be more productive if we didn't have to deal with this stuff. MB22:45, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Bare urls are wrong in some infoboxes. If you click on the first link in this section, you will see what happens when you use the url template in an infobox that is coded to apply the url formatting internally. MB23:22, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello, MB. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.
Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.
If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! – bradv🍁17:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
Jesmond
Apologies but I removed your tweaks to Jesmond because of extensive wikifiddling and block evasion by persistent sockpuppet Politialguru. Do you want to revisit the article and see if any of your previous changes are still needed? Thanks. 10mmsocket (talk) 09:51, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
I can’t see any justification for the editor changing the infobox from academic to person on the basis of “newer information “. I would have changed it back except for your edits. What do you think? Doug Wellertalk18:57, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
It makes no difference which infobox is used, what is important it what information about the person is key/relevant for the infobox. They wanted to add Wang's political party to the infobox, and I agreed it was relevant since Wang is predicting US presidential elections. I cleaned it up so party is displaced via IB person and the other academic fields are all still there in the embedded academic infobox. MB23:23, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
Can you do cleanup, on following articles?
MS Dhoni, Sachin Tendulkar have some trivia issues and other issues. These articles needed clean-up and can we creat public image or image section in these articles ? If yes how should have to write it, it's templet.
Where, someone can create portal templet, I mean which section on the article. Holland Tok (talk) 07:02, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Furst 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.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Faridpur Polytechnic Institute, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Faridpur.
Thanks for your touchups etc. on my new article. Much appreciated. I'm embarrassed when I think about my hundreds of references using "accessdate" instead of "access-date". Also, should I always be putting in a "short description" for a horse with each new article plus for other articles i.e a horse race, or an individual's bio? Stretchrunner II (talk) 11:37, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Stretchrunner II, there is nothing wrong with using accessdate; I would not have even changed them to access-date had I not been making some other changes to the article at the same time. All articles should have a short description. If you don't add one, someone else will eventually come along and do so. MB15:50, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for correcting my edits on the Roberto McCausland Dieppa inbox I did include Paulina Vega Dieppa after I saw your notes. Thank you.Deanna Coakley (talk) 18:55, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thanks for adding the cvt template to the IBM hammer printer article. I was blissfully unaware of it and have now updated three other articles with the same template.
AVandewerdt, you're welcome. Note you can also do:**Had an 8 in × 10 in (200 mm × 250 mm) viewing screen to align and verify roll filminstead of:**Had an 8 in (200 mm) x 10 in (250 mm) viewing screen to align and verify roll filmwhich may look more natural. You can also change the output units; cm might be better than mm: 8 in (20 cm). {{convert}} has lots of options! MB22:44, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Your suggestion makes way more sense than what I did in the IBM microfilm article. I followed your suggested changes and the results do indeed look way more natural. Thanks yet again for taking the time to help me be a better editor (it is very much appreciated). AVandewerdt (talk) 00:05, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkltalk16:18, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
We were working at the same time. I overwrote your version with mine, but I don't think we lost anything - apologies if we did. I got interested and wandered off into adding the info to Jaxon's page, as one does ... Wikipedia, the time-sink. PamD16:49, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
