</div></div> <section end="technews-2015-W26"/> 15:24, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
</div></div> <section end="technews-2015-W26"/> 15:24, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Guillaume (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Tech_ambassadors&oldid=12487826 -->
<!-- Message sent by User:Guillaume (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Tech_ambassadors&oldid=12487826 -->
== User:Lucd13 ==
Sorry but your claim is simply inaccurate. Bish disagreed with you on ANI as did Liz and I personally disagree with you as well. Nice job at censorship though, bet you must feel proud. Do the right thing and revert your edits on User:Lucd13. [[User:Caden|<b><font color="black">'''Caden'''</font></b>]] [[User talk:Caden|<font color="red"><sup><small>'''cool'''</small></sup></font>]] 19:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
C H A P T E R 11 "This spot blank for now " .
Reply from the Cap'n
Hello, KoshVorlon. You have new messages at Captain Screebo's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Talkback
Hello, KoshVorlon. You have new messages at Skamecrazy123's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
From your user page
Considering that my edit spoke of the fact that Tullian has publicly debated other with regards to his views, and the links I referenced go DIRECTLY to those debates, there should not be an issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BaptistBolt (talk • contribs) 18:51, 13 May 2013
Support request with team editing experiment project
Dear tech ambassadors, instead of spamming the Village Pump of each Wikipedia about my tiny project proposal for researching team editing (see here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Research_team_editing), I have decided to leave to your own discretion if the matter is relevant enough to inform a wider audience already. I would appreciate if you could appraise if the Wikipedia community you are more familiar with could have interest in testing group editing "on their own grounds" and with their own guidance. In a nutshell: it consists in editing pages as a group instead of as an individual. This social experiment might involve redefining some aspects of the workflow we are all used to, with the hope of creating a more friendly and collaborative environment since editing under a group umbrella creates less social exposure than traditional "individual editing". I send you this message also as a proof that the Inspire Campaign is already gearing up. As said I would appreciate of *you* just a comment on the talk page/endorsement of my project noting your general perception about the idea. Nothing else. Your contribution helps to shape the future! (which I hope it will be very bright, with colors, and Wikipedia everywhere) Regards from User:Micru on meta.
Please be more careful with your reverting in the future KoshVorlon, spending more than 5 seconds looking at this would have made it obvious that reverting was the wrong thing to do and the section should have just been removed. Sam Walton (talk) 18:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some things don't belong at AN//I
As per WP:Oversight, you should generally request oversight (revdeletion with suppression) quietly. If you feel it needs to be revdeleted in the mean time, report it privately to an active administrators. This would generally include and private and highly unflattering information about non notable possibly real individuals (particularly minors) and the case you mentioned ticks all those boxes. Nil Einne (talk) 19:58, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For clarity, what I'm saying is if someone has posted highly unflattering informationstories about and the birth date of a a (possibly real) minor, somewhere on wikipedia, you should revert or remove it and request oversight, rather than posting about anywhere. Yes this may have been childish vandalism, but people particularly teens can be affected by that sort of thing and there's no reason it belong anywhere on wikipedia, even the edit history. Nil Einne (talk) 20:11, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Incidently, quietly removing such misreported threads is also generally best practice. (I was in the middle of messaging you when I received your comment.) As the oversight page I think mentions, it's all about minimising unwanted attention. (I possibly should have said something like "wrong place" rather then leaving no edit summary but I'm tired and couldn't think of a suitable neutral summary at the time.) I was also about to email the oversight team but it seems it's already been dealt with. BTW, if there is any threat of violence you should also email emergency at wikimedia.org. In this case, I didn't think it necessary as the information appeared to be just more rude info rather than a possible suggestion of violence, but if there's any doubt it's always best to email. Nil Einne (talk) 20:07, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
let me spit in the face of that filthy bastard.. he deserves it!
...but didn't you and I have an agreement where you would check with someone to make sure you were in the right before getting into multiple reverts? --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!