User talk:Mauro Lanari

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Mauro Lanari, 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! SabreBD (talk) 15:15, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. When you recently edited Banana republic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vanity Fair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 14:39, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cupio dissolvi

The article Cupio dissolvi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Dictionary definition as per WP:NOTDICDEF

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Not your siblings' deletionist (talk) 07:55, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

August 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at 2012 phenomenon. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 11:10, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Intervengo

Senti, ma con un'altro account puoi sempre entrarci e scrivere oppure sei bloccato pure in questo modo? Nel frattempo nella pagina di it.wikipedia Discussioni template:Cita libro ho aggiunto anche un esempio del template che ho creato appositamente così tutti possono vedere quello che dico subito. Raoli (talk) 02:36, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

2012 phenomenon excessive reversions

Please stop your edit warring. Multiple editors have declined the material WP:BRD - take it to the talk page and discuss, dont edit war and get yourself blocked. -- The Red Pen of Doom 14:25, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Cupio dissolvi

Please see the talk page. This original research, anachronisms and all, is not the way to move forward. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• Please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

On encyclopedias and reliable sources

Hey, Mauro! I just wanted to let you know/remind you about encyclopedias and reliable sources. As it says here, tertiary sources like encyclopedias are good for sourcing broad summaries, but aren't really appropriate for citing details. I think you're good so far, and I think that the reworked section will be a good addition, but as I said on RSN, you'll have to be very careful about things like reliable sources and synthesis, as it's going to be easy to slip into bad habits regarding either of those when writing about such a subject. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:53, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mauro Lanari. You have new messages at Writ Keeper's talk page.
Message added 21:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Don't know if you need one, but just in case. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Your additions to the List of Psychologists

You might want to take a look at a list generated by Legobot on my request: User:Legobot/Psychologists That is a list derived from the categories. Clearly, manually adding each entry is a hopeless task. I am checking if there is a way to merge it in, weeding out some entries there by mistake. Churn and change (talk) 02:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

No way out.

How accurate is the information on this article?

How accurate is the information on this article? I'm not talking about this talk page. I'm talking about the article called "2012 phenomenon". --Fladoodle (talk) 23:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Like any Wikipedia article, it's as accurate as its sources. The reliability of its sources can be determined by their publishers. Serendi^podous 05:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Circular reasoning aka petitio principii.

Like any Wikipedia article, it's as accurate as its sources. The reliability of its sources can be determined by their publishers editors. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 08:17, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Er, no. How well those sources are interpreted can be determined by the editors. Editors had nothing to do with the creation of the sources. Serendi^podous 08:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

"Er, no. How well those sources are interpreted can be determined by the editors". That's enough: sources have not a reliability in themselves, their truthfulness is not self-evident. The paradoxes of the Catch-22, the bootstrapping, the circular reasoning aka petitio principii, the criticism of the impact factor, the Matthew effect: all epistemological problems still unsolved by anyone. Or do you believe to be an exception? Is perhaps Jimbo's motto: "not hesitating, editing without meditating?" Ps: "er", "er", "er": do you need a mouthwash? Sorry for the overlinking. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 11:25, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

You are familiar with the Wikipedia rules on personal attacks, right? Also, the one about Wikipedia not being a discussion forum? Unless you have something constructive to say about how we might go about editing this article, keep your opinions to yourself. Serendi^podous 12:05, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not talking to you, I'm just trying to give an answer epistemologically less indecent to the first user. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 13:15, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Nice work in elaborating AiC's musical style

Appreciate the contributions in musical styles section. Keep up the good work. Bloomgloom talk 16:20, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Strange but true: a discussion in talkpage with an appreciable result in the article. Also thanks to you. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 17:11, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Bro, place your thoughts in the subsection. Bloomgloom talk 07:19, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Adios

What happened to me was not justice by any means. Many of the so called good editors are bias in a very cunning way. Anyway, I might get blocked any moment now. Kudos to your meaningful & valuable contributions. Keep doing those good works mate. If it's possible I hope we'll work again sometime in future. Goodbye as of now. Bloomgloom talk 13:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Metalwayne. A tsunami of crap, this is the whole project of Jimbo. No other words. You are just the latest victim. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 23:04, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I dunno.. someone who consciously socked to avoid a topic ban is far from a "victim" in my eyes. Яehevkor ✉ 23:12, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah,it's hard to have too much sympathy for someone who knowingly broke rules time and time again. No victimizing here. Sergecross73 msg me 23:25, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

That featured article had became bullshit with about 30% of no more updated sources. For the editcounters is fine just the add "dead link": a few seconds and go. Your so-called sockpuppet instead has taken the trouble of the dirty job trying to replace the outdated sources. But in your inverted, perverse and evil meritocracy, he would be not good but bad for your stupid little rules from small children: you stop to look at only your formalisms, not the substance. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 19:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

He didn't get blocked for any of those things, he got blocked for sockpuppetry both times, and the reason he resorted to that is because he was unanimously decided by 8+ people (Technically even he didn't oppose.) that he was constantly edit warring, POV pushing, and even adding homophobic vandalism to articles. Go look up his WP:ANI report if you want to know more about his "noble" efforts. His background isn't as innocent as the few times you've interacted with him... Sergecross73 msg me 19:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

He can continue to edit the article (just not genres) when his well deserved block expires. Яehevkor ✉ 19:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

In my idea of justice is infamous condemn someone and simultaneously take and keep his editorial contributions. If he is detrimental to the project, then you be consistent and revert all his edits. Do ut des, tertium non datur. Otherwise you are exploiters who use people as long as you need them. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 21:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure I follow. No one is exploiting him. He is neither paid nor required to be here. We are all volunteers here. Despite some good edits, he repeatedly ignored warnings and broke the rules. And he's not even banned forever anything, he just has to take a week off. Seems pretty straightforward and fair to me. Sergecross73 msg me 21:14, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

It's also worth noting that after the topic ban he was not blocked and was free (encouraged?) to pursue productive editing beyond genres. He did not do this. Яehevkor ✉ 21:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

"No one is exploiting him. He is neither paid nor required to be here. We are all volunteers here." Here is explained quite well. PS: maybe are you two a pair of Siamese twins forced to intervene always together? Mauro Lanari. --134.255.169.95 (talk) 22:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Apparently, they represent Fez & Michael Kelso respectively here on Wikipedia. :D MetalVayne talk 06:43, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Mauro Lanari; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:59, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Papal conclave, 2013, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cardinal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 14:26, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Seven gifts of the Holy Spirit may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Seven gifts of the Holy Spirit may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:07, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to John Densmore may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:12, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Mosquito

Sure, no problems at all. Happy editing. :) SnapSnap 16:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Sources

Hi Mauro! Thank you for adding a section to Oceanic feeling, but please also add some sources! Lova Falk talk 15:48, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cupio dissolvi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Milieu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:32, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey!

Totally appreciate the thanks dude! Have a nice day!--Shallowmead077 (talk) 13:43, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Language speaks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bühl (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sound City Studios, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pistolero (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:08, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Épuration légale may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• The '''''Épuration légale''''' ([French "legal purge") was the wave of official trials that followed the [[Military_history_of_

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:49, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Dimensions of "Creation of Adam" in the Sistine Chapel

Thanks for looking at this! So does this mean that the Italian, ecc. Romance Wikis are right and (most others?) are wrong?

I think the references could better be at the end, because after all they apply to the size, not just the American units. Also, since this error has now been copied to millions(?!) of other web pages, an online-verifiable reference would really help -- it doesn't matter if it's in English, Italian, or any other European language, if we can see the numbers (preferably in metres, too).

Imaginatorium (talk) 19:09, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Jonah

With regards to your edits to Jonah, the expansion is interesting, but not relevant to that present article. You see, if you are going to include the Matthew reference and an expansion of just how it is that Jonah is a presage of Jesus, then you also have to greatly expand the biblical references and explanations for why Michelangelo selected each and every one of the prophets, and what each prophet had to say about the Christ. There is no room for that, in the context of the present article.

Moreover, Jonah doesn't point at the figure of the Christ in the Last Judgement. His pointing fingers go straight past. In fact, the Last Judgement wasn't planned or even thought of, at that date. What you have written there sounds like Original Research! In order to find out what it was that Jonah was pointing at, you will need to find out what was on the wall before the Last Judgement. From the angle of his fingers, it could have been one of the papal portraits, but I don't know who occupied that position. Was it Julius?

If you look at the page Sistine Chapel, you will find that many of the paintings have monographs. You could write a whole article on the significance of the prophets and sibyls. Amandajm (talk) 02:53, 19 June 2013 (UTC) Amandajm (talk) 02:53, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bernadette Soubirous may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• and Jorge Gonzalez,<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogTknfFnoyI Full movie] on [[YouTube]]].</ref> available in English since 1991 with the title ''Bernadette - The Princess of Lourdes''.<

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:47, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mary Faustina Kowalska may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• and Father Sopocko.{{sfn|Torretto p. 16}}That was the only Divine Mercy painting Faustina saw.{{sfn|Torretto pp. 84-107} It has been discovered that the Face of Jesus on the Image of the Divine
• Kowalska, Faustina. ''[Diary: Divine Mercy in My Soul. The Diary of Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska]]'' 2003 ISBN 1-59614-110-7

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:13, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Valentina Vezzali

C'è un motivo per cui non ti piace il template "commons-inline"? Se esiste va usato, non credi? ;-) --Kasper2006 (talk) 10:57, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Purtroppo da tempo immemore non c'è un MOS per le biografie di sportivi come su it.wiki. Dobbiamo arrangiarci tra noi con un po' di buon senso. Io uso l'inline perché mi sembra più ordinato, ma non ho certo intenzione di fare un edit-war con te, ne tantomeno di andare ad un "dispute". Ergo ti lascio a quota due revert e mi fermo qui, con la mia quasi ventennale esperienza su Wikipedia ormai so che ci sono quelli ostici da convincere e che devono fare per forza come dicono loro. ;-) --Kasper2006 (talk) 11:47, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Ho messo il "bug" è l'hai colto, bravo. ;-) Io non ti avevo detto niente che Template:Commoncat non eseiste, ma semmai c'è {{Commonscat}}. :-P Bando alle ciance non capisco perché dici a me "ostico da convincere" se tu hai fatto due revert (per giunta cambiando uno status quo) ed io uno? :-P --Kasper2006 (talk) 12:17, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Tuttavia quest'ultima cosa che hai detto mi incuriosisce. La foto che vedi la feci con Valentina negli studi di Cologno Monzese nel settembre 2004 all'epoca di una mia partecipazione ad un torneo di Passaparola (io sono di Messina e quello tagliato con lei sono prorio io). C'erano le medaglie di Athens 2004 (Cassina, Trillini, Vezzali, Baldini, Bonomi, Rossi, etc..), più altri personaggi (Franco Causio e Irene Pivetti che erano in squadra con me, la Canalis, la Fontana, etc...), ah c'era Montano, all'epoca non ancora famoso come adesso. C'era anche la mamma della Trillini ed io la "sconcicai" a dovere sulla presunta rivalità con Vale, lei mi confermò...l'odio. Più o meno come anche Elisa Di Francisca e C. nelle interviste recenti. Poi ci fu il suo impegno politico, i figli, gli spot TV. Certo lei è un po' "presuntuosetta"...ma dai con quello che ha vinto. Una leggenda. --Kasper2006 (talk) 13:22, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Yves Congar

Thank you for your interesting reply to the correction on the Yves Congar page. In English, we do not place a hyphen between a first and middle name as that implies a single name (as in Marie-Joseph). I know you commented that is standard in French but you indicated that we do that n English. Your comment is intriguing, so I have contacted the person who writes the site you referenced. In addition, I will check with other native English speakers who have written about Congar in order to determine a correct answer in this matter. Thank you for your input. 75.173.134.1 (talk) 23:05, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mauro Lanari, I saw your kind reply on my talk page, I don't know if you saw my reply to you. It was as follows:

"Hi Mauro Lanari, Thank you! This is a very interesting subject (for me at least). I have been in contact with the gentleman who writes the page at http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bcongar.html. He thinks it might be an error that has spread across many Internet pages. He said that he would be correcting that tomorrow. Elizabth T. Groppe is credited with much of the Encyclopedia Britannica article you mentioned, so I will contact her tomorrow and see what she thinks about the spelling. I wanted to mention that I found Congar's obituary in the New York Times, printed two days after he died. It is at http://www.nytimes.com/1995/06/24/obituaries/yves-congar-french-cardinal-dead-91-vigorous-ecumenist-promoter-laity.html In the 10th paragraph, Congar is referred to as "Yves Marie-Joseph Congar." My feeling is that the article was printed so close to the time of his death as well as pretty close to his time of appointment as a cardinal, that that is the more accurate spelling of his name. Currently, I am reviewing "Yves Congar: Theologian of the Church" a historical monograph edited by Gabriel Flynn to see if his middle name is used anywhere in the text. I can see how using a hyphen between first and middle name may seem confusing since his fellow Dominican, Marie-Dominique Chenu, used Marie-Dominique as his complete first name. So, since it is meant to be one name, Marie-Dominique is rightly hyphenated. I will keep you informed as I learn anything more about punctuation of Congar's first and middle names. Taram (talk) 03:55, 8 July 2013 (UTC)"

Anyway, I have been doing some studying on the subject. In English, when one puts a hyphen between nouns (including proper nouns) that is called a compound noun (or many nouns to create one word. Congar and those who spke about him when he was alive would use just the name Yves as if it is a noun that stands by itself. I also looked at a first English edition of one of his books. There, his name is given as "Yves M.J. Congar." They didn't even use the hyphen between the two middle names (at least in the acronym form). I did find a reprint of an article which he wrote and in that his name is listed as "Yves M.-J. Congar." There, there is an hyphen between the two middle names to create a compound proper noun. I have not been able to find any original works in which there is a hyphen between his first and middle names. Again, I think that is because it would have made all three names into one name as in Marie-Dominique Chenu's name. WOUld you feel comfortable in removing the hyphen between Yves Congar's first and second name at his page with this information? Thank you for your help and kindness in this matter. I am always so terrified that somebody is going to reply in utter anger, hurtfulness, and disgust about me personally. (That run with Qworty was not comfortable.) I will also post this at my talk page in case you would like to reply there. Thank you, again! Taram (talk) 07:38, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

MOS:Ety

Hello. Please note that text in non-Latin scripts (such as Greek, Cyrillic or Chinese) should not be italicized at all [1]. --Omnipaedista (talk) 22:16, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Also note that loanwords or phrases that have been established in English (words such as nous and Arrondissement) do not require italicization. --Omnipaedista (talk) 22:37, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

The "prediction" in this case [2] is clear-cut. That is, if you check the word's etymology and find that it is not a direct loanword then it is certain that italicization is not required. Words like biology and autopoiesis are English words based on classical Greek roots. Also note that some times italics are used in the lead to indicate use–mention distinction. That it why "autopoiesis" was italicized before my last edit. I converted italics to quotation marks to avoid confusion. Regards. --Omnipaedista (talk) 13:44, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

A warning that needs to be used by vicious editors

Stolen from Taram's user page.

Mauro Lanari. --79.2.239.163 (talk) 18:28, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

If I knew how to put a smiley face up on your page, I would!! Thanks! Taram (talk) 07:28, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

And thank you

For your edits on Lightning Bolt too! Looking forward to hearing it. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:54, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Knew I'd find a cite for the punk sound on Mind Your Manners! Thanks for the thanks :D Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:15, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brian Klugman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Director (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:56, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mind Your Manners (Pearl Jam song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 23:05, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Lucifer

Thank you for undoing my edit of last night. It was a bad mistake to think I was editing a talk page, not the article. Esoglou (talk) 07:57, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sándor Ferenczi may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• , Volumes 12-14 }}</ref> and the comfort of its amniotic fluids symbolizes a wish to return to the origin of life,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:59, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Hegel and Process Theology

Hi Mauro Lanari- I certainly don't have a problem with you adding that second reference on the Process Theology page, and have no plans to remove it. But I thought I'd ping you for my own edification, only because I am a bit confused as to what you think it demonstrates. In the footnote you cite, both Lucas and O'Regan make very clear that "process theology" and "Hegelian ontotheology" are different things: "Any relation between 'Process Theology' and 'Hegelian Ontotheology' needs to be argued," i.e. we take for granted that they are different (unrelated) things, but people sometimes confuse them because they both identify as "panentheistic." Have you considered editing the panentheism page? This seems like it would be a better place to make the sort of points that you've been making. Panentheism seems like the real link between Hegel and process thought, not the term "process theology" itself. Best - Joseph Petek (talk) 05:14, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lucifer may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [http://books.google.com/books?id=hKAaJXvUaUoC&pg=651&dq=%22cast+out+of+heaven+as+a+fallen+angel+(a+misinterpretation+of+Is.%22 651]| publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | year=2011 | id=ISBN 0-

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:40, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Intrigue and Love, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page German (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:51, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

ISBN

I think your division of ISBN numbers in these edits needs to be corrected. You seem to have treated -08- as a language group identifier, although for English the language group identifier should be -0- alone (or -1-). You probably know that the language group identifier for the Italian-speaking area is -88-. This may explain why you seem to think that the language group identifier should have two digits. In reality, it can have anything from one to five digits. I cannot myself correct your edit. I could change every -08- to -0-8..., but I don't have at my disposal any indicator of how many of the digits after -0- indicate the registrant element or editore (anything from 2 to 7 digits) and how many indicate the publication element or titolo (the remaining digits until before the check digit or carattere di controllo. Esoglou (talk) 18:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I studied library science (aka bibliotheconomy), but on Pedia I learned that the main rule is to adapt, and it is here, in the articles to which I contributed, which most of the times I have found this type of subdivision. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 18:40, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

I doubt very much that, any time at all, you found Wikipedia articles with the ISBN given as 978-08- ... rather than 978-0-8... Certainly not "most of the time", although I suppose a mistake may have been made sometimes. Esoglou (talk) 18:54, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Pipes in templates

Hey! I saw in this edit that you used the "<nowiki>|</nowiki>" tag to place pipe characters within a template. You may wish to know that "{{!}}" accomplishes the very same thing! Happy editing!!    DKqwerty    03:17, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Heart-Shaped Box, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hachette (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:15, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Post-grunge is NOT Pop Rock, Post-grunge is not called Pop Grunge for a reason

I see you made plenty of edits saying that Post-grunge is a genre of Pop Rock. Post-grunge is NOT, pop rock and has nothing do with it. Really, Post-grunge is a sub-genre of Alternative Rock. Not Pop rock. Post-grunge means, grunge but with a more radio-friendlier term. Post-grunge doesn't add pop elements to it's sound. Post-grunge is not similar to Pop Punk or Glam Metal. Post-grunge is basically Grunge but in a more ready to radio rock. It is not pop because no pop elements was added. If it was, it will be called Pop grunge. User:Thecalling2002 (User:Thecalling2002) 3:22, 30 September 2013 (UTC

• Mauro, you can consider filing an SPI (ask for CheckUser) for this guy and Truthalwaysrules. Drmies (talk) 20:00, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Drmies. But smells like fighting windmills (Cobain, modified). Mauro. --87.20.66.66 (talk) 20:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Una richiesta

Tu sai già che, se non fai "log in", ognuno può vedere da dove contatti Wikipedia. Recentemente hai viaggiato un po'. È forse possibile che andrai un giorno a Loreto? Se sì, vorrei chiederti il favore di vedere se nella Basilica della Santa Casa ci sono ancora quattro lastre di pietra rossa, ognuna con una lunga iscrizione rispettivamente in inglese, nell'inglese seicentesco della Scozia, nel gallese, e nel gaelico d'Irlanda. Dove si trovano? Penso su quattro pilastri di divisione fra la navata centrale e le navate laterali. Il testo presenta in ognuna delle quattro lingue la storia della Santa Casa, che un gesuita del XVII secolo aveva tradotto da un'iscrizione in latino, che allora si trovava dietro l'altare maggiore ma che non c'era quando io ci sono andato alcuni decenni fa. Sarei grato se volessi informarmi sulla situazione attuale. Esoglou (talk) 06:37, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of directorial debuts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Gray (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Sludge metal (Oct 2013)

Hi, please participate in this discussion and help us out. Regards.--Shallowmead077 (talk) 11:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Shallowmead077. But smells like fighting windmills (Cobain, modified. See above). Mauro. --95.247.65.193 (talk) 12:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Chéreau

Ok, yes. What do you think of mentioning it in the text. I could imagine even a 5* expansion, together. The pic is in my personal memories, DYK? (+ here) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, but you know you need to support it with a trusted/reliable source. Do you have it? Mauro --79.23.69.177 (talk) 08:30, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Will start today ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:25, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for expanding the awards! (Only it will take more other prose to count for DYK, did you know?) Could you expand the film and acting parts? (Or he will look like an opera director.) Expanding the lede would also be a good idea ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:42, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Over four hours to transform the IMDb data in that schema. Now I need to rest, hope you can understand and forgive me. Thank so much for your thanks. Mauro. --87.3.63.246 (talk) 17:22, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!! I meant it, the table is admirable! It's too bad that the DYK regulations are as they are, - I only wanted to make sure that you know them ;) - There's material enough for more expansion, don't worry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Gerda, did you mean WP:WIADYK rules? No, I didn't know them. And maybe it was better that way. Mauro. --87.3.63.246 (talk) 00:34, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Mauro, I like the table as it is! (I do tables myself, a lot.) Just for DYK eligibility, only prose counts. You do your part, I do mine, I think we will get "him" to 5* expansion, he deserves to be shown ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Really a great job, Gerda, congratulations. But I have the impression that, apart from the external link at AllRovi, there are no sources that deal with Chéreau as a film director. And this lack is very heavy. Mauro. --95.232.15.206 (talk) 08:28, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Then his article will keep leaning heavily towards opera, - I hope he would have forgiven us. More later today. See my talk for other "business", but I am also off now. 17+k views in the last days, not bad ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

A me (n).

A me (A moi).

Mauro Lanari. --79.23.69.177 (talk) 08:36, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Michael Clayton (film) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/michael_clayton/ |title=Michael Clayton|work=''[[Rotten Tomatoes]]]''| |publisher=[[Flixster]]|accessdate=October 21, 2013}}</ref> At [[Metacritic]] the film received

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Ian Curtis

Hi Mauro Lanari, thank you for your excellent contributions to the Ian Curtis article. I noticed that User:Myxomatosis57 reverted one of your recent edits and I'd hate to see an edit war over this. I completely agree that "punk rock" and "gothic rock" both need to be cited, though so many citations make the article appear 'cluttered' to readers and editors, and this may be Myxomatosis57's concern. May I suggest you tease out the references not needed for Wikipedia:Verifiability? Thanks! Richard Apple (talk) 12:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Richard Apple. I would inform you that the discussion is going on here. You are invited to participate. Mauro. --79.2.239.184 (talk) 12:38, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Scorpion & Frog

Hi Mauro, I looked for a discussion but didn't see one. It's notable and seems able to stand alone. Malke 2010 (talk) 23:20, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Patrice Chéreau

Gatoclass (talk) 13:38, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Finally! Congrats! I tried GA, nothing to lose :) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:12, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Precious

film and philosophy
Thank you for quality collaborative contributions to articles such as Patrice Chéreau and Alice in Chains, The World's End and The Phenomenology of Spirit, aware of Circular reasoning and "Like any Wikipedia article, it's as accurate as its sources", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:10, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

GA won, thanks to you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:50, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 656th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Six years ago, you were recipient no. 656 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Various Authors

The article Various Authors has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Classic WP:DICDEF article. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Various Artists (2nd nomination)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Mnnlaxer (talk) 17:13, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The End (The Doors song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Top Gear. 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) 10:31, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stauros, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Strong. 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) 09:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Changing citation style, removing links

Could you please stop stripping out links in citations, such as Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes? It doesn't serve any purpose, and some people prefer to include links; this is allowed per MOS:LINK. Changing citations needlessly is also against WP:CITEVAR. Thanks. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:00, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Haec ornamenta mea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Locution. 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) 10:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Stranger Things (TV series)

Hi. I noticed that you reverted my edit. What is the problem exactly? you may want to read Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Punctuation_and_footnotes. In Engish, in conrary to some other languages "Any punctuation must precede the ref tags." -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:02, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Mr. Nobody gross

Hi Mauro Lanari. I've removed box office data you added to the article of Mr. Nobody (film) since during past discussions (see talk page) it has emerged that the worldwide gross of the film is not available. Box office performances of most countries in which the film was released are not available (Box Office Mojo is cited in the article but has very little data). The film run elsewhere ([3]), but since worldwide gross is not available, it is described just the domestic box office performance (Belgium and France).--Earthh (talk) 13:11, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Regarding your edits to Zootopia

Search engine results are never reliable. They are just an index of existing sites and not sources in themselves. It is your responsibility to pick an appropriate source.

There's also the problem of WP:SYNTH: you need to find a source that specifically brings up Stapleton's Zooptopia in the context it's effect on or relation to Disney's Zootopia. Also, you are at your third revert (readding is manually reverting). This source, which you pointed to here would be appropriate if it did more than possibly hint at that album. The citation does not establish that Stapleton's album is indeed the album responsible for the name change. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:24, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Daughter of Dr. Jekyll, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lanham. 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) 09:50, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

3RR

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. PeterTheFourth (talk) 06:29, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. PeterTheFourth (talk) 06:50, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited O. Henry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cabbages and Kings. 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) 09:02, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of directorial debuts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Mitchell. 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) 10:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello Mauro

I have just noticed your message to me in the history of the Jungfrauen article. Yes, it should be in italics because it is an insult and not a scholarly category. Not only that, it should not be an article at all. It should be merged as a piece of trivia in the main CG Jung. Whoever wrote it has made more of it than it merits and actually continues insulting women. Anyway, it is no big deal and in my opinion utterly fails on grounds of notability. There are far more important things to write about in relation to Jung and his interesting work. Kind regards, --Po Kadzieli (talk) 00:15, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back to me. I'm afraid I do know quite a bit about this topic, but less about Wiki protocol. What would happen if I merged it in the main Jung article? It is no more than a footnote in the history. I fear that some people would attack the move and I have neither time nor inclination for a ding-dong? Best to you,--Po Kadzieli (talk) 10:09, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

"Wiki protocol"? "Wikiquette"? Don't you know that (also) here on Jimbopedia the law applies to enemies and is being interpreted for friends? Have a nice survival. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 11:44, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mauro Lanari. 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)

Warning

Pitchfork is an online website and has never been a printed magazine. Learn our rules, if Pitchfork appears in italics in the article, it is up to you to rectify this, as this mess was made by you. Woovee (talk) 23:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Bullshit. Mauro Lanari. --82.84.28.243 (talk) 10:30, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Room 237

Hi. Please see this Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Film#External_links. This is how the external links section is formated for Allmovie. If you disagree with this, then please discuss it on the article's talkpage as you are now edit-warring. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 19:42, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

January 2017

Your recent editing history at Room 237 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:44, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 12:10, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Edit warring at Room 237

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Regardless of who turns out to be right about the policy, you must not edit war. A sincere belief that you are correct and following Wikipedia policy does not justify reverts. Most people at the noticeboard think they are right. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 21:23, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

"Laws are applied to enemies, but only interpreted as regards friends" (Giovanni Giolitti). Mauro Lanari --82.84.37.189 (talk) 07:11, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Alpha Alert listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Alpha Alert. Since you had some involvement with the Alpha Alert redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Jimbopedia: a cultural suicide

"Conflicting Wikipedia philosophies"

Game over

--Mauro Lanari (talk) 20:59, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

CinemaScore

Regarding edits like [4] using [5] as source, is there any evidence available to readers that the image is published by CinemaScore or depicts a page published by CinemaScore? It seems better to me to give the official site https://www.cinemascore.com as source. It's a little annoying that they don't appear to have url's directly to the score of a film but you only have to enter the film's name to see the score. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:23, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

The problem is that readers and editors cannot tell from the url whether it's authentic. I suspect any Twitter user could upload a fake image and it would get a similar url. I found the original tweet https://twitter.com/CinemaScore/status/809989503259643904. That would be a better reference. For example using {{Cite tweet}}:

@CinemaScore (December 17, 2016). "@starwars #rogueone Congratulations on your A #CinemaScore grade!" (Tweet) – via Twitter.

It would be even better if CinemaScore had a verified Twitter account [6] with a blue badge like https://twitter.com/RottenTomatoes. Currently you apparently have to find the Twitter link at https://www.cinemascore.com to check it's authentic. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:19, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

I certainly trusted the Twitter account is authentic after I checked it's linked from https://www.cinemascore.com. "verified Twitter account" does not refer to me or Wikipedia but to an account verified by Twitter and marked with a blue badge. That would have optimal so other editors and readers didn't have to wonder whether the account is authentic (which it is). Fake Twitter accounts have been removed from many other articles. I will accept tweets from this account as source for a CinemaScore, but it wouldn't surprise me if other editors prefer to just use https://www.cinemascore.com. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Clement of Alexandria

Hallo Mauro,

I just stumbled upon this website; it has a lot of information on Clement. Again, I'm amazed about Neo-Platonism, theoria, and the apophatic tradition. It sheds unexpected light on Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, and the workings of the mind. Mysticism seems to be closely intertwined with cognition, and the restructuring of coginition. In the Zen-tradition, there is a strong claim that insight comes independent of texts. I've doubted this for years; one needs a framework to make sense of meditative experience. But it's even more fundamental: the texts, the way of thinking c.q. contemplation, shapes and onvokes the "experience". It's not an 'experience of some-"thing"'; it's a change in cognition, actively shaped by theoria. Very interesting. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:14, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Closer (Joy Division album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stephen Morris. 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) 09:47, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

AllMovie in external links

Please don't link directly to reviews in the external links. If you want to include an AllMovie review, add it to the reception. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:38, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

If you continue to edit war over AllMovie-related external links, I will ask for you to be blocked again. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm not linking AllMovie reviews, but aggregated AllMovie ratings: can you tell me where this difference was ever treated? --Mauro Lanari (talk) 23:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mauro Lanari. 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)

Barnstar

		The Music Barnstar
		Thanks for your contributions as of late to the Joy Division-related articles. Observed and appreciated, dude. Keep up the good work, Mauro. Kez.--Kieronoldham (talk) 03:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Closer

This may be intriguing. I/we'll have to look further. Regards.--Kieronoldham (talk) 05:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Donald Davidson (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) 09:13, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Metaphysics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Popper (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:43, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

"Infobox fixes"

Hello Mauro, I observed a few of your recent "Infobox fixes" edits to various The Matrix-related articles. However, I fail to see how these edits are useful, as you are merely replacing {{plainlist}} with {{ubl}}, although their output is equal, only the input is different (* instead of |). Since this appears as a predominantly opinionated edit, and since you are doing it en masse, would you bother explain your reasoning behind them? Cheers! Lordtobi (✉) 10:09, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey again, you can also reply here, no need for edit summaries to substitute that . Anyhow, it appears that TOJ correctly removed the <br /> tag per WP:VLIST and stripped the 'Pictures' from 'Warner Bros.' per WP:COMMONNAME. That they changed plainlist as well is again an opinion matter, although it seems that they wanted to align the template usage (previously, both ubl and plainlist was used). On The Matrix, on the other hand, there was only one template used, so the change did practically nothing. Lordtobi (✉) 10:34, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

And there are also {{flatlist}}, {{hlist}}, and so on. Anyway, my apologies to both of you. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 13:42, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

A Matter of Life and Chess

The film isn't about Alekhine's book, any more than it's about ping pong. Chess just isn't a central part of the plot, like it is with other entries in the category. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:50, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Schelling

Come on, have you ever check francese1 or even portuguese2 versions? The article in english is poor and biased. LuizProta (talk) 02:24, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alexander Alekhine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A Matter of Life and Death (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Trinity, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Bowden and Stephen McKenna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 23:06, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Link to Google Books as a source?

I like that you review my edits on Falsifiability. I wish there was more people active on this article, which needs a bit of work, I feel. I read a bit the rules in WP before changing the references. (Note that I mostly changed references that I had included myself.) In particular, I noticed this suggestion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Links_to_sources. I suspect that we are free to decide amongst us what is the best way. So, I don't want to make a big deal about rules. This suggestion, however, makes a lot of sense to me. I don't like that we pick a particular database, search engine, etc. to source a book, unless it is not accessible elsewhere. This is especially the case for Google Book, because it provides a sample of the pages only - it's worst than other databases. In particular, you removed a reference that existed since a long time ago (which I only edited recently), which was used in the sentence below and you replaced it with a reference to Google book instead:

   In work beginning in the 1930s, Popper gave falsifiability a renewed emphasis as a criterion of empirical statements in science. Popper noticed that two types of statements are of particular value to scientists:

When I click I see that the pages 48-50 are not available. Maybe they were available for you, I don't know. There are many ways to get Logic of Scientific Discovery on the web. In particular, it is archived in https://ia800409.us.archive.org/34/items/PopperLogicScientificDiscovery/popper-logic-scientific-discovery.pdf . Therefore, the suggestion that is given above makes a lot of sense in this case. I want to have your opinion on this and on the suggestion of not using private databases or search engines, in general.

There is one rule that I have seen in Wikipedia in many places. It seems the most important of all the rules: editors need to work together and consensus is more important than most rules. There is a lot of work to do on this article. In particular, the notion of "naive falsifiability" is not well introduced. In Popper's view, there is no such a thing as naive falsifiability. I think that this notion was introduced by Imre Lakatos. In the current paper, it is introduced out of context. I feel most of the content in the article is fine. It is also fine to mention Lakatos's view. In fact, I think we should explain it better. Dominic Mayers (talk) 16:11, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

References

Hi Dominic, I'm sorry for the trouble I gave you. In fact, in my country that link is readable in full. But don't worry: I'm tired of both epistemology and Popper, and I don't think I'll edit anything more about them. Cheers. Mauro --82.84.23.62 (talk) 07:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eschatology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Verisimilitude, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Miller (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Triangle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Congruence of triangles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Monsieur Verdoux, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A Matter of Life and Death (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Edit war warning

Your recent editing history at Simon Baron-Cohen shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog (talk) 08:38, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Notice of discretionary sanctions

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Jytdog (talk) 08:39, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mauro Lanari. 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)

IP contributions

Are 82.84.28.151, 82.84.30.160, 82.84.35.66, and 82.84.17.101 (and possibly more) you? If so, did you mean to sign out? Nardog (talk) 17:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Is original sin in Scripture? listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Is original sin in Scripture?. Since you had some involvement with the Is original sin in Scripture? redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — the Man in Question (in question) 23:58, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Come and See, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dolly (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) 08:08, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Ian Curtis 2019

Hi, following the recent news around Ian Curtis I believe it's not the inscribed memorial stone that has been stolen, but rather the top piece of his grave. The text now makes it appear that the inscribed stone has been stolen yet again. Regards Jake --93.117.253.225 (talk) 14:44, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Don't worry, I think you did a great job of re-editing. Mauro --82.84.30.225 (talk) 19:48, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Siemon Muller

Thanks for the useful updates on the Siemon Muller article. I did some edits on it previously, but that was mostly as an addendum to creating an article on Henry G. Ferguson. Finney1234 (talk) 16:44, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

I had already noticed the article on Ferguson: my compliments, great job (even if the infobox scientist is still missing). On Muller: "you know, it was hard work, but someone had to do it". Mauro --82.84.20.250 (talk) 20:42, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

And thanks for the Ferguson updates; I'll have to look at the changes to see what you did (it's a level of detail in places that I don't focus on). But it looks like it's all improvements :-).

For something completely different, the one other article that I am the primary author of is Harris Isbell. Finney1234 (talk) 03:52, 10 August 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) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Come and See

Hi, Mauro. If you can find a copy (online or otherwise) of this book, you may find at least a few of the outstanding citations for the above article. I cannot find these references online, not within any reputable references anyhow. Best regards,--Kieronoldham (talk) 04:23, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

oops

I thought that was vandalism so I smashed the wrong damn button. Apologies. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Citation formatting

Hi. Regarding your edits here and here you should know that "website" (or "work") is the more appropriate parameter for websites such as Box Office Mojo and The Numbers, per the Template:Cite web documentation, major sources do not require a "publisher" (e.g., adding "CBS Interactive" after "Metacritic" or "IMDb" after "Box Office Mojo"), per WP:CS1. Also, per WP:INFOBOXREF, references are not needed in infoboxes when said references already appear in the body of the article. Thank you. snapsnap ^(talk) 20:37, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi SnapSnap, you should know the long-standing problem of sites that are not written in italics, such as The Numbers, Box Office Mojo, Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, etc. Also, on WP: INFOBOXREF, I would not be wrong but on this issue Lugnuts has an opposite idea to yours, and already once made me block for a day. Wikipedia's policy and guidelines are liable to an infinite hermeneutics, and you super editors interpret them according to your advantage. I just add some content; you all, brighter and cleverer, decide everything else. M. L. -84.223.149.116 (talk) 12:23, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

CFD for neologisms categories

Some of the categories, which you have created or edited are proposed for renaming. You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 October 4 § Neologisms, words and phases introduced in time periods. —⁠andrybak (talk) 01:34, 4 October 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) 01:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Blanking

Stop it with the blanking sprees, especially while logged out. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:09, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Blanking? Sorry: when, where? Mauro Lanari --84.223.141.216 (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

All over the place--what you were doing on Organ language is probably the same kind of thing that NinjaRobotPirate had in mind. It's irritating and disruptive, and it causes work for us, because we have to go and clean up after you. Drmies (talk) 02:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

I am blanking my anonymous changes by myself and only after they have reached a sufficient value of Kb, so I am not "disrupting" anyone else's work and I do not see why this requires the intervention, "irritated" or not, of you admins. M.L. --84.223.141.113 (talk) 04:21, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

You're still doing this after I warned you? Continue doing it and you'll be blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:44, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

What rule of the MoS, of the WP policies or guidelines, would I ever be breaking? Could any of you point it out to me, so I learn something? Thank you very much. --151.43.39.67 (talk) 05:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Seriously? First of all, unexplained blanking is disruptive--and calling it vandalism wouldn't be very wrong. These series of unexplained edits, from an IP and from the account, look weird and confusing, as if a registered editor is undoing vandalism. Adding "expand - in the name and memory of Aaron Swartz" helps no one at all. (And I'll add that "anonymous" here doesn't mean what I think you think it means.) You've been reverted by User:Rdp060707 ([7]), who seemed to wonder what's going on--and you've been reverted by yourself ([8], [9], and many other places--God knows why). And I suppose this is you reverting yourself too? This is a collaborative project, and what you are doing is spreading confusion. And now two highly-paid administrators are having to spend time on your edits. NinjaRobotPirate has already blocked one of the IPs, and I'll block another. But the whole thing is really simple: you should sign in when making edits, you should give sensible explanations of your edits. If you do not, you may be blocked for actively undermining the collaborative nature of this project. Drmies (talk) 15:36, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

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) 00:20, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:36, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

August 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:45, 21 August 2023 (UTC)