User talk:TaqPol/Archive 1

Archive 1

TaqPol, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi TaqPol! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! Technical 13 (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:29, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hooray! You created your Teahouse profile!

	Welcome to the Teahouse Badge
	Awarded to editors who have introduced themselves at the Wikipedia Teahouse. Guest editors with this badge show initiative and a great drive to learn how to edit Wikipedia. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
Thank you for introducing yourself and contributing to Wikipedia! If you have any questions feel free to drop me a line at my talk page. Happy Editing! ~ Anastasia [Missionedit] (talk) 01:27, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Copy-edit review

Hi Andrew; just in case you're not watching the page; I've reveiwed your copy-edit of Economy of Hong Kong here. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:25, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

GOCE November copy editing drive awards

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to TaqPol for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words during the GOCE November 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:13, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Alf Healing

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi TaqPol,

I saw your changes to the Alf Healing article - just a couple of things:

• He was an Australian Rules Footballer, not an Association Footballer
• The article is notable per WP:NAFL, and there have been numerous discussions relating to this as well, with a consensus to inclusion.

Based on those points I've reverted your edits - Let me know if you want to go over anything in more detail

Cheers Terlob (talk) 12:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks - apologies for not checking it further before tagging it. I will be adding a new (correct) stub tag. Please do let me know if the new tag I applied is incorrect. - Andrew Y _talk 12:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

No worries - thanks for having a look over it. I don't usually add the tag - I just keep it on the talk page as most people looking at the page won't have much to add. Definitely no problem having it on there though! Thanks Terlob (talk) 14:42, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

May 2015

I don't know how editing witing correct wikipedia guidelines can be seen as unconstructive. Warning without fully explaining is unconstructive. Please read the template documentation, MOS:CAPS and other guidelines and then discuss the edits. Thanks. 208.81.212.222 (talk) 19:27, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:208.81.212.222. The reason that I reverted the edit is because of WP:REMOVAL - you failed to explain fully the reason for removal of some of the content in the article. However, admittedly the revert of your other contents was not the most appropriate action and I apologise for that. — Andrew Y _talk 19:33, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Associations are considered more than just passing work. Other formatting. This is fully explained when you know the template documentation and general editing guidelines. However, your edit explained nothing. Thanks for your apology. 208.81.212.222 (talk)

"Associations are considered more than just passing work." is not a sufficient justification for removal of content w/r to instruments played. Nor is it immediately obvious that you are referring to the associated acts in your summary. It would have been a lot more helpful to note "inaccurate information" or "unsourced information" instead. — Andrew Y _talk 19:55, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

NFA Page

Andrew, the edits that I was replacing are not neutral. They are inflammatory and incorrect. My edits, which are accurate and verifiable, have been placed there to provide a much more balanced picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redleafjumper (talk • contribs) 20:42, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Redleafjumper, Your content is directly copied from the NFA website [1] - this is not only copyright infringement but also represents a biased view. You are welcomed to bring this issue up to Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard if you so wish. — Andrew Y _talk 20:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Andrew, I am fully empowered to make use of that content. I am also well aware of the content and what would be biased and what is correct and what is not. I am the Presdient of the NFA, and I have full permission to provide accurate NFA content and to remove inflammatory and inaccurate content from references to NFA. Thanks, Sheldon Clare, President and CEO NFA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redleafjumper (talk • contribs) 21:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Sheldon, please see WP:COIADVICE. It is highly recommended that you do not edit the NFA page as you have conflict of interest. Regardless, Wikipedia is not the NFA website and you have no right to control content on it. At Wikipedia, we have to maintain a neutral point of view, meaning that the articles represents "fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic". As such, we (and indeed, you) cannot remove content at your will and it is our responsible to list controversies supported by reliable sources. I believe in this case an administrator or a more experienced editor can better handle the case. I hope you won't mind that I bring it up at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents — Andrew Y _talk 21:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hedgehog (weapon)

Sorry but I really tire of this site and people like you.

You don't contribute to article's themselves; you just delete stuff with a sanctimonious attitude.

Using your own link provided http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hedgehog_%28weapon%29&oldid=619419254 The article that this is supposed to be copied from were created after this article was written not the other way around.

So unless the editors of this page have some how invented a temporal typing machine, it goes without saying that what was in this article first is what has been copied!

The fact that I have to point this out - bangs head against desk - is one of the reasons I hate this site and editors like you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.173.149 (talk) 00:46, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

There is no need for the personal attack. You can comment on my edit politely, but you should not and cannot attack myself as a person. I have now explained my reasoning at the talk page for the article itself here and while there were areas that I can and should improve on, I have to emphasise that I do not "delete stuff with a sanctimonious attitude". I have ran a number of checks for the revert concerned, but I didn't run enough and I wasn't careful enough. That was simply carelessness.

The criticism on my editing habit, presumably based on one single edit, was also unnecessary. A simply check at my contributions would show that I reverted many edits attempting to remove content written by hard-working editors like you. I also reverted edits attempting to put in factually incorrect content on here. I am not superior in any way and I am also just a human. We do make error at times. As a editor that has haven't done that many edits, errors are naturally more prone to happen. — Andrew Y _talk 09:17, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Your edits to Edexcel were superb! Nice job, and thanks in reaching a consensus. ~NottNott ( ✉ -☺) 21:09, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

rollback user right

Hi TaqPol. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! KrakatoaKatie 00:11, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

A bit bitey, perhaps

This edit might have been a bit bitey. True, the author of an article is not supposed to remove the speedy deletion tag, but in this case, the author addressed the concern at hand (that the article was a copyvio) by rewriting in their own words. True, the rewritten version didn't provide much evidence of notability, but that's a different concern. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:24, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I think the policy exists for a reason and editors should abide the rule, especially when it is listed in bold in the page. But I suppose you do have a point and I will take that into consideration next time when I faced with similar edits. It's just that I am really uncertain on whether I should still assume good faith in this case where a rule has clearly been violated. I will think about it and thanks anyway. — Andrew Y _{talk contrib} 16:33, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a confusing place with lots of rules. New users rarely grasp them all. (Heck, I have over 40,000 edits to my credit and I'm still learning new rules!) Sometimes WP:IAR applies to dealing with other users, as well as writing articles. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:39, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: I do agree - I do not expect new users to follow all rules either. What bothers me, I suppose, is that the template has "do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself" in bold... I suppose in the future if the article is sufficiently improved there is indeed no point reinstating the CSD template. Though obviously I still need to remind the editor of the policy, but perhaps not via a generic template but a personal message.— Andrew Y _{talk contrib} 16:47, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

im sorry 4 vandalising

forgiv me--69.65.47.115 (talk) 19:16, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

No worries. You are very welcomed to make some constructive edits. If you don't have any idea of where to start, you can learn about ways that you can improve articles at Wikipedia:Basic copyediting and you can find articles to work on at Category:All articles needing copy edit. If you have any questions you are also very welcomed to drop me a message. I look forward to seeing some of your constructive edits :) — Andrew Y _{talk contrib} 19:22, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

My "Gravity's Rainbow" entry was not a "test".

Hi Andrew, My "Gravity's Rainbow" entry was not a "test". My gallery in Auckland was asking my about the artwork that I made in 2005 http://www.thebigidea.co.nz/node/27777 and https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-168131109/remarks-on-following-gravity-s-rainbow. I looked up the Wikipedia entry to send to them as a link (since they may not be familiar with the book) and saw that there was an "art" entry. I thought that it would certainly be appropriate to add the art work (a video/sculpture installation,"Following Gravity's Rainbow" made in Wellington's New Zealand Film Archive Gallery in 2005) to the entry. I will add it again. I hope that it is OK with you. I may ned help with the editing. I have not edited for a long time (under a different user name - I couldn't remember it.

Best,

Brit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brit Bunkley (talk • contribs) 22:46, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Brit, Thanks for taking the time to write back with regard to my revert.

I am sure that you would be aware that any changes you make on the article concerned shows up live. As a result, it is preferable that any content you added was formatted correctly. If you want to test out some tags, it would be helpful if you try it out at your sandbox - you can do that at Wikipedia:Sandbox or by starting your own sandbox at User:Brit_Bunkley/sandbox or by clicking at the top right hand corner, where you will see a "Sandbox" link. Alternatively, you can click on "Show preview" when you are editing before you save the page. It is just next to the "Save page" button.

The other issue is that there is no reliable source suggesting how your artwork "Following Gravity's Rainbow", relates to the book "Gravity's Rainbow". The content also does not meet the notability criteria. The two links you provided to me, are both not independent coverage, because one was written by yourself while another was written by a staff at the New Zealand Film Archive. As such I believe the content should be removed. I kindly request that you either improve the content and provide some more sources suggesting its notability a reliable source suggesting how the book relates to your work, or remove the content.

In addition, you may also wish to read Wikipedia's guidance on conflict of interest. It states that you are strongly discourage to edit any content in any article about yourself.

Thanks, — Andrew Y _{talk contrib} 07:25, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Brit, I just would like to note that I have reverted your edits for now as I was unable to receive any response from you. If you want to discuss this further, please feel free to bring this up at Talk:Gravity's Rainbow - this allows other editors to see the discussion and join in as they wish. — Andrew Y _{talk contrib} 11:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Comment:You point out that the introduced content does not meet WP:N. That is true, but that simply means the content does not get its own separate article. The threshhold for including material in an article is WP:V. The issue here is WP:RS: we normally don't allow press release material. And for something as significant as GR, more attention will be needed because of WP:UNDUE. Choor monster (talk) 18:57, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I have updated my comment to reflect your comment. — Andrew Y _{talk contrib} 19:11, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

MK College page edits

Hi, just to let you know that I've made a series of edits to the page for Milton Keynes College - my name is Andy Gardner and I'm the PR Communications Executive in the College's marketing department.

In the last few days, we've been the subject of a number of unfounded and defamatory posts on our Facebook page of a similar nature to those added to our Wikipedia page on 13th June 2015. As such, I've removed them from the Wikipedia entry, returning the page to its original state.

I hope this is ok - if you have any problems or require any further info, please do not hesitate to contact me directly - andy.gardner@mkcollege.ac.uk.

Many thanks,

MKCollege1 (talk) 15:30, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Andy Gardner Milton Keynes College

Hello Andy,

Thanks for writing back with regard to my message. I have reviewed the history of the article, and I can see that some of the edits by an anonymous IP editor indeed have not been reverted promptly despite the content added not having been supported by any reliable source. I have to, however, remind you that our general advice is still to avoid editing any pages that you have conflict of interest with. You may wish to highlight the issue at the article's talk page and request that another editor review and remove the content. I, personally, would also be more than happy to help if no other editor respond to your message on the talk page in the future.

I also have to once again inform you that you may not use a username that represents the name of a company, group, organization, product, or website. Your username, MKCollege1, implies that the account represents Milton Keynes College as the whole, which is not permitted under Wikipedia policies. Can I recommend that you change your username to, for example, Andy Gardner at Milton Keynes College, by submitting a request here?

Thanks, — TaqPol _{talk contrib} 15:45, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

This page has now been updated to reflect the current "Requires Improvement" grade issued by Ofsted in their February 2014 inspection. I have provided a link to the source material so this can be verified. I agree that the previous edits conducted by author(s) unknown were partially unfounded however upon investigation the college is indeed regarded as "Requires Improvement" by Ofsted (UK Government Schools Inspectorate) so I have reinstated (and referenced) the one valid addition previously made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.249.164.156 (talk) 16:33, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. — TaqPol _{talk contrib} 16:38, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi TaqPol - thank you for your feedback and support in regards to this. I will ensure that I bear in mind your guidance for future edits.

Regards,

MKCollege1 (talk) 11:06, 18 June 2015 (UTC) (Andy)

July 2015

Hi, I just want to change name (also Title)on Social Democratic Party "Concord". It's official translation from native language and "Harmony" is not correct. It's also written at reference Nr.1 on your page. Please change it. Regards Katrinasaskana87 (talk) 07:32, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for leaving a message. I have now reviewed the party's official website and made the move. Thanks, — TaqPol _{talk contrib} 07:40, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

GO ON THE INTERNET LOOK UP BUSTA RHYUMES ARREST

Zeff, Zeff! (talk) 06:10, 7 August 2015 (UTC)pROBlem $ol^ed

Okay. Typed Busta Rhymes into Google, clicked on News. A Times articles apparently said that he recently threw protein shake at someone. Couldn't find anything related to him killing anyone. [2] Regardless, Wikipedia policy says that any controversial claims must be backed with a reliable source and you didn't. Any poorly sourced claims are liable to immediate removal. — TaqPol _{talk contrib} 06:17, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Nimeia001

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User talk:Nimeia001, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Stabila711 (talk) 12:33, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

@Stabila711: Thanks for doing that - I am not entirely sure if speedy deletion applies to user talk pages though... Anyway, I've also reported the user to Admin's Noticeboard so hopefully either the ads get removed or the user get blocked. — TaqPol _{talk contrib} 12:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Yep it does. Blatant advertising/spam is not tolerated anywhere including on user pages. --Stabila711 (talk) 12:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

@Stabila711: Good - thanks for letting me know! — TaqPol _{talk contrib} 12:39, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Miguel Layun

I was just about to revert the edits there - the previous editor also vandalized the page claiming that the player had scored -68 goals for the national team. What should be done about this? Leeds United FC fan (talk) 09:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Leeds United FC fan: Hi! Yah I am also looking at the page now. I think [3] perhaps looks like the last good version? If you can also confirm this I would restore that version. — TaqPol _{talk contrib} 09:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

It does seem to be the case. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 09:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Leeds United FC fan: Done and thanks for your help! You may wish to enable Twinkle in the future, which allows you to quickly revert vandalism, restore past revisions, and warn users who vandalised articles yourself. — TaqPol _{talk contrib} 09:40, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. — MusikAnimal ^talk 03:49, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

William Holland (politician)

I have a workbook that mentions he was crazy. Please write a expansion for me then :-( change = :-)99.253.40.224 (talk) 18:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

@99.253.40.224: You do realise that the revert was made in June right? Regardless, no that's not going to happen. — TaqPol _{talk contrib} 19:48, 27 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) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Sign up to become an ACC user

[4] - the identification diff from the Access to nonpublic information Noticeboard. I have read, understand and will comply with the WMF Privacy Policy and the request an account guide. — TaqPol _{talk contrib} 09:35, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

ACC access approved

TaqPol, thank you for interest in the account creation process. I have verified your Identification [5] and I have approved your request, welcome to the team. You may now access (Time dependent, a tool root has to set your access in the database) the interface here. Before you do so, please read the account creation guide and our username policy thoroughly to familiarize yourself with the process. You should also join (Also needs a switch flipped by a moderator/admin) us on IRC #wikipedia-en-accounts ^connect where a bot informs us when new account requests come in and to get any advice on requests as well as the mailing list(Also needs a switch flipped by a moderator/admin). Please note that we have implemented a policy of zero tolerance on mishandled requests, and that failure to assess correctly will result in suspension. I would like to emphasize that it is not a race to complete a request, and each one should be handled diligently and thoroughly. Currently you are allowed to create up to six accounts per day, although you won't be able to create an account with a similar name to that of another user; these requests are marked "Account Creator Needed" by the bot and "Flagged user needed" on the interface. However, if you reach the limit frequently, you can request the account creator permission at WP:PERM/ACC. Please keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse will result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. Again welcome!
Mlpearc (open channel) 05:30, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Account creator granted

After reviewing your request for the "account creator" permission, I have enabled the flag on your account. Keep in mind these things:

• The account creator right removes the limit on the maximum number of new accounts that can be created in a 24-hour period.
• The account creator right is not a status symbol. If it remains unused, it is likely to be removed. Abuse of the account creator right will result in its removal by an administrator.

If you no longer require the right, let me know, or ask any other administrator. Drop a note if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of the account creator right. Happy editing! — xaosflux ^Talk 19:51, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, TaqPol. 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)

Move request

A request to change the title and content of a comics article has begun at Talk:X-Men (film series)#Requested move 7 April 2017. Any interested WikiProject:Comics editor may comment there within one week. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:23, 8 April 2017 (UTC)