User talk:RuneMan3

If anyone would like to comment kindly on any content/subject, feel free to do so! -RuneMan3

Page move

I have reverted your move of Jacob wrestling with an angel to Jacob wrestling with God. This is not an uncontroversial name change, and requires discussion and consensus. If you wish to make such a move, please discuss it at Talk:Jacob wrestling with an angel first. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:22, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh well, different people have different interpretations of Scripture, and this is one of the more ambiguous pieces of it, so I will let this revert stand. Besides, it lists alternative interpretations of the event in the beginning of the article anyway, so shalom, peace. RuneMan3 (talk) 19:29, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't say that I believe your move is wrong, just not uncontroversial, and requires discussion first. So, open a discussion at the talk page and see where the consensus goes. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:22, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

March 2015

Hello, I'm Donner60. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Dome  with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 03:20, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through - in order to show that it is my deletion) because I made a mistake. You did leave an explanation and further explained it on my talk page. I just missed it for some reason. I am sorry about the mistake. Please proceed with your edits. Donner60 (talk) 03:31, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Broken bibliographies

Rune, you've been splitting off a series of articles from Dome. Unfortunately, you are breaking the bibliographies in the process. For example, History of prehistoric and ancient domes has a series of references that all point to a non-existent bibliography section, so none of the references work anymore. You need to create a reference section with a {{reflist}} template and also copy the relevant sources over from the source article, as in this revision. Then, you need to go thru the source article (Dome) and remove any sources from the bibliography that are no longer used. Thanks for editing, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:28, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Your article splits

RuneMan3, in addition to what Oiyarbepsy stated about your article splits, I want to address you with the topic of unnecessarily splitting articles. See what WP:Spinout states about "no need for haste." Ideally, WP:Spinouts should only be created when needed. We should not be unnecessarily forcing our readers to go to more than one article to read about a topic. Judging by this edit (where you asked about the matter at the article talk page), you are being careful when it comes to splitting articles. But I wonder if you are creating unnecessary WP:Stub articles and similar in other cases. Take your move of the Tooth development article, for example, which I noticed last year. I don't think that there was a need to split the content into a Human tooth development and Animal tooth development article. Per WP:MEDMOS#Anatomy, we generally keep the non-human animal content in one article as an "Other animals" section unless the content needs a separate article. This is the case for the other listings at WP:MEDSECTIONS as well. I will ask about the Tooth development split at WP:Anatomy. If you want to comment on it, I ask that you comment on it there to keep the discussion centralized (see WP:TALKCENT). If you want to comment about anything else I stated above, then I ask that you comment here at your talk page to keep the discussion centralized. Flyer22 (talk) 01:24, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liquefaction, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dissolution. 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) 11:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Point of View tag on 'Shift work' article

About the POV tag on the Shift work article [1], can you be more specific as to what's wrong? I was thinking of removing the tag. Willondon (talk) 02:16, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, RuneMan3. 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, RuneMan3. 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)

September 2018

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  21:47, 10 September 2018 (UTC)