Leave your comments here.

You made a perceptive comment about this song a year ago. FWIW - I agree! The Yowser (talk) 08:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite interesting it may be, but is it reliable enough? --TraceyR (talk) 19:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I mean as for as WP is concerned. Does QI name its sources somehow? I'm not sure that saying "QI knows its stuff so it must be OK" is really enough. Have a look at this Guardian story for instance! --TraceyR (talk) 23:06, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cuckoo clock in culture until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:32, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You added a fact about the building stone. Inserting information into an existing sentence can be problematic, regardless of how factual the information may be.

The sentence read as follows: "The cathedral is built New Red Sandstone, like the cathedrals of Carlisle, Lichfield and Worcester."

It now reads: "The cathedral is built of warm-toned Keuper Sandstone, a form of New Red Sandstone, like the cathedrals of Carlisle, Lichfield and Worcester."

The sentence was factual before the addition. Is it still entirely factual, with the addition of the words "warm-toned Keuper Sandstone"? Or are Carlisle, Lichfield and Worcester built of different types of New Red sandstone?

If this is the case (or may be the case) would you please make the addition into a second sentence, detailing Chester specifically.

Amandajm (talk) 01:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited War Music (poem), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guardian (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) 01:00, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have put in a deletion request for List of Dewey Decimal classes as it appears to be a copyright violation. I'm notifying you as you have either made multiple edits to the article in the past year and/or on the talk page for that article and Talk:Dewey Decimal Classification. --Marc Kupper|talk 04:22, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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) 14:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]