Robert the Devil

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Robert the Devil, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 15:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

William Milward (actor)

Your best starting point is likely to be A biographical dictionary of actors, actresses, musicians, dancers, managers and other stage personnel in London, 1660-1800, Volume 10. ISBN 9780809311309. See Help:Sandbox for more on where to put the new article while you're working on it (and apologies for stumbling into it by accident). Good luck. --Old Moonraker (talk) 17:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

As requested. Let me know if it doesn't work. --Old Moonraker (talk) 16:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Page 260 is not available because this is a preview. That page has much of the information about Milward that I need. Do you know any way of finding a Wikipedian who has a complete copy of this book? Robert 15:05, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Pity. There are just over three pages with, as you say, most of what you would need. --Old Moonraker (talk) 16:15, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I've just checked the Google Book Search page again: there's a blue link at the top left of the page 260 preview, which gives the whole article. --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:23, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

A reply to this question has been posted at WP:RX. JanetteDoe (talk) 19:14, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Control of your account

Hello, please make sure that you have control of your account at all times. This edit does not seem to be in keeping with your regular editing style. Graham87 15:44, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating The Importance of Brevity, Robert the Devil!

Wikipedia editor I dream of horses just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Interesting essay. If only there's a specific essay namespace.

To reply, leave a comment on I dream of horses's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

The Importance of Brevity

Hi. I have moved your guidance essay The Importance of Brevity to the project space at Wikipedia:The Importance of Brevity per Wikipedia:Wikipedia essays. Regards,  GILO   A&E⇑ 01:44, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Quite correct; that was my mistake. Robert (talk) 01:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Help readers to find your articles

Hallo, If you create an article like The Last Command (short story), don't forget that you need to make it possible for a reader to find it. In this case it needed an entry on the disambiguation page at The Last Command (which I've now added); sometimes it needs a "hatnote" on an article, if there isnt a disambiguation page; sometimes it's a matter of creating the disambiguation page. PamD 10:19, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

On brevity

I noticed your essay mentioned above: you might be interested in User:Tony1/Redundancy exercises: removing fluff from your writing. PamD 10:24, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Hell's Gate (novel) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hell's Gate (novel) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hell's Gate (novel) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Joshualouie711^talk 17:00, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

your essay

Hi, recently I started a housekeeping proejct looking over essays. Looks like you started one and then abandoned the effort. If so, please consider listing Wikipedia:The Importance of Brevity at WP:MFD to help clean up. Or if you want to work on it, maybe look for help at one of the project spaces. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:47, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

Thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia and articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke edits, as you did to Catalan number. Readers looking for accurate information will not find them amusing. If you'd like to experiment with editing, please use the sandbox instead, where you are given a certain degree of freedom in what you write. Deacon Vorbis (talk) 02:03, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Migrants around Calais, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English (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) 09:56, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Robert the Devil. 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 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ilya Ponomarev, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Runoff (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) 09:08, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Crunchball 3000 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Crunchball 3000 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crunchball 3000 (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 12:38, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

April 2020

Hello, I'm OcelotCreeper. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Epic Movie have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. OcelotCreeper (talk) 14:55, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello, Robert the Devil! I saw you recently edited a page related to the Green party and green politics. There is a WikiProject that has been formed - WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to the project page and take a look! Thanks for your time.

Me-123567-Me (talk) 22:00, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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) 02:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Your request

I saw your request for a book on your user page. Assuming you still need it, it is available for free (if you sign up for an account) on the Internet Archive here https://archive.org/details/biographicaldict0000high/page/n1/mode/2up. Dracophyllum 08:44, 16 September 2021 (UTC

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Project 2025

“ despite precedent that Congress constraining the actions of future Congresses by legislation is unconstitutional” is placed so it seems to e in the source, is it? Doug Weller talk 19:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

That edit was also marked as minor ("Checking the minor edit box signifies that the current and previous versions differ only superficially (typographical corrections, etc.), in a way that no editor would be expected to regard as disputable.") Doesn't seem minor. Novellasyes (talk) 20:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

That was a mistake. Most of my edits are typographical so checking that box is almost muscle memory. Robert (talk) 23:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Fixed. Robert (talk) 00:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Doug Weller talk 19:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Tom Swift and His Electric Rifle

Hi, I reverted your edit because I don't believe it is supported by the source. The Guardian article contains no suggestions that the book is "now considered racist", only that it is racist.

Also, your edit was marked as minor. As Help:Minor edit states, "Any change that affects the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it concerns a single word."

- Martey (talk) 18:06, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting my misunderstanding about minor edits.

As The Guardian is known for, and established to be, a left-wing newspaper, I think my version is more consistent with NPOV. Robert (talk) 16:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, but I still think there are serious issues with your edit that adding an edit summary does not solve.

First, it's good not to "un-revert" someone's reversion of your edit after they have started a discussion but before consensus has been established. This is especially true when dealing with a contentious section in an article that multiple previous editors (many anonymous) have tried to remove or modify simply because they do not like its content.

Secondly, you can't rely on NPOV as a rationale for making an edit that adds weasel words and (as I stated in my original comment) is not supported by sources. Doing so is original research and subverts NPOV by introducing your own viewpoint into the article. You might think that the Guardian article has a left-wing bias, but the Guardian is considered a reliable source on Wikipedia. It's your responsibility to find a source that supports your assertion that the novel's descriptions are only "now considered racist".

Wikipedia's article on racism suggests that while the acceptability of racism has changed over time, what is considered racism/racist has not. Note that the article on Tom Swift itself has had similar issues (editors wanting to state that content wasn't racist, but being unable to find sources to support their views).

If you disagree with me and think your edit should stand as is, please create a discussion on the article's Talk page so that other editors interested in the page can help us resolve this. Martey (talk) 17:08, 30 August 2024 (UTC)