Hello, MCaecilius! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! — MusikAnimaltalk00:08, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Syllabus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Atticus (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.
With reference to the mentioned page unfortunatley the current page isnt considered a source, at present it is just a external link, to have it considered a source the reference needs to be cited in the body of the text to explain where the reference refers to.
This can be done by using the appropriate citing references as explained on WP:CITE
Hope this helps to prevent future articles gettign tagged in a similar manner
Actually, WP:BLPPROD, which you tagged the page with, has more stringent requirements than you perhaps realized. According to guidelines:
To place a BLPPROD tag, the process requires that the article contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc.), which support any statements made about the person in the biography.
There were significant factual errors in the deletion nomination. Can you please go back to the AfD page, review the comments, and consider changing your recommendation to Keep. Thank you. --Jersey92 (talk) 13:20, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do not spot the so-called "significant factual errors" you allege. I stand by my opinion. Furthermore, I am not sure that I am comfortable with user talk page communication on the topic of a deletion discussion. If you can provide substantial information to change my opinion, then do so on the discussion page. So far, what you've said is not convincing. M. Caecilius (talk) 16:18, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I myself believed that it is a blatant enough hoax to apply G3, but User:Ahecht disagreed and submitted to AfD. I don't think speedy deletion should apply if there is any reasonable doubt on the part of other editors, so I removed the speedy tag in deference to that user's submission. M. Caecilius (talk) 18:12, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Tutelary: I felt it was borderline, so I nominated it for AfD as a hoax instead of under CSD (MCaeciliusG S Palmer put up the CSD tag while I was preparing the AfD in Twinkle). Usually I don't CSD as a hoax unless it is obvious to the viewer without further explanation or research. In this case, there could be offline sources that contain this information, although the chances of passing WP:GNG would be slim if it were true. --Ahecht (TALK PAGE) 18:18, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Tutelary:@Ahecht: I understand the possibility of offline sources backing up the subject, although WP:DUCK says that it is exceedingly unlikely. Based on this, I've changed my vote from snowball close to regular close just in case. (Small and immaterial correction: I was not the original nominator for speedy deletion.) M. Caecilius (talk) 18:42, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ivan Pavle, Slovak painter
Dear MCaecilius, I created a page Ivan Pavle, Slovak painter. There was a gallery with his paintings, but the gallery was removed from the site. Please, could you explain me, why this happened? Czech and Slovak site is the same gallery. Ivan Pavle has copyright permission for the paintings and photo paintings and sent this permission to Mr. Libor Kuba from the Czech Wikipedia team some days ago.
Similarly, I do not understand the objections to show on the page. All citations are from public sources and the assessment his work is from the book, written by Daniel Hevier, distinguished Slovak writer... Please, could you help me...
@Jozef Heriban: First of all, when you add comments to the talk page, it is considered helpful to insert your comment at the bottom of the page (as I've moved this section to), since this makes it easier to find and to respond to your comment.
Secondly, it appears that you did not log in while making the edit, thus exposing the IP address connected to your account. If this is a concern to you, then you should speak to an administrator about removing the revision that shows your IP address.
Thirdly, please do not understand the page maintenance templates as "objections" so much as they are a guideline to what the page needs working on. It's more like a to-do list, a way of saying "if you put efforts into resolving these issues, then the page would be much better." Clearly we don't expect every new editor to be well-versed in every aspect of Wikipedia's rules, so these templates show you what we think you ought to work on. Don't be discouraged by them, but rather take them as a personalized tutorial to Wikipedia! (You may remove them at any time when you think that the problems listed are resolved.)
Fourthly, I removed the gallery because it didn't appear to me to have an encyclopaedic value in this article. Normally images should be kept only to those which are necessary to educate the audience on the subject. I think it would be much better if, instead of a gallery, you could have a few in-line images which are most representative of the artist's work. M. Caecilius (talk) 09:11, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, MCaecilius. 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.
Hello, MCaecilius. 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.
