User talk:Sangdeboeuf

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

This is Sangdeboeuf's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 3 months

Thank you!

	Cake of Helpfulness
	Your user page in incredibly helpful for new users trying to find their place in wikipedia, and you set a great example through your edits and attention to detail. You deserve a beautiful celebratory cake! Itherina (talk) 02:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The lady doth... phrase or line

Re my revert of your recent edits to The lady doth protest too much, methinks, if you really want to describe this whole sentence as a mere phrase, I suggest you raise a discussion on its talk page. Batternut (talk) 09:04, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The lady doth... get better by the day

Just in passing, while we may take different views upon formatting, I'd just like to give some thanks for the work you have put in at The lady doth protest too much, methinks over the last week or two. The general improvements are not going unnoticed! Batternut (talk) 10:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Jessica Valenti

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jessica Valenti. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Bill Shorten

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bill Shorten. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Template:Z33 --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:03, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Subjective editing

Hi,

It appears that you took out even reputable source including even the Atlantic from edits for Cathy Newman. It's one thing to re-edit so that it appears more accurate, it's another thing to delete accurate sourcing/details out of your own biases. This is Wikipedia, please keep your own biases to your blog posts. Edit rather than hide accuracy depictions and sourcing. Thanks.