User talk:Skarmory: Difference between revisions
→Rollback granted 2: Reply |
→pictures from the weather article: new section |
||
Line 352: | Line 352: | ||
:Thank you! <span style="background-color: black">[[User:Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">Skarmory</span>]] [[User talk:Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">(talk •</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">contribs)</span>]]</span> 00:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC) |
:Thank you! <span style="background-color: black">[[User:Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">Skarmory</span>]] [[User talk:Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">(talk •</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">contribs)</span>]]</span> 00:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC) |
||
== pictures from the weather article == |
|||
Yes of course i can add the place where they taken since images are screenshots from video and there are no info on image properties..i like being more weather videographer than photographer ...p; |
Revision as of 21:09, 29 January 2022
This is Skarmory's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Hey! I'm Skarmory, if you have anything to say just leave me a message. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:39, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, YellowSkarmory, 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:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
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 , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Longhair\talk 07:54, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Welcome to the WPTC
Hi, and welcome to the Tropical cyclone WikiProject! We are a group of Wikipedia editors who help to improve articles related to tropical cyclones on Wikipedia.
Looking for somewhere to start? Here are a few suggestions.
- You can check out topics on the main page.
- You can re-assess tropical cyclone-related articles to assure they are up to standards.
- See the to do list for the WikiProject, and opt to try and complete some of those tasks.
- Check out the guidelines to get an idea of the project's standards.
- If you want to work on an article, Category:Stub-Class Tropical cyclone articles is a great place to start.
- You can also check out the newsletter.
- For further information, you could join the WikiProject Tropical cyclones IRC channel or Discord server.
If you have any comments, suggestions, or would like to talk about the project in general, feel free to leave a message on the talk page.
🌀Weatherman27🏈 (chat with me!). 18:21, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Technical Barnstar | |
Thank you for your additions to List of Category 1 Atlantic hurricanes! I, and others, appreciate you helping make that much more complete. Those list articles can be a pain, but they're quite useful to have, especially once they're done. Keep up the good editing! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:56, 17 November 2020 (UTC) |
- Thank you! YellowSkarmory (talk) 21:25, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Thanks a lot for your work in List of Category 1 Atlantic hurricanes! Your work in my opinion is impossible to achieve by myself because of the tediousness. As such, I'm here to reward you this barnstar. SMB99thx my edits! 08:20, 24 November 2020 (UTC) |
44th edition of The Hurricane Herald!
Extended content
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Why?
I know you are helping but why did you remove some of the 'P' names I just added in? Typhoon2013 (talk) 09:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Did I? Probably an edit conflict? I definitely didn't intend to. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 09:58, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah probably an edit conflict. Sorry I hate when that happens after a very long edit lol. I believe I have found the last one-named 'P' storm so I think all should be fine from now on. I'll leave it to you with the rest. :) Typhoon2013 (talk) 10:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Also on a side note, you may see that some PAGASA named systems are not there or do not have a section, but you should look at either the Season summary/effects table. Kind regards, Typhoon2013 (talk) 10:18, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah probably an edit conflict. Sorry I hate when that happens after a very long edit lol. I believe I have found the last one-named 'P' storm so I think all should be fine from now on. I'll leave it to you with the rest. :) Typhoon2013 (talk) 10:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi
Hi Skarmory – welcome to Wikipedia! I see that you've really picked up your editing recently and I'm glad that you're joining us as a more active member of our community. Just a quick pointer – 4im warnings are generally reserved for exceptional or egregious vandalism and disruption and generally editors like Rjc463 do not require an immediate jump to a level 4 warning. One other tip: if you install Twinkle, it makes a lot of the reverting/warning process much easier; to get started, read that page and then enable the "Twinkle" gadget in the Gadgets section of your Preferences page. It really does make things a lot faster. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 07:57, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks! I saw someone else use a 4im warning on someone who was vandalizing as well, so I used it - good to know for the future! Skarmory (talk • contribs) 14:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Skarmory – Please understand that my son who is a UF student was very distraught with Marco Wilson's bone-headed penalty for "throwing the opponent's shoe" which directly led to UF losing the game and any chance at the national title so the edit change to describe Marco as a "show thrower" instead of a "cornerback" was pretty understandable considering the intense amount of emotional energy the students place in these affairs. Being that he was home on Holiday, please do not impact my IP address as that would not be fair to me. I also understand that the edit would had been hurtful to Marco and his family and parents so I thank you for fixing the ill-advised edit.68.205.28.214 (talk) 05:05, 17 February 2021 (UTC) –
- @68.205.28.214: Don't worry about it, it happened 2 months ago and warnings reset each month, so if for some reason you did end up getting warned for something else in the future, the previous warning wouldn't impact anything. Also, even if you're blocked, you can still read Wikipedia, you just can't edit it. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 18:35, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Happy Holidays!
Hello Skarmory: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 13:29, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message~ Destroyer🌀🌀 13:29, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
- Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
- Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
- Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
Mz7 (talk) 23:25, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Trout
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. I got this due to your help question in the #technical channel on Discord. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC) |
Lol, sorry! Skarmory (talk • contribs) 17:16, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Skarmory!
Happy New Year!
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.
Welcome to the 2021 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
RHONJ S10
Hi! Hotwiki's edit of this page is vandalism. It editorializes descriptions of the episodes with opinions, employs incorrect grammar and sentence construction, and refers to the women using their last names, which is inconsistent with other Housewives articles. My edit is an improvement. You should compare the two. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:650:B20:29B2:3E5D:617:863E (talk) 17:21, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
- What incorrect grammar? Cast members and people have to be addressed by their last name in Wikipedia articles especially if their first name was already mentioned, thats just writing 101. Episode summaries for the Real Housewives aren't an exception. You also persistently removed references and edited the article without providing an edit summary. I suggest you take it to the talk page of the article before you make another edit.TheHotwiki (talk) 20:53, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Hotwiki. Every single article for the Real Housewives on wiki uses the women's first names when describing the content of individual episodes. This page was therefore inconsistent, and unnecessarily so. Additionally, the grammar and sentence construction needed cleaning. Lastly, there was tons of opinion and editorializing in the episode descriptions that breaks the rules of this website and has no business being there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:650:B20:4CE7:D416:97E4:3287 (talk) 04:00, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
- And every Real Housewives article used to include taglines until they were removed due to being against the rules. Stop your disruptive editing. There's NO exception for The Real Housewives. Your ip adress will be reported to the admins for your continous disruptive editing.TheHotwiki (talk) 05:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Hey
I love your username!! :D –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 00:16, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
45th edition of the Hurricane Herald!
Extended content
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
46th issue of Hurricane Herald newsletter
Extended content
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
WikiCup 2021 March newsletter
Extended content
|
---|
Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews. Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC) |
WikiCup 2021 May newsletter
Extended content
|
---|
The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.
Our top scorers in Round 2 were:
Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC) |
47th issue of Hurricane Herald newsletter
Extended content
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
WikiCup 2021 July newsletter
Extended content
|
---|
The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:
In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC) |
WikiCup 2021 September newsletter
Extended content
|
---|
The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, The Rambling Man and Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are Gog the Mild, Lee Vilenski, BennyOnTheLoose, Amakuru and Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC) |
48th issue of Hurricane Herald newsletter
Extended content
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 19:46, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
- Thank you! Skarmory (talk • contribs) 23:13, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
WikiCup 2021 November newsletter
Extended content
|
---|
The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is The Rambling Man (submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:
All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.
Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot. If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC) |
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
Third user opinion request
Hello dear Skarmory. I recently explained my edits here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Negrito#Edit_explanation:_Trying_to_restoring_useful_additions/changes_while_correcting_misrepresented_parts._~Nobuaki_H.. Some other editor seems to confuse me with another editor in dispute. I can verify to not be related to any of both parties. I have corrected grammar, dublicates, and original research, explained in the talk. It got checked and accepted, but than reverted.
Where can I request a third user opinion? Cleanup tag? It is necessary, as the current version has serious issues. I am unsecure what is the motivation. I stated that some edits of previous users are constructive and this is according to Wikipedia rules, which state that reverting to a bad version is not in the good of Wikipedia. I hope you can help clarify it. Sincerely Nobuaki H.176.97.70.48 (talk) 14:10, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Edit request misunderstand and accusation. Thank you. ——Serial 14:31, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Is this how to communicate?? re: Patrick Moore
I made the correction to the Patrick Moore article. Why did you revert it if you agreed with me????? Is it fine for Wikipedia to present an unsubstantiated lie, call it out and correct it in the latter part of the sentence, and sanction someone who corrects it???? And this happens several times in this pinhead article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.47.175.2 (talk) 18:13, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
- I was meaning to go to the talk page on the article itself, not my personal talk page. I'm not taking a stance, just putting it back where it was until a consensus is established - you should strike up a discussion on Talk:Patrick Moore, where anyone interested in the article will respond. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:57, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Rollback granted
I have granted the "rollbacker" permission to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. -- TNT (talk • she/her) 05:56, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
- Temp, 1 month -- TNT (talk • she/her) 05:56, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the suggestions
Dear Skarmory, thank you very much for looking into my edit on the Michael Ghil article and I apologise for any poor edit. I am new to wikipedia and certainly the article needs improvements. I will do so as soon as possible. I will also remove any material that I cannot find sources for. Thank you again. Geograma (talk) 22:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Geograma: Hey! No worries. In general, the edits seem to come off as somewhat promotional, especially in the awards/honors and publications sections (I can't find any specific guideline, but looking at other articles of researchers it seems to be a bit excessive compared to the rest of the article e.g. too much of the article is taken up by them), but I do see some of the awards and publications have been trimmed. I also would like to apologize here because I don't think I assumed good faith at first on your part, which I should've. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 05:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- I should also point out the guideline on primary sources, as I notice the article has a bunch of sources under Ghil's name. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 09:08, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!
Duplicate message
|
---|
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
|
This message to thank you for your warm welcome
Thank you for your warm welcome. I already got some tea yesterday and now also some cookies. Thank you very much for the good tips, so handy. Happy New Year and I hope we meet again Phacelias (talk) 12:39, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- You're welcome! I'm always willing to help out if you need it. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 20:40, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Turn To Skarmory
Nonsense/Vandalism
|
---|
My bad
Hey! I see you undid my reversion on Natural Light. Sorry about that, I'm still trying to figure out Recent Changes and I mistook the prior edit for something else. Thank you for your patience and your kind welcome! Perfect4th (talk) 21:28, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
- Don't worry about it! 99 times out of 100, a section being blanked with an edit summary along the lines of "this is a lie" or "this is false" is vandalism, but in this case, it wasn't. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:31, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Civil conflict
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Freedom_Convoy_2022 I'm deleting your message on my talk page and reverting the edit. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlcarlsonvt (talk • contribs) 01:18, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Carlcarlsonvt: Alright, that's fine! I just saw the infobox being removed without an edit summary explaining why and didn't check the talk page – I usually do but this time I forgot. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 03:43, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Assyrianism
Don't give our community from Tur Abdin terms like "Assyrian"! We as a ancient Christian community and our church accepted Aramean as our herritage name. Don't give us name that we don't accept. It's against our will! You are using the same method as the Arabs, Turks and Kurds did in the past. We will protest as a community against these crimes. You people are brainwashing readers by doing this. If the Christians in Iraq choose to use these terms, it's fine for us but don't make a fool out of yourself by thinking that all Middele-Eastern Christians are identifying their selves with Assyrians. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aramean81 (talk • contribs) 10:18, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Tagging pages for deletion
Hello, Skarmory,
I see that you are tagging some pages for deletion. Just a reminder that any time you tag a page for any type of deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/RFD/TFD/etc.), you need to post a notification on the talk page of the page creator. This will be easy for you since you use Twinkle, which is great. Just look at your Twinkle Preferences and be sure that a) "Notify page creator" box is always checked and b) that all types of speedy deletion criteria are selected. I think the default setting in Twinkle is to only have a few criteria (like A7 and G11) checked off but it doesn't really matter why the page is being deleted, the page creator should still receive a notification. Then, any time you use Twinkle to tag a page for deletion, Twinkle will post these notices for you which makes things easy.
Thank you for all of your contributions to the project! Liz Read! Talk! 01:25, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
- Alright, I did not realize that wasn't notifying. I'll go configure it now. Thanks! Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:33, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hmm. I'm not seeing an option to notify page creators with G8, which seems to be the most important one, along with a bunch of other ones (F4, F5, F6, F8, F11, G7, G5, and U2 I believe is the full list of those?). I guess I'll have to keep a mental note to notify authors on G8; I doubt the other ones will be all that significant for my purposes. Do you have any idea on this? Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:46, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
RfA
I just wanted to thank you for what you said here about not yet feeling comfortable participating at RfA. I wish every editor would treat RfA as something to watch and read for a while until they understand what's going on instead of something to jump right into. :) valereee (talk) 09:26, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, I just don't really have a good enough grasp on the general workings of a lot of areas on Wikipedia, and a lot of those areas are related to adminship, so I don't really have a great grasp on what makes a good admin and that leads to me feeling uncomfortable at RfA. I'll drop in some comments whenever I feel like I can provide anything, but for now, that's all I'm doing at RfA until I learn more. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 18:53, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
- FWIW, and this isn't anything I'm telling you that you should do, the best way to start participating at RfA is to, when you feel you understand what others are saying well enough and feel it's how you're leaning, support. I would recommend being more cautious with opposes. And even more cautious with questions. I think I've probably opposed once and quite possibly never asked a question, and I've been here 15 years w/50K edits. And I don't think that's really unusual, even for people who are engaged at RfA. valereee (talk) 19:17, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
New Page Reviewer granted
Hi Skarmory. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers
" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:
- Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
- You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
- If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
- Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:49, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you! Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:48, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Rollback granted
Hi Skarmory. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:
- Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
- Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Rollback should never be used to edit war.
- If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
- Use common sense.
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Mz7 (talk) 00:47, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you! Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
pictures from the weather article
Yes of course i can add the place where they taken since images are screenshots from video and there are no info on image properties..i like being more weather videographer than photographer ...p;