User talk:Headbomb/Archives/2014/July
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Because you commented at this discussion, I would appreciate your views at this RfC on the larger issue of DOI templates. Thanks! -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chemical laser, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TRW. 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) 08:56, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Charm page
Someone was erasing the Charm page as I was reading and referencing it. Not cool! Can you fix it. Especially when I got to Anticharm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.25.11 (talk) 22:47, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Refs over one line or many
Most people prefer them over one line. Thus can you revert your edits here please [1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:40, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- You seem to do this alot. Do you have consensus for this? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:44, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Not sure what exactly you mean by "having consensus". I just do it like that because it makes the references much easier to parse, edit, and verify. Switch to single-line if you want, but reverting means undoing the changes I made, which go well-beyond single-line vs. multi-line. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:46, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- So consensus for medical article is over one line. Thus would appreciate it if you put them back to one line. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:56, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Not sure what exactly you mean by "having consensus". I just do it like that because it makes the references much easier to parse, edit, and verify. Switch to single-line if you want, but reverting means undoing the changes I made, which go well-beyond single-line vs. multi-line. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:46, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- You seem to do this alot. Do you have consensus for this? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:44, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Endometrial cancer
Hey there, I tried to keep your content fixes while leaving the format. I think it's stupid that WP forces editors to manage refs in the content in the first place, and it's just an added unnecessary annoyance when editors have difference format preferences. If I fix refs again I will put the spaces back next to the | bars like I saw you do. Thanks for your edits. Zad68 03:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Barnstar of Diligence |
| Thanks for the great work on David Malet Armstrong! —Tom Morris (talk) 08:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC) |
1976 Canary Island UFO Article on AFD
Please join the discussion about the fate of this article.98.174.223.41 (talk) 20:45, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Greetings! If you have an opportunity, could you take a look the "Article alerts" for WikiProject Miley Cyrus? I know that there is some Miley-related content that has been nominated for GA, but they are not showing up on the "Article alerts" subhead for her WikiProject. This makes me think that perhaps I messed up when I created all of the subpages for the project, but I'd like to have some more experienced eyes take a peek and see if there is actually an issue. Regards, WikiRedactor (talk) 18:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
- @WikiRedactor: You don't seem to have subscribed to the alerts. See Wikipedia:Article alerts/Subscribing for details. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:15, 31 July 2014 (UTC)