User talk:Marbe166

Hello.

Although her name in press often appears as Toini Gustafsson-Rönnlund, according to both Swedish Census 1970 (Sveriges befolkning 1970, a cd) and the webplace www.ratsit.se (which builds on the current census records), her name is in fact Toini Rönnlund. She married Assar Rönnlund in 1968, so this seems to have been the case since then. Do you have any references for your move?

If not, I will move this article to Toini Rönnlund in a near future.

Cheers.

HandsomeFella (talk) 22:26, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, but, she never appears as Toini Rönnlund in the press or record books etc. It's either her maiden name Toini Gustafsson (which she used for the most part of her carrer) or Toini Gustafsson Rönnlund. Therefore the article should be named Toini Gustafsson Rönnlund (without hyphen). --Marbe166 (talk) 07:53, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any statistics to support your claim? HandsomeFella (talk) 11:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A quick google search only finds pages with Toini Gustafsson (Gustavsson in some) or Toini Gustafsson Rönnlund. The Swedish national encyclopedia ne.se has her listed as Toini Gustafsson Rönnlund. ne.se --Marbe166 (talk) 13:33, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did an "extended" google search with search string in double quotes. These are the results:

• Toini Gustafsson: 18,400
• Toini Gustafsson Rönnlund: 3,760
• Toini Rönnlund: 368

Given the result, I suggest we move the article to Toini Gustafsson, and word the lede like this:

Toini Gustafsson (married name Toini Rönnlund, often also Toini Gustafsson Rönnlund, born 17 January 1938 in Suomussalmi, Finland) is a retired Swedish cross-country skier...

What do you think? Maybe we could skip the often also part?

HandsomeFella (talk) 14:09, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your move suggestion. I feel that since her surname de facto is Rönnlund but she is mostly known as Gustafsson it is most right to have her credited as Gustafsson Rönnlund, of course with a redirect from both Toini Gustafsson and Toini Rönnlund. Also, both ne.se and Swedish Wikipedia has her as Gustafsson Rönnlund. I suggest the following lede:

Toini Gustafsson Rönnlund (born Toini Gustafsson, 17 January 1938 in Suomussalmi, Finland) is a retired Swedish cross-country skier...

--Marbe166 (talk) 22:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ne.se is just one source, and wikipedia is not source to itself, so se.wiki does not count.

Since we cant agree, I'll put the page up on WP:RM, so the greater community can have a say.

Cheers. HandsomeFella (talk) 15:47, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see nothing on the talk page there that could make me anything but confused about this edit of yours. Until I do, I must assume you made that edit in error, against your own opinion on the talk page and against what the WP:3O editor would prefer as per h input there. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 02:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paul Kuhn (band leader), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ARD (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) 11:48, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kristian Gidlund, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Kristian Gidlund played drums in the rock band Sugarplum Fairy until his death in 2013? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kristian Gidlund. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 05:48, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edwards collided with the barriers on a racetrack, hence he died in a racetrack collision, not some generic nondescript "accident". WWGB (talk) 11:58, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eurovision Song Contest 1961, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harry Robinson (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) 11:27, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	You are cordially invited to join WikiProject Eurovision!
	You appear to be someone that may be interested in joining WikiProject Eurovision. Please accept this formal invitation from a current member of the project. We offer a place for you to connect with users who also like Eurovision and facilitate team work in the development of Eurovision articles.
	If you decide to join the project, please add your name to this list, and add the project talk page to your watchlist.
	I hope you accept! - Wesley Mᴥuse 12:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Oleh Babayev may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• '''Oleh Meydanovych Babayev''' ({{lang-uk|Олег Мейданович Бабаєв}}; (October 21, 1965 — July 26, 2014) was a [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:49, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please, can you remove the "of Sweden" part of the article's name. For the sake of consistency with all other Swedish princes. Thanks in advance. 82.155.80.206 (talk) 15:15, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Juan Carlos Calderón, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santander. 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) 12:22, 7 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) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not post any personal information into articles. If you continue to do so you will be blocked. Mike V • Talk 02:09, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please exemplify what you mean. Marbe166 (talk) 06:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd clicked on the ANI alert above, you'd know. This is the specific ANI discussion. If you reinsert the address in either of the articles again, I'll block you myself. Bishonen | talk 14:43, 5 April 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for your report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism about the vandalism on articles related to Swedish Royalty from the IP address 86.166.73.120, which I have blocked fro a month. You also say that the IP editor is likely to be the same person as uses the account Leona, Duchess of Ôland. I think you are very likely to be right, but with only two edits (one of them deleted) there isn't enough evidence to take any action, but I have placed a block which will prevent logged-in users from editing from that IP address for 24 hours, so if it is the same person they may be temporarily prevented from vandalising. If you see more vandalism from that account, please feel welcome to contact me on my talk page, and I will consider whether to block the account. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at List of oldest living people, you may be blocked from editing. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 10:12, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That edit was not disruptive! Pointing out that Morano is the last living woman born in the 1800s is perfectly legitimate. You need to check your definitions of vandalism. --Marbe166 (talk) 10:16, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marbe, would you be interested to continue our discussion at Talk:Mie Østergaard Nielsen#Proposed move? Gap9551 (talk) 21:48, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi marbe166, I saw in recent changes that you added a warning template to User:The crown princess's userpage. Generally, we put those on the talk page. Not a big deal, but please take that into consideration in the future. Thanks, Jergling (talk) 21:21, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. My edits were in accordance with the WP:GLOBALPERSPECTIVE project (see here) or check with Deb. Yours, Quis separabit? 18:55, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the article First Lady of the United States has been written:

The First Lady of the United States is an unofficial title and position traditionally held by the wife of the President of the United States, concurrent with the president's term of office.

However, in the article List of First Ladies of the United States says:

This list included all persons who served as First Ladies, regardless of whether they were married to the incumbent President or not...

Well, how it is really with:

  3: Martha Wayles Skelton (or should be as Martha Jefferson?) Died nearly nineteen years prior to his presidency → Thomas Jefferson

  7: Rachel Donelson (or should be as Rachel Jackson?) Died after election, prior to husband's inauguration → Andrew Jackson

  8: Hannah Hoes (or should be as Hannah van Buren?) Died eighteen years prior to his presidency → Martin Van Buren

21: Ellen Lewis Herndon (or should be as Ellen Arthur?) Died nineteen months prior to his presidency → Chester A. Arthur

Finally, how about Jane Wyman, if "regardless of whether they were married to the incumbent President or not"? She was the first wife of Ronald Reagan 1940-1949.

--85.76.78.121 (talk) 16:49, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My information is much more helpful though. It's one thing to be in the top 10 but it's more impressive to be 8th. I think we should have a more specific number there. I provided a source and have good information. Please stop deleting it.

Sincerely, Nathan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.231.99.62 (talk) 14:39, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you revert in Wikipedia, you should write the reason why you do so. Regards--Buchbibliothek (talk) 19:09, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I saw that dmy is usual in enwiki.Done--Buchbibliothek (talk) 19:21, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Therese Johaug, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Jeppiz (talk) 12:31, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Therese Johaug. Jeppiz (talk) 16:59, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently contributed to the discussion at talk:Living Presidents of the United States about changes I have made. I initiated that discussion and have tried to drive it to consensus, in the process making more recent talk page edits than the other editors combined. For your participation in that discussion, I thank you. I am, however, wondering about my participation in that discussion.

• Have I been pushing my own ideas too much?
• Have I ignored those with opinions different from mine?
• Can you think of any way my talk page involvement could have been improved?

You may answer me here, on my talk page, or by e-mail. Thank you for your desire to improve this online encyclopedia! YBG (talk) 05:04, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see in your recent contribution many unexplained reverts but zero participation in talk page discussions. Please get engaged in the discussions, otherwise you are risking to be blocked for edit-warring.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:00, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Friend of" is normal English. "Friend with" is slangy English, dialect, or English influenced by speakers of Germanic languages. I have taught English for over 50 years, with English as my first language. You and I will get along just fine as long as you don't try to give me English lessons. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:11, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SergeWoodzing That was uncalled for in such a minor dispute. If you have taught English for over 50 years you should know that there are different, perfectly acceptable, ways of expressing the same thing. --Marbe166 (talk) 15:32, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And that there are wrong ways. Wrong English does not belong on English WP. I'm glad to help you at any time. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:US Presidential Administrations has been nominated for merging with Template:US Presidents. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. --Nevé–selbert 16:03, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I fear you have guaranteed many more weeks of block evasion and sockpuppetry by your edit. That's your choice, but I hope you will be around to clean up the mess. Theeasytarget (talk · contribs) was blocked (and not by me) for a good reason. --Yamla (talk) 00:55, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My concern came to pass. Because of his earlier success, this vandal is now promising to sink "to the use of brute force". --Yamla (talk) 14:19, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See here, under "F". --Rob Sinden (talk) 16:16, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you removing the formatting for the sources? --BabbaQ (talk) 20:13, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with the sources, it's the bad formatting in the initial sentence that needs to be removed. Reformat the links based on my latest revision instead. Cheers. --Marbe166 (talk) 20:16, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason to revert the entire edit for such small matter. Just simply make that small change instead. I have done it for you now.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:18, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there was no reason for you to reinsert the bad formatting after I changed it the first time. --Marbe166 (talk) 20:19, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate

I'm the same person you were kind enough to apply the Air India Express delay edit on their behalf, despite being heavily oppressed by the admins.

Same issue again here bro, a blatant mistake on Iran Air destinations and no one is listening, the wiki elite is in full force muting me again:

As of the time of writing this edit request, Iran Air has not resumed services to Beijing and Kuala Lumpur, therefore the two pertinent rows need to be deleted from the table.

Source: http://www.aviationiran.com/2017/03/10/iranairs-first-a330-arrives-in-tehran-on-11-march-0900/

The second paragraph clearly explains that the freshly acquired aircraft were supposed to be used to resume those routes but for the time being they'll be flying European destinations.

Yes, Iran Air planned and submitted GDS entries for those 2 routes thrice but they never actually started. (First:http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/269829/iran-air-proposes-dec-2016-east-asia-service-resumptions/ Second: http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/269983/iran-air-moves-east-asia-service-resumption-to-jan-2017/ And third: http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/270615/iran-air-moves-east-asia-service-resumption-to-mar-2017/

Could you possibly help your fallen comrade out a second time?

178.235.227.198 (talk) 13:42, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Prime Ministers of Finland. hydrox (talk) 18:32, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Marbe166. Thanks for the talk. I looked at some of my edits and noticed they are not the current version, and checked that someone else cleaned up my additions, changing 100m to 100 m; changing "gold" medal to 1st place, and removing unnecessary information about prelims/heats rounds when the athlete has reached finals. OK, I will bear that in mind. Also I will avoid writing times in form of 1'50"40 and will use 1:50.40 as you said. The reason for the stockholm event prelims was because the results posted on the website for the finals were in facts prelims and I was too lazy to delete the sentence, so I just mentioned it's a prelim! But that won't happen again. Any encyclopedia (such as wikipedia) should try to be concise and only contain important information.

Anyway I'd be happy to know what contributions you yourself make to wikipedia.

Cheers!

Please do not restore the unsourced date of birth on Bruce Payne again. For one thing, all biographical data requires a citation to a reliable source. Secondly, the IMDb is not a reliable source and can not be used to source biographical data. The data on the IMDb is user-generated, which makes it particularly unreliable. We already have a source for his general age; please do not replace it with poorly-sourced content. If you continue to do this, you may be blocked. This is important, because WP:BLP requires us to use high quality sources; per the policy: "To ensure that material about living people is written neutrally to a high standard, and based on high-quality reliable sources, the burden of proof is on those who wish to retain, restore, or undelete the disputed material." Speaking as an admin, please do not edit war to restore unsourced content in a BLP. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop editing pages when you have no information. Pay more attention and do your research.

You made an unjustified removal of correct information without doing any research. If I find you making any further edits without research or if you post on my page again then I will mark your IP to be blocked from making any further edits on Wikipedia. You have been warned.

@Nicholas0: I gather that in this case you mean the edit I made on Anne Boleyn. You are partly right, that was a too hasty revert, and I apologise for that. However, you need to cool down and think about who is harassing who here. I have merely reverted your unsourced (in the first instance) inclusion of Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden into the category Category:People with prosopagnosia. When you reinstated her, you provided a source, and that is all fine. You also left a rude and unsigned message here on my talk page [1]. I then replied on your talk page [2], pointing out your failure to provide a source for the original inclusion. You then left the threatening unsigned message above. I fail to see any harassment from my side. --Marbe166 (talk) 18:19, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If someone is known by a common nickname instead of their full legal name, (take Jackie Kennedy, for example) it is perfectly acceptable to pipe the link to use said nickname instead of their legal name. Some of the first ladies and second ladies were not known by their legal names, so their nicknames are used instead (Lady Bird Johnson, Happy Rockefeller). Second, the changes you are making to the Kennedy article were changing the piped link from the correct one (Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis) to one that redirects (Jacqueline Kennedy), which is part of the reason I undid the change. Davejohnsan (talk) 14:28, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I couldn't help wondering. What's wrong with links that redirect, Davejohnsan? Surtsicna (talk) 21:02, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When warning users or anon IP dont put a final warning from the start, as especially in this case [3] do you got that !?Shellwood (talk) 13:29, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Shellwood: That doesn't apply to obvious IP hopping vandals who keep repeating the same vandalisms over and over again. --Marbe166 (talk) 13:37, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There has been no jumping in that case. Shellwood (talk) 13:43, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Shellwood: Have a look at the history page of Violet Brown and you'll see that there have been a number of vandalisms performed by IPs starting with 2.191 in June. --Marbe166 (talk) 14:00, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dont wanna hear your excuses, the end. Shellwood (talk) 20:01, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Marbe 166. Where in Wikipedia:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization is it advised not to use "Followed"? Surtsicna (talk) 23:04, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the example, it uses s-aft. See also Template:S-roy. --Marbe166 (talk) 23:13, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So, what you are saying is that there is no recommendation there not to use s-fol? Surtsicna (talk) 23:18, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am saying that s-aft should be used, nothing else. And that is also the case in all other succession boxes I've seen. --Marbe166 (talk) 07:08, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then you haven't seen enough succession boxes. What I have never seen is Wikipedia saying that a person succeeds another in a line of succession. Surtsicna (talk) 10:37, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then you must be blind, because that is what is used in most other royal succession boxes, see for example Catharina-Amalia, Princess of Orange, Princess Ingrid Alexandra of Norway and Leonor, Princess of Asturias to name a few. If you want to change the wording in the succession boxes, take the discussion in an appropriate place, for example here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization. --Marbe166 (talk) 11:16,6 September 2017 (UTC)

Are you deliberately refusing to understand me for some reason? I am talking about article text, common sense and usage. Succession boxes should reflect that. Where on Wikipedia have you read that a person succeeds (rather than follows) another in a line of succession? First you say "all other succession boxes", then it's "most other royal succession boxes". Prince Harry article, among others, uses the correct box. Why should there be a discussion to use a template designed for this use, a template that has existed for almost a decade? Do you have a single reason to oppose it or are you just making problems of out nothing?Surtsicna (talk) 11:48, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not. I see your point, I don't agree with it. My point is that this discussion should not take place here on my talk page, as it covers the wording of succession boxes, and if you want to discuss the wording of succession boxes, that should be done on a talk page related to a succession box, and it should involve more people than you and me. Please, do take up the discussion in a more appropriate place, for example: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization. --Marbe166 (talk) 12:33, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are the only one so far opposing it, so I am perfectly content discussing this here. You have so far given not one argument for your opposition though, so I take it you simply don't like it. You are requesting that I seek blessing prior to making an edit that reflects common sense, English language and actual usage not because there's something wrong with what I'm doing but because... you think I just need a prior blessing? With all due respect - no. Surtsicna (talk) 16:13, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making unexplained chages to articles without leaving an Edit summary. Such changes are indistinguishable from vandalism and may be reverted on sight. Britmax (talk) 12:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, my bad. --Marbe166 (talk) 12:45, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

By now you should have come across the BRD principle. If not, read it. If so, then this edit should not have been made. Your extensive removal of qualifying results from the qualifying section of various pages is both misguided and unhelpful to readers. Please stop. Pyrope 15:47, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any particular reason why you deleted the apostrophes from the prize money amounts? Surely deleting something that is directly from the FIS website https://data.fis-ski.com/alpine-skiing/prize-money-ranking.html and that has worked well for the past few years requires consensus? MattSucci (talk) 15:15, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a standard thousand separator, see [4]. You could argue that it could be replaced by a comma instead, but ISO prefers the space. --Marbe166 (talk) 15:53, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response. At school we only used commas to seperate the thousands and so on, the FIS website has chosen to use apostrophes (maybe it has something to do with Swiss Francs). I personally would prefer to see a comma used, but leaving a space doesn't look very professional (just my opinion). What are your personal thoughts? Sincerely, MattSucci (talk) 16:02, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Swedish and we use the comma for the decimal and the space for the thousand separator. My personal opinion is that it should be as clear as possible, thus using a combination of comma/dot or dot/comma is out of the question. Which one you use for the decimal doesn't matter to me, but for the thousand separator I don't like the apostrophe as it is neither the English standard (comma) or the ISO standard (space). --Marbe166 (talk) 16:08, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you agree, I would prefer the comma. It's much neater. Do you think it's necessary to consult on the talk page? MattSucci (talk) 16:19, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't really agree, comma/dot as thousand separator is a no-no for me. The ISO standard talks about a "thin space", and that is what I prefer, although I don't know how to do one, so I did a normal space and extended the cell size to avoid double lines. --Marbe166 (talk) 16:27, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, so it's probably best to ask the question on the talk page. It's not the most important thing in the world, but I'm quite conservative and prefer things that are agreed by consensus, whether it's agreed to use a thinner space or comma. Sincerely, MattSucci (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, let's put it to the talk page. I will copy this whole conversation to the talk page, if you agree? --Marbe166 (talk) 17:33, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree :-) MattSucci (talk) 17:37, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. WP:HOCKEY hides/removes diacritics from names on NHL/North American non-bio articles. GoodDay (talk) 20:03, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Max Burkhart has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Axolotl Nr.733 (talk) 11:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Smjg. I noticed that you recently removed all content from Julia Reyes Taubman. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. As a rule, if you discover a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If a page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you wish 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. — Smjg (talk) 16:18, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Smjg The redirect was removed for a reason, there was no mentioning of Julia Reyes Taubman on the page that her name was redirected to, thus making the redirect completely incomprehensible. I didn't nominate the page for deletion just yet, in case someone wants to add information about her. I don't have such information. --Marbe166 (talk) 16:29, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. In this scenario, if you're going to do anything before nominating the redirect for deletion, the best thing I can think of is to contact the person who created the redirect. I've just left a message on User talk:GiantSnowman accordingly. Hopefully the snowman'll respond. :) — Smjg (talk) 17:56, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert on the Jamie Farr page. I could have sworn that the article read that Jamie Farr was "the ONLY surviving" member of the M*A*S*H cast, hence the change. My bad.

PoughkeepsieNative (talk) 21:25, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am quite aware of the alphabetization on Deaths in 2018. With the hundreds or thousands of names I've added to those lists, a mistake is bound to happen every now and then. Just fix it and move on. It should be rather obvious that I put stuff in the right order 99,9% of the time. Nukualofa (talk) 11:15, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sweden at the 2018 Winter Olympics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fredrik Lindström (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do not revert my edits when you don't even have a clear reason. The proper format for the infobox has been previously discussed and is already in use in the articles of British and various other royal families. See Elizabeth II and Prince William, Duke of Cambridge. If you are not in favor of this method, discuss it with the other users, get a consensus and then apply your changes. Keivan.f^Talk 05:29, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keivan.f What is the proper format for British royals isn't necessarily the same for Swedish royals. I've looked for a discussion on the formatting of infoboxes of royals, but haven't found one. Can you point me to it? --Marbe166 (talk) 05:47, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the proper format for British royals only. Check the articles about Jordanian and Norwegian royals for example. I cannot point you to a specific discussion at the moment because rules and methods are created through time not by one single discussion. Generally women, royal or non-royal, are referred to by their maiden names in the infoboxes, mostly for genealogical reasons, and to show that they were still someone before marrying their husbands. In some cases, we even use maiden names for the titles of articles, like Mary of Teck and Sophia of Nassau. Keivan.f^Talk 05:59, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your continual vandalism of List of the verified oldest women will not be tolerated. Firstly, when the page is loaded, the default setting is for table to be listed by rank which is as you wish. Secondly numerous other Wikipedia articles for longevity have sortable tables so why this one article should be exempt makes no sense. Wikipedia users have a right to sort any table by any column as they choose, and this flexibility does not affect any other users of Wikipedia. Your opinion that this option should be removed is both ignorant and arrogant. Crveni5 (talk) 05:32, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Crevni5 Vandalism? Arrogant? Harsh words. I'd prefer to discuss issues without resorting to personal attacks, thank you very much. Having said that, you do have a point regarding the issue at hand, and you might have overlooked that my revert titled "rvt vandalism" was a revert of an IPv6 user who inserted a false death date of Maria Capovilla. --Marbe166 (talk) 05:43, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. To clear any misunderstanding, the subject who died came from the country of Niger ("Nigerien" people) and not Nigeria ("Nigerian" people). So I have reverted the spelling correction you made (actually the second time this has happened to the entry since it was posted). His article gives further creedence to the grammar. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 12:28, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, my bad then. Should have checked. Thanks. --Marbe166 (talk) 12:42, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is a long standing dispute between editors on the page over what the consensus of a citation is. What the Deaths page is doing to the cite is nothing short of plagiarism. I wont put in citations on the page if they are changed or altered in any way, which they have in the past. I fully cite other articles on the other Wiki pages all of the time. There is a portion of people out there that dont understand the effects of plagiarism and on a personal level what can happen to any academic endeavors or state licenses that a person (like myself) may carry if they are found to have plagiarized. Additionally many of the digital platforms we use could benefit from proper citations and we are in effect taking money from them by not doing so. So thank you for your concern, but it is not really an issue.Sunnydoo (talk) 21:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sunnydoo You make absolutely no sense whatsoever in the context of citing deaths in accordance with the established guidelines of the page. Please see point (4) in the instructional text at the top of the Deaths in 2018 page. When you added Noorjahan Kakon Bibi you only provided the URL of the article, not the title of the article, which I added in this diff. That's why I left you the message. If you have an issue with the established guidelines, please address it on the article's talk page. Thanks. --Marbe166 (talk) 21:42, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

She is one of only three female heirs apparent in the world – the other two being her goddaughter Catharina-Amalia, Princess of Orange, and Princess Elisabeth, Duchess of Brabant.

While this is true, you undid an edit that included Leonor, Princess of Asturias who is also a female heir apparent. I understand that Leonor could be superseded in the unlikely event her parents had a son but that is no reason not to include her at the moment. I hope that you choose to rectify the edit, I also didn't appreciate your use of the word vandalism as it hardly qualifies as such. --HLH301298 (talk) 19:45, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

HLH301298 There is a clear distinction between being a heir apparent (Victoria, Catharina-Amalia and Elisabeth), and a heir presumptive (Leonor). Calling Leonor a heir apparent is wrong, as she is, in fact, a heir presumptive. It doesn't matter how unlikely it is that she will get a younger brother, she will still be a heir presumptive until she eventually ascends the throne. This has been rectified so many times in the article that it has been deemed necessary to insert explaining text (in captials, even), warning editors NOT to put Leonor in the sentence. Those that do anyway are therefore vandals, and very annoying ones. --Marbe166 (talk) 19:58, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response, perhaps you should have led with this explanation to begin with rather than your original response. Additionally, within the article, you could perhaps mention this to prevent further attempts at adding in Leonor so that the distinction is there for editors to see. --HLH301298 (talk) 21:16, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you find time for it take a look at the article about Fallet Kevin that I created today. Regards,BabbaQ (talk) 18:25, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I didn't know about it. I'll hope to be more attentive in the next updating (now I am in the same time zone, as you). With the best regards, --Noel baran (talk) 13:05, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The obits say “Ms. Roundtree,” that makes the last name “Roundtree,” not “Johnson.” It is pretty common for maiden name to become middle name, and that appears to be the case here. See NYT obit. If continuing to change, what is your source for “Johnson Roundtree” as the last name - it’d typically read as “Johnson-Roundtree?” Rikster2 (talk) 02:07, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why we are edit warring while the issue can be resolved with a simple discussion. First of all, you are right; as titled royals most of the consorts do not use/have a surname, but using their maiden name in the infoboxes has been a practice which I haven't started. Examples include Louise Mountbatten, Mary of Teck, Queen Letizia of Spain, and Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother. We use their maiden names for genealogical reasons, and personally I don't see a problem in that. Keivan.f^Talk 17:00, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keivan.f Thanks for starting the discussion, I was about to do the same. I think it might be more suitable at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility. Let's continue there? --Marbe166 (talk) 17:04, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you can start a section over there if you wish, and we can ask what the other users think. Keivan.f^Talk 17:05, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With the exception of heirs-apparent & heirs-presumptive, most royal bios don't bother mentioning the grandparents, even if they're monarch & consort. Just trying to get consistency across these articles. Anyways, I already got reverted over at some of the Norwegian royal bios. This just isn't a fun day for me :( GoodDay (talk) 16:58, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GoodDay OK, fair enough, but you should have menitioned it in the edit summaries in the first place. I still don't agree, I think it is reasonable to mention the relations to the reigning monarch, or broadertheir reason to be in the line, of everyone who is in a line of succession. --Marbe166 (talk) 17:04, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Silvia isn't reigning as queen. GoodDay (talk) 19:41, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please note this revert revert edit (not by me incidentally) and the supporting dedicated English source giving credence to the translated spelling. CERTAIN names are not to be translated, I agree (we would not, for instance, translate a German surname such as "Flaschenbürste" into "Bottlebrush"!), but obvious conflicts in languages application must be dealt with according to sources in each language, and ours are predominantly English where possible as you know. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 09:52, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello; why not make entries in chronological order? So we would know who is the last "VIP" passed to a better life. Thanks for the attention you want to give to my suggestion. Raffaele bonacchi ( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.171.53.28 (talk) 13:09, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was written in "American English" and therefore the American-style of dates were used. You've basically screwed up the whole article with the "British English". If everything that happened was in Britain back then, then I would have made it "British English". Which of course wasn't the case and I had to therefore choose the style of writing before you long before came about it. Adamdaley (talk) 07:28, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adamdaley American English in terms of grammar is OK, but that doesn't encompass the date formats. American date format is only to be used for American subjects, and those of the other few nations who use the mdy format (example Israel). Also, when I edited the infobox I made it consistent with the rest of the article. Reverting. --Marbe166 (talk) 08:11, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have debated this with other people on the talkpage? Adamdaley (talk) 08:14, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, now both formats are in there! What a screw up! Adamdaley (talk) 08:15, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So, why did you take down Tom Pryce's nationality with this edit? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 19:46, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So you prefer to revert rather than talk? Let's discuss on the talk page. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:30, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. On another user's Talk page, you said "City and counrty of birth are mandatory in infoboxes, if known". I wonder whether that is really expressed in any guideline. My impression is that it is sometimes unnecessary to identify the country. For example, if we say someone is born in Dallas, Texas, I think it is unnecessary to say "Dallas, Texas, United States". If the city name is Wikilinked, and someone doesn't know what country Dallas, Texas, is in, they can click on the link and learn more about it. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:16, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

3 February will start per GMT. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:56, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, it starts at the dateline. LINT is the first timezone. --Marbe166 (talk) 17:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But in luge, skeleton, bobsleagh and biathlon medals have awarded, although they are world cups not championships or olimpic games! Schami1989 (talk) 12:57, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This conversation started on your talk page, and I continued it there, by copying this message from you. --Marbe166 (talk) 13:26, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing entries that aren't in alphabetical order is going a bit too far. Just put them in their right place. By removing a sourced entry, you're making the list less good. I realize you have tried contacting the editor several times, but it's more disruptive removing actual deaths than having them listed slightly out of order. Nukualofa (talk) 22:19, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Here are some reliable sources that confirm that it was Bent Evold (an editor who worked at DR) and not Bent Henius who gave the points of the Danish jury in the ESC. https://nordjyske-avisarkiv.dk/ Vendsyssel Tidende - Hjørring - 23/03 1983 Aalborg Stiftstidende - 22/03 1983 Aalborg Stiftstidende - 23/03 1980 Carlos MS (talk) 21:04, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos MS That archive is behind a paywall. --Marbe166 (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you revert my edit on Lara Gut-Behrami for Not defining characteristic for her while there are characters more famous than her like Shakira and Irina Shayk in this category, and they also Not defining characteristic for them, so there no point for your reverting my edit --FPP (talk) 10:55, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Three wrongs don't make a right. None of them belong in the category. --Marbe166 (talk) 11:53, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Games of the "X" Olympiad is part of the official title but the WP article titles when concerning specific Olympiads does not include "games" and instead the 200? Summer Olympics with a redirect when games is used. It is understandable that this is now known as there are various styles of article titles that have developed over time for particular aspects or portions of each Olympiad but maybe that should be special order of talk so that people are not confused.2605:E000:9149:8300:8A3:2B37:752B:62C (talk) 23:02, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lawrence Clarke (athlete), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Athletics (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:25, 5 October 2019 (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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You do realize that there's no difference between 22 months and 1 year 10 months? DrKay (talk) 20:47, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not in actual time, but in the way it is displayed. --Marbe166 (talk) 20:53, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bertil Norström, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sala.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 20 October 2020 (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) 01:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

According to the US constition, Biden does not succeced Trump until the hour. Regardless of when he takes the oath. Legally Biden isn't president for another 54 minutes.
SSSB (talk) 16:56, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. For anyone aged 90+ where we don't have date of death, they are included in the possibly living person's category, as is the case here. If she was 106, there would be some coverage of this, including her celebrating her 100th birthday. The burden is with you to show she is infact alive. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 11:25, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's not how it works. People are assumed alive until reported dead. 106 is not very old, it is still 4 years until being a Supercentenarian. --Marbe166 (talk) 11:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marbe166 - actually, that is incorrect and Lugnuts is right. If you review the description at Category:Living people, it says "Individuals of advanced age (over 90), for whom there has been no new documentation in the last decade, may be removed from this category and transferred to Category:Possibly living people." Since Weikert would be 106 and has no evidence of being alive for decades, "possibly living" is the correct category. Canadian Paul 07:45, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lucas Braathen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slalom.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:22, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Great work 👍! ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 21:29, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not revert sourced content. The YouTube source provided is acceptable by wikipedia rules as it is sourced from the actual broadcast of the show to which the article page refers. 76.160.6.50 (talk) 21:37, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, YouTube is mostly unacceptable as a source since it has mainly user-generated content on it, which Wikipedia does not allow. See WP:USERGENERATED. FloorMadeOuttaFloor ^{(Leave me a message•Changes I have made)} 04:46, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This pages does not say for face only infobox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images#Image_quality do you have better policy page? Shadow4dark (talk) 13:08, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the page you link it says "showing the subject too small". Infoboxes should have clear face photos. Marbe166 (talk) 13:13, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but this is a good official portrait and face crop is unnecessary. I see many other wikipages like Barack Obama who does not has face only.Shadow4dark (talk) 13:47, 7 October 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) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Downhill official trainings are infact integral part of World Cup, World Championships and Olympics. All the main ski countries (Austria, Slovenia, US, France, Norway, Italy, Germany etc...) follow training scores intesively, published in all the main country's media. Sportomanokin (talk) 17:30, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That still doesn't matter. They have no influence on the results of the competitions. No points are rewarded for "winning" a training. --Marbe166 (talk) 17:41, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Marbe, does the user not know where the article talk page is found? Drmies (talk) 22:47, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mirjam Puchner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lake Louise.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus --Kasper2006 (talk) 12:19, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Hilma Lövblom, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Khgk (talk) 12:14, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok your diktat is that WC podiums are not medals. But why its can’t inserted in the body of the article? As WC podiums of course :P Kasper2006 (talk) 13:57, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As categories for persons are normally sorted by last name, I corrected the default sort for this athlete. His family name is Bø, after his father. His mothers maiden name is Thingnes, which Johannes was given as a middle name. If "Thingnes Bø" were his family name, how come his brother, Tarjei Bø has another last name? Will you please confirm with default sort "Standardsortering" in Norwegian Bokmål: {{STANDARDSORTERING:Bø, Johannes Thingnes}} and change it back to correct? At the same time, would you consider changing occurences of his reference name down thru the text from "Thingnes Bø" to "Bø"? Else I will feel I don't harm anyone by editing Winston Churchills article to mention him by the name Spencer Churchill ... TorSch (talk) 19:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He has two surnames, one after his mother and one after his father, by choice. His brother chose not to have his mother's surname. --Marbe166 (talk) 20:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are most probably right. This news article in Norwegian [ https://www.nettavisen.no/sport/derfor-bruker-han-ikke-thingnes-navnet/s/12-95-3752583 ] supports your view. I rest my case. TorSch (talk) 21:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Glad you noticed the similarities between edits at Deaths in March 2022 by Newzap123 and previous annoyance Bestf123, now indefinitely blocked. If you have any knowledge of the procedure for reporting such vermin as sockpuppets, I and many others would be glad. I don't have a clue, to be honest, having never done such a thing before (vandals, yes, sockpuppets, no). Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 13:49, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Refsworldlee I took it on your cue. I don't have time to report it, but you can read here how to do it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry#Handling_suspected_sockpuppets. Cheers. --Marbe166 (talk) 13:52, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. However, that process appears to be extremely time-consuming, and I don't have that luxury myself either. I expect things will progress over time, just a case of diligence by us all until then. Thanks again. Ref ^(chew)(do) 13:58, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. José Antolín Toledano defaultsorts to Toledano - check it out. Please do not revert my edit again. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 05:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Refsworldlee, the guy was Spanish, and Spanish normally defaultsort on the first surname. Also, if you read the article, he is referred there to as Antolin, and he was chairman of Antolin Group, and finally, the article that cited his death (on his page) names him as José Antolin. I.e. the defaultsort was wrong, I have corrected it now. --Marbe166 (talk) 07:38, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's the correct action if you are right. If the defaultsort in his article now says Antolin, then your alphabetical edit in Deaths will be correct. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 09:33, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marbe166! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Anna Lindh that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see He