Jump to content

User talk:Masato.harada

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello, Masato.harada, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! ww2censor (talk) 18:12, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

[edit]
Hi Masato.harada! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 15:26, Thursday, April 20, 2017 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Masato.harada. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Thanks for your efforts in improving Wikipedia articles. 
NotYourFathersOldsmobile (talk) 06:41, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Masato.harada. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Queen of Spades (1916 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Flashback (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:59, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Edith Meinhard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Allied bombing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Red tape, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Rule and Standard (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:09, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Mansion of Madness (May 3)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Sulfurboy (talk) 11:36, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Masato.harada! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sulfurboy (talk) 11:36, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:The Mansion of Madness has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:The Mansion of Madness. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 10:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
1292simon (talk) 00:45, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Canonbury Square has been accepted

[edit]
Canonbury Square, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Robert McClenon (talk) 04:58, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Mansion of Madness (August 8)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Atlantic306 was:
Rotten Tomatoes audience scores are not used. What is needed is summaries of reviews in WP:Reliable sourcesand they don't have to be in English.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Atlantic306 (talk) 23:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

[edit]

Plot descriptions cannot be copied from other sources, including official sources and IMDb, unless these can be verified to be public domain or licensed compatibly with Wikipedia. They must be written in original language to comply with Wikipedia's copyright policy. On Girl in Room 13. — Diannaa (talk) 17:17, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Mansion of Madness has been accepted

[edit]
The Mansion of Madness, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:33, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Canonbury Tower has been accepted

[edit]
Canonbury Tower, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bkissin (talk) 14:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Canonbury Tower

[edit]

Hi. Thank you so much for adding this excellent new article. I have greatly enjoyed it. At work I stood up and walked to the window at lunchtime today to check it's still there and looking good! Likewise the Square - that's a great addition too. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 20:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Missing cites in Canonbury Tower

[edit]

The article cites "Shapiro 2010" and "Wadsworth 1958" but no such sources are listed in bibliography. Can you please add? Suggest installing a script (explained at Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors) to highlight such errors in the future. Also, ref #14 to ""The Daily Post". 1738" should provide more details - author/title, exact date, url, etc. Thanks, Renata (talk) 19:05, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Renata3 – looks like "Shapiro 2010" and "Wadsworth 1958" are used in Baconian theory of Shakespeare authorship but I am sure that Masato.harada will wish to sort this out themselves. Cheers DBaK (talk) 19:42, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Filmakers Inc. (November 19)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AngusWOOF were:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Ida Lupino. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Needs more external news sources showing its notability independent of Lupino
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:34, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Filmakers Inc. (2) (November 20)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Curbon7 was:
This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, The Filmakers Inc., which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Curbon7 (talk) 00:56, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Filmakers Inc. (December 26)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chicdat was:
The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Ida Lupino. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Simply expanding it will not help, per WP:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notablity.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 13:00, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited A Nude Woman Doing Her Hair Before a Mirror, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Vaughan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:21, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Balranald (disambiguation) has been accepted

[edit]
Balranald (disambiguation), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Disambig-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Paul ❬talk❭ 15:26, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:The Filmakers Inc. (2)

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Masato.harada. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Filmakers Inc. (2), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:47, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:The Filmakers Inc.

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Masato.harada. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Filmakers Inc., a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:01, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Frans Vera (June 14)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ken Tony was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Ken Tony Shall we discuss? 14:18, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Frans Vera (July 22)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Eternal Shadow were:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines for academics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
As with so many other submissions on professors, secondary sources are necessary and may be the difference between an accept and a decline. Please add Wikipedia:Secondary sources from Wp:RSreliable publications that have WP:SIGCOV of the subject. This will indicate notability and lead to an accept.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Eternal Shadow Talk 22:34, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Building Act 1774 has been accepted

[edit]
Building Act 1774, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bkissin (talk) 16:43, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited CCT, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carbon capture.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

[edit]

Copyright problem icon Your edit to Draft:Frans Vera has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 20:35, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not create duplicate submissions; this can cause confusion and take up the time of other volunteers. Eagleash (talk) 11:43, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the duplicate was submitted in error. Is there a simple way for me to withdraw it? Masato.harada (talk) 12:45, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The second draft (with a suffix of "2") has been copy-edited more in line with Wikipedia's style and conventions and the earlier one seems to have had come copy-vio content removed and 'revdel'd'. In the circumstances the **** (2) should probably be the one to be deleted. This can be done by adding {{Db-g7}} to the top of the source. This will produce a speedy deletion notice which should be effective within a few hours. I will look at the other draft in respect of which of the copy-edits may be necessary. Eagleash (talk) 13:03, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to have made quite a hash of this. I've now marked (2) for deletion. I hadn't intentionally submitted either the original or (2) as AfCs, because I haven't yet fixed the issues correctly flagged by my last AfC submission. Please don't spend time reviewing it, just reject it back to Draft status. Masato.harada (talk) 15:45, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have fixed the g7 request at the (2) item. It is now in the queue awaiting deletion by an admin. The 'original' Draft:Frans Vera is currently awaiting review. If you do not want it reviewed, you can remove the AFC submission template which is currently the very last line of the source. It can be re-submitted by adding {{subst:submit}} (just the curly brackets and what's within them) to the top of the source when you are ready. Eagleash (talk) 18:03, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Frans Vera (September 14)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nomadicghumakkad was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Please cite all information. Topic seems notable otherwise.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 02:06, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gossip Calypso has been accepted

[edit]
Gossip Calypso, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bkissin (talk) 17:28, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Barnsbury Square has been accepted

[edit]
Barnsbury Square, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 13:26, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Frans Vera has been accepted

[edit]
Frans Vera, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 14:13, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, please advise if any interest in collaborating together in your next article about Islington. Thank you Goodwillgames (talk) 22:11, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hi Masato.harada! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, References in foreign-language Wikipedias, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.


See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Conjuration

[edit]

Hi! I've just closed Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 10#Conjuration: the redirect Conjuration can't be retargeted to Conjuration (disambiguation) because of WP:MALPLACED. What needs to happen is for the disambiguation page to be moved over the primary title. Renaming of pages can occasionally be done as a result of an RfD, but not normally in cases with higher stakes (long-established title, relatively non-obscure article...).

The way to do that is via an RM discussion, see WP:RSPM for how to do that. The argument you're basically making is that there isn't a primary topic for "conjugation". I would support such a move proposal, and in case you don't bring one forward, I'll take care to start one myself at some point next week. – Uanfala (talk) 23:39, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Uanfala. Could you take this over and start the RM discussion? This is all way over my head - I found it hard enough to follow the WP:RfD process for starting a redirects discussion, and I can't make head or tail of WP:MALPLACED! Thanks again.Masato.harada (talk) 07:35, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The point of MALPLACED is that when there is no primary topic for some word or phrase ("Foo") then the corresponding disambiguation page should be title just Foo (and not Foo (disambiguation)).
Yeah, starting an RfD (like with other deletion discussions) has several steps and it's complicated at first (though WP:TWINKLE can save you a lot of time). Requested moves (RMs) are on the contrary pretty simple: you just make a new post on the talk page with {{subst:RM|<proposed new title>|reason=<your reason for the new title >}} and that's it. I've started an RM at Talk:Conjuration (disambiguation)#Requested move 12 March 2022 and you're welcome to take part. – Uanfala (talk) 19:12, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll just take the opportunity to say - Good catch! Starting any of these types of discussion is unnerving the first time you do it; but if you spot what looks like a problem, the important thing is to get the discussion going. You may have been the first person to notice this particular problem, and you were certainly the first to do anything about it. You'll find that very few editors point at you and laugh for getting technicalities wrong. Narky Blert (talk) 19:50, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:The Filmakers Inc.

[edit]

Hello, Masato.harada. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "The Filmakers Inc.".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 06:25, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus, or lack thereof

[edit]

Hi there, how are you? I'm afraid what you referred to as consensus on the talk page isn't consensus at all. You happen to be the only one who voted for the image, while the image that I restored was there on the article for a long time (that should somewhat form consensus; see WP:CON). Anyway, I think that a younger image, where she has the appearance that is often mentioned throughout the article (see the first quote block on "Reception and legacy"). If you disagree, please discuss this on the article's talk page, but there's no consensus for using the one on the article now, which I find quite unflattering. Shahid • Talk2me 10:22, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, if we do not reach agreement between us, I'll take it to WP:RfC. Shahid • Talk2me 10:32, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sybarite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Luxury.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Contested move of Murder in Reverse

[edit]

I just want to let you know that I contest your proposed move of this article and have requested it be reverted due to lack of consensus. Please raise this as a move discussion via WP:RM so that other editors can express an opinion on whether the question mark should be appended to the title. I can understand why you think it should have a question mark in the title based on the title credits, and maybe others would agree if discussed, and if so then that's consensus. I observe that the poster in the infobox doesn't have this and the current title has been without the question mark for many years. Bungle (talk • contribs) 14:14, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alexander Hood, 1st Viscount Bridport (British Army officer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bronte.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of House of Rossetti

[edit]
Notice

The article House of Rossetti has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Original research and unreliable source (a memoir giving the family history "According to the tradition preserved in the family", not a scientific historical or genealogical approach), coats of arms which may or may not belong to a Rossetti family, and where the families may or may not be related to each other... Noble families (and others) always like to trace their origins back as far and as high and mighty as possible, but we need something better to actually make such claims here.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 16:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See my reply on the Talk page. I have no objection. Masato.harada (talk) 16:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

[edit]

<s>[[File:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|alt=Stop icon]] You may be '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]] without further warning''' the next time you [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalize]] Wikipedia, as you did at [[:DeForest Kelley]].</s> <!-- Template:uw-vandalism4 --> - FlightTime (open channel) 16:45, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FlightTime, I am astonished by your actions here. I quite reasonably and in good faith amended the non-encyclopedic 'nearly scored the lead' to 'nearly secured the lead role', and you revert it, accuse me of vandalization and threaten me with being blocked withour further warning. As a long-standing and experienced Wikipedian I am sure you are very well aware that this is not the right way to discuss what to me seems an improvement to the English in this article, nor to escalate a concern. Perhaps you could explain your response? Or has your account been hijacked? I am interested to know what this is all about. Masato.harada (talk) 17:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Late comment) I just came across this while scrolling to the bottom of this page, and would like to say that this definitely merited more of a response (indeed, an apology) from FlightTime than merely crossing out the vandalism warning. The "vandalism" revert (diff) was of an edit that was clearly not vandalism (much less an edit that was clear vandalism). I have further obscured the erroneous warning with <code><nowiki> tags. SilverLocust 💬 23:48, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking the trouble. I'm not sure what that little incident was all about, and was surprised not to get an acknowledgement of a mistake nor an apology, but I can live with it. Masato.harada (talk) 09:50, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Musée des Beaux-Arts de Cambrai moved to draftspace

[edit]

An article you recently created, Musée des Beaux-Arts de Cambrai, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969 TT me 12:01, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Musée des Beaux-Arts de Cambrai has been accepted

[edit]
Musée des Beaux-Arts de Cambrai, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Drmies (talk) 20:47, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Quatermass and the Pit (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Graham.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:37, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Holland Park Circle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shorter title?

[edit]

Hi! You've moved this to here (with a slight hiccup along the way), but I don't understand why. What was wrong with the shorter title? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:55, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I said on the talk page: previously, if you weren't careful with your capitalisation, then searching for 'absence of malice' would take you straight to the legal terminology page and you would never see the film's page. If you concentrated, then the search box's drop down would show two options: 'Absence of Malice' (which was the film) and 'Absence of malice'. (the legal term). It was a mess, and I think is much clearer now. Masato.harada (talk) 08:14, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

[edit]

Information icon Hi Masato.harada! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Music hall that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:42, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shipping container architecture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malcolm Maclean.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Takeshi's Castle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MXC.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Masato.harada. Thank you for your work on Aldroen. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:15, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jane Coker

[edit]

Hi, thanks for your message. I redlinked Jane Coker so that she appears on the list of women who don't have articles, maintained by WP:WikiProject Women in Red. The brief description of her in the alumni list makes it look as if she is potentially notable. Of course an article on her will need references to establish this. Hope that makes sense. You are welcome to remove the redlink, and her entry at all on that list, if you think that is preferable. Best wishes, Tacyarg (talk) 13:13, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

[edit]

Hello, Masato.harada,

If you believe that a category should be renamed or merged or deleted, please make a proposal for this at Categories for Discussion, do not empty a category and assign red link categories to articles (see WP:REDNO). Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 18:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yahgan

[edit]

Please note that articles are not allowed to be left sitting in redlinked categories that don't exist. If you want to take issue with the spelling that a category is currently located at, then you may list it for a renaming discussion through the WP:CFR process — but so long as the category is at Category:Yaghan and not at Category:Yahgan, you are not allowed to presumptively move pages out of the bluelinked category and into the redlinked category before the redlinked category actually exists.

Whether you like the spelling or not, the pages must be left in the category that exists, and cannot be moved to a category that doesn't exist. Again, you're allowed to submit a renaming proposal through the CFR process if you feel strongly that the category should be spelled differently than it is — but until the category does get moved you have to leave content in the category at its existing spelling regardless of whether it's right or wrong, because the pages cannot be left sitting in a category that doesn't exist.

I note as well that you've already been advised of this before, and then reverted pages back into the redlinked category again after being asked to take it to CFR — so note that there may be consequences, possibly right up to the temporary or permanent removal of your editing privileges, if you continue not to follow the rules. Again: if you have an issue with the spelling that the category is located at, we have a process under which you can raise it for discussion, but until that process is followed you cannot move pages into a category that doesn't exist to have pages in it. So your choices are to either list the category for a CFR discussion, or leave it alone. Bearcat (talk) 13:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, Bearcat. I now understand the process. I was confused by the Categories +- tool which appeared at the bottom of my page, which I misunderstood as an easy means to create a new category, followed by confusion with how to reverse my mistake. However, I'm puzzled by your final paragraph, saying I've been advised of this before. Are you referring to the immediately previous message from Liz about Categories, which was a result of my identical mistake made within a minute of the one you refer to? In which case, I think your mention of 'consequences' is a little harsh for a simple error made twice. Or is there another occurrence I have forgotten or missed? I am not aware of being a serial categories offender. Masato.harada (talk) 14:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Editor's Barnstar
Thanks for pointing up the misinformation in Ghosts (play). Well done! Softlavender (talk) 02:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Treaty of Pouilly-le-Fort moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Treaty of Pouilly-le-Fort. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 18:11, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Castle Sinister (1948 film) moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Castle Sinister (1948 film). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Boleyn (talk) 15:23, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Mission: Impossible – Fallout#Production company/Distributor

[edit]

Hi @Masato.harada. The recent discussion about about production company/distributor. Your comments would be appreciated. Regards. 2001:D08:2945:C99:17C2:A74:7897:8BD1 (talk) 03:59, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Big talkpage

[edit]

You may want to consider Help:Archiving (plain and simple). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Joseph Conrad

[edit]

Please explain why you reverted my post - and in doing so not even giving a comment in the edit summary. Plutonium27 (talk) 16:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templating me as being not constructive - and still without giving an explanation as to your reason(s) - is an insult. I am restoring my edit on the talk page and if continue your peremptory and unreasonable behaviour, I shall take this to an admin. Plutonium27 (talk) 16:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, my mistake. I've reverted the changes. Apologies. Masato.harada (talk) 16:34, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Edited, having reviewed and reflected) I see your apology but what I'm owed is an explanation. I ask again: what was so wiki-wrong with my post on Talk: Joseph Conrad that compelled you to revert it without explanation or even an edit summary within 2 hours? And why was my subsequent query responded to (this time within 2 minutes) with a vandalism2 Template warning on my talk page? Your failure to explain or justify is most concerning; absent a satisfactory answer I will take this further. I hate to think of rhose less experienced/younger/ESL being subjected to such an experience. Plutonium27 (talk) 23:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I have already said, it was my mistake. I was reviewing my watchlist under time pressure (which is clearly a bad thing), saw your note about Joseph Conrad having written a preface for a cookery book (which looked superficially facetious), didn't check the reference, thought it was yet another of the dozens of stupid vandalisms I see and correct every day, checked your user page, saw a barnstar for good humour, glanced at your talk page, saw some comments about past unexplained edits, and wrongly concluded there was a history of dubious editing. The timings you observed (2 hours, 2 minutes) were entirely accidental. I was hasty and should have checked everything in more detail. I have said it was an error, I have reverted everything and apologised, and I apologise again now. If there is anything else I can do, let me know. Masato.harada (talk) 09:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A mistake is an act of carelessness, not poor judgment. After all, this was just a post on a talk page asking for opinions. Meanwhile, some of us veterans make a point of leaving on our talkpage all the butthurt comments and precipitate actions we've endured over the years from the novices, the over-eager, the self-righteous, and the judge-first-think-laters; in the hope that such integrity may lead to exploration and not an excuse for summary judgment. And how also naive of me to think that a 2008 Barnstar of Good Humour - from a still active admin - was not a clear signal of malicious intent!
Meanwhile, please do check out Jessie's book which is most unusual for its time, written as it was by one who actually cooked the dishes described when other authors either copied each other or gleaned vague details from their servants. I would like to know what you think. Best, Plutonium27 (talk) 22:38, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Castle Sinister (1948 film) has been accepted

[edit]
Castle Sinister (1948 film), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

~ L 🌸 (talk) 05:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nadia Sibirskaïa

[edit]

I do not understand your complaint about my addition to the article. I would have thought, and indeed still do think, that it was obvious I was adding material from the Nadia Sibirskaïa article in French Wikipedia. And yes, it was in good faith, and in my opinion has greatly improved the article, which had been a stub except for the filmography. Languagehat (talk) 20:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the added material could be verified, then I agree it would be an improvement. However, the French WP article is already flagged for not citing sources, and unverified material should not be included in English WP articles. If you can find trusted sources for the specific, in-line statements in the Biography section (they may be within the general references at the bottom), then please restore the section.
Incidentally, when translating material from a foreign language WP article, you should credit the source article as described in the License requirements section of Help:Translation. Thanks. Masato.harada (talk) 08:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yasujirō Ozu

[edit]

This is not non-existent. Drmies (talk) 13:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Florence Delay
added a link pointing to Calderón de la Barca
Jean-Claude Fourneau
added a link pointing to Amour fou

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:LQ

[edit]

Hi there, for your info, please see [1]. Cheers. - DVdm (talk) 09:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder. However, It wasn't me. It was Denisarona's edit on 21 August 2024 at 07:18. Pip pip. Masato.harada (talk) 10:17, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, you're correct, sorry. Pinging @Denisarona: It was indeed this edit - DVdm (talk) 10:23, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Little Russia

[edit]

Information icon Please do not remove references from article. If you have issues, please discuss them in article talk page, e.g. using the tag {{dubuious}} to mark the questioned statement. --Altenmann >talk 15:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About applying MOS:APOSTROPHE on Apostrophe

[edit]

Greetings, about this change in Apostrophe, I'd like to respectfully object that this part of the article specifically explains the use of a unicode character (the "letter apostrophe") in a non-English language (breton in this case) according to Unicode.org data, which differs from the MOS:APOSTROPHE policy.

MOS:APOSTROPHE itself mentions: "For further treatment of apostrophe usage (possessive, elision, formation of certain plurals, non-English language issues) see the article Apostrophe." (emphase is mine).

The Apostrophe article, by its very topic, ought be the allowed to talk about the uses of apostrophes in other languages that differ from the English Wikipedia policy. Applying the MOS:APOSTROPHE on sections of Apostrophe presenting other forms of Apostrophe, would effectively prevent illustrating topics being discussed.

Otherwise, please bear with the rough analogy, it would be a bit like saying "According to MOS:BLUE policy we chose to use navy blue in this wikipedia, but to find out about other types of blue used elsewhere, see the Blue article". I hope you would agree that in such situation zealously replacing all mentions or illustrations of other types of blue in the Blue article with "navy blue" might be somewhat counterproductive.

I look forward to hearing what you think about this. Have a nice day!

-- FoeNyx (talk) 10:19, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Apologies. I have reversed that change, and also corrected a second occurrence of lang|br|c'h which was overlooked. Thanks. Masato.harada (talk) 11:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Restless Records, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Perfect and Wipers.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EMS VCS 3‎

[edit]

That's two reverts now. Please stop edit-warring. I've already warned your colleague, who is at three reverts. Best off bringing it to the talk page. I've already asked the other person to stop, and to provide better sources - Alison talk 22:40, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm allowed to post a possible source to a talk page

[edit]

It's just vandalism to remove it presumably because you don't like it. WP:INDISCRIMINATE is only about articles. Doug Weller talk 10:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Masato.harada&oldid=1258276111"