User talk:Mikeblas/Archives/2014/May

Disambiguation link notification for May 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Warriors For the Working Day, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:53, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Yamaha FZ700 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Yamaha FZ700 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/Yamaha FZ700 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. Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:56, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Alphabetical list of filename extensions (F–L) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |Animation format FLIC >320x200
• |}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:16, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Novels Project

I've notice you've removed wiki project novels from a number of pages but you're not listed as a member of a project. In general it is up-to members of the project to decide what is and what is not in scope of their projects and no-one should remove them if they're happy with the tag. see WP:PROJGUIDE#OWN, cheers GimliDotNet ^{(Speak to me,Stuff I've done)} 13:58, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Why am I not listed as a member of the project? -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I could be wrong, I very often am [1] GimliDotNet ^{(Speak to me,Stuff I've done)} 14:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Hunh? Wrong about what? -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:10, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

You're not on the list of members at WP:NOVEL unless I am mistaken GimliDotNet ^{(Speak to me,Stuff I've done)} 14:12, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I am not. I'm asking why I am not. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:15, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't know. Perhaps someone removed you by mistake? GimliDotNet ^{(Speak to me,Stuff I've done)} 14:18, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I have added myself. Note that the classifications I've removed (at least recently) were added by someone who's not listed as a member of the project. Note further that the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Novels/Assessment page says that mis-applied tags should be freely removed. That advice is far more prominent than the completely buried guide page that you linked. Regardless of my membership status, it seems appropriate to correct taggings that are clearly out of the stated scope of the project, or are directly covered by another project or working group. Most editors struggle to identify and categorize over the vast available groups and categories, helping set things straight seems like a positive contribution. The guide you list refers to cases where there's implications for the subject of the article, and I don't think that applies here. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:55, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

this is true and I think you're right in this case. The guideline I linked to is more for people who are attempting to prevent groups from tagging an article rather than cleaning up :). GimliDotNet ^{(Speak to me,Stuff I've done)} 15:17, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the project Mikiblas! Feel free to further the tagging: make sure to keep an eye out for biographies, those are the most frequent articles that get included by editors, but aren't in our scope. If either you or @GimliDotNet: need feedback on novels articles, I think I am one of the most active content creators currently active in that field, so feel free to ping me. Best of luck editing, Sadads (talk) 17:36, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Given that, GimliDotNet, I'm not sure I undertand the point of your post; is there some behaviour you believe I should change? -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:25, 29 May 2014 (UTC)