YoursT

Welcome!

Hello, YoursT, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Spartan7W § 19:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

question about which layout-option you prefer

Hello YoursT, welcome.  :-)     It looks like you prefer the circle-shaped imagefiles, from your edit on the 6th, a few days ago.[1] You also put in a bangvote,[2] over here on this page:

• Talk:United_States_presidential_election,_2016/Remodeling_of_major_party_candidate_areas

Which of course you are quite welcome to do.  ;-)    However, I didn't actually understand which layout you prefer. Can you help clarify, so I can figure out which layouts you like best? There are several proposed page-styles, each with a letter-identifier, click on the links below to see what each one looks like:

• Option A
• Option B
• Option C, circle version
• Option C, square version
• Option D
• Option E
• Option F
• Option G
• Option H

Which of these letters would you support? (You can support more than one letter... if you have a first-choice-pick, however, please say which letter.) Which letters would you oppose? Are there any letters that you don't really mind, one way or the other, aka you are neutral about them?

I'll try and help you get your bangvote figured out, and then help you add it to the page, so that the graphic designers understand what you like best. p.s. The circle-pics-with-hover-captions were the brainchild of User:Spartan7W. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 15:05, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello again. Thanks for your reply. Do not worry, you are NOT causing any problems. You are doing just fine. The trouble is that we have too many options.  :-)     Please look at the list above. Which option do you like the best? Which option do you like the second-best? That is my question. Can you tell me which letter-option is the best looking, in your opinion? Thanks 75.108.94.227 (talk) 01:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Citations

Please do not insert bare urls as citations. Templates for cites are available here. Thanks. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 15:01, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 22 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Democratic Party presidential primaries, 2016 page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:38, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41 Parliament of Canada

Right. And hello and how are you. We have a situation, but it's nothing that can't be fixed. The article is currently at Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41 Parliament of Canada. Is a numerical+parliament disambiguation needed? Sources? Sam Sailor ^Talk! 22:52, 31 October 2015 (UTC) (please  mention me on reply)

I was trying to move an article and I botched it. Please deleted it.YoursT (talk) 12:30, 1 November 2015 (UTC)— Preceding text originally posted on User talk:Sam Sailor (diff) by YoursT (talk⋅contribs) 12:30, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, you did not really answer my questions, but having looked more into it, there is a need for disambiguation and the final target should be Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41st Parliament of Canada. That used to be a redirect to Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada) and after your two page moves

• 27 Oct: YoursT moved page Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada) to Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 4st Parliament of Canada
• 30 Oct: YoursT moved page Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 4st Parliament of Canada to Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41 Parliament of Canada

you performed a cut-and-paste move from Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41 Parliament of Canada to Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41st Parliament of Canada.

Observations:

1. Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 4st Parliament of Canada is a useless title, has no useful history, and has no incoming links.
2. The current Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada) has no useful history, but has lots of incoming links.
3. The useful article history is currently found in Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41 Parliament of Canada.
4. Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41st Parliament of Canada has a short history as it used to be the redirect Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada).

Possible solution:

1. R3 delete Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 4st Parliament of Canada.
2. G6 delete Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada) to make way for
3. A move of Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41st Parliament of Canada to Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada) without leaving a redirect.
4. Move Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41 Parliament of Canada to Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41st Parliament of Canada without leaving a redirect.
5. Create a DAB in Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada) pointing to

• Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 39th Parliament of Canada
• Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 40th Parliament of Canada
• Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41st Parliament of Canada

As you see, YoursT, I deliberately say "possible" because I could easily have missed something. With the {{Admin help}} template now in place, a patrolling admin will drop by, judge what to do or ask further questions.

The lesson to be learned here is: don't be afraid to e.g. post on the article talk page first and await reactions from other users. (You seem to have relied on your edit summaries.) If that does not generate reactions, it's maybe because few people are watching the page and a page move is maybe uncontroversial. Several options exist, but when I'm in doubt of something, I often take it to the WP:Helpdesk, and there's usually someone who remembers what best practise is in a given situation. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 16:05, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@Sam Sailor: thanks for all the research. Your plan looks good, and I will do the necessary. There is one point I don't understand, after a first pass through: what is the point of your step 3, moving a page to where we are going to make a DAB? JohnCD (talk) 18:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@JohnCD: Well, it has a very short history, but I guess you're saying that it serves little purpose to keep, and I concur. Thanks for dealing with this. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 18:55, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@Sam Sailor: all  Done, I think, but better check I've got it right. YoursT, the reason why you shouldn't do cut-and-paste moves is that Wikipedia's CC-BY-SA license requires authors of content to be given attribution. That is done by the article history, but cut-and-paste moves the content away from its history. No worries, it's all sorted out. JohnCD (talk) 20:31, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

thanks for the help. It was my screwup and I should have added something to tell people who knew how to delete the bad titles. YoursT (talk) 20:37, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@YoursT: I'll second John's mantra; @JohnCD: Looks good to me, thanks for mopping; both: don't we deserve a cold one , cheers! Sam Sailor ^Talk! 20:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@Sam Sailor: alas, we actually aren't done yet: nothing is ever as simple as it looks. A helpful bot has pointed out a very large number of incoming links to the DAB page, which it asks us to fix to point to the appropriate target. This is less alarming than it looks, because (though I haven't time to check now) I'm sure that the majority of those are coming through templates like Portal:Canada; but they won't be looking for any of the specific articles, so we probably need a few words at the top of the DAB page to explain the general concept of the Shadow Cabinet. Maybe it should be a paragraph-length stub article with "See also" links to the individual ones. Ideas? In particular, ideas for a source to satisfy [WP:V]] for a general article? JohnCD (talk) 22:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@JohnCD: I'm willing to do the DAB solver chore, but you better double check my old brain on this: Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada) used to be the target of Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41st Parliament of Canada. I assume that was because it was the latest Shadow Cabinet. Now we have switches the roles. Meaning, I believe, that links to the DAB (Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada)) should simply be changed to Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet of the 41st Parliament of Canada. I could very well be wrong. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 22:31, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Looking at {{Politics of Canada}} you are maybe right with the idea of turning Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada) into a stub with a /See also/ section. YoursT, would that be something for you to do? Sam Sailor ^Talk! 22:39, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I think incoming links like that are looking for something about the Shadow Cabinet in general. If we point them to the current one, it will in due course be out of date. JohnCD (talk) 23:08, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, YoursT. You have new messages at Hamtechperson's talk page.
Message added 00:18, 13 November 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hamtechperson 00:18, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Republican Party presidential primaries, 2016

Hi, in this edit to Republican Party presidential primaries, 2016, you introduced a reference tag <ref name=RCPdelegates/>, but did not define it.

It continues to generate the error:

Cite error: The named reference RCPdelegates was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Can you correct this, please? I'd give it a shot, but I don't know what external reference you intended to cite. TJRC (talk) 01:27, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Hampshire primary, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jon Huntsman. 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) 14:05, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

YoursT (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

your reason here First I have no idea what you're talking about, second I am not who you say I am, third, I didn't do anything wrong. I beg you please let me edit again.....YoursT (talk) 20:05, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Decline reason:

After reviewing the contributions of this account along with those of Ericl, my ears were filled with a deafening quacking sound.OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:05, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Reviewing admin, please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ericl/Archive. This is not a checkuser block. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

please remove the block. I did nothing. I am not a duck. What's wrong with the name I use it all the time and nobody seems to mind.

could you please tell me what I did that was wrong or offensive since I started here in august.YoursT (talk) 22:21, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

YoursT (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

What do I do to get unblocked? I am innocent.

Decline reason:

I have compared the editing histories of your accounts, and there are so many indications of being the same person that it's ridiculous to pretend otherwise. If you waste another administrator's time with such a pointless unblock request don't be surprised if your talk page access is removed to prevent you wasting a whole lot more admin time. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:36, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

YoursT (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Assuming I am who you say I am. How do I get unblocked? YoursT (talk) 16:33, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As JamesBWatson, by posting an unblock request on the talk page of your original account. PhilKnight (talk) 23:37, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You have already been told how to request an unblock, on the talk page of your original account. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:24, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

I cannot do that:

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

YoursT (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Okay, you got me, but what the hell was I supposed to do? I was ganged up on with a bunch of false, ad homonym attacks by people, that it seemed were feeling petulant that day and decided to pick on someone just for the fun of it. I tried to defend myself, but that was the cause of my suspension. Defending myself. [[Due to the incredible level of arrogance of your unblock requests and other comments since being blocked, I'm afraid I see little hope of you successfully appealing this block, and have therefore revoked your ability to edit this page. If you wish to appeal further you may use WP:UTRS or contact WP:BASC by email. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:11, 27 July 2015 (UTC)]] I am innocent and was forced to do what I did. Please give me a "clean start" and let me rejoin the community I love.YoursT (talk) 18:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Decline reason:

If you wish to appeal further you may use WP:UTRS or contact WP:BASC by email. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 18:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, YoursT. 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)