User talk:NPguy

Hello NPguy! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, 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 using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Vox Rationis (Talk | contribs) 16:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC) Getting started Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Attribution • Neutral point of view • Notability Conflict of interest • Autobiography Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Citing sources • Footnotes Image use policy • Copyrights • Fair use External links • Spam • Vandalism Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry What Wikipedia is not • Deletion policy The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article Perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Chicago Pile (CP-1)

Please, sir, elaborate on your decision to revert my recent tweaks to the CP-1 article. You stated simply, "not improvements" -- but some justification for this would be appreciated, since an improvement can be in the eye of the beholder(s). Thank you for your prompt reply, Silverhill (talk) 17:00, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

"artificial" is redundant with "human-made" in the same sentence. "even though it would be" doesn't explain anything, and implies (without evidence) that there was a discussion/decision about whether to build the reactor in a populated area. NPguy (talk) 02:33, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

OK on the note about 'artificial' (though note that "human-made" is actually in the next sentence).

Re: "even though it would be", IMHO, avoids the (possible, but erroneous) nuance that the decision was made because of, rather than despite the dense population. Not a really big deal.

I would like to join various other editors here, though, who have objected to your making (at times) arbitrary-seeming reversions without offering real explanation and discussion. We need to keep it cordial here, and your help in that pursuit is essential.

Silverhill (talk) 03:46, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

2019 Koreas–United States DMZ Summit

Regarding your previous edit below, if you believe the edit is not relevant to the main article. Can you please write the details on the talk page of the main article?

• The subject: 2019 Koreas–United States DMZ Summit
• The time and date: 02:27, 1 October 2019‎
  

Goodtiming8871 (talk) 03:51, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Nuclear Technology

Regarding your undo of my edit on the above-mentioned page.

A gentle reminder that whenever you undo any edit, it is a basic Wikipedia norm to tell what led you to do that. It is even better if you can leave something on the user's talk page. Simply saying that "these kinds of edits make things worse" is an insufficient reason for undoing any edit. It implies that you didn't see or read my edit and undid it, just because of the edit summary; I hope that is not the case. It may be the case that most such edits are bad but it is kind of necessary that you first see the edit and then, take any decision. I have undone your undone :) of my edit. Feel free to discuss this. Viewing your talk page shows that this is a big problem of yours. Please try to amend it. FlyingNinja1 (talk) 05:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Please check my edit to Critical mass

If you have the time, could you check my edit to the lede of Critical mass here? Regards, 220 of ^Borg 11:05, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

MAUD Commitee

Hi! I'm searching for someone to contribute a review to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/MAUD Committee/archive1. Someone who is not one of the usual suspects. If you could have a look, that would be much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:33, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

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) 01:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

RNM edit

Imagine a day when I don’t have to wonder what a beautiful world is and we can all share our truths? ❤️ KnowStringsAttached (talk) 23:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

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) 00:15, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

IFNEC edit reverted

Hi. I did not understand why you reverted my edit updating the composition of IFNEC. The title of the article is IFNEC (not GNEP) and the paragraph in discussion reads: "In 2010, the GNEP was renamed the International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation. IFNEC is now an international partnership ..." The key word here is "now". This paragraph is an IFNEC paragraph and GNEP is simply in the past.

Could you please reread the entire paragraph with my edit and explain what you find incorrect? Were the article named GNEP, your edit summary would make more sense to me, but as it currently stands IFNEC is not being correctly described in wikipedia. Erkcan (talk) 06:17, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks.Erkcan (talk) 04:37, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

"Turkey" vs. "Türkiye"

in spite of the Erdogan government's proclamation, the English-language WP:COMMONNAME of this country remains "Turkey", and it is Wikipedia policy to use that name. Please don't make any similar changes to other articles.

Please see the WP:COMMONNAME policy page for more information. If you would like to dispute this, please take this up at Talk:Turkey, where the issue has been discussed repeatedly and at great length. — The Anome (talk) 19:30, 29 October 2022 (UTC)