User talk:LayfonCSR

Welcome!

Hello, LayfonCSR, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! —dima ^/sb.tk/ 21:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the links, I'm sure they'll be very insightful =)Vejet (talk) 01:52, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blood+[edit]

Neither the article nor section needs a minute break down of every way chiropterans can die. The primary method for killing them in the series is through the use of the blood of a queen, particularly higher level ones. Further, the section, again, does not say they are immortal, only that they are difficult to kill. Also, keep in mind the Schiff were created from Diva's blood for the purpose of being able to kill chiropterans, so it is not the same as if a human attempted it. The section is already overly detailed, as is. Please also remember to observe [{WP:BRD]]. If you add new material to an article and it is questioned, it is better to actually discuss it either on user talk or on the article talk rather than just continuing to add it over and over. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from List of tallest buildings in Toronto. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Island Monkey ^{talk the talk} 17:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A cupcake for you![edit]

Please enjoy this cupcake with my best wishes Tonywalton ^Talk 23:07, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

=

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Vejet. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, LayfonCSR. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, LayfonCSR. 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]

Infobox RfC[edit]

I'm proposing a redesign containing visual, technical and other improvements to {{Infobox radio station}} and {{Infobox broadcast}}. The discussion is located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Radio Stations/2020 infobox redesign proposal. As an editor active in editing radio and/or TV station articles, or in recent changes to the templates in question, I wanted to make you aware of this proposal and kindly ask for your feedback. Raymie (t • c) 05:29, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020[edit]

Hello, I'm Robynthehode. Your recent edit(s) to the page List of tallest structures appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been removed for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Robynthehode (talk) 20:54, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Robynthehode: Fair enough. There are discussions that the actually height of the structure is to be in the 1300 m range or perhaps beyond that but finding a reliable source confirming such is difficult. It seems the developer has done this intentionally so as to not be upstaged by any future developments in their desire to become the world tallest tower & structure.LayfonCSR (talk) 21:53, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Robynthehode. Your recent edit(s) to the page List of tallest freestanding structures appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been removed for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Robynthehode (talk) 20:57, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Robynthehode: Incorrect. "For all structures the pinnacle height is given". This is stated very clearly at the very top of the list. Various examples including; Willis Tower, One World Trade Center, John Hancock Center, Empire State Building and numerous others. Please read the article description thoroughly before making unnecessary edits.LayfonCSR (talk) 21:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have checked article criteria again and it is confusing. Pinnacle (the link is to an article on pinnacles) is an architectural feature on a building and therefore should be equivalent to 'architectural height' as is used by the most reliable source - CTBUH. However many of the structures in the list show height to tip (also used by CTBUH) which includes antenna and other temporary or removable features. It would be good to clarify this in the article as 'pinnacle' adds to the confusion about the total height of any structure. My preference is to use the architectural height as this is used by most articles in Wikipedia. Having different criteria for different lists is confusing for the lay reader. Robynthehode (talk) 21:20, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Robynthehode: Undoubtedly it can be confusing for the reader to see differing figures for the same building on varying articles, unfortunately as I'm sure you know the CTBUH themselves have set three separate criteria when it comes to measuring heights; https://www.ctbuh.org/resource/height. When it comes to measuring building heights I suppose most would probably agree that using architectural height is preferred standard. However lists of the tallest structures includes structures such as communication tower. The architectural height of most towers is not known or listed, instead these structures have typically been measured to their tip which is the pinnacle height of the structure eg; http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=21. I assume pinnacle heights was chosen for this list because it maintains a consistent and fair standard when comparing structures as the pinnacle heights of both towers and buildings are known.LayfonCSR (talk) 21:38, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article that prompted this discussion, on reflection, should state both architectural and tip height. I agree with you that some structures are measured to the tip because of the nature of the structure - communication towers being one. My comment above also illustrated the fact that pinnacle height is the same as architectural according to the linked article for the meaning of pinnacle as is mentioned at the top of the article. So that needs sorting out. Skyscraper page is not a reliable source as it is user generated, so we shouldn't be using it as a go to source WP:UGC. Robynthehode (talk) 22:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]

Hello, LayfonCSR

Thank you for creating WCPO TV Tower.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work. A photo would be really cool.

@North8000:Tired to find one for this tower but no luck yet and unfortunately I'm not local to the area. I'll keep looking though and I've added images to some of the other pages I've been working on.LayfonCSR (talk) 02:04, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 19:43, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]

Hello, LayfonCSR

Thank you for creating Landmark Tower Company.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work. Regarding wp:notability, this article is sort of three topics in one, (McGinnis, the company, and the tower style) which could raise questions on what the wp:notable topic is. But IMO it is probably best and overall notable as-is. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 12:41, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000:Thanks! True the article does make note of multiple topics. I thought about making a seperate one for the tower design itself but wasn't sure whether it was notable enough and if split into multiple topics they would each be stubs whereas all in one it makes for a more substantive article. But I'm always open to suggestions either way.LayfonCSR (talk) 01:52, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@LayfonCSR:My personal opinion is that the way you did it is the best way. And that the best thing for me to do was pass it but make that sidebar note. Happy editing! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:14, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of tallest industrial buildings moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, List of tallest industrial buildings, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) 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. Mccapra (talk) 03:26, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All the items on the list have their own wikipedia pages which are easily accessible by clicking on the individual items and they are properly source within each and everyone of those pages. Is it not redundant to add references on a simple listing page? Not to mention the double standard here. For instance why are the no links next to any of the individual items on the List of tallest buildings and structures? Or for that matter almost any of the buildings on the List of tallest buildings. Should we consider these pages to be largely unsourced as well then? Out of a total of 73 items on that list only 2 of them have citations. What's the difference between those 2 items and the 71 others on the list? Those two items do not have their own wikipedia pages. So please explain this inherent contraction; why this standard, which is commonly employed throughout wikipedia, does not apply to the List of tallest industrial buildings?LayfonCSR (talk) 05:22, 21 August 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) 01:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About Draft:List of tallest industrial buildings[edit]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Draft:List of tallest industrial buildings a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Tallest industrial buildings. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Zoozaz1 talk 22:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Tallest industrial buildings has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Copy of Draft:List of tallest industrial buildings that still needs to be improved; in short, no references state that these buildings are the tallest.

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. Zoozaz1 talk 22:52, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you didn't check the references because it is clearly specified in the very first one that it is the tallest industrial building in the world.LayfonCSR (talk) 08:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

'List of famous transmission sites'[edit]

I see you have added a link to 'List of famous transmission sites' to various articles. I have changed this on a number of these because there is no such article as 'List of famous transmission sites'. Instead the actual linked article is 'List of transmission sites'. 'Famous' should not be used in relation to this article and I have changed the descriptive intro of the article to 'notable' sites. Please change any other pages you have edited to the correct article title. Thanks. Robynthehode (talk) 07:07, 6 January 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) 00:11, 23 November 2021 (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) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Torre Bruxelas[edit]

Hello, LayfonCSR. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Torre Bruxelas, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Torre Bruxelas[edit]

Hello, LayfonCSR. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Torre Bruxelas".

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. When 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!} 16:11, 10 January 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) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]