Hello from me to me!! Jonwurl (talk) 20:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-I change the category as you had suggested. Do you have information that he lived in the town of Dewey in Portage County that you could added to the article? The early history of Wisconsin is fascinating and I like to start articles about the early territorial and state legislators. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 00:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I came across this link:Dubay-thanks-RFD (talk) 01:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the comment.RFD (talk) 20:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-I statrted an article about Andrew Jackson Turner. Feel free to add to the article, etc. I started the article because there has been many articles about Wisconsin legislators being started. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 15:50, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-An article about about [[John Ha==Disambiguation link notification for February 15==

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Walter D. McIndoe, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Republican Party and Whig (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.

Thanks. McCord has been on my to do list for a while (I have been slowly working through Arizona's territorial governors and some of the state governors). Your image is what gave me the push to complete the work I had already started. --Allen3 ^talk 01:19, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Much thanks! --Orange Mike | Talk 18:42, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lafayette Bunnell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Metis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	Happy New Year!
	Hello LaurentianShield: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 09:28, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply] Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

I noticed—and appreciated—your attempt to introduce ideas of common sense and context into the the recent Abby Martin AfD discussion. I also noticed that the AfD had been relisted twice while 'keep' was the majority view and then it swung to 'delete' and then closed swiftly after you began to introduce counter arguments.

I happened to look into it after seeing Abby Martin mention during a recent 'Breaking The Set' episode that the article about her had been deleted again. On a personal level, she was mostly laughing it off with a roll of the eyes and a 'whattevah' attitude but did take a moment to point out that it was worth giving consideration to how it reflected on Wikipedia's editorial policy/stance in general.

My personal experience has been that mentioning ideas of 'common sense' and 'context' tends to fall on deaf ears these days in en:Wikipedia land. I rarely, if ever, see such even responded to directly—side stepping to obtuse repetitive wikilawyering tends to be the norm in my experience. With much regurgitating of acronyms. To the extent that I'm wondering if it might be worthwhile to instigate proceeding to formally remove WP:Ignore All Rules from the WP:Five Pillars so as to bring de jure in line with de facto. Along with other instances where open consideration of context is mentioned within specific statutes ... err ... guidelines*. I imagine at the very least it might open up room for some healthy debate and illuminate present practice.

[*Funny that 'statute' was the term which came naturally ... intuitive recognition that WP:Wikilawyering has become the norm perhaps.]

Well, a 'thank you' note seems to have blossomed into a bit of a rant ... Pardon me, LaurentianShield, — incidently, I looked up 'laurentian shield'; was anticipating perhaps medieval chivalry or heraldry rather than geology/geography — anyway, I noticed timeline details while glancing back at the AfD page to link it and it kinda' 'got my goat' and then was 'off to the races'. I do appreciate your effort to calmly address ideas of encyclopedic value as a counterpoint to talk of the encyclopedia's formal standards.

Thanks for trying,

--Kevjonesin (talk) 23:50, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am a daughter of Charles Passel and my sisters and I are curious about how you became aware of this information and why you decided to post an article.71.144.19.194 (talk) 17:38, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found out about Passel via Paul Siple, and I found out about Siple via an interest I had in Carl Eklund. When I looked up who Siple was in Wikipedia, I noticed there was no article on Passel so decided to research the information to at least get a basic article written. I do that fairly often, that when I run across someone who has no article I stop and write one, because I figure if I want to know, eventually someone else will also. LaurentianShield (talk) 00:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you67.11.38.33 (talk) 20:59, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment over at Draft talk:Abby Martin#Requested move 04 March 2014. Viriditas (talk) 02:19, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I notice we share an interest in 19th-century Wisconsin biographies. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC) (in the computer lab on the first floor of the Union, rather than at Pantherfest)[reply]

I live in California now, but am a UWM graduate (engineering). My interest is not 19th century biographies per se but I tend to follow certain threads of interest that lead me to dig up "stories" that I think should be told. For whatever reason Wikipedians focus so much on political figures (end even then often merely superficially) and leave out others who affected history in significant ways, like Daniel Whitney who co-founded Green Bay, and John Stevens, who invented the flour roller mill.LaurentianShield (talk) 15:52, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LaurentianShield. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

HazelAB (talk) 19:46, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LaurentianShield,

You should have full access to Newspapers.com now. HazelAB (talk) 16:39, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-I like the article about Publius Virgilius Lawson. However, Publius Lawson served briefly in the Wisconsin Assembly in 1918 and then declined reelection. I added information about this in the article. His term was very brief for there was no biographical sketches in the Wisconsin Blue Book; the 2007 Wisconsin Legislators roster listed Publius Lawson as serving in the Wisconsin Assembly for 1917. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 21:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tony Evers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Benson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There have recently been a lot of "notable people" added to the regiment. At least Davis is really notable. I think they should ALL have references. You might consider adding your info to the Jefferson Davis page. Thanks for the fix.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 17:58, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Anderson (Civil War), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black Hawk. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you disagree with the nomination, discuss it at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jonwurl/LafayetteBunnellDraft rather than removing the template. As noted, there already exists Lafayette Bunnell. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:59, 23 October 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) 17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:PaulWallaceGates.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 17:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Holton, Kansas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Henry Lane. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:57, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:20, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LaurentianShield. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I'm not editing Wikipedia these days, as I find it bad for my peace of mind, but I appreciate your contacting me. I agree that Trist's history is not simple. Good luck with your revisions.

Regards, J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 03:42, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Hello, LaurentianShield. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:32.218.43.245. Thank you.
Hello, I'm 32.218.43.245. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Tomahawk, Wisconsin that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 32.218.43.245 (talk) 20:45, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LaurentianShield. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm writing a new article about the Suzon River in France. Here's where I'm working on my draft: User:Tucoxn/Suzon. Here's the french article on the same topic: Suzon River [fr]. I noticed that you seem to have access to Elsevier ScienceDirect and I was wondering if you could help by getting me access to an article housed in ScienceDirect: A web based tool for operational real-time flood forecasting using data assimilation to update hydraulic states. This ScienceDirect journal article discusses the relatively extreme flooding in the Suzon river and would be useful for the new Wikipedia article I'm writing. Thanks! - tucoxn\^talk 15:51, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @LaurentianShield! I want to thank you for your contributions to ACARS. In that light, I want to draw your attention to a change I made to a change you made nearly 10 years ago!

Ten years ago you so very kindly added a detailed description to my example ACARS audio recording in the article. In that description you wrote the sentence

The balance of the message which sounds like radio static is the actual data stream of the message.

I felt that this sentence uses the word "balance" in a very unconventional way for English, and that it addresses the sound of the clip as though it were the same as its interpretation ("message"). These are not equivalent concepts. So I replaced "balance" with the word "remainder", replaced "message" with "audio clip" and finally, used an "em break" to identify your otherwise wonderful description, "which sounds like radio static", as a side remark to the sentence. The new sentence reads:

The remainder of the audio clip -- which sounds like radio static -- is the actual data stream of the message.

The kind of edit you made is a hallmark of someone who is very skilled, knowledgable, and interested in the subject, but who might not be a native English speaker. As such, I feel comfortable telling you about this change so that you might appreciate the difference as a learning experience. Ke6jjj (talk) 05:59, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]