We do not capitalise prepositions (including "to") in titles of works on Wikipedia per MOS:CT, "official name" or not. Most music platforms generally capitalise prepositions, but this is not grammatically correct on Wikipedia. Please familiarise yourself with MOS:CT and do not move pages like Sing Me to Sleep to the incorrect namespace. Thank you. Ss112 12:23, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks for letting me know. Hayman30 (talk) 14:51, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Ronz. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you.

See also WP:COI in case it might apply. [1] --Ronz (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Walker Tour, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Ronz (talk) 16:09, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days for persistent promotion. 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 ~~~~}}.  Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:30, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems clear from your editing and spamming that you have a conflict of interest when editing article about Alan walker and you must declare it. In particular, if you you work directly or indirectly for him, his management or any associated company, or otherwise are acting on his behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly. Regardless, if you are paid directly or indirectly by any entity associated with Walker, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Hayman30. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Hayman30|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:36, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Walker has no studio albums, and releases of "Faded" as remix EPs should not be listed on discographies; it's debatable they're even EPs. They should be listed on the article for "Faded". Please stop readding this section to Alan Walker discography. Also read WP:DISCOGSTYLE, or see any featured discographies on Wikipedia: We do not include track listings on discographies. Thank you. Ss112 12:59, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Hayman30 (talk) 13:10, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm TheMagnificentist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Marshmello, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Please note that the verifiability policy mandates that unsourced material that has been challenged, such as by a "fact" tag, or by its removal, may not be added back without a reliable, published source being cited for the content, using an inline citation. The cited source must clearly support the material as presented in the article, and the burden is on the person wishing to keep in the disputed material. So if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so, following these requirements! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - TheMagnificentist 13:31, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marshmello could be American but you provided no reliable source to verify the claim. He might not even be Dotcom until it has been confirmed. - TheMagnificentist 13:32, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have found a source, it's on the about page of marshmello's YouTube channel where it says "United States", but I have no idea whether it should be considered as "reliable" or not. Hayman30 (talk) 13:42, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, please see Alone as well, since someone also claimed that Marshmello is an American. Hayman30 (talk) 13:51, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marshmello isn't reliable himself. He said he was Tiesto but everyone knows he isn't. A reliable source like Billboard would have to explicitly confirm Marshmello's identity and country. - TheMagnificentist 14:06, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'd like to inform you that you shouldn't reupload larger version of files as it is always better to have a smaller filesize (refer to WP:NFCC). Hence, in the future, please do not upload large image files, and if you see someone uploading a relatively small size, please do not change it. Thanks! Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 08:13, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thanks for informing me. Hayman30 (talk) 08:33, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me why you reverted my edits? thanks.--Schrödinger's dog (talk) 11:06, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the reasons for the reversion of each of your edits:

• Revision 766181442: A comma was added between "3 December" and "2015", which is unacceptable on Wikipedia. Please familiarize yourself with WP:MOSNUM.
• Revision 766181660: Unnecessary edit.
• Revision 766182335: "-British" was added after "Norwegian" along with an unreliable source. iTunes is definitely not a reliable source for verifying a person's nationality. Please see Talk:Alan Walker (music producer) for more information about Walker's nationality and citizenship.
• Revision 766182705: An irrelevant citation was added after "Alan Walker".

Please don't undo my reversion again without a logical reason. Thank you. Hayman30 (talk) 13:19, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't appreciate being followed for no logical reason. Please find your own articles to edit and stop looking at my contributions. This can be interpreted as Wikihounding, regardless of your intentions. Thank you. Ss112 12:08, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you looked at my contributions basically only to tag articles for unreferenced sections that I did not add (despite the track listings being referenced by sources elsewhere on the page), then you go and add one yourself to a page I had just edited? Righto. Ss112 12:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't have any intentions but yeah, I'm sorry and I'll stop doing that. Hayman30 (talk) 12:18, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you've been struggling with the edits I made on NoCopyrightSounds article. Just tell me if you don't want the statement about NCS achieved 10 million subscribers on their youtube channel to be on NoCopyrightSounds article. Or you should put the right link instead of mine. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnonEditor1 (talk • contribs) 09:27, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You used an archived webpage of NoCopyrightSounds on YouTube as the source, their subscriber count is still at 9,994,557, makes no sense. Hayman30 (talk) 09:36, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Heat The Knocks.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:36, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the track listing is for one song with no alternate versions is completely superfluous and not what the template is designed for.  — Calvin999 12:19, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

South Korean a.k.a K-Pop artists release "mini-albums" which are equivalent to extended plays. Therefore EPs for K-Pop discography can also be referred to as albums ([2] [3] [4] [5]). — Simon (talk) 05:08, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for informing me. Hayman30 (talk) 11:30, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering what WP policy you are quoting when you are making some of these changes? I've seen you post the the EP article, but that is an article, not a policy.

Yes, I am aware that there are times where an EP isn't included in a list, but as example Cam'ron discography - in that list, why would an EP not be a subsection, particularly when Mixtapes, Compilations, and Collaborative are still there.Kellymoat (talk) 14:00, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kellymoat: There isn't a WP policy for that, and I doubt that there'll be one in the future, as it's a debatable topic. I've seen an experienced editor saying this in the edit summary: "EPs are not albums. They may chart on albums charts, but they are distinct from both albums and singles." The line between an EP and an album is blurry sometimes.

Mixtapes are widely considered as albums, and since compilations and collaboratives are also albums, they belong to the album section. EPs are, I'd say, not worth it to be named an album, so they should have their own section. I've seen many discographies on Wikipedia, some of them give EPs their own section, some of them just put them under albums. We really need a policy to distinguish EPs and albums. Hayman30 (talk) 14:25, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alan Walker discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Single. 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) 10:13, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have to ask you a question: Why did you remove GoogleBlog's Chrome Releases from references in Google Chrome Stable and Preview History?! I always use GoogleBlog to keep the releases up to date, and it sounds like you're vandalizing the templates by removing GoogleBlog from References! That kind of vandalism is not allowed! Put GoogleBlog back in References, please! --Angeldeb82 (talk) 15:26, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Angeldeb82: I didn't remove Google Blog sources, I simply changed them to OmahaProxy CSV Viewer as it provides an overview of Chrome releases through all channels and on all platforms.

Please be more careful when you revert others' edits, you removed Beta and Dev channels for iOS when you attempt to reinstate your sources here. Thank you. Hayman30 (talk) 03:00, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have spent a fair deal of time either looking at my contributions or seen me editing around places, but I don't think it's very wise to be copying my edit summaries. I saw your edits to Zara Larsson discography, where you used the summary "Extra ref no longer necessary", which I have never seen another user write besides myself. Other editors may see your copied summaries from me and then see mine either on the same page (the biggest concern) or elsewhere and think that your account is related to mine, or that you may be a sockpuppet of mine, and I don't want to be accused of this. Please word things your own way, and don't use what others regularly write in their summaries for your own. It looks suspicious. You've also done the same with your edit summaries on a plethora of discographies targeting EPs being classified as albums (and using the summary "EPs are unqualified as albums; see Extended play", which I'm pretty sure you also got from me. As much as sockpuppet investigations may use technical means like CheckUser and other sensible determinations of which accounts are related, I think it's better to come up with things in your own words. Ss112 04:24, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: I have nothing to say except your definition for "copying" is pretty wide. Hayman30 (talk) 04:50, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, because as I pointed out, "Extra ref no longer necessary" in that exact combination is not something I have ever seen written as an edit summary on an article besides when I've done it. If you are honestly trying to imply through that one line response that that's something you came up with on your own, given your history of heavily editing on articles I had recently edited, your admission you had followed me, your very early contact with me after creating your account, as well as quoting me (without naming me) to Kellymoat above, you'll excuse me if I find that quite hard to believe. I really don't think I'm levelling too heinous an accusation at you here. You have copied what I've written on page histories before, as I quoted in my first message here. Please stop copying my stock-standard edit summaries regarding references no longer being necessary and what EPs are, because if I'm roped into a sockpuppetry accusation by an editor who's seen you using the same summaries as me on articles you edit that I do, I really won't be too pleased considering you a) could have stopped after receiving the first message and b) you should really word things your own way and decide if the way others edit is really correct for yourself and not assume what they're doing is necessarily 100% correct. Ss112 05:59, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Fine, I just don't understand why it bothers you that much. It's the first time I wrote that (Extra ref no longer necessary), I must confess that I've seen someone (now I know it's you) wrote this before in discographies, and that's why I wrote the exact same thing. I don't think it's that big of a deal though, I'm clearly not a sockpuppet of you. Hayman30 (talk) 07:19, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just explained why it bothers me. I also just explained to you that I find it quite hard to believe when you say "I didn't know it was you who wrote that" when you've contacted me before, seen me editing pages you have and even quoted me to other users. Look, we can sit here and say, "well I know I'm not you" and all, but other users don't know this, and there's little else for them to go on sometimes besides behaviour and editing patterns. People can lie on their user and talk pages, and I've even seen IP addresses I have reverted for vandalism on EDM artists' discographies deliberately copy my edit summaries to try and associate themselves with me to confuse an administrator looking into the issue or divert suspicion away from themselves. Sockpuppetry by users on music articles is quite a common and significant issue, so I really wouldn't put it past somebody to think we are associated. Ss112 07:38, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please be conservative with your use of Template:Unreferenced section. Any more than two or three on an article and you're overtagging, which is widely considered unhelpful nor does it compel editors to go look for sources to back up the material. Users have done this and run into considerable opposition from others, so I'd be wary of doing so yourself. If there is more than one section that needs sources, consider tagging the article for refimprove. Ss112 19:18, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Alright, I'll bear that in mind. Hayman30 (talk) 23:41, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Paint 3D logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:48, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of awards and nominations received by Alan Walker, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Faded. 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) 10:21, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add the "unreferenced" template to articles that include links to websites supporting material in an article. Per the template usage instructions "This template should only be used on articles that have no citations or references at all. Don't add this template to articles that contain even one general reference, parenthetical reference, or citation-containing footnote. A citation is any description of a reliable source that supports any of the article content, even a bare URL. The format of the citation and the name of the section heading are not what determines whether a link or citation is a source" (emphasis original). Thank you, --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:13, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ignite (Alan Walker song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alan Walker. 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) 10:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Apple Music logo.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 19:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Every blog on the internet including MS blog, download tool dism log and file times, and insider preview pages conflict with what you and 175.141.38.1 are putting on the Windows 10 entry.

175.141.38.1 is out right trashing the whole thing.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.196.91.6 (talk) 09:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@88.196.91.6: I have no idea what you're talking about, I just saw you undid a whole bunch of versions by 175.141.38.1 without a valid reason. Please discuss on the article's talk page instead, thank you. Hayman30 (talk) 10:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Back to beautiful.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all the edits you did so far to pages related to Bruno Mars. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 10:33, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MarioSoulTruthFan: Thank you! Hayman30 (talk) 12:22, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited AirPods, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Android. 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, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

15063.250=PC 15063.251=Mobile

Citation has zero mention of PC build.. again.. Media Creation Tool still putting out 15063.250... again

I see you got the entry locked last time someone pointed this out.. You're lucky staff don't actually check citations or verify ANY information..

Per your revert of Raritydash on Memories...Do Not Open, it appears to be the general consensus not to include promotional singles in the infobox, but only full commercial singles. I don't think there's policy either way on it, but pretty much all recent examples I can think of omit promotional singles (Lemonade (Beyoncé album), Walls (Kings of Leon album), I Decided (album), etc.) Ss112 17:43, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: What is that supposed to mean? Promotional singles aren't singles? Hayman30 (talk) 17:50, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

...They are types of singles, they're just not included in the infobox because that is seen as being reserved for commercial singles. I would think that is obvious looking around at any article for a recent album that has had promotional singles released for it. Ss112 17:51, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Man that's confusing. I guess what you mean is we used to do that but now we don't 'cause people somehow appears to have reached a consensus? Hayman30 (talk) 18:00, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I guess somewhere along the line it's been discussed and decided against. I'm not aware of where, though. Ss112 18:02, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 23:47, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Well done. - TheMagnificentist 17:13, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TheMagnificentist: Thank you! Hayman30 (talk) 17:17, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hayman30. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! – Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:09, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted an addition I made to this page. I did not include an external reference because this is popular knowledge for those who know the band. I've now added a reference. I can add others if necessary.

@58.173.41.143: As you said, it is "popular knowledge" only for those who know the band. We cannot assume that everyone who read the page know the band, that's why we need to cite reliable sources. Please familiarize yourself with WP:CS, WP:RS and WP:V in case it might apply. Thank you. Hayman30 (talk) 06:01, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think you meant bizarre insertion of hoaxes somehow involving Filipino celebrities by an obsessed, IP-hopping vandal. It's been a recurring thing on GTA IV-related articles I'm afraid, which led to them being PC'd recently. Blake Gripling (talk) 21:41, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Blakegripling ph: I believe what I saw was a section being added between references and see also, we don't do that usually. I probably meant that there's something wrong with the placement of the section. Hayman30 (talk) 23:28, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I know. At first glance it seemed like a hasty addition, but there's more to it once you look up the references this vandal made. The latter edits account for the protection placed as I mentioned earlier, but if this goes even further, I guess we have no choice but to semi it for a while to further deter any such vandalism. Blake Gripling (talk) 00:34, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Blakegripling ph: There actually isn't a single reference in the edit I reverted, he just wikilinked the "cast". A semi won't be effective, I've seen IP addresses who make nonsense edits coming back after I got a page semi-protected for 2 weeks, they don't want to give up for some reason. Hayman30 (talk) 08:59, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for confusing you, but I was actually referring to the references to Filipino popular culture the IP hopper made, not footnotes as you may have thought. Should've elaborated on that before lol. Blake Gripling (talk) 09:15, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Blakegripling ph: Lol not your fault, I still have no idea what you're talking about, not a native English speaker. Hayman30 (talk) 09:21, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nah it's OK man. That being said we definitely need to keep a close watch on this guy. Blake Gripling (talk) 12:11, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This edition, in case you did not know, if is real benefit to the page, because reduced bytes as it says here. It is beneficial for users, and more in terms of "empty spaces" is about.

One question: What makes your edit if it be «real benefit to the page» and mine not?. Because add «blank spaces» I do not think so.!! --200.89.248.75 (talk) 19:51, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@200.89.248.75: If you actually intended to reduce the size of the page, you wouldn't have changed the line breaks into their XHTML forms. Simply <br> is sufficient, <br /> adds an unnecessary extra space and forward slash. Hayman30 (talk) 00:46, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.54.191.81 (talk) 15:47, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

24 October, 1992 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:205:6103:2C49:0:0:427:E0A1 (talk) 14:22, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hello.

I keep trying to update the Big Lemon Page, I am the Development Manager for the company and our page is hideously out of date.

We have the First Solar powered electric bus in the UK and have updated our fleet, added services etc. I've added photos and it keeps being disallowed.

The changes I have made all legal and correct.

How can I stop them from being reverted to the very out of date material?

Many thanks

Kelly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.168.192 (talk) 14:32, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@79.78.168.192: If you work for the company, it means that you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, and you must declare it. You are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=79.78.168.192|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Hayman30 (talk) 15:53, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hayman30. In the Brexit article, I explained my removal (actually a transfer) of the three ex-PM's views thus: "The ex-PMs' views are not really a "political effect"". Yet you say I offered no explanation. I assume you have simply overlooked my explanation. Please confirm. 86.170.123.57 (talk) 06:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@86.170.123.57:  Re-accepted revision I have re-accepted the revision, didn't see your edit summary in the first place. Hayman30 (talk) 06:40, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. 86.170.123.57 (talk) 06:43, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw that you reverted my contribution to Ek Mulaqat mentioning that it was not constructive. I think I added few references and links from various sources to verify the notability. Can you please elaborate ? Ashutosh1010 (talk) 10:54, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashutosh1010:  Done Hayman30 (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting the non-neutral SPA's edits to the article on the 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt. The same SPA tried to do the same to the article on the 2016–17 Turkish purges. I have placed template message on his/her talk page; please could you do the same if he/she makes further non-neutral edits.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Fabio Capone the author and designer of GEKIDO , what's wrong into adding the correct 'official' facebook page into the external links ? and add my name correctly into the designer slot ?

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.54.77.19 (talk) 14:27, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@151.54.77.19: If you work for the company, you are having a conflict of interest when editing this article, and you must declare it. You are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=151.54.77.19|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Hayman30 (talk) 14:30, 16 May 2017 (UTC)Hayman30 (talk) 15:53, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I didn't know someone else have to fix this missings. I just found there was an empty slot into designer, and it was missing the offcial FB page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.54.77.19 (talk) 14:37, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Faded Restrung.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ℯxplicit 23:55, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Faded Remixes.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ℯxplicit 23:55, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Faded Remixes II.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ℯxplicit 23:55, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Faded Lost Stories Remix.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ℯxplicit 23:55, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Sing Me to Sleep Marshmello Remix.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ℯxplicit 23:59, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Sing Me to Sleep Marshmello Remix by Marshmello.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ℯxplicit 23:59, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Sing Me to Sleep Burak Yeter Remix.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ℯxplicit 23:59, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fuck you Hayman30. sincerely me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sottak (talk • contribs) 14:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fuck you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sottak (talk • contribs) 14:17, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Allow me to take back my previous statement, so in a polite and respectful manner, Fuck You. Twice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sottak (talk • contribs) 14:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the delay. Worked all day and not the brightest one of the bunch evidently lol. What do you need me to help with?Tshane007 (talk) 06:03, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Moffat was born in Irvine, not Kilmarnock. Kilmarnock does not have a hospital. It is an insult to people who play for Ayr United, to be from Kilmarnock which is why someone has put this in the first place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.30.84.180 (talk) 12:04, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DO YOU NOT WANT MY MUFFIN? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LmaoLmaoLmao (talk • contribs) 13:06, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hayman30,

           I forgot to put in the source that I edited about Soma Laishram.It was from a local online news site epoa.net

Sorry, Newbie mistake — Preceding unsigned comment added by AkaSkaHappy99 (talk • contribs) 05:11, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Hayman, I'm responding to your message on my user page regarding the deletion of three new paragraphs to this article. I'm not sure why you would label the material as not cited. I provided several new citations and corresponding references. The last two sentences presently do not have a citation and I can fix that, but I do not see that that warranted deleting all the new, and cited, text that I've just added.Historical Perspective 2 (talk) 12:44, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Historical Perspective 2: Sorry for the revert and warning, Huggle failed to load the page history, the diff I saw was the unsourced paragraph, Sorry again. Hayman30 (talk) 12:55, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

the FBI is coming for you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:9680:1FAA:91AC:2D8C:1945:87E1 (talk) 05:53, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you use the word Kill in this article the FBI and CIA will arrest you Hayman30. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:9680:1FAA:91AC:2D8C:1945:87E1 (talk) 05:56, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Hayman! Thanks for letting me know regarding the not so constructive changes in the page Surbhi Chandna. It's more of a newbie mistake. I've been trying to upload a picture of hers' since a long time but to no avail. I'll be glad if you could help in any way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gajju111 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gajju111: Thanks for writing to me. I noticed that the image you uploaded previously was deleted due to copyright violation. I would suggest you to familiarize yourself with WP:UPIMAGE. You should ensure that image is either owned by yourself or meet the Non-free Content Criteria.

I usually upload images using File Upload Wizard, the steps should be easy enough for newbies. If you are still confused, please drop a message at help desk or Teahouse, thank you. Hayman30 (talk) 16:33, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Faded Restrung.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ℯxplicit 00:51, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I made an error in editing the "Pakistani canadians" page if you could fix that. However, according to Immigration Watch Canada and according to IM Canadain Magazine for Immigration, the Pakistani immigration from each year after 2011, leading up to 2015 has demonstrated the Pakistani population to be above 200,000 people. This when you add 2012-2015 numbers to the current 2011 stat. Please take a look and understand that I added the value of 205,000 based upon this data. Off course though, this doesnt take into account in regards to the Canadian born Pakistanis.

kind regards

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:IOS 11 32-bit iPhone 7 Plus.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:49, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded your image at Commons (with upload history and credit). Your version here is marked for deletion. Images that are in the public domain or do not contain any non-free elements should preferably be uploaded there.–Totie (talk) 16:20, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why you edited this userpage? They did in fact create those articles, as they claim. — Gestrid (talk) 16:32, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gestrid: I'm not sure why you decided to step into this but I'd be glad to answer your question. Those pages I removed from his userpage are apparently created by me, and was originally redirected by him, as you can see here and here, these pages are created by me on top of a redirect. I'm sure at this point you and me can tell the difference between redirecting a page and creating a page. Now at the same time I'm claiming that those page are created by me on my userpage, and the fact that other pages in the same category on his userpage are actually created by him, we're both claiming that those pages are created by ourselves, and I don't want anyone to be confused by this. Editing of other's user page isn't prohibited per WP:NOBAN, and I'm just addressing a significant concern, I don't see any problem with my edits on his userpage, except that I should've asked him beforehand. Now here's a fun fact, he actually created my userpage back in September last year. Hayman30 (talk) 03:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I got involved because their talk page (and, consequentially, their user page) is on my watchlist, so I got an email when you changed it. To quote WP:NOBAN, In general, it is usual to avoid substantially editing another's user and user talk pages other than where it is likely edits are expected and/or will be helpful.. In the case of removal of content from a user's page, many would see that as unhelpful without some sort of prior discussion allowing the change. (Besides, what are the chances that an editor will happen upon you two and ask themselves why those two articles are listed on the different userpage?) I can see the difference between creating an article (written content within a page) and creating a page (the place where the content resides), but it's usually best to just discuss with a user about making a change to their userpage instead of making it with yourself. Also, your edit summary doesn't really explain why you made the edit. It just conveys that you don't agree with that content, but it fails to say why. — Gestrid (talk) 04:10, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gestrid: Well I see that as helpful as it clears the confusion of who actually created those pages and I'm pretty sure he knows what I mean by that nope, but I'm not gonna further elaborate on this, I know my argument is weak. Yes, I should've discussed with him beforehand, as I said. I'd like you to explain what you mean by "Besides, what are the chances that an editor will happen upon you two and ask themselves why those two articles are listed on the different userpage?", I'm not sure I understand that. Hayman30 (talk) 04:47, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You said [W]e're both claiming that those pages are created by ourselves, and I don't want anyone to be confused by this. To that I responded with what you quoted above. What are the chances that someone will see both of your userpages and ask themselves why those two articles (the two you removed) are listed under both userpages? I probably should've said it better the first time. My only excuse was that I was on mobile at the time, and it was a couple minutes before church. — Gestrid (talk) 02:48, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Scared to Be Lonely Acoustic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:00, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, you recently reverted my change on the Clive Peeters page for not being constructive?^[1]

My change was to fix a spelling mistake in one of the sections, where Clive Peeter's name was spelt "Peters" and not "Peeters". I'm pretty sure that's a very constructive change. :P 150.101.209.102 (talk) 05:24, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@150.101.209.102: Whoops! Hayman30 (talk) 05:26, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Pings don't work on IPs. I've also added {{reftalk}}. — Gestrid (talk) 00:00, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Instruction (song), Hayman30!

Wikipedia editor Nick Moyes just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

This article has only passed new page review because it appears to have been written by a notable artist. Normally, it would have been submitted for speedy deletion on the basis of WP:TOOSOON. In future, please don't prematurely submit articles, but wait for notability to have been established. I shall be monitoring this page, and will not gladly submit it for deletion if it fails to meet the required criteria.

To reply, leave a comment on Nick Moyes's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Nick Moyes (talk) 00:01, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello what you doing ? U don't know iub

hi

This iub director, your name ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olbolb (talk • contribs) 06:36, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect the page. 2 reverted. Nvm Tornsado (talk) 07:13, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I am just responding to your comment 'I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Penduline tit— because it did not appear constructive.' I am not sure what you mean by it not appearing to be constructive? This is new research that has just been published on these species? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NinaJayneOH (talk • contribs) 07:36, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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. 2.25.45.179 (talk) 07:50, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the speedy-tag. A7 is not appropriate, as the article describes a ritual in Church. Regards. Lectonar (talk) 13:55, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lectonar: Are there any other appropriate tags for that page or it shouldn't be tagged at all? Hayman30 (talk) 14:00, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think? Have a good look at the available speedy-tags, evaluate the content of the article, is it appropriate for Wikipedia at all, has it context, might it be a content-fork of Baptism, e.g. And: why so eager to get rid of it? Lectonar (talk) 14:03, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hayman30 and Lectonar: I just saw this come up on my watchlist, as I had planned on fixing it later this week: it is definitely a topic that should be included in the encylopedia in some way, and not a content fork. It could be a candidate for merger into Holy water, but you could also likely find sourcing enough for its own article if you had access to an academic library that had enough sources on liturgy (I'm thinking around 1950s print sourcing, but possibly older.) TonyBallioni (talk) 00:21, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You marked Iowa Civil Rights Commission for deletion under section A7. Given that the article for the Sioux City Human Rights Commission states, "The Sioux City Human Rights Commission is a branch of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission," I thought the ICRC would be notable enough for its own separate article.^[1] How do you suggest revising the ICRC article to address the notability issue? Since, I'm new to writing on Wikipedia, I your feedback would be appreciated (and save the time associated with multiple false-starts trying to address the reason for the speedy deletion tag). Thank you. Labdog (talk) 14:32, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Labdog: Don't contest the speedy deletion here, do it on the article's talk page. Click the Contest this speedy deletion button inside the notice. Hayman30 (talk) 14:40, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon! I am press secretary of a member of the Ukrainian parliament - Valery Pisarenko. I created his page on Wikipedia. Correct spelling of his patronymic - Volodymyrovych I fixed it on his page.

But you wrote to me:

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Pysarenko Valeriy Volodimirovich. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Hayman30 (talk) 

Why I can not enter the correct data?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oolesya (talk • contribs) 09:53, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Oolesya: You changed "Volodimirovich" to "Volodymyrovych", which clearly contradicts the page's title "Pysarenko Valeriy Volodimirovich". I can't really see how you're "entering the correct data". Hayman30 (talk) 10:04, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Oolesya and Hayman30: It would seem the difference is a trivial one; Ukrainian uses a variation of the Cyrillic alphabet, and so naturally transliteration varies in style. Linguists differ on whether or not the character "И" is transliterated as "i" or as "y", as it phonetically resembles the short i in words like "big" or the y in words like "myth"; either transliteration is functionally correct but I would contend that Hayman was correct in reverting the edit for the sake of consistency. --Lukeisaacbrown (talk) 09:15, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hayman30, I created a page entitled by "Mahdi Fadaei Mehrabani" who is a writer and professor with lots of writing and prises. there was already a Farsi page for him, and this English one is the English link to it. could you please help to confirm it? thanks and all the best, Wikiposten — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiposten (talk • contribs) 12:40, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for your lines. since i have the proper nastaleeq unicode fonts installed, i want languages that use them to be rendered correctly (eg. persian, dari, urdu, sindhi and many more) … that is about why i changed the code a little bit. but if you prefer a straight line in your articles do go on ;) thanks a lot — Preceding unsigned comment added by 52deb342 (talk • contribs) 14:05, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	For your expansion of various singles' articles (you generally develop these better than most other editors I know), and your tireless reverting of vandalism (some of which are on my watchlist). Good job! Ss112 07:50, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on User talk:LK SUDHISH requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 08:42, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Committed is a stigmatizing term that blames the victims and is no longer used. It is DIED BY or DIED OF suicide. I am a physician who has been working on preventing doc suicide for five years and this is the modern terminology. I also do not understand why you removed Greg Miday. I added him to the list of suicided doctors on the Physician Suicide page. http://www.thedailybeast.com/american-doctors-are-killing-themselves-and-no-one-is-talking-about-it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pamela Wible MD (talk • contribs) 08:58, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamela Wible MD: That's because you added the categories Category:Doctors who have died by suicide and Category:Medical students who have died by suicide, which apparently doesn't exist on Wikipedia currently. Gregory Miday MD was removed since it's unsourced, you should cite a source like what they did with Kathryn Stascavage. Hayman30 (talk) 10:25, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I can´t see why what I put would be untruthful or even biased? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fct1 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fct1: I can't really see how you came up with "the slow government response was obvious". Hayman30 (talk) 14:42, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I added the reference on a neutral way, removing the subjective vie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fct1 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Hayman30, first off, great job on "Instruction" 👍. Though I'm fairly certain Stefflon Don's previous single was "16 Shots", which was released after "Real Ting".--Theo Mandela (talk) 21:09, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Theo Mandela: Interesting. I've checked Apple Music while creating the page, and it seems like both songs were released on May 22 ([6][7]), but "Real Ting" is listed between "Instructions" and "16 Shots" ([8]), so I guess it was released before that. You could definitely change it if you got a better source. Hayman30 (talk) 02:41, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's all good User:Hayman30, the video for "16 Shots" was shown on MTV months after the one for "Real Ting", this is the only reason I thought it came after it. 👍--Theo Mandela (talk) 22:42, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I appreciate your telling me that you reverted my edit on the Grenfell Tower page, and I understand that, given its near total overlap with the Grenfell Tower Fire page it's a canidate for deletion, but I don't fully understand how my edit was not constructive. I'm new to Wikipedia so if I made a mistake I didn't realize I'd appreciate clarification. I changed "has" to "had" for grammatical correctness, the rest of the page was written in the past tense and there was no reason for that sentence to not have been. I separated the 58 missing and presumed dead into the 30 dead 28 presumed dead for greater clarity and precision, and I added the link to London Metro Police as I was aware that page existed, it was referenced, and nowhere else in the page did I see it linked to. I appreciate your clarification, thank you! Lukeisaacbrown (talk)

@Lukeisaacbrown: The tower still has 120 apartments, right? Just because the rest was written in the past tense doesn't necessarily mean the whole article should be written in past tense. We don't need to be too precise when describing the fire as the article is about the tower itself, not the incident. We just need to give a brief description of what happened, people will "automatically" head over to the separate article as it covers this topic in more detail. London Police doesn't need to be linked, I'm sure most readers can understand what it means and won't dive in further. Hayman30 (talk) 08:42, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Hayman30: Well, seeing as how the first line says that the tower "was... a(n) apartment block" I would contend that something that is no longer an apartment block probably cannot actively have apartments, also, undoubtedly many walls were destroyed and few if any of the apartments are or could be functional as apartments at this time. I don't believe that the tower does in fact "still" have 120 apartments. I understand that we don't need to be too precise, but is it harmful to add links and clarify numbers? I for one often go on wild tangents while reading Wikipedia, I wouldn't be surprised to first read about the tower and soon thereafter be reading about London Met PD's special units purely by virtue of the pages along the line having been linked.--Lukeisaacbrown (talk) 08:51, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lukeisaacbrown: I didn't say it's harmful, I said that it's unnecessary. Hayman30 (talk) 08:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Hayman30: I would still say that the link is helpful, there is no good reason not to have the link that I can think of (Wikipedia is not paper), you also didn't refute my argument for the past tense of tower's the possession of apartments, I still think that the tower had the apartments but does not have them as it stands. I'm willing to cede the clarification of the death toll, but I think the link and the change in tense were constructive, and positively so, to the article.--Lukeisaacbrown (talk) 09:14, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lukeisaacbrown: Alright alright, you win. The article won't be here for long anyway. Hayman30 (talk) 09:17, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Hayman30. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Grenfell Tower fire— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Hayman30 (talk) 06:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

ok

Hello Hayman30, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Michimasa Naka, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Also, it is not a good idea to nominate articles for deletion immediately after they are created. It's best to wait at least 10-15 minutes to see if the article creator will improve the article. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. - MrX 11:20, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for patrolling new pages. I have declined the CSD you placed on Secretofpet because it was fully comprehensible English text, not gibberish in any form. Please check out WP:CSD and if you have any questions don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:33, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings User:Hayman30. I am restoring my edit to the Laird page, as it indeed is both constructive and in keeping with standard Wikipedia form. "The Current Situation" is unnecessarily wordy, conveying no more and being unnecessarily idiosyncratic versus the standard form for such sections being labeled simply "Today". Yours, 24.61.220.85 (talk) 11:35, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, dear, but those were only some grammar issues and spacing. But you know better. Thanks Prof.Marlin (talk) 12:11, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hayman30. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Michael Leroy Oberg, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: This article does not meet A7 criteria based on the credible claim of significance that the subject is a distinguished professor. Again, you are tagging article way too quickly. This subject is covered in books and in new sources. Thank you. - MrX 13:10, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Heyyy !! You sended me a message not so long ago about the article 2016 in South Korean music with a made changes, so yes i did and every-time i get too lazy to put a citation ( xD ) i'm going to put one, and just to be sure, you're talking about the A.de debut right ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Similardi (talk • contribs) 13:55, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hayman30. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Asrham Durga Puja, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Please stop tagging articles immediately after they were created. Thank you. - MrX 11:13, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MrX: That article's like completely filled with empty sections. Hayman30 (talk) 11:27, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then it's probable that the editor plans to put something in those sections. You should wait at least 10 minutes, or even a 30 minutes to give them an opportunity to do so. This is not a race. The only times you should immediately nominate an article for deletion is if it is blatant, irredeemable spam or vandalism.- MrX 11:39, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MrX: Alright, I'll try not to tag them right after they're created in future. Thoughts on whether King jpt20 should be tagged? Hayman30 (talk) 11:56, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that should be tagged A7, and possibly G11.- MrX 11:59, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You keep beating me to vandalism with Huggle. :) SuperTurboChampionshipEdition (talk) 13:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello i am jwala mukesh i dont edited wrong things i collected the information in www.nellore.ap.gov.in Jwala Mukesh (talk) 13:54, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I was just adding a comment tag for when the series ends so that when it does end, the comment tag can be removed and the proper end date can be placed. Thank you. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:E471:FB5:DF1E:FF87 (talk) 13:21, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hayman30. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Enkare review, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to magazines. Thank you. - MrX 13:22, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MrX: Thanks, I thought it counts as an organization. Hayman30 (talk) 13:28, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If the article is about the company that publishes the magazine (which may have the same name as the magazine), then yes, it is eleigible for A7. Otherwise, no. I wish that were not the case, but that is what the community has decided.- MrX 13:51, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you create the article at Came Here For Love with the capital "f", then request that it be moved when you could have created it at Came Here for Love to begin with? Ss112 16:16, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: I'm not aware that I'm writing in the incorrect namespace. You probably thought it's because I want to be the "true creator" of the article, since you redirected it first? Hayman30 (talk) 16:25, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what I said or thought, and that's not even the case anyway, as the page history was moved. I'm just saying, as you wrote the text with a lower-case "f", you clearly knew it should have been at Came Here for Love to begin with, so why not create the text there instead of requesting it be moved? Ss112 16:27, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: I just explained to you, I'm not aware of it when I'm creating it. Later I go onto both artists' discographies to link the page, and I realized that I've messed it up. Hayman30 (talk) 16:31, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How were you not aware? It was a conscious choice to click on the then-redirect for Came Here For Love and create your content over the top of it. You surely knew where it was going. Ss112 16:34, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Why would I deliberately create an article in the wrong namespace? It's an accident. Hayman30 (talk) 16:41, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't understand how it occurred. Ss112 16:42, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: I think I might've went on a random site that has the "f" capitalized and copied the entire title and pasted it in the search bar here, then started creating it. Hayman30 (talk) 16:48, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Won't it be better if one of these images is posted in Imagine Dragons's profile pic instead of the old one? Here are the links to some of these new images: http://www.billboard.com/files/media/Imagine-Dragons-press-photo-2016-billboard-1548.jpg http://digitalspyuk.cdnds.net/14/15/1600x800/landscape_music-imagine-dragons.jpg https://images.genius.com/5c8d17623e70864ae52816935bef8e75.592x383x1.jpg http://mmusicmag.com/m/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/No39-imagine-dragons-1.jpg Thanks. MCU Lord (talk) 10:44, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI, but if an author removes a speedy deletion tag by blanking the entire article, you can usually just as well tag it with Template:db-author, rather than restoring the article with the original CSD tag. TimothyJosephWood 15:05, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Timothyjosephwood: Yeah I know, thanks. Hayman30 (talk) 15:05, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Using two IPs to sneak in vandalism at once so that when you revert the one putting the sex image in, you revert to a vandalized version of the page. :/ Gatemansgc (talk) 01:40, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gatemansgc: I did? Could you provide the diffs? Pretty sure they've been around for a while, at least they know how to sign messages. Hayman30 (talk) 01:48, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted to an older revision here[9] after my revert reverted to a page with {{vandalism|date=June 2017}}. There was also the infobox vandalism likely from the same person editing at the same time with their phone here[10] so that when it was reverted, we needed to do more work. Gatemansgc (talk) 01:57, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gatemansgc: Oh well I was reverting to the so-called "last known good version" without the speedy tag, I guess you weren't aware that someone's placing the tag. And FYI, diffs can be presented in wikilinks with the Special: namespace, e.g. Special:Diff/787554745.

Oh, I thought it was the IP on the first one. The second one is definitely being creative due to the infobox vandalism. Thanks for telling me about the diffs thing! Still so much to learn on Wikipedia. I gotta learn this, I wanna be an admin one day. Gatemansgc (talk) 02:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've done nothing wrong! — Preceding unsigned comment added by B. Wishart100 (talk • contribs) 10:55, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete my change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:3908:DC00:780D:572C:D135:521D (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your motive is Not Fair and Biased, rather should have been appreciated for there was very little on ASECNA with so much work in progress, all the information contributed to the "Agency for Aerial Navigation Safety in Africa and Madagascar" was obtained, verified from the website and referenced. This information was not confidential. It is for the benefit of those who would want to know more about ASECNA while posing no risk to the organization. Even with translated information from French to English you will call that a copyright infringement?> — Preceding unsigned comment added by MuxAjax (talk • contribs) 18:10, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MuxAjax: It's not me calling it a copyright infringement, it is a copyright infringement. It seems clear that the paragraphs you added were copied directly from this website, doing this is considered as copyright violation, which is highly prohibited on Wikipedia. It doesn't really matter how much you've contributed to the article, or the point of view of the content, as long as the content you contributed is a copyright infringement, it has to be removed. Copy-and-pasting information directly from the website is not "obtaining information", even if it's referenced. Please spend some time to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially WP:CV, WP:CLOP and WP:PLAG. Thank you. Hayman30 (talk) 23:24, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Officer, am not new to Wikipedia and copyright violations or maybe you look at my account and assume am a newbie. I have many anonymous contributions I have made because I don't do it for the credit or because I need credit for ASECNA's work. You are good at speedy deletion of others contributions too, WHY DON'T YOU GO AHEAD AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE FEW LINES WRITTEN? Please don't write to school me, let it be noted even in your contributions I can quote instances of copyright infringements.MuxAjax (talk) 10:10, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MuxAjax: Please keep calm per WP:CALM, your comment is full of assumption. I deleted your contributions because it's a copyright infringement, I'm not "good at quick speedy deletion others contributions", the article you created is a blatant copyright infringement and should be deleted as soon as possible. I didn't go ahead and contribute to that article since I'm not interested in the topic. No one's schooling you, you're just too mad 'cause I removed all of your copy-and-pasted contributions (and that's a very loose definition of contribution). Feel free to quote instances of copyright infringements in my contributions, I don't understand why you're so mad at this. Hayman30 (talk) 10:21, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HAHAHA, I ain't mad at you or the content removal either...anyways you WIN. I got the knowledge and needed others to have it too. You keep quoting "Please keep calm per WP:CALM" I feel like you are an AI. LOLMuxAjax (talk) 10:47, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hayman 30...grateful for your advice regarding the sandbox--Widmun (talk) 13:17, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hayman 30, I had a message from Yahweh about deleting my page entitled "Mahdi Fadaei Mehrabani". short time ago I had improved the page with some changes. could you please help in saving the page? the link to my received message is this:

http://wiki.crisclara.com/mahdi-fadaei-mehrabani-wiki/#comment-125

thank you in advance, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiposten (talk • contribs) 00:05, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have a problem for the matter. It seems that you always remove the Google Play Store links from both Template:Latest stable software release/Google Chrome and Template:Latest preview software release/Google Chrome, but you never pay attention to the Template:Latest stable software release/Google Chrome for Android section because it still has the Google Play Store link! Aren't you going to remove that too and replace it with the OmahaProxy link? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 02:00, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Angeldeb82: I've changed it, I don't even know that page exists. I don't really understand why you reverted my source change, Play Store shows no build number whatsoever, it just says "varies with device". I know it's a reliable source since it's where the software is officially distributed. However, it doesn't verify those build numbers in the template, which's why it can't serve as a source. The OmahaProxy viewer is maintained by the Chromium team, which is I guess also reliable, and it updates faster than Chrome Blog, we should use it as a primary source. Hayman30 (talk) 04:57, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I understand now. And I thank you. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 14:57, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hayman, I really don't think edit summaries like this are necessary. Don't write snarky things to people when it's not warranted. I only removed the spacing around the title in that heading as a dummy edit to correct my previous summary, not to make the whole page consistent, which I did not stop longer to see. Ss112 06:49, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hi dear Hayman30, I am Wikiposten. I had created the page "Mahdi Fadaei Mehrabani" and once you gave me a good advice and i modified the page. Now, a user (Yahweh) has written me that the page may be deleted. the page is about Prof. Fadaei one of the living Persian philosophers. I added some references to the bibliography of professor Fadaei. if the page needs to further References , please reply again. the link to his page is: http://wiki.crisclara.com/mahdi-fadaei-mehrabani-wiki/ thanks a lot, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiposten (talk • contribs) 11:55, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hi dear MrX, I am Wikiposten. sorry for my writting the message in your main page. I had created the page "Mahdi Fadaei Mehrabani" and once you gave me a good advice and i modified the page. Now, a user (Yahweh) has written me that the page may be deleted. the page is about Prof. Fadaei one of the living Persian philosophers. I added some references to the bibliography of professor Fadaei. if the page needs to further References , please reply again. the link to his page is: http://wiki.crisclara.com/mahdi-fadaei-mehrabani-wiki/ thanks a lot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiposten (talk • contribs) 12:05, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi im TTTEFan2017 I want you to tell Spshu to stop overriding my edits because my edits are true he just thinks Im causing vandalism It's a free country and he should appreciate it not overriding it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TTTEFan2017 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Spshu: Why am I involved. Hayman30 (talk) 09:23, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Except for your message on his talk page, I have no idea. I could not even pin down what article his complaint is about. Apparently, it is about HIT Entertainment as I removed the unsourced prior name of "HIT Communications" that he added and remove duplicate original name in the ibox. You are involve as this message is supposedly enough for TTTEFan2017 to consider my removals as improper "Sorry Spshu you should accept our edits i talked to another user to not override edits." Spshu (talk) 13:12, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]