User talk:PhantomTech: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edits by 2409:4060:193:DFDA:0:0:1CB:60A4 (talk) (HG) (3.4.10)
Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 59: Line 59:


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png|100px]]
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Blowjob.jpg|100px]]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar'''
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar'''
|-
|-

Revision as of 04:19, 19 July 2022

W&M网络太古仙狐

狐(嚟)_歪(邪、不正_斜) 14.0.152.85 (talk) 13:58, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@14.0.152.85 鄞宏 14.0.152.85 (talk) 13:59, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I don't know Chinese and Google Translate hasn't helped me understand what you're trying to say. I've looked through your global contributions and did not see any recent contributions that might have allowed me to figure out what you're trying to contact me about. Wikipedia:Local Embassy may be helpful. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 20:24, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Charge of the Light Brigade

Hi, you left a message on my talk page about my deletion of the "New Information" section of the Charge of the Light Brigade article. Apologies if I went about this the wrong way; but I did intentionally remove it.

This issue is problematic, because I am not in a position to replace the section, if it in fact deserves to be replaced (having no current access to the appropriate sources). But the section is plain wrong, and really shouldn't be there in its current form. The information which is claimed as "new information" from 2016 has in fact been well-known since 1854. (There is a reference provided to a Sunday Telegraph article, which I can't read since it is behind a paywall. I imagine that this article has been misinterpreted somehow, but cannot tell how.)

This part article stood out to me as obviously wrong when I read the article the other day. On reading the talk page, I saw that the error had been pointed out by user Khamba Tendal in a lengthy post from 2020, which had elicited no response. I judged it best simply to remove the section, and I added a note to the talk page to say that I had done this. (I realize now that I should have written an edit summary referring to the talk page for my reasons.)

I have no stake (or particular interest) in this topic, and will leave it to your judgement whether the section should remain or not. JBritnell (talk) 18:54, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@JBritnell Hi, thank you for this message and for your contributions to Wikipedia, I've restored your changes. Please do use an edit summary in the future, especially when making big changes or removing content that isn't obvious vandalism.
I haven't looked heavily into if the section should be in the article or not but I did see that there does appear to have been an attempt at a discussion on the talk page and that you noted your changes there. While it's possible that another editor might still disagree with the change, my original reason for reverting it was that it was an unexplained removal of apparently cited information and that's no longer an issue as you have very much explained your reason. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 20:15, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My edits

Hi there. The reason I changed the Delaware categories from Northeast to South is because the Census Bureau classifies the state as South, Wiki follows the Census definitions, the maps in the category pages follow the Census definitions, etc. 2603:7080:9D3F:2C32:A8FF:1273:D8C2:7205 (talk) 01:37, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a link please. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 01:39, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/maps-data/maps/reference/us_regdiv.pdf--2603:7080:9D3F:2C32:A8FF:1273:D8C2:7205 (talk) 01:41, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, sorry I'll begin reverting my edits. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 01:43, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

File:Blowjob.jpg The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Just for having to deal with that one dude. FrederalBacon (talk) 05:56, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moving user talk pages

Please the script you use to move user pages to draft space to not also move the talk page to avoid messes like what happened with User talk:E.abhir. Thanks. * Pppery * it has begun... 13:21, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery I think you missed a word in your message but I'm aware of what happened and have already disabled the script until I fix the issue. Out of curiosity, how did you become aware of it? PHANTOMTECH [TALK] 19:35, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did indeed (I meant to say please fix your script), and the answer to how I became aware of it is that I've been running a database query to find all moves of user talk basepages to targets outside of the user talk namespace every day since around 2020. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:41, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info, cool query idea. PHANTOMTECH [TALK] 20:01, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]