Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:

• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• Simplified Manual of Style

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create an account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:

• Create new pages and rename pages
• Edit semi-protected pages
• Upload images
• Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed

If you edit without an account, your IP address (70.51.200.101) is used to identify you instead.

We hope that you choose to become a Wikipedian and create an account. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Happy editing!

Galaxy X (galaxy), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the .
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

George Edward C – Talk – Contributions 14:30, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please check your facts before criticizing the actions of fellow editors. Thank you. —174.141.182.82 (talk) 09:11, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't give context, it's very hard to determine what you meant. I had to review your edit history to find out what you're talking about. That's very bad to make me do so. In any case, you did not follow the WP:RM procedures, and my statement was not meant to be literal, it was figurative. And figuratively, it is perfectly fine. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 03:52, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It’s just good advice in general, really. But yes, your comment on the {{Wider attention}} RM was what provoked it. But I agree—proper procedure would have been to file at WP:RMT from the start, rather than first posting an RM for something that seemed uncontroversial. So if there is a protocol for dealing with an RM that was mistakenly begun when RMT would have been more appropriate, please do tell me what it is for future reference. —174.141.182.82 (talk) 04:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and also, it’s good to keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy—adherence to proper procedure is not a priority. Still, if you can inform me of the proper procedure for correcting something like what had happened here, I’d appreciate it. —174.141.182.82 (talk) 05:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orion (ship), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Disambig-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the .
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

George Edward C – Talk – Contributions 07:18, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ascension (ship), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Disambig-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the .
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

--George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) 13:21, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the speedy discussion to a full discussion at CSD now. Please comment there if you can. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:17, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the headsup -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 11:16, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Cutest Penguin was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at 1770 instead.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/1770 (disambiguation) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the .
• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— CutestPenguin^Hangout 05:42, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! 70.51.200.101, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! — CutestPenguinHangout 05:42, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1770 (disambiguation), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Disambig-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the .
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

—CraigyDavi (T∙C∙@) 15:19, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, for your vote on the Phantom Menace talk page; a ':' usually denotes the subtitle. The subtitles of the Star Wars movies are "Episode X – Subtitle". When I say subtitle following the episode number, I meant "The Phantom Menace, etc.". I realize it is usually manual of style, but the official titles for all except The Force Awakens are written as I have proposed.

Also, an en dash (–) in this case represents the usage of addition. Episode X – Subtitle.

The em dash may also be used, as it is modernly used for description or summary. Which makes sense, since The Phantom Menace is the descriptive of Episode I. Etc.

Anyways, cheers. Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 20:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We can avoid dashwars with the colon. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 08:00, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what is a dashwar? The movies are sold under the format Star Wars(colon here) Episode X (en dash here) Episode Name. So, they should be Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace, Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones, Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith, Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope, Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back, and Star Wars: Episode VI – Return of the Jedi. (Yes, the originals need a move although fanboys on this Wiki have no common sense and say that the most common name is without Star Wars Episode X, which is false. N grams GREATLY disprove that. And n grams provide nothing but reliable published books. Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 20:34, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Hyphen luddites explains the situation on dash wars -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:24, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That page is a joke. (Not really, but metaphorically speaking) It comes off insincere so I don't know how to feel about it. Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 21:46, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, choosing which is the proper dashing causes movewars, which is why I prefer colons -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:29, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We could, instead, just denote the alternate titling with the dash in the introduction. Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 21:31, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If the article page name uses colons, and the intro line uses alternate styling, that'd be fine by me. I'd just prefer the article page name to use colons. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 00:17, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It can be all be solved with my newest discussion I have started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Wars. Take a look, maybe? Cheers. Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 01:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think some of those titles have failed move requests in their past, and all of them have had past move requests, so would all need full-up move requests -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Passer (disambiguation), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Disambig-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the .
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

-- Sam ^Sing! 09:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I made a proposal to dabify Unconventional weapon. The draft text is currently below the redirect for review. Your thoughts would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 February 10#Unconventional weapon. An attempt was made to ping you, but I don't believe IPs can be pinged. --BDD (talk) 16:25, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was already processed before I saw this messgae. Thanks for the headsup tho. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:12, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia is not a social club". Well, some of it is, of course; Hafspajen's talk page, for instance, is quite the social club, and much good for Wikipedia comes out of it--editors bounce ideas off of each other, pages are discussed and articles improved, articles are found on other wikis and translated and brought into the English wiki, images are looked for and found and nominated for FP...all of it in a very friendly banterish collaborative style, and this is how we get Ploughing in the Nivernais (a DYK) and File:Rosa Bonheur - Ploughing in Nevers - Google Art Project.jpg (an FP), and a whole bunch of edits associated with the topic, including the as-yet dramatically short La_Mare_au_Diable. Hafspajen, this reminds me that there's a bunch of related articles that are hard to find; Nivernais links to Nièvre, of course, but that article has only wine to offer (tasty wine, Pouilly-Fumé, but still), not cattle (our famous Charolais cattle, and thanks for doing so much work on Rosa Bonheur earlier, which probably led you to the oxen). Perhaps Xanthomelanoussprog can figure out a smart way to connect all these connected topics, including the Nivernais horse, which needs some work. I see that File:Rosa bonheur horse fair 1835 55.jpg is an FP (thanks Crisco 1492!), though The Horse Fair still needs plenty of work. Perhaps Montanabw can help out--if anyone knows horses, it's her: hey Montana, check out [Nivernais horse]] as well, please!

I'm sorry--I'm turning this into a social network. Anyway, you're right: we shouldn't. Drmies (talk) 20:20, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If there is anything in particular that has to happen at the horse article, post a note there, I have it watchlisted. I will admit it's not on my A-list of to-dos, but if I can't help, I might know who can. Montanabw^(talk) 02:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Horse articles already have a collaborative area, namely WP:EQUINE ; similarly, most articles ahve collaboration areas, called WikiProjects. If one does not exist for the particular topic in question, then perhaps a wikiproject should be created, or the Village Pump may be employed. (Or the Portal's talk page, if an associated portal exists) Membership in a wikiproject would not involve building a social circle by categorizing other people's user talk pages in a category about a single (different) user. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:21, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to your comments at Talk:Queensgate bus station. I hope that it explains the situation. 163.167.125.215 (talk) 14:28, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

replied -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:04, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So you're back on your 70.51 and lost the 71, recycled again?

Thanks for all your help at RfD, I mean it sincerely, I will not always agree with you but I will disagree with you politely!

S. Si Trew (talk) 10:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your reply at RfD for "Happinefs" made me laugh out loud.

Thanks for all your hard work there. I for one appreciate it, but don't say it well: this is an attempt. It is noticed by at least one other editor. Si Trew (talk) 05:17, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and thanks. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:18, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your request at Files for upload! Unfortunately, your request has been declined. The reason is shown on the main FFU page. The request will be archived shortly; if you cannot find it on that page, it will probably be at this month's archive. Regards, TLSuda (talk) 15:25, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your request at Files for upload! Unfortunately, your request has been declined. The reason is shown on the main FFU page. The request will be archived shortly; if you cannot find it on that page, it will probably be at this month's archive. Regards, TLSuda (talk) 15:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your request at Files for upload! Unfortunately, your request has been declined. The reason is shown on the main FFU page. The request will be archived shortly; if you cannot find it on that page, it will probably be at this month's archive. Regards, TLSuda (talk) 12:32, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your request at Files for upload! Unfortunately, your request has been declined. The reason is shown on the main FFU page. The request will be archived shortly; if you cannot find it on that page, it will probably be at this month's archive. Regards, TLSuda (talk) 14:17, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, there is an RM discussion you may be interested in since you have participated in the past:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chairman#Requested_move_22_March_2019

Any input would be appreciated. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:36, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]