User talk:Oy

Your comment is inflammatory and uncivil. Do it again and I'll report you. Your edits were revert because the inclusion is irrelevant and not needed. See my comment in it's history if you'd like. Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

There are vacancies in terms under several pres/PMs, to include them all would be overkill, unsightly, congested and un-encyclopedic. The names themselves are linked for a reason. If anyone wants further information, they click it. Including everything obscurely related to someone is against policy. Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:30, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Saying "I would like to call on everyone, whose edits are constantly reverted by this user, to share their remarks here. Thank you.", "Have a nice day full of successful reverts" and extending my (frankly long-winded) comment into "immature, inflammatory, uncivil, impolite, wicked, loathsome and revolting" are EXTREMELY inflammatory and uncivil and you should know that; and I don't take insults lying down. Even though you are editing to the best of your ability, know that nearly all of us are. Forgive me for pulling seniority here, but I've been editing pages for a very long time, a great deal of them being infoboxes and I am well aware of what belongs in them. I don't want you to lie down and just accept what I do, but if you're going to contest it don't leave a comment on my talk with a rude section title and begin it with an even more rude sentence.

I revert a great deal of good faith edits and vandalism, it consumes a very large amount of my time here on the site, as it does many editors. If you bothered to look at what I have reverted, you would see that they are almost always for the best. I don't spend my time here to "destroy" other peoples work, I come here to make sure the articles are encyclopedic and when I see something that doesn't belong in the article, I won't hesitate to remove it so it can stay encyclopedic. It is useful to include that information but rather as prose in the article, not in the infobox, which is meant as a short, quick run-down. Sentences are never to be used in an infobox unless something specifically needs a footnote like on Mahmoud Abbas' page. A vacancy in the president's office is not something that can be hotly contested or is controversial, even if it is under a new state (which you didn't stipulate as your reason for it's inclusion), so it would be best to simply put it in the section themselves (although if you do believe it belongs in the infobox, I suppose it could be made into a footnote.) Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd actually just gotten into a fight with my sister right before I saw this. I understand what you mean, and I'm quite ashamed of how I use edit summaries instead of the talk page invariably leading to an edit war. And no, it wasn't. :) Therequiembellishere (talk) 00:47, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Archives

Please be careful to actually archive material by putting it somewhere else - this edit removed discussions without putting them anywhere else. You may find the information in WP:ARCHIVE useful. Best, Knepflerle (talk) 14:33, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The page was (and is) archived in a proper way. No idea why you may not have found it. Black&White (talk) 15:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the archive you made after my comment is fine, thank you for doing that. As for [1]: people spell my username like that more often than the correct version, so I'm impressed you noticed! Knepflerle (talk) 21:27, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Maybe someone blanked the archive in the meantime... < Black&White > talk 01:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Karkonosze#Poll_II

There has been a new and expanded preferential poll created on Talk:Karkonosze similar to the recent Ireland poll. The votes from the previous poll could unfortunately not be transferred over to the new system and you may need to recast your vote. I apologise for the inconvenience. —what a crazy random happenstance 04:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the information! < Black&White > 21:27, 29 January 2010 (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) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Avast (software company), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Android. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Black&White. 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)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Oy. 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)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Oy. 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)

Disambiguation link notification for May 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sergei Wojciechowski, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page In Memoriam (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) 11:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)