User talk:Peaceingalaxy

Believe I owe you an apology

If so, I deeply regret my error and ask that you consider me and no one else accountable. I urge that you return to Wikipedia and not hold this unfortunate experience against what is usually a wonderful and worthwhile experience. But protecting the project from abuse evokes a vigilance that, sometimes, goes astray. As you will note here, I have asked that corrective action be taken with respect to your editing account. Again, I am truly sorry for my mistake at your expense. FactStraight (talk) 06:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked with apology

Following your request to ArbCom, I have reviewed your block and my own handling of one of your unblock requests. There is indeed compelling evidence that you are not LouisPhilippeCharles, and I should have realized this when I saw your unblock request instead of letting my annoyance with that other user cloud my judgement. I hope you will forgive my heavy-handedness, and I wish you luck with your future editing. Sincerely, Favonian (talk) 14:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Belated Welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Peaceingalaxy. I see that you've already been around awhile and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help one get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! —Ute in DC (talk) 06:56, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. AdvertAdam^talk 07:27, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My response

Here are some lines from the blocking policy of Wikipedia:

Blocking is a serious matter. The community expects that blocks will be made with good reasons only, based upon reviewable evidence and reasonable judgment, and that all factors that support a block are subject to independent peer review if requested.

Administrators must supply a clear and specific block reason which indicates why a user was blocked. Block reasons should avoid the use of jargon as much as possible so that blocked users may better understand them. Administrators should also notify users when blocking them by leaving a message on their user talk page unless they have a good reason not to. It is often easier to explain the reason for a block at the time than it is to explain a block well after the fact.

In your short message I didn't see any specific references to my so-called disruptive editing. Be specific on what was disruptive according to you.

I almost only edit with giving sources. When I don't give sources, the edit is a minor one in which I try to make an article clearer or when I remove spelling mistakes.

I've already been accused of being a sockpuppet once by an overhasty administrator and after taking it to the arbitration committee, they agreed that I was innocent and got apologies from those involved. They also told me that something like that would not happen again.

Before you start threatening people with blocking, you should at least specify what I did wrong, because I edit very conscientiously, and almost exclusively edit with citing reliable sources.

Good day to you and greetings, Peaceingalaxy (talk) 07:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An apologies should me mentioned first, if accepted :). I totally understand your tensity with these warnings, hoping you don't take it personally. I usually never give a number 3 warning immediately, but I didn't see a reason to just give a reminder when I saw the block history. Again, I apologies that I haven't seen the template signs and thought it was vandalizing with "whom" and changing many headers (which usually needs community approval) in Marie of Brabant, Queen of France, and so on. However, I don't see any serious problem with your edit now, and I restored it myself exactly the same way. Just try to put a summary on your edits so editors don't assume the worse, and take care when changing headers without a summary. Wish you luck and Happy Editing! AdvertAdam^talk 08:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted. I had a feeling you looked at my blocking history and judged me by that; it's unfortunate that mess is still following me around, but I understand why it made you less gentle with me. One good thing that came out of, though, it is that I know the blocking policy of Wikipedia very well ;)

O ya, you do now. Guess I can't mess with you :p jkjk. I'm sending you a Barnstar on your page, for your polite responses, while you can move it wherever you want. Btw, you're allowed to remove the blocking template after the apologies if you'd like. Happy editing, and let me know if you need help on anything :) AdvertAdam^talk 08:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I changed the heading is that both the information I was adding and some existing information were about her life after Philips III died and there was no appropriate heading for that. You are definitely right by saying I should put a summary, especially when changes are made and I shall take more care to do so in the future. Greetings, Peaceingalaxy (talk) 08:46, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Empress Iwa-no hime merged into Princess Iwa

I have merged the text from Empress Iwa-no hime into Princess Iwa. Both short pages appear to describe the same person. The pages Empress Iwanohime and Empress Iwa no Hime now redirect to Princess Iwa. Cnilep (talk) 04:10, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Samur Gunj

The article Samur Gunj has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

All biographies of living people created after March 18, 2010, must have references.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Uberaccount (talk) 03:10, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jane Dormer

Some time ago you added some text to an article which included a citation. The citation software now includes warnings for missing fields. Unfortunalty you did not supply a title= for the citation, please could you do so. I would have done it myself but without a first name or an ISBN I can not work out the which book it is. -- PBS (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have guessed that the book used was "Children of England: The Heirs of King Henry VIII" but please confirm it. -- PBS (talk) 12:19, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tournament (medieval), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Margaret Beaufort. 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) 09:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An invitation to join WikiProject Women writers

Hello Peaceingalaxy! We are looking for editors to join WikiProject Women writers, an outreach effort which aims at improving articles about women writers on Wikipedia. We thought you might be interested, and hope that you will join us. Thank you!

--Rosiestep (talk) 15:50, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism

Your edit here appears to have been copy & pasted from Christian History: An Introduction, by Alister E. McGrath[1]. Please do not do this again. Also, Alison Weir is not a historian, thus not a reliable source. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:18, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fontevraud Abbey is literally the first article in my contributions (see there). Apparently, I forgot to quote one line, while I was still trying to adapt to Wikipedia. I apologize for that. Any further check of my history would have shown you that I always take care to quote and make references, often for articles that had none before. You could have inferred my good intentions from the fact that I quoted someone else in the same article. Your comment on my mistake is very much appreciated. Titling it 'plagiarism' as if this was done intentionally is not. Especially since I have edited four years conscientiously afterwards.

Also, Alison Weir is called a historian on her Wikipedia article.

Presentation proposal for Wikimania 2015

How to pick up more women...

Hello to the members of WikiProject Women writers! Victuallers and I have developed a proposal for a talk to be presented at Wikimania 2015. It's titled, How to pick up more women -- as in more women editors and more women's biographies. The proposal review process has begun and there's no guarantee that this proposal will be accepted. That's where you come in. Please review our proposal and give us feedback. Ultimately, we hope you add your name to the signup at the bottom of the proposal which signifies you're interested in the talk (it does not signify you'll be attending the event). Thank you! Rosiestep (talk) 21:45, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:29, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge

Hi, at Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge we're striving to bring about 10,000 article improvements and creations for the UK and Ireland and inspire others to create more content. In order to achieve this we need diversity of content, in all parts of the UK and Ireland on all topics. Eventually a regional contest will be held for all parts of the British Isles, like they were for Wales and the Wedt Country. We currently have just over 1900 articles and need contributors! If you think you'd be interested in collaborating on this and helping reach the target quicker, please sign up and begin listing your entries there as soon as possible! Thanks.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Peaceingalaxy. 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)[reply]

WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest

Hi. This month The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There is over £3000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. Wikimedia UK is putting up £250 specifically for editors who produce the most quality new women bios for British women, with special consideration given to missing notable biographies from the Oxford Dictionary of Biography and Welsh Dictionary of Biography. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate independently this is also fine, but please add any articles created to the bottom of the main contest page even if not competing. Your participation in the contest and contributing articles on British women from your area or wherever would we much appreciated. Thanks.

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Peaceingalaxy. 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)[reply]

Survey about History on Wikipedia (If you reside in the United States)

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. You must be 18 years of age or older, reside in the United States to participate in this study. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 (talk) 17:17, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Altani for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Altani 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/Altani until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:16, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Altani for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Altani 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/Altani (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]