354:): I reverted you with the edit summary "Unexplained removal of working wikilink to section about the program; I don't see why this wl should be removed" which is about as much of a reason I can give you. To elaborate my thought process and respond to your reasoning above, I would say that while the linked article is the same, the linked terms are different ("Engineers Australia" and "Engineering Heritage Recognition Program"), and the removed link links to a specific subsection that directly corresponds to the linked term. So, a person clicking on the first link would expect (and get) more information on Engineers Australia in general, and a person clicking on the removed link would expect (and get) more information on the program specifically. Without the removed link, people that want more information on the program specifically would perhaps believe that there is no further information on Knowledge (XXG) on that and only see that there is if they happen to click on the first link (and it isn't apparent from the linked term "Engineers Australia" that there would be), which is why I believe this does add value. (If it was simply a link to
298:: Hi :) Thank you very much for the invitation (and sorry for taking so long to reply)! I think I came across that page before, and I think it's a nice idea! I looked at it again after your invitation and thought about what my answers would be, and I'm not sure my entry would add much (I don't think I can offer any smart or insightful reflections or even remember enough for some questions). I also don't really like to draw attention to myself, so I'm afraid it's unlikely that I'll add my answers atm (but I'm going to leave the notification of your message on unread, so I will at least sporadically be reminded to reconsider since it really is a nice idea). Thanks again!
198:), so "a blog of some kind" would not work either. Side note: I think it's unlikely that a suitable, reliable source even exists as I don't believe "chess set enthusiasts" are often written about, right? (And you would need something like that since you're making a claim about the preferences/opinion of that group people.) I hope this helps. Also, please let me know pages where you "saw a couple of stores linked to" if you come across them again.
22:
214:
What? It’s not about the chess enthusiasts, it’s about luxury chess sets, which is a highly searched topic “among” chess enthusiasts With no article / page in
Knowledge (XXG). Which to me seems odd. There are multiple sources I can think of who cover this topic. If the part about the enthusiastic is
137:
to the lead of the article followed by an external link to a webshop for chess sets. Besides the fact that I would call it at least questionable whether this piece of information is a "necessary addition" (and that I can't imagine why the FIDE would care about this kind of information which you seem
241:
about chess set enthusiasts (also notice how you went from "chess set enthuisiasts" to "chess enthusiasts"; those are obviously two different groups of people that not necessarily overlap completely). If you want, you can link me all those sources you mentioned and I will happily tell you whether
167:
Oh,I see. I’m no official nor I’m related to the website linked… I contacted fide because I suspected this could happen due to the linking, and wanted a confirmation which the customer representative gave with no problems at all.(it is just the only chess website I found that focuses on selling
324:
I noticed that you reverted my recent edits, can you explain the reason? I added a link to the "External links" section at the end of the article. That is the new ‎Engineering
Heritage website having the most up-to-date information on heritage markers as I mentioned to you before. Regarding the
420:
together so I can make amends. For example, you can recommend me an article to check over and I can check over it to the best of my ability and if there, for example, a minor spelling error, I could fix it, bringing me one step closer to make amends on
Knowledge (XXG), Thanks for reading this.
419:
I have reflecting on my edits and I have now realised, thanks to you that my edits were not good enough for
Knowledge (XXG) and I want to make amends. I am proposing a Amend plan. For every edit l did wrong, I do another good edit to compensate for that wrongful edit. I propose you and me work
377:
as to why), but after a closer look, it seems fine as an external link (NB: regarding its use as a reference, I'm not sure but leaning towards no at the moment), and it has been added again since my revert of your edit, so it's currently listed.
142:
supporting it and the included webshop link certainly doesn't support it). Moreover, not only does the included link not support the claim you made, it seems hard to think of a useful claim that it would support, a use case in line with
344:: Hi, thank you for your message (and sorry the late reply; btw, I wasn't notified about and thus had not seen the one you left on your talk page two months ago; I've read it now, thank you for the explanation/context)! Regarding
193:
to get an idea what kind of source would be suitable. Blogs and other websites with user-generated content (e.g., Internet forums, social media sites, fansites, wikis) are "generally unacceptable" as sources (see
233:: Your original claim was not that luxury chess sets exist or that it's a highly searched topic (which is a claim for which you have not provided your source either btw); your claim was that they're
401:
216:
109:
172:
358:
and not the specific subsection, I would totally agree, but then it would also be kind of misleading to link it anyway. Another way to evaluate this situation is to imagine that
405:
147:, or any other valid reason for inclusion (given that "web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services" are not allowed as external links either, see
366:.) So, that was my reasoning, but if you feel strongly that it doesn't add any value, feel free to remove it again and I won't contest the change :)
362:
would redirect to this subsection, and we wouldn't remove that link just because it redirects to (a subsection of) the same article as the link
273:
220:
113:
176:
359:
190:
43:
38:
76:
99:
Luxury chess is an important topic not coverd at all on wikipedia and is a well searched topic (See Ahrefs/Semrush)
55:
168:
luxury chess sets, and I’m pretty sure I saw a couple of stores linked to multiple articles in
Knowledge (XXG).
96:
Please advise the edits was made with the authoraization of (FIDE), the regulatory body responsible for chess.
230:
186:
124:
370:
285:
325:
wikilink to the program, it's a duplication of
Engineers Australia wikilink and does not add value.
425:
363:
355:
341:
326:
144:
330:
61:
352:
The '''Australian
Engineering Heritage Register''' is a ] maintained by ] as part of its ] ...
148:
57:
21:
374:
195:
295:
277:
139:
127:(assuming this is you): Hi, thank you for your message! However, just to be clear, with
440:
436:
421:
369:
The external link addition I was on the fence about because of its wiki character (see
444:
379:
321:
299:
243:
199:
152:
138:
to imply), your addition is an unsourced claim (i.e. you did not include a
59:
454:
429:
409:
389:
334:
309:
288:
253:
224:
209:
180:
162:
117:
135:"Luxury Chess Sets are a popular choice among chess set enthusiasts."
171:
if the problem is the link we can change it to a blog of some kind
443:(same link is also available on the sidebar as "Random article").
350:(where you removed the last wikilink from the following sentence:
272:
Hi Felida97Â :) I'm looking for experienced editors to interview
62:
15:
242:
they're reliable and what kind of claims they would support.
93:
Hey, you removed necessary additions to the chess set page.
346:
129:
151:). I hope that clears up why I removed your addition.
105:
Please contact me if you need any extra information.
89:Removed necessary additions to the chess set page.
276:. Feel free to pass if you're not interested.
235:"a popular choice among chess set enthusiasts"
439:: Mmh, not sure, but you could just take any
215:the issue we can rephrase it to your liking…
70:This page has archives. Sections older than
8:
360:Engineering Heritage Recognition Program
316:Australian Engineering Heritage Register
108:Kind Regards, Ohad - GandalfGreyWizard.
102:The external link is the correct link.
402:2A02:C7C:E248:B400:50AC:34B5:6AEB:2DE3
351:
217:2A0D:6FC2:6A00:100:2C74:2907:F768:BB52
110:2A0D:6FC2:6A00:600:7534:FDA6:D4EE:1DDE
80:when more than 5 sections are present.
347:the one edit you're referring to here
7:
173:2A0D:6FC2:6A00:600:1BC:8AB8:F941:7EF
14:
400:Im sorry for my immature actions
74:may be automatically archived by
191:Knowledge (XXG):Reliable sources
20:
455:14:58, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
130:the edit I reverted, you added
1:
430:19:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
390:17:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
268:Editor experience invitation
471:
254:00:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
225:00:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
210:00:17, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
181:16:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
163:16:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
118:18:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
410:12:05, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
335:06:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
310:23:24, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
450:
385:
305:
289:12:38, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
249:
205:
189:: Please have a look at
158:
77:Lowercase sigmabot III
415:Reflection and Amends
364:Engineers Australia
356:Engineers Australia
237:, so, it very much
231:GandalfGreyWizard
187:GandalfGreyWizard
125:GandalfGreyWizard
84:
83:
49:
48:
462:
349:
283:
280:
132:
79:
63:
35:
34:
24:
16:
470:
469:
465:
464:
463:
461:
460:
459:
417:
398:
345:
318:
281:
278:
270:
140:reliable source
128:
91:
75:
64:
58:
29:
12:
11:
5:
468:
466:
458:
457:
416:
413:
397:
394:
393:
392:
367:
317:
314:
313:
312:
269:
266:
265:
264:
263:
262:
261:
260:
259:
258:
257:
256:
169:
90:
87:
82:
81:
69:
66:
65:
60:
56:
54:
51:
50:
47:
46:
41:
31:
30:
25:
19:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
467:
456:
452:
448:
447:
442:
438:
434:
433:
432:
431:
427:
423:
414:
412:
411:
407:
403:
395:
391:
387:
383:
382:
376:
372:
368:
365:
361:
357:
353:
348:
343:
339:
338:
337:
336:
332:
328:
323:
315:
311:
307:
303:
302:
297:
293:
292:
291:
290:
287:
284:
275:
267:
255:
251:
247:
246:
240:
236:
232:
228:
227:
226:
222:
218:
213:
212:
211:
207:
203:
202:
197:
192:
188:
184:
183:
182:
178:
174:
170:
166:
165:
164:
160:
156:
155:
150:
146:
141:
136:
133:the sentence
131:
126:
122:
121:
120:
119:
115:
111:
106:
103:
100:
97:
94:
88:
86:
78:
73:
68:
67:
53:
52:
45:
42:
40:
37:
36:
33:
32:
28:
23:
18:
17:
445:
418:
399:
380:
319:
300:
271:
244:
238:
234:
200:
153:
134:
107:
104:
101:
98:
95:
92:
85:
71:
26:
441:random page
371:WP:OPENWIKI
296:Clovermoss
279:Clovermoss
437:Supelrand
422:Supelrand
145:WP:VENDOR
44:Archive 2
39:Archive 1
342:Kazemi.F
327:Kazemi.F
322:Felida97
27:Archives
149:WP:ELNO
72:90 days
446:Felida
381:Felida
375:WP:SPS
301:Felida
286:(talk)
245:Felida
201:Felida
196:WP:UGC
154:Felida
396:Sorry
451:talk
426:talk
406:talk
386:talk
373:and
331:talk
306:talk
274:here
250:talk
221:talk
206:talk
177:talk
159:talk
114:talk
453:)
428:)
408:)
388:)
333:)
308:)
282:🍀
252:)
239:is
223:)
208:)
179:)
161:)
116:)
449:(
435:@
424:(
404:(
384:(
340:@
329:(
320:@
304:(
294:@
248:(
229:@
219:(
204:(
185:@
175:(
157:(
123:@
112:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
