User talk:User2534
Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
|
2016 Nice attack
[edit]Probably best to seek consensus for broad changes to content on this article. You have been reverted by multiple editors today, and it seems you have not substantially been involved in relevant discussion on the talk. TimothyJosephWood 19:03, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Careful removing ref name
[edit]You've mucked up three multiply used refs by removing the ref names on '2016 Nice', I fixed one earlier today which I also think was one of yours. Care to go back and clear up the mess? Pincrete (talk) 19:04, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry I got a bit carried away right now and somehow missed naming them (or it was on part of another editing at the same time). Think I fixed it though. User2534 (talk) 19:11, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- You did two, I did the third. Pincrete (talk) 19:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello
[edit]Hello. Thank you for your recent contributions to current events (Isis) articles p.👍👍 If this is a hobby of yours, Feel free to contact contact me on my page. 🌚https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GrenadierSoldi3rsKill — Preceding unsigned comment added by GrenadierSoldi3rsKill (talk • contribs) 20:03, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 16
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page In absentia. 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Ways to improve Kenneth Kristensen Berth
[edit]Hi, I'm Sadads. User2534, thanks for creating Kenneth Kristensen Berth!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Though minimally Notable, Biographies of Living People need greater verification to ensure that they aren't malicious.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Sadads (talk) 02:57, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I've reviewed your article. In general really good, but there's a slight problem with the wording in one of the hooks. Please see my comments on the nominations page. yorkshiresky (talk) 13:56, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
DYK for 1998 World Cup terror plot
[edit]
On 14 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1998 World Cup terror plot, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that up to 100 people were arrested in several European countries in connection with a terror plot against the 1998 FIFA World Cup? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1998 World Cup terror plot. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 1998 World Cup terror plot), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Edit summaries
[edit]Hi User2534. Would you please try to use meaning fuli edit summaries, especially on contentious articles. "No..." is not helpful, but if you had instead written "No consensus for inclusion - see talk page discussion", it would make it less likely that someone like me would revert your edit. Thank you.- MrX 17:37, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Continuing discussion at Talk:2016 Nice attack
[edit]The terrorism category discussion has been reopened by Gerry1214 and an IP user and is now ongoing again. Contribute if you're interested. Parsley Man (talk) 02:20, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, User2534. 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.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Your reversion at Article List of grenade attacks in Sweden
[edit]Hi, you seem to have reverted some of your own edits for "no source", apparently while trying to revert IP edits for really having no source. https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=List_of_grenade_attacks_in_Sweden&type=revision&diff=765189375&oldid=765087130 If you didn't wish to revert your own edits, feel free to put them back. Although I take slight issue with some of them not being confirmed grenade attacks (firework attacks, 'possibly' a grenade attack, "an explosion", etc). I can't read Swedish and rely on machine translation. Perhaps if you see an article saying that a grenade could have been used, you should say exactly this in the cited statement. --BurritoBazooka If you reply here, please add {{ping|BurritoBazooka}} to your message 06:08, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
- PS: If you want to include other types of explosive attacks, I would suggest getting the page moved to a more appropriate name. --BurritoBazooka If you reply here, please add {{ping|BurritoBazooka}} to your message 08:11, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Pro tip
[edit]Never use the Sun or the Express for anything. The paper is too low a grade to wipe your ass with. Carl Fredrik talk 16:11, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
A cup of tea for you!
[edit]
|
Anyone who deals with [redacted] deserves a nice cup to tea to relax. Cheers! ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peador ᐁT₳LKᐃ 15:49, 22 June 2017 (UTC) |
Nomination of 2014 Norway terror threat for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2014 Norway terror threat is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 Norway terror threat (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Sport and politics (talk) 11:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The page Islamic terrorism in Europe (2014–present) you reverted has a 1RR rule
[edit]I suggest a self-revert and going to the talk page, as the Islamic Terrorism in Europe page has a 1 Revert Rule. Discuss the edits. Reverting will only lead to a unnecessary problems. You have made you changes they have been reverted, you have now committed a second revert. I suggest that you discuss the edits you wish to make. The edits appear to make assertions, which are highly controversial, and have been discussed before, but if you wish to discuss the merits of the proposed edits you wish to make, do so, otherwise you are sailing close to the wind. Sport and politics (talk) 10:11, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Did you even care to notice that I have added multiple new sources, in contrast to the admittedly very poor sourcing the article originally had? I haven't added anything that isn't directly supported by several sources. User2534 (talk) 10:14, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Discuss these changes, the wording is creating a narrative which is out of line with NPOV. This is a controversial subject. Please justify the edits you made if you believe they have genuine merit. Otherwise let them go. Stand by the editing you made, or let it die. This topic and this article in-particular has a history of editing similar to what you made, with sourcing, which has been remved, and discussed thoroughly. I suggest discussing this thoroughly first, before leaping to defend the addition you authored, and calling foul play. Remember to always assume good faith. Sport and politics (talk) 10:22, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- It was removed because the sourcing was poor. I have now fixed this by thoroughly improving the sourcing. What's the problem?. A normal Wikipedia user should be glad that someone else is helping out to improve an article. User2534 (talk) 10:45, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Normal Wikipedia user, I have yet to ever encounter one of them. Should be glad, by the same token, authors of any information should expect their edits to be challenged, that is how Wikipedia operates. The problem is you have attempted to fix an issue, which has been discussed at length on the talk page over a long period, and have in doing so created more problems, these are all listed on the article talk page. Sport and politics (talk) 11:07, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- It was removed because the sourcing was poor. I have now fixed this by thoroughly improving the sourcing. What's the problem?. A normal Wikipedia user should be glad that someone else is helping out to improve an article. User2534 (talk) 10:45, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Discuss these changes, the wording is creating a narrative which is out of line with NPOV. This is a controversial subject. Please justify the edits you made if you believe they have genuine merit. Otherwise let them go. Stand by the editing you made, or let it die. This topic and this article in-particular has a history of editing similar to what you made, with sourcing, which has been remved, and discussed thoroughly. I suggest discussing this thoroughly first, before leaping to defend the addition you authored, and calling foul play. Remember to always assume good faith. Sport and politics (talk) 10:22, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, User2534. 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.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
[edit]
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Awarded for excellence in the creation of new articles on significant topics, and diligent attention to the improvement of dusty old pages. E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:06, 10 May 2018 (UTC) |
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, User2534. 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.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)