User talk:Eric/Archive 3, 2015

Eric's talkpage archive no. 3 – 2015

Re: Edit summaries, please

Hi Eric, I deeply sorry about all the inconvenients that my attempts to being a proper editor made to you and all the Wikipedians...I try to made better my job! thanks a lot and I'm sorry again! Aldebaran69 (talk) 01:40, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

As I replied above, I very much doubt you care about the quality of your work here. Everything you do on Wikipedia makes more work for other editors. I'm copying this exchange to your talk page and restoring my post there. Eric ^talk 02:47, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Why did you completely undo my edit on Willy Rohr?

I might have understood that on some parts with a proper explanatation but what is the reason for the complete undoing? --Olivers Wiki (talk) 13:39, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

@Olivers_Wiki: I'm sorry if you felt slighted by my revert. It was late, I was tired, and when I saw the edit summary announcing improvements to the English in the article, and noted that the edit had introduced multiple English errors, I reverted it. I do see that some of your changes to the content seem to be improvements. If you want to work on a wiki in a language other than one in which you are fluent, it is best to enlist the aid of native speakers. Otherwise your efforts, well-intentioned though they may be, make more work for other editors. Note that I made some translation corrections to the Allright article (and moved it to Allright (automobile). Eric ^talk 03:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

:-) Thanks, and yes, you're right at some point. I just thought, I did the "major work" knowing the need to have someone "supervising" my English, which is good but not perfect. Further I thought that it would be easy for a native speaker, who has to check it anyway, looking through my changes and improving the used words and - which is more difficult for me - the correct grammar. That is why I pointed this clearly out on my remarks. I apologize on the weighTed, I should have realized this spelling mistake. And to be honest, I do not see that there was sooooo much to change on it, was there? You also corrected some earlier mistakes like the "vee"-engine. I just left it as it was, though looking curious at it, but as a non-native speaker you never know about the special names or definitions for technical things like "conical" (besides I looked for help at the english Wikipedia and dict.leo.org at that point)... Anyway, it was my first edit like this and I take your remarks as a hint better not to continue like this.--Olivers Wiki (talk) 10:08, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

About Willy Rohr: Frankly speaking, I think there are some different meanings in the content between the German and the English text which I tried to "correct" in the English version, assuming that the German text about a German historical person might rather be correct. But I don't mind too much as he is of not enough importance to me. And maybe, I just didn't understand the English properly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olivers Wiki (talk • contribs) 10:25, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indian Space Shuttle Programme

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indian Space Shuttle Programme. Requesting you to add your opinion. Regards Thanks. M.srihari (talk) 07:22, 8 June 2015 (UTC)Srihari

Pinus albicaulis

Your reversal of my helpful and positive changes to the Pinus albicaulis was completely ill-advised and unwarranted. Links do not hurt anyone. Quite the opposite, they help the reader find explanations for many terms for which s/he may be unaware. And as for erasing even more helpful synonym listing and extra references, shame on you.Joseph Laferriere (talk) 09:15, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Aw, sounds like somebody needs a hug, huh? This is a collaborative encyclopedia, not your personal term paper space. My revert achieved what I hoped; that you would go back and restore your useful edits, but restrain yourself from putting links on things like "Western United States" and "Canada". Eric ^talk 14:10, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Saint-Denis

Hi Eric,

Now that the aricle's been moved, you might want to go through the 350 links to Saint-Denis and verify that they should rd to Saint-Denis, Seine-Saint-Denis. (We can't very well automate it, as many may have been at the wrong link to begin with.) — kwami (talk) 23:02, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll try to devote some time to that, though the move was not my project. Eric ^talk 12:46, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Cistercians 2

Hi, Eric - I saw your recent edit to Cistercians [1]]. I think the change in sentence structure is fine. I just wonder whether the word "located" is necessary. Do you really think it is? Also, I notice that the next sentence refers to "the latter murals", presumably the murals in the Abbey Knockmoy. I changed "the latter murals" to "the latter's murals". But the sentence after that refers to "the abbey", and I think it's a stretch to connect "the abbey", through "the latter's" in the previous sentence, back to Abbey Knockmoy. Could you check to be sure "the abbey" really means Abbey Knockmoy and not Tintern Abbey, and if it does, perhaps it could be made clearer that it is Abbey Knockmoy. Corinne (talk) 16:26, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Corinne Yeah, I thought adding "located" might help the sentence, but maybe it doesn't. As I mentioned my edit summary, I'm not in love with how that sentence reads... I'd say hack away at it! Re Abbeyknockmoy: I took a quick glance around the Interwebs and it seems multiple sources mention that abbey's murals, including gool ol' wp: Abbeyknockmoy#Abbey. Eric ^talk 16:43, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

What do you think of it now? I joined the sentence about the sculpture to the sentence about the murals. Is it clear that "the abbey" means Abbeyknockmoy? Corinne (talk) 23:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

@Corinne Yes, that looks good, and it's clear. The preceding sentence was still bugging me, so I tried a reword on it. See what you think. Eric ^talk 00:05, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Grammatically, what you wrote is all right. It's just that (a) I'm not fond of using the present participle of be (being), but that's a stylistic choice, so I won't change it, and (b) putting "in Ireland" first like that puts more emphasis on it, and I don't think that emphasis is needed. Putting it last, after a comma, is a lighter touch (less emphasis on it). But that's also a stylistic choice, so I won't change it. I'm glad to work with you, though, since you obviously know English, and you are courteous. Corinne (talk) 00:35, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

@Corinne Hi- What I did there was just an uninspired attempt to rework that cumbersome sentence--I feel no ownership of it. I encourage you to make any edits you think would improve it! Eric ^talk 01:34, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Blanching page edits

Hi, I found that you removed some of my edits from blanching page here. Kindly help me to understand the reason for your action. I am new to wikipedia, but with help of people like you, I will improve my edits. -- Roughbook (talk) 14:01, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello- I'm traveling, so I have to be quick. If you read the edit summary, you will see my reason. Please don't take offense, but it's better for your co-editors if you avoid trying to edit articles on a wiki whose language you aren't fluent in. The bit you added to the Blanching article--which is already a borderline article in both its title and content--was full of vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation errors that make more work for your co-editors. Eric ^talk 13:45, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

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) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

User's disruptive editing

Hi. User:Rtkat3 is embarking on a mass addition of redundant information to image captions again. Some of these are OK, but many of them are requiring clean up. We both commented on this earlier this year on their talk page (see the section "redundant information in infobox". Do you think we might need admin assistance with this?DrChrissy ^(talk) 19:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

In my defense Eric, some of the pictures like the giant anteater had it's captioning listing it's zoo location and having them listed in the image captioning. If this is a problem, I apologize for that. --Rtkat3 (talk) 19:17, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

As I have indicated in my edit summaries, it is a problem. The location of the animal is unnecessary and could even be seen as advertising - this is not allowed on WP.DrChrissy ^(talk) 19:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello- I've been away and haven't had a chance to look into this. Will try to soon. Eric ^talk 20:57, 4 December 2015 (UTC)