User talk:Me, Myself, and I are Here/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Thanks for the Caps fix.

Was working on figuring that out and then you got it, #REDIRECT? is that how you did that?Ed42311 (talk) 03:37, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ed42311. To fix the caps in the title, I moved (renamed) the page, which usually automatically creates a redirect to avoid breaking existing links. (You can see the redirect here.) I also made a redirect for "peace silk" to help people searching for it find the article, and I did use #REDIRECT there. Thanks for creating the page, by the way, it's very well-formed and I enjoyed reading it. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 03:45, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to thank you

for cleaning up my user page, and you are right. I did say (write) that you could. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: YOUR REASON HERE

? At least give a reason. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 01:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

ELNEVER

Hey if you ever come across stuff like this please remove it per WP:ELNEVER. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 02:11, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I must have not been paying attention! I will in the future. Thanks for telling me, Jytdog. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 02:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected

Hi, I've protected your user page and user talk page for a couple of day due to the vandalism earlier. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Malcolmxl5! I appreciate it. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 02:18, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

orna salinger page

Hello, I've been editing Orna Salinger's wiki page. I know her well and it is full of inaccuracies (i think it may have been put up as a joke). I am trying to remove the untrue information but this has been flagged up as "vandalism". It would be better to take the page down or allow my edits. Thank you!

p — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.85.212 (talk) 14:33, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Guinea worm vs guinea worm vs Guinea Worm?

Hi there! I noticed your edit to Dracunculus medinensis changing "Guinea worm" -> "guinea worm" which was later reverted. I was totally going to re-revert back to your version and wave around English grammar claiming that even though "Guinea" is a proper noun on its own, it is here an eponym which has fallen into common use as all lowercase (much like fallopian tube which is also named after someone). So I was totally with you. But then I realized that CDC and the Carter Center both go with "Guinea worm" (although WHO seems to have gone with "guinea-worm"). So maybe both are commonly-used... I guess not everyone will appreciate grammar like we do. Anyway, I just figured I should post this here so that when you notice the revert, it'll save you a few minutes of slightly-irate Googling (though now it's such a common word, perhaps "googling" is more appropriate). Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 23:36, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

I guess I'll have to leave that alone...at least until =use for the lowercase is firmly established. I have a bad habit of thinking the ones I commonly see is the common use (availability heuristic?). Thanks for telling me! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 00:30, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Dashes versus hyphens on Literature pages

I notice that you have been amending a number of my "year in Australian literature" pages by replacing the existing dashes with hyphens. Is there a specific reason for this? When I created the first pages in this series I was following the lead of the "year in literature" pages which also used dashes. Is this a style consideration or did I miss a discussion on the topic? I'm happy to get it right but would rather I figured it out now. Thanks for your help with this. Perry Middlemiss (talk) 01:20, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Perry Middlemiss! Did I accidentally leave spaced hyphens? If so, I apologize; that was not my intention. I was trying to replace the em dashes (—) with en dashes (–), since MOS:DASH says to use spaces with en dashes but not em dashes. I was also trying not to use spaced hyphens (-), so I'd be happy to correct any errors. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 01:37, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Must be my eyesight seeing en-dashes as hyphens. I'll use them in future. Perry Middlemiss (talk) 10:03, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Alright then! I find that on some devices, it's nearly impossible to see the difference. It's not just your eyesight. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 18:49, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Precious

the MOS expert

Thank you for taking care of the numerous and often confusing MOS guidelines, which many of us hopelessly try to memorise, across hundreds of Wikipedia articles ever since you began editing less than a year ago. Your countless minor edits, politeness, humility to accept your own mistakes speak for themselves. Yur spelng iz soo gud , and you are no more "insignificant" , for you are an awesome Wikipedian!

Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:20, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your kind words! (Mi speling is gud, iznt it? ) Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 06:57, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, itz sooooo guud tht u hv bin aworded ur oun daay!!! Visit the Precious page for more information. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:02, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Wow, my own day? It's quite an honour! Thanks again. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 18:22, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, and here's a tip

I'll refer to the MOS in the future now that I know about it!

Also, it turns out that the link to the relevant section was MOS:REFPUNCT, not WP:REFPUNCT (just in case we need to share that in the future)Myoglobin (talk) 00:12, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Myoglobin: Thanks! I'll make sure to use that link from now on. (Rather embarrassing ... all this time and I never figured out that they weren't equivalent! Oh well...) Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 00:45, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Whoops, turns out that WP:REFPUNCT does work, though only if I click on the link without opening in a new tab. I think the case where WP:REFPUNCT didn't work for me was more an issue on my end due to using a rare browser, qutebrowser. Sorry! Myoglobin (talk) 00:53, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Ah, no worries. I learned something nonetheless. Thanks anyway! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 01:45, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Repetition of article name in section titles

As you are interesting in editing I thought this may interest you. Many articles have unnecessary repetition of the article name in section titles. I must have cleaned up a few hundred such articles myself but there is much more to do. It is generally fairly easy to check - just scan the contents lists of articles until you see a problem.--Penbat (talk) 19:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Penbat! That is indeed one of the errors I like to correct. Thanks for the suggestion! I usually fix them as I come across them, but is there a way to find a large number of articles with that problem, or is the random way all right? Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 20:12, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I can't see any systematic way of picking out the problem articles. It only takes about 10 seconds to give the contents list a scan whenever you view an article for whatever reason. I tend to check this issue by opening up an article and quickly viewing all the linked articles in another window. You may from memory remember the ones you have checked previously. Reducing the level of article name repetition helps reinforce that norm to editors so probably reduces its occurrence in new edits.--Penbat (talk) 21:30, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

A case in point for an article you just edited - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gene_knockdown&diff=727838629&oldid=727710644 --Penbat (talk) 15:26, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Ah, ok! I'll be sure to look out for that. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 18:21, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Ooops https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Personal_development&diff=729945053&oldid=729933416 --Penbat (talk) 17:38, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Aw, shucks! Missed one (and so, probably more). And I was doing so well... Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 02:11, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Migrant agricultural workers in Southern Spain (Question)

Hi! I noticed you left a question on the history of Environmental racism in Europe.

Yes, the change I made was intentional. These secondary citations link to the original location of an embedded video which is found at the website of the original reference. Some of the citations reference the video specifically instead of the other site, as it was produced by different authors / journalists and I felt it was in good practice to reference them as distinctly as possible.

You are more than welcome to delete these secondary citations if you feel it is appropriate. If you think they are unnecessary, feel free to remove them. Once again, I really, really appreciate all of the editing work you have done to ensure that this article meets Wikipedia standards! It means a lot :)

(FYI, I am close to completing my main contributions to this article. I will be adding several more country profiles tonight, and am working to obtain permission for a number of photographs, which may take some time. This being stated, a significant amount of the material in this article is time-sensitive, and will benefit from ongoing updates and potentially further peer editing.)Sturgeontransformer (talk) 04:23, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, Sturgeontransformer! I had assumed '51' referred to citation #51 (Kennedy, Siobhan (April 15, 2016). "What's the real cost of your fresh salad?". 4 News. Retrieved July 10, 2016.) since the piped link led back to Environmental racism in Europe, and attempting to make a link in the article to the article title results in unclickable bold text.

I'm happy to help . I'm not very useful for content contributions, however (I think I've made 56 edits on the article just naming/templating the references and tweaking the punctuation! ). I think adding the article to some WikiProjects might bring some new editors. Happy editing! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 04:58, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! :) And I will definitely look into your advice--re: adding the article to some WikiProjects, once I finish my remaining planned additions!

Best,

Sturgeontransformer (talk) 05:11, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Oops! I'm afraid I already added some banners to the talk page, which automatically adds it to the WikiProjects. I hope you don't mind. You'd probably not be disturbed for a while, though. If you want to secure the attention of other editors, I suggest looking at the members of the WikiProjects and perhaps contacting some of the active ones to see if they're interested, after you finish your (excellent) work on the article. Best, Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 05:35, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Awesome! And honestly, no worries in the slightest about it being added to a Wiki project already—that’s great actually I have now (finally!) finished my last major additions of text (I’ve also saved a copy of the entire text & coding of the article in its current state, for archival purposes). From this point on, I’m going to start adding photos, while also welcoming new contributions (and potential discussions!) from other editors in the community. I’m a big believer in peer review.

Lastly, I just wanted to say thanks for the kind words—your support & encouragement really means a lot, especially since I am a relatively new contributor. This is a subject I really care about, in part because I also happen to be Roma / Romani myself. Until relatively recently there has been very little academic material which includes the voices of Romani people themselves, let alone in relation to the broader world of Indigenous and gender studies.

Also, I’m not sure if you have checked out the following wiki article, but if you haven’t, I just thought I’d share it if it was of potential interest. I really enjoyed writing it, because it concerns the city and people where I live

History of Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Longshoremen, 1863-1963

Best,

Sturgeontransformer (talk) 06:45, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

That's wonderful! The article would do well to have a few photographs to accompany the text. I wish you and the other contributors all the best. The article is very detailed already...I foresee that the next major contributor input may be a split.

We're lucky to have you here! It's an asset to Wikipedia to have useful new contributors, and I am glad to be of help. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and taking the time to cover these oft-neglected topics!

What a fascinating article! I've checked it out, and made a preliminary sweep of the punctuation with wikEd. I wonder if anyone will tag it with Lead missing...in that case, removing the Overview header should fix that. I'll probably name the references sometime later, unless you want to do that yourself or leave it as it is. (I usually template references out of habit, but that's not necessary.) If you need any assistance with basic formatting or the Manual of Style, I'm always happy to help.

P.S.: I hope you don't mind, but I've indented our replies with colons per talk page custom, as it was starting to get a little confusing. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 19:38, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Wonderful! And thanks for your interest in that other article. There's a few similar topics under Pacific Northwest history I may consider writing about in the foreseeable future With regards to naming the references, this actually might be a good opportunity to try and learn how to do it on my own. I tried looking up how to do it, but found it rather confusing. I am going to try again, I just need to be patient! I'm sure it can't be that tough. I've read the following through, but if you had any other words of advice, I would be all ears!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Footnotes#Footnotes:_using_a_source_more_than_once — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sturgeontransformer (talk • contribs) 02:26, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, that's an interesting prospect! I'd be happy to assist with your future articles if you want. Feel free to drop me a message anytime.

As for naming refs, something you might have some experience with already: As the page says, to name a ref, you simply type "name=(whatever)" after "ref" (e.g., <ref>Foo</ref> → <ref name=Foo>Foo</ref>), and to use the name ("Foo"), you put down a forward slash after the name (i.e. <ref name=Foo/>), and if the name is more than one word, quotation marks are necessary (e.g. <ref name="Multiple words">Ref whose name has multiple words</ref>). (Demonstration: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.) I see you used reFill to assist naming refs, but the problem with that is that it only identifies and names perfectly identical references, which means those finicky page numbers have to be put in manually. You can keep the ref names as they are (or use something more descriptive), and use the template for reference pages to indicate page number. If you want, you can look at examples, like this diff. To use it, simply plop down double curly brackets, a vertical bar, the page numbers, and closing double curly brackets after the ref (i.e. {{rp|X}}, which produces ). Hope this wasn't too confusing or repetitive for you. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 03:39, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Cool--this helps! I think I sort of had the idea earlier, but the way you explained it a little differently, this is already looking clearer to me. I'm going to do some work on this tomorrow! And thanks, I won't hesitate to message you with further questions down the road, I'm sure I will have many more in the foreseeable future! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sturgeontransformer (talk • contribs) 05:50, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Okay! I'm happy to be of help. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 02:29, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, rarely do I crack a smile at a Wikipedia editor, but you just made my day. Feel free to review my work as many of the mistakes that happen come from the bizarre autocorrect feature on our favorite site. My advice on edit summaries: never explain, never complain. No one cares. I'm not sure about this user name of yours....but to each his (or her) own. Oh, by the way, since you are an editor, can you tell me how to actually create a family tree--I feel like an idiot reading the W. instructions. Dr. Grampinator (talk) 16:23, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Dr. Grampinator! I'm not sure what event caused the day-making, but I'm glad for it nonetheless. I'm afraid I am not well-versed in making family trees. The page says the Ahnentafel is easiest to create, but even admits that it isn't easy to understand if you're not familiar with it (which I am not). As far as I can tell, it means using one of the templates depending on how many generations you want, and adding members in the order of each generation. Sorry I can't be more of help. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 02:29, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

WP:WE interpretation

I have no personal objection to [this change], but for future reference I think you're misunderstanding WP:WE, which specifically allows "we" when it refers to the modern world (or, as in the case of the article, the human race) as a whole. Rolf H Nelson (talk) 02:15, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you very much for bringing that to my attention. I admit I tend to let my personal preferences (i.e. avoiding the use of "we" altogether) leak into my edits, leaving extremely awkward constructions in my wake. I will be more judicious in the future. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 03:12, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Friendly Message / Updates!

[Edit: clicked "leave message here," but it posted here, which is why this post is written like a personal email!] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sturgeontransformer (talk • contribs) 19:19, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi!

Just wanted to send you a friendly update on recent work and changes regarding my Wikipedia articles.

First off, photos! You may or may not have noticed that about ten days ago, I tagged several photos for speedy deletion shortly after uploading and posting them. (Well, except for one photo, which I missed and only tagged for deletion yesterday, lol). Long story short, it was a bit of a learning curve when it came to educating myself on the finer points of wikipedia standards for image copyright. I think I've finally got it all figured out, and we shouldn't be seeing too many more issues of this nature in future. This being said, if there are ever any questions, I always welcome it when people point out an error!

(OK, seriously, is the banner at the top of your user page that says "If I make any mistakes, feel free to break out the trout" your own, or can I use it too!?)

The Environmental racism in Europe article may still see a couple photos added. All of the photos in the article (except for one, which I'll mention in a moment!) are on solid copyright grounds. As it stands, I basically see this article as done, with the exception of ongoing updates and future additions to Wikiprojects. There is also a possibility that I might add a couple more photos. Right now, I'm just waiting for further notice of copyright permission from a couple people, and will likely know more in a few days.

(And it's been fun, actually--right now, I'm having a copyright permission request translated into Italian, and am getting up at 4AM to phone someone in Jokkmokk, Sweden, tomorrow, lol....) I'll send you a message if I actually get permission from anybody!

Now, I do have one question for you. I've had this one image posted under a Fair Use rationale, and it's remained up for two weeks, yet hasn't been fully reviewed by editors. So far, nobody has tagged it with "|image has rationale=yes"

It's kind of driving me crazy--I've given a very detailed rationale, but nobody has checked it over, so it's kind of in limbo, and it seems to me like, maybe nobody is paying attention to it? I'm starting to wonder if the Fair Use status will ever get confirmed. So basically, I was wondering if you might have any suggestions for getting it reviewed quicker? In any case, here's the image!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Essential_Oils_Distillery_Explosion,_Mitcham_March_30,_1933.jpg

Lastly, if you hadn't noticed already, I just thought I'd let you know that I finally did finish the ref tag cleanup for History of Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Longshoremen, 1863-1963. Once I had it figured out, it was easier than I thought! From now on, any future articles I write will come with pre-tagged references :)

best, Sturgeontransformer (talk) 19:15, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Great to hear from you again, Sturgeontransformer! I think I have the "email this user" feature disabled, but I don't mind a longer message. I'm glad to hear you've gotten the hang of image uploading! Now you can grace some other poor image-less articles with some pictures or work with those in Requested pictures in the future. I was watching the image additions to the article on my watchlist as they came, and they did add a much-needed splash of colour. I wonder if anyone will assess it soon...

Well, "fun" is one word for it, I suppose. Glad you're enjoying the labyrinthine mess that is Wikipedia policy and all that it entails. But in all seriousness, the copyright process is crucial and it's good that people take it so seriously.

(I actually pilfered the banner from another user and tweaked it to serve my own nefarious purposes with my limited knowledge of HTML. Feel free to use it )

I've never uploaded an image, so I'm afraid I'm as unfamiliar with the process as you are. I see you used a non-free use rationale template, and that seems to be a good first step. I don't know how long it usually takes for a patroller or admin to review it – the people at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions might be able to help you there. Of course, you could always try contacting an admin who works with image copyright to ask them directly if your rationale checks out (have you seen this page by any chance?), but I don't have any recommendations off the top of my head. (Oh, and for other Wikipedia-related questions, I think the Teahouse and the Help desk are useful resources to have. The editors there tend to be more knowledgeable and helpful than I am.)

I didn't see that yet, but the refs look nice and compact now! Great job! Now you'll barely have any use for me. I'll still poke around in your future articles, though, like the nosy little gnome I am.

Good luck on getting permission for those images! I look forward to hearing from you. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 20:00, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Dead link update

Hi

Please update the dead link about the Nativism vs. empiricism paragraph in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptual_psychology.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thehalcyonsavant (talk • contribs) 14:32, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done! In the future, tagging the dead link in question with the {{dead link}} template might be more effective in case editors are busy. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 16:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Jeremiah Fufeyin

Hi, I was in the middle of a massive set of corrections to Jeremiah Fufeyin when you did your edits & got hit with the conflict note when I tried to save it. Several of our corrections were the same (like fixing the section headings) but I'd made a bunch of other fixes like correcting multiple errors in the ref links. There were too many differences for me to easily reconcile, so I replaced your changes. There might be a few I missed if you want to check back (the bolding bits, for instance, I didn't get to yet). Thanks for your help, the page creator's a newbie & he asked me for assistance but it's a massive bit to do. JamesG5 (talk) 17:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me! I hope I didn't cause you too much trouble. I'll go check back now. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 17:58, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

(All right, everything seems to be in order now. Thanks again!) Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 18:06, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Yep! Thanks so much! I see what you did, I was working on some of that too, but there were so many errors I've been trying to do it in stages & coach the page creator thru as I go so he doesn't keep creating new problems. Appreciate the help. :-D JamesG5 (talk) 18:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

No problem! Good luck to you and the page creator with the page! I'm always happy to see new contributors and people working to welcome them. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 18:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Pancolitis entry

Hi,

In the pancolitis entry it stated it is IBD, and you say this is "Inflammatory bowel disorder", it is a disease, not a disorder, it is "inflammatory bowel diseases. I am a sufferer of IBD (ulcerative colitis), and disorder makes it sound similar to IBS, but it's much worse than a disorder or syndrome. Misinformation is a really producer of ignorance for the condition. Please correct,. Thank you. Nadene82 (talk) 00:35, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Sorry to hear about your condition. I wasn't the one who wrote the article, though, so I can't really say why it read "disorder" instead of "disease"; I've always used "inflammatory bowel disease" myself (as the link shows). I've removed the piped text and it should now read "disease". I see that the page is unprotected: in the future, you can make such changes yourself if you wish. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 01:23, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your work!

I just wanted to thank you for your tremendous work here on Wikipedia! I've seen you making constructive edits on countless of articles I've watched. In fact so many that I'm wondering if you're using any software for it? For instance do you use some tool that shows you articles which have the article titles in multiple section headers (such as here)?

--Fixuture (talk) 11:42, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@Fixuture: Thank you for the kind words! I'm rather low on tech knowledge, so I rely on mere happenstance to find section headers with errors. (I remember reaching Photo sharing through Template:Web syndication and Photoblog.) If I found any software available for it, I'd switch to using it in a heartbeat. Sorry I can't be more helpful there. Cheers, Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 15:03, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I just want to join Fixuture here. Thanks for the all the little fixes to circadian rhythm articles lately! It looks as if you are going down my watchlist.

I, too, am bothered by such inconsistencies etc. and they give ammunition to Wikipedia-haters. Keep up the good work. --Hordaland (talk) 10:14, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Aw, thanks! You are too kind. I'm happy to be of help. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 16:57, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Sexism in the technology industry

An article that you have been involved in editing—Sexism in the technology industry —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. TheDracologist (talk) 22:54, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Singular possessive

I've asked for a revert of your undiscussed move to remove the final s from Brooks's law. See the recent RM discussion there. And see Strunk & White and other guides about this. Dicklyon (talk) 05:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Dicklyon, I think the s was removed by someone else (in this edit) – the page was at Brooks’ law, and I requested to have the curly apostrophe changed to straight. Thanks for reminding me of those conventions, by the way – I'd almost forgotten that most sources suggest adding the second s nowadays. I probably should have checked that before requesting a move. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 06:09, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I saw you had requested to move, but didn't notice the intermediate broken state. Thanks for your help. Dicklyon (talk) 06:47, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

No problem! I'm glad it's sorted out now. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 23:46, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Untitled

SORRY, I PUT THIS IN THE WRONG PLACE! (unrelated message, please don't bite me) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frescadp (talk • contribs) 23:41, 3 November 2016 (UTC) Hi, Me, Myself and I... Fresca here. It looks like you'ree still actively doing good deeds here, which is lovely. We met last spring when I was a newbie, and I'm afraid I totally dropped off soon afterward. I have, however, just now finished(?) an entry I started in my sandbox back in [eek] March. This is *totally optional*, of course, but I wondered if before I hit the button to send it off to some anonymous Wikipedian, you would take a look at it to see if I've put it together correctly? (Actually, I'm not even sure that's possible. But I hope you might...) Please don't hesitate to tell me to just go ahead and send it off! I've even forgotten how to format these messages correctly. I think these tildes will do it. Frescadp (talk) 23:39, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Frescadp! I'm glad to see you around again! No worries, I've just put a heading to separate this message from the rest. I'd love to check out the article! (I can find your sandbox at User:Frescadp/sandbox, right?) I hope you don't mind if I edit it a little. Congratulations on your first article! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 23:46, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh, hi! That was fast! HOORAY--thank you for separating out my message and for being willing to take a look at my work, which, yes, is at User:Frescadp/sandbox. Do you need anything else to access it? If not, please, edit away! It ("Jody Williams") should be the only thing there. I am super grateful for any help! And I hope to get back to editing a little more now that I've started again. Frescadp (talk) 23:53, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

@Frescadp: Haha, I just happened to be on. I performed some edits to make it conform to the MOS. Now, for the next part...I'm not the best person in terms of sources/content...I mean, there are third-party secondary sources and they seem reliable enough, it's not overtly promotional and imparts real information... I think it's ready to be sent off for review to someone who's more experienced in content. I'm so excited to see you editing around here again!

By the way, are you going to use the Articles for creation process or just move your sandbox (in that case, I suppose you'd need to put something in parentheses to set it apart from Jody Williams)? I'm sure you've seen Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies already, so I won't go into too much detail there, but if you ever need post-publication (is that what we'd call it?) assistance with deorphaning or anything like that I'd be happy to help. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 00:10, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, thank you, you are an angel for catching all those futzy little things, and I won't be quite so embarrassed to send it off now, once I edit my draft again in the morning (it's evening here and my brain is tired) and also read the articles you kindly recommend. (I did read those back in March, so you can imagine how much I retained.)

But, one more question: How do I accept your edits? I'm afraid to lose them... Frescadp (talk) 01:00, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

@Frescadp: You're too kind! I'm just happy to help. You don't need to accept my edits – I edited the sandbox directly, and you won't lose them since they're in the history (viewable here). If you check back on your sandbox now, the edits should be live. I'll put it on my watchlist to watch its progress. Good luck with your article, and good evening! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 01:09, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

College of the Holy Spirit CDES

Hi @Me, Myself, and I are Here. Thanks for improving the article. I am not a native English speaker, so will you please help me to improve the article? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_of_the_Holy_Spirit_CDES They also have a fantastic choir band which can be listened online http://cdes.edu.uy/es/cdes-choir-band/ and its located in a UNESCO world heritage site http://cdes.edu.uy/es/unesco-world-heritage-40-imutes-away/ I knew the place when I visited the Country to promote my work, Free Rice for the Poor. The CDES its a well known institution nationalwide. Also its a Dot EDU domain provided by the Ministry of Education. Thanks in advance Taesulkim (talk) 19:54, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Taesulkim,

Unfortunately, it seems that the article has no secondary sources. I could always edit it for grammar, but it is likely to be deleted if its notability isn't proven. I suggest looking for more second-party sources, and I'll be happy to assist with copyediting after more sourced content is added. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 22:07, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Me, Myself & I (☮)

I will research and let you know. Thanks in advance!!Taesulkim (talk) 22:13, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi again.. I find this Video at Carleton University and Professor Odin givin a Speach on Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcSCQ1fmJes on minute 9:04 he start his exposition and present himself. I will continue looking If I can bring more sources to support the article. If you find it suitable, plese include it in the page I created.! Taesulkim (talk) 01:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

In this case, I'm afraid this still looks like a primary/non-independent source, as Odin is involved with CDES. Are there any sources that come from unrelated people/organizations? (I would also take caution in citing YouTube videos.) Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 06:45, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi again Me, Myself & I (☮)You are right. In the website http://cdes.edu.uy/ there is a link under Presidents name as follows http://cdes.edu.uy/es/en/about-president-professor-daniel-odin/

Although it is inside the College itself, all the studies and honours are linked to the certificate. I really don't know if it suitable, or if I must decline from the article I wrote. Thanks for the advice, or for the editing if you are willing to help. Taesulkim (talk) 02:06, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi again... I edited the article myself. Can you take a look? Thanks Taesulkim (talk) 05:39, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for the late response.

Once again, I think the sources mentioned (http://cdes.edu.uy/) are not secondary sources, since they come from the official site of the College itself. Although you can certainly include them in the article, you'll need other sources to establish notability. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 05:53, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi again... Can you please help me to improve the article?? I updated with reliable links, but it is schedulled to be earsed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/College_of_the_Holy_Spirit_CDES Sorry to bother you.. Its quite discouraging getting the first article deleted, although I already edited over 100 articles. Taesulkim (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello again. I'm sorry to hear that; I understand that it must be upsetting to have your article deleted. Please don't take it personally; the other editors are just trying to help. I'm afraid I cannot help – the webpages cited in the article (like https://www.presidentialserviceawards.gov/) don't seem to mention CDES at all, and I can't seem to find any reliable sources that are not affiliated with the CDES, so I cannot verify that it is notable and oppose the deletion. I do hope you aren't too discouraged; Wikipedia does have a steep learning curve and has to be quite choosy when it comes to sources. Best of luck in the future. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 03:31, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Updates!

Hi! Greetings from Sturgeontransformer; long time, no see!

First off, I just wanted to inform you of some recent changes to an article I wrote. Un-cited edits were made to the article by another user, without adequate explanation or rationale given. In any case, I am prepared to follow proper protocols of third opinion and dispute resolution if need be. Since you are familiar with my work, I wanted to share the explanation I wrote on the talk page defending my original text.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_Squamish_and_Tsleil-Waututh_longshoremen,_1863%E2%80%931963

Also, I wanted to provide an update on the Environmental racism in Europe page. Recently added a whole new set of photos to the article, which was quite the mini-project!

Last time we spoke, I had mentioned that I was getting up at 3 AM to phone someone in Sweden for permissions. We ended up having a great academic discussion, and it was an all-round wonderful exchange. Really cool person!

Best,Sturgeontransformer (talk) 09:13, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello again, Sturgeontransformer! It's nice to hear from you again!

That seems like a proper revert – you've discussed the specific sources your information comes from and started a thread. If the editor can come up with more definitive/overriding references, then more discussion might be required, but I do not think there will be a need for third party dispute resolution. That's usually only necessary for serious, intractable disagreements. Let's see where the discussion goes.

Ooh, academic discussion? Sounds like the 3 AM call was worth it then! That's great to hear! I think readers will appreciate the visuals – it does wonders in livening up the blocks of text. Here's to future effective discussions and the betterment of articles!

Cheers, Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 00:03, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Glad to hear you think I did the revert properly, I appreciate your assurances! As for the visuals, I've really come to value the importance of having pictures. FYI, if you want to check out probably one of the longest Fair Use justifications you'll ever find of wikipedia, have a look at the Mitcham Common Distillery explosion photo I uploaded! Link below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Essential_Oils_Distillery_Explosion,_Mitcham_March_30,_1933.jpg

And my friend in Sweden! Yes, we called several times. Trying to call during business hours from Vancouver was awkward, especially before having to leave my work at 6:00 AM (I work at a tuna processing plant!) I kept missing the person (away from phone, meetings, etc.) and probably called 5-6 times before we were able to organize a better time to talk. So I had to wake up at crazy hours for quite a few times in a row! But it was totally worth the effort.

The person / my friend is a Sami activist from Jokkmokk. Once we finally had the chance to speak, we talked for nearly an hour about environmental and social issues related to mining in Arctic Sweden/Norway/Finland/Sapmi, among many other subjects of interest. We had a wonderful discussion about things we think could be done differently with Creative Commons, and talked about ethical considerations surrounding journalism and the depiction of politically charged historical events, such as the Kallak Controversy. Talked about how sometimes "boring" images without people (aka images of landscapes, machinery, and inanimate objects) can be just as interesting & valuable as photos of the actual conflict itself!

In any case, we decided to keep in touch, mostly by email, because we have so much more to share with each other. Once we got to know each other, we actually joked, with all meaningful intentions, that the image permission / wikipedia stuff was really just an excuse to make the connection and get in touch to share all these things. It was! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sturgeontransformer (talk • contribs) 09:11, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

No problem! Your revert is well-justified; I didn't want you to be worried about it. (And wow, that must be the most footnoted Fair Use justification I've ever seen! Well, to be fair, I haven't read a lot of them, but still.)

Jokkmokk (I just know I'm pronouncing it wrong in my head) looks beautiful from its photographs. That sounds like a terrific discussion, and I'm glad it was worth it! I agree that so-called "boring" images are still worth the proverbial thousand words. And hey, if hammering out tedious copyright permissions means you get to have meaningful discussions, I've got to do that more often. I'm a little envious that I didn't get to participate, but I must admit my ignorance would preclude me from being able to hold an intelligent discussion on these topics. (By the way, is this the Kallak Controversy)? Oh well, at least I'm learning a lot from you and the articles you work on. Thank you both for adding to Wikipedia! You're helping to educate know-nothings like me. I'm so glad that you and your friend have so much to share and that meatspace interactions aren't dead!

It's always a pleasure to hear from you! Keep up the good work, and I hope you have a nice day. Best, Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 03:31, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I don’t think meatspace discussions will ever go out of fashion! People love to be acknowledged, and to acknowledge others. If anything, in our era of social media, I think many, many people appreciate respectful, thoughtful, direct communication all so much more.

There’s no point writing on Wikipedia to prove how much we know. Academic formalities are very important, but should not be barriers to expanding critical perception. I write on Wikipedia as a way of learning. I see this resource as an entry point to meaningful dialogue with others. It isn’t about where we are coming from, or what we never knew. It is about where we are going, how we are learning, questioning, and sharing. Life has simply thrown me some quirky coincidences of opportunity, and I see it fitting to share what I have learned, in the hope that it will give others inspiration to ask questions.

Yo[h]ck-mock!!!

I’m friends with someone from Umeå who confirmed how to pronounce it. Funnily enough, that friend also happens to be Sami, and was visiting Vancouver for the year. We met when I was at the Scandinavian community centre looking for someone to translate a letter into Swedish (also for someone in Jokkmokk...I know, it was a total coincidence—long story—it was art-related). Honestly, I’m not sure what it is about Vancouver, but I keep running into Sami people here, and I’m like, what is it about this town?

Here’s three people whose work you might find interesting!

http://elle-maija-tailfeathers.com/

https://worksthatwork.com/4/sami-self-sufficiency (Joar Nango was in Vancouver for a residency, and is an absolute riot! His partner, Tanya Busse, also an amazing artist, has this really cool project on the go, in collaboration with Emilija Skarnulyte: http://www.debrisfanzine.com/emilija-skarnulyte-and-tanya-busse/)

You are correct about the Kallak controversy article—that is the event I am referring to. I might try and expand on it if I have time in the foreseeable future. Too many articles that need to be expanded!

According to the person I was speaking with, the project is on hold and under legislative review—and nobody knows when the results of that review will come out. It could be next week, or it could be in five years. It is believed that the protests did influence the decision to grant a more in-depth review instead of a more streamlined approval process.

There are many factors behind the pending decision, which under Swedish law (much like in Canada) is supposed to balance the overall economic benefit of the mine, the social and cultural impacts on the Sami reindeer herders, and of course, the effects on the regional ecology and all the animals in it. A UNESCO Biosphere is nearby. The person I was speaking with told me something that I found really thought-provoking. He said “the reason why it is so difficult to counter these kinds of developments is because they are offering dreams. Whether it is good jobs, healthcare, education for your children, having a nice home, these are dreams that everyone wants. But then you ask other people in the [Sami & hunting/fishing/foraging-dependent northern communities], and there’s the other side of the story, the impacts, the other point of view.”

You might wonder how I ever found out about Kallak / Gallók in the first place—it was actually from listening to music on YouTube. I know...basically, I listen to a lot of heavy metal music, and a lot of it is from Scandinavia, and well, the YouTube search also brought up some folk / electronica / bluegrass musicians who I thought were really awesome, namely Sofia Jannok (her most recent album, “Orda” blew me away!) and Maxida Märak. Their songs talk about these issues a lot, which helped bring my awareness right around the same time that I was starting to learn about environmental concerns facing Romani communities. And so that’s how I began to think about these two issues in relation to each other, in large part because of music. I merely stumbled upon these stories.

Lastly, in case you were wondering about what I actually do for a living. As mentioned earlier, I am employed at a fish processing plant for several months, which has been good. In the summer, I worked as a junk & scrap metal collection worker because it is a traditional Roma occupation, and I wanted to get a sense, just a little, about the garbage & recycling industry. Before that, I was in university studying visual art at ECUAD until I graduated last spring. I got into writing for Wikipedia as a result of a school assignment where we were tasked with sharing new material to the encyclopedia.

I just turned 24. After deciding I’m not ready to pursue a career in the art world—not yet, at least—I decided it was time to start looking for other work that interests me. This coming spring, I am planning to train at the BC Institute of Technology for several months in how to become a freight railroad worker, so that I can work for CN, CP, BNSF, etc. Being in Vancouver—aka “Terminal City,” where the trains horns blare 24/7 nonstop, it’s hard not to be interested in these monster machines. (Port Metro Vancouver is now the 3rd busiest and most diversified port in North America; a satellite port in Prince Rupert is also rapidly growing.) A lot of my art has been about this.

www.jeffrey-wynne.com

Anyways, that’s a little bit about who I am, and how I came to be interested in these subjects.

Keep asking questions! Your contributions to Wikipedia, regardless of how technical, academic, utilitarian, or expansive, are all important. These are the spaces that open consciousness and generative communication, and we should never limit ourselves to any perceived limits of knowledge.

Cheers!Sturgeontransformer (talk) 04:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello Sturgeontransformer! Sorry for the late response.

Yes, indeed! Meatspace is safe as long as people exist. I don't know anything, but I still come on here and muck around. I've learned a lot from editing on here, and I don't even work in content creation. I definitely won't ever stop asking questions. Thanks for teaching me the pronunciation! At least in my mind it's no longer mangled beyond recognition.

That's interesting! Music is such a powerful tool of communication...it's very practical to use it to spread awareness about issues. The controversy there sounds a lot like the pipeline situation in BC...I do hope you can expand some of the articles if you do have the time: I'm sure many people would benefit from knowing more about it.

Yay! One student that kept editing! (I see students working on class assignments on articles all the time, but very rarely do the students stick around after the assignments are completed . Or maybe they've just created a new account...)

Thanks for the recommendations. I'll have to check those out. I'm facing a bit of a quandary since I do want to discuss things further, but I don't want to get too off-topic since talk pages are apparently supposed to be for discussing Wikipedia (I mean, what a silly notion...), so if you have any more recommendations, send me an email. I'll respond with any further comments there. Til next time! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 22:15, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Untitled

Hello, Thank you for your contribution to the page work behavior. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.66.204.22 (talk) 17:36, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

No problem! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 22:15, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Me, Myself, and I are Here. 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)

Thanks for all of your fixes to the 12-step and recovery related articles

That was very handsome of you. - Scarpy (talk) 22:40, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks! I'm glad to be of help. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 23:58, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Author editing page's subheading

Hi there. Thanks for pointing out WP's rules about subheadings. I agree that the simple "Origins" is better, but I'm unsure of modifying "Author editing and authors' writing skills". Other subheadings could be "When authors hire an authors' editor" or "Which authors benefit from an authors' editor", but I do not think these are very nice. Or perhaps "Impact of authors' writing skills on need for an authors' editor". But this is long. The short version you propose doesn't seem to describe the section at all. Can we leave it as is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valmataro (talk • contribs) 18:29, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

@Valmataro: Sounds good to me! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 19:17, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Theories of love

Hello

I wanted to thank for adding more into theory of love. Im not sure if you are in my sociology class but thank you, The other thing is that because of all your adding I'm not going to be able to do my final project because everything i wrote is differently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorry92 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello Dorry92! I am not in your sociology class. Sorry if I caused any inconvenience: since the article in mainspace, it's considered "live" and must conform to the Manual of Style. If you'd like, I can point out some of the guidelines. I'm not sure what your final project entails – is it possible for you to create a user sandbox and for that to be graded? Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 23:48, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Few people would stop by a new account to leave a kind and helpful message as you did here. It went without a response, until now. Even while the intended recipient might have ignored it, it is open, in public, as yet another evidence of the kind people of Wikipedia. Caballero/Historiador ⎌ 07:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh, wow! Thank you so much! (I'm not particularly good at thank-yous, unfortunately... I'm just glad that I seem to have made a difference here, however small. ) Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 06:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

I t  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.255.134.46 (talk) 07:54, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 

wikivoice

Hi! Thanks for the comment about pseudogenes, but I confess that I have no good understanding of wikivoice (I ain't no Englesh majur). I searched help and there was nothing. Could you please direct me to more details about wikivoice? Thanks, Dennis Drdfp (talk) 08:23, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi again, Drdfp! Sorry for the unclear instructions (I ain't no Englesh majur meself). What I mean by "wikivoice" is that footnotes should explain/clarify the article in the same encyclopedic tone as the rest of the article – neutral and dispassionate, no value statements that aren't quotes, no use of first-person (I/we) or second-person (you), and they shouldn't be signed etc. As an example, the footnote you inserted might read "The authors of the review paper by Xiao-Jie L, et al appear to be using English as a second language. Some parenthetical changes have been made for clarity" and so on. (Oh, and for separating references and explanatory footnotes, WP:REFNEST might also be helpful.) Hope this helps! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 08:50, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! I am closer to understanding footnotes. Drdfp (talk) 18:12, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Rape culture

Explain me WHY did you revert my edit because I don't get it. Blanca Lap (talk) 21:40, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello Blanca Lap, consensus appears to be against the inclusion of that paragraph for now. While most of your sources seem to be good, there are some concerns about your edit, and those should be resolved before reinsertion. Per EvergreenFir's comments at Talk:Rape culture#Rape culture / Societies without rape culture, there is one unreliable reference (http://www.mosuoproject.org/myths.htm) and possible OR (and this reference might not be the best quality either). I suggest making changes to the paragraph to address those concerns (e.g. replacing that ref), and after gaining consensus, you are more than welcome to reinsert the paragraph. I come in peace, Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 21:50, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

I already did that! I mean, please!! (And the mosuo project is a reliable organization)(and the second link is not in the article) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blanca Lap (talk • contribs) 21:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Although there's been a discussion, I don't see a consensus yet due to a continuing WP:SYNTH concern. As for the sources, I won't comment further here, as discussion of the sources belongs on the talk page. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 22:07, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're wrong, there is no WP:SYNTH. Blanca Lap (talk • contribs) 19:21, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

That may be true; let's see how the discussion goes. I see you've pinged me at the talk page so I'll head there. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Eicosanoid page

Thanks for your edits to this page. The eicosanoid page, at the bottom ~1/3, has a lengthy section on omega-3 versus omega-6 fatty acids and their metabolites. While sound, I think this section is off the topic of eicosanoids and is covered elsewhere in Wikipedia. I hesitate to delete it from eicosanoids while moving some of it to a more appropriate page. The section represents a lot of work. Your opinion and advice would be appreciated. joflaher

Hello Joflaher. I'm afraid that I'm not really qualified to comment on the content itself and I haven't contributed much to that article. I think starting a thread on the talk page (or the talk page of the article you intend to move the content to) would be best. You could also try pinging any other major contributors to the eicosanoid page to see if they'd like to participate in the discussion. If no one contests the content move, then I say go for it. Template:Merge portions from might be useful. Cheers, Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 22:47, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I will chase down your recommendations.(talk) 22:47, 11 January 2017 (joflaher)

Untitled

There is no mention of the fact that Julian Knight was abused while at ADFA. That fact has never been exposed. So, what was going through Julian Knight's mind after repeatedly being abused at ADFA. What was the answers to his alleged reporting to his superior officers that this was ocurrring. What drove Julian Knight to finally crack and do the most terrible acts on innocent people. This may be as a result of being stone-walled by his superiors and higher. Did the Defence Department cover up his abuse? Who were his abusers and more importantly, where are they working today? Were they promoted and are currently serving in the Australian Army today? Lots of unanswered questions that have been suppressed. Why is Julian Knight not allowed to discusss his abuse at ADFA? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.97.3 (talk) 06:16, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, please read WP:NOTFORUM. Also, I have only adjusted punctuation on that page and am not the most knowledgeable on the topic, so it'd probably be best to discuss that at another locale. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 17:12, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

talk:Poverty of the stimulus

Hi,
You have helped me a lot. Thanks:-) 85.193.237.204 (talk) 06:13, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

No problem! I'm happy to be of help. Thank you for pointing out that wonky sentence in the first place Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 06:21, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Unitarianism

This isn't about three reverts. The cycle is edit/revert/discuss. Reverting because you assume that you are right should not be an option. I happen to think that a dash without enclosing spaces looks utterly wrong, and there are no clear guidelines in MOS. As I attempted to say, use the talk page. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 02:30, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

@Fiddlersmouth: I will definitely use the Talk page in the future (thank you for the reminder!). I am slightly confused re: the MOS, however: MOS:EMDASH states "In all these cases, use either unspaced em dashes or spaced en dashes, with consistency in any one article" and goes on to state "An em dash is always unspaced (that is, without a space on either side)", which I interpreted as a clear guideline (at least the consistency part). I might be too pedantic in my interpretation...the formatting of the dashes doesn't really matter to me personally (I've seen and used both forms of em dash spacing). Either way, it seems the problem has been resolved. Sorry for the mess, and have a nice day! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 02:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

You highlighted a problem. Thanks. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 03:04, 27 February 2017 (UTC)