User talk:Passer-by

Hello Passer-by! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! —Khoikhoi 21:29, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Cleaning up vandalism Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Hi I've noticed that you have readded the information about assymmetric federations to the federacy article. I don't think it fits there because the article discusses federacies not assymmetric federations. Maybe we can set up an article about assymmetric federations and try to include as many examples there, instead of on the federacy article. C mon 11:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know people should be sorted by last names, and that's fine for regular categories. However, for stub categories, it's more hassle than it's worth. In theory, the stub tag shouldn't be on the article for very long, so it shouldn't matter how they're sorted. Also, having the names in a parameter causes problems for bots (or people using WP:AWB) to easily do a find/replace when renaming stub templates. There's some discussions here and here that talk about it some. Let me know if you have any more questions. Have a great day and happy editing! ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 13:34, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Additionally, please do not remove {{sfd-c}} from categories unless it was deemed to be kept. Similarly, do not remove things from the "to delete" section of WP:SFD after consensus was finalized. If you didn't want the category to be deleted, perhaps you should have voiced your opinion before the 7 day review period was over. If you had read carefully, the decision was to "upmerge" which means that the template will be kept, but the category will now be that of its parent (Category:Chinese sportspeople stubs in this case). I also left a note on the category's talk page as well. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 13:43, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was tie. And the two votes for upmerge were split between Asian and Chinese. Passer-by 18:59, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

You may be interested in this discussion: Talk:Pedra_Branca,_Singapore#Requested_move_2.--Commander Keane 02:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add any question mark to an article. For sure Wikipedia:Verifiability is not allow any unveriafiable collection of information such as question mark. All information must be true and non invite any speculation. The sentence already covered the first round vote and should be no questions mark. The other also about the table , Wikipedia:When to use tables, the simple information should do in simple formatting. Mean the table should be avoid. Please not violate again. Thank you. --Aleenf1 16:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Table is better to convey complex information. Passer-by 19:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't simply to use the "References" to defend your editing, Wikipedia can make difference, no need to follow ALL what the sources mentioned, "don't simply revert" i don't think you should said this to me, i haven't see you make any dicussion in talk page as other did. I don't care you hate me, but all thing must be claim with same point.
The route revealed is 8 former Asian Games host countries, if Macau and Hong Kong is not under China, they not include in this route, plus 4 GCC alliance, 4 + 8 = 12 + host = 13, then it come with difference sentences said 15, that is confusion. Please raised WHY in talk page, and have a discussion. Thank you --Aleenf1 05:59, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When there is a dispute, follow the sources, and tell readers the information were taken from the referenced sources. That is the only way all people can get out of the dispute. Passer-by 14:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

That is true, but having separate SEZ articles for each of the original four is superfluous and can be confusing. If you so wish you could merge the articles together and then say they are separate from the city limits. Colipon+(T) 23:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is more confusing to have one article for each SEZ and the city it is located. Passer-by 14:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Please see how to fix your signature. Alai 08:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are blocked for being a sockpuppet of User:Instantnood, as proven by Checkuser, please use only 1 account in the future as you are under remedies of the ArbCom, thanks. --WinHunter ^(talk) 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What had happened? What use one account? Passer-by (talk) 14:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you think the notification is not clear enough, it's:

Blocked as a sockpuppet You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of Instantnood (talk • contribs • block log • creation log).  As a blocked or banned user you are not entitled to edit Wikipedia. All your edits have been reverted. Details of how to appeal a block can be found at: Wikipedia:Appealing a block. WinHunter (talk) 00:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are he and I thought to be the same person? Passer-by (talk) 11:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Passer-by (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Not the same person

Decline reason:

Confirmed sockpuppet, see here. — Yamla 17:47, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Passer-by (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Accessing Wikipedia from shared network and shared computers.

Decline reason:

You are a confirmed sockpuppet. As such, the unblock review is not available to you. Please contact the checkuser admin (Jpgordon (talk · contribs) in this case) if you believe the finding was in error. — Yamla 17:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Template:Subst: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. _→AzaToth 14:34, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Asian Newspaper Focus, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Postcard Cathy 20:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Passer-by

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Hong Kong Parliament Electoral organising committee for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Goldsztajn (talk) 12:17, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Hong Kong Parliament Electoral organising committee and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 7#Hong Kong Parliament Electoral organising committee until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. JaventheAldericky (talk) 17:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]