User talk:Padgriffin/Archive 2

A kitten for you!

A kitten for you!

SauravKumeriya (talk) 15:08, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Johndvandevert

Thank you for the message, sorry! I will not do that again. Please I am just doing edits like a normal person, I won't do anything you don't want. I apologize! Johndvandevert (talk) 16:55, 31 March 2021 (UTC) John David Vandevert[reply]

@Johndvandevert: Yeah, sorry about that. I didn't see your past edits. I'm a bit rusty with Huggle, heh. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 17:04, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You gave me quite a scare. I didn't appreciate that, I have to be honest. Johndvandevert (talk) 17:09, 31 March 2021 (UTC) John David Vandevert[reply]

Yeah, again, my apologies. We all make mistakes sometimes. That's why the template tells you to come here if you think I made a mistake. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 17:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No biggie! It was nice to meet you though! I hope you are staying healthy!Johndvandevert (talk) 17:16, 31 March 2021 (UTC) John David Vandevert[reply]

Can I add my own research about Husky on the Wiki page or is that a conflict of interest? Johndvandevert (talk) 19:34, 1 April 2021 (UTC) John Vandevert[reply]

Hello. I couldn’t help but notice your change to the jack nicholson page which I have since reverted, because there is indeed a citation, where he clearly mentions “I’m always at odds with my own constituency. I support every president. Period.” If you still don’t read the citation, please do. Salutations! P. S. The citation is 95 - Pudge — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.116.40.129 (talk) 21:32, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:09, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recent changes

Hi,

I noticed you changed my recent edits to the "humanism" page. I'm pretty sure I left a lengthy explanation of why I removed the Confucius section, including a brief survey of the idea explained in the section, since I took a course on Chinese philosophy in school. I used almost the entire allotted length of the explanation bar. I will do it again, and be sure to double check that I leave a substantive explanation, although there must have been some mistake. Also, you removed 3 edits with one stroke, claiming they were not minor edits. Two were not minor edits, but one was a minor edit, in which I added only one word, and I checked the minor edits button only on that one edit.

Thanks.

@DYW2020: Please be reminded that edits have to follow WP:RS and WP:No Original Research. Please cite your edits. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 08:37, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re: April 2021

Hello, you recently reverted an edit I made on the grounds of it not appearing to have been constructive. Could you clarify your reasoning?

The edit in question added a {{Distinguish}} note advising people looking into Protected powers that they may have been looking for the Protectorate page instead, as both pages deal with concepts in international diplomacy with names that are similar enough that they may be confusing (especially when it comes to the related terms "protected state" and "protected power" defined on those pages).

Is that similarity not worth pointing out, or is the issue just that I added the note in the wrong manner? If it is the latter, why revert rather than correct it? And does the note I added on Protectorate have the same issue, or was it intentional to leave one of the notes but revert the other? 2001:9B1:22FF:1A00:B58E:7172:912D:B882 (talk) 10:16, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, same person here but with a different dynamic IP. Since it's been two days since the edit was reverted and you've been actively editing during that time without giving me an answer, I'm left assuming you don't have one but instead reverted the edit by mistake - it happens when using automated tools, no hard feelings. If I'm wrong and you did have a reason to revert the edit, feel free to do it again, but this time please explain why. 2001:9B1:22FF:1A00:99BD:22E3:6D5B:45CA (talk) 13:28, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please add the citations that you have removed

Good afternoon! yesterday only, I took a dreaded and a long process of adding citations in China, Nepal and Pakistan section in foreign relations of India, and now, it is removed. Why?! I'm very much unhappy, because it took me hours doing so, and now it was un done. Please don't do it, and revert back the changes.🙏🙏🙏🙏 And of today's edit, you can keep it un done, but at least re-add the citations. That would be nice. Thank You! Have a good day. Utkarsh555 (talk) 10:48, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Utkarsh555: Sorry, Huggle didn't show me your past edits, so they all got rolled back. Your edits have been restored. Next time, be bold and revert it yourself if you think an edit was in error. Happy editing! Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 10:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you,Thank you SO MUCH!!!!!!🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Next time, I'll keep in mind before doing anything on an article especially Foreign relations of India, because I love that article. Utkarsh555 (talk) 10:56, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 2024 in spaceflight

Hello, I’m Yaya Furaha. I’m sorry that I forgot the reason for giving the edit. My edit is because the information provided by China Space Day shows that Chang'e 7 will be launched before Chang'e 6 in 2023. Again, sorry for bothering you, thank you. Yaya Furaha (talk) 07:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Yaya Furaha: Do you have a source for that? I haven't been able to find any sources that state that Chang'e 7 will be launched before Chang'e 6- both appear to still be scheduled for 2024. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 07:43, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can only get few information about Chang'e-7 from the media, and I get all this information from this Chinese forum: https://9ifly.spacety.com/thread-91684-1-1.html also from this: https://twitter.com/ChinaScience/status/1289003002250981377 Yaya Furaha (talk) 07:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure a forum and Twitter are not considered RSes per WP:USERGENERATED, even if the latter is an official account. You'll need something like a press release to pass WP:GNG. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 08:06, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Minor barnstar
	This was probably a wiser and more easily implemented edit than the one I was going to do. Thanks. I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me if replying off my talk page. Thank you. 08:03, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 08:06, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For your edit on Gibby (singer)!

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Govvy (talk) 13:34, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Raises claws in defeat as he accepts the trouting look, those two buttons are really small and close to each other, okay? Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 13:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, it was just a bit of fun

Govvy (talk) 13:39, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

???

could you be more specific about how what I did wasn't an improvement?

--2602:306:BC74:6240:68A1:E9E3:281E:2B24 (talk) 04:20, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cease editing ask

On April 27 you asked me to cease editing, and demanded a statement regarding compensation for editing, to which I responded on the same day. Since then I have not heard anything, which leads to two questions:

- Am I still asked not to edit?
- Have you reversed the deleting to my November 2019 addition to Optical music recognition?Heinzr99 (talk) 17:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Doing major reverts

You reverted 8 edits to Sennheiser made between 8 October and 15 December 2021. What about my edit, which was the oldest of those reverted and contained only minor and general improvements mainly to the infobox and URLs to using HTTPS, made you think it might be a paid edit? Be careful when doing multi-edit reverts. Zarex (talk) 01:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that- I was mostly attempting to restore the article to a pre-paid edit state, and your edits got caught up in the crossfire. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 08:15, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your position, but in fact there was no crossfire. As I said, my edit (not edits, but one edit) was not between other edits, but the first one that got reverted. So you restored Binksternet's revision that was directly before my single edit. No big deal, but let's be more careful next time. Zarex (talk) 10:40, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]