User talk:Malc82 - Knowledge

1345:

und z.b. in diesem Artikel Dresden so darstellen als sei Dresden "Militärstadt" gewesen. Dresden hat natürlich Kasernen etc. gehabt, aber es ist bekannt dass dies nicht Dresdens Hauptfunktion war. Wie dem auch sei, mich würde interessieren ob du es in Ordnung findest, dass meine Beiträge zu Dresden ständig verändert werden. Militärziele, wurden eindeutig in der Innenstadt nicht bombardiert, weil es dort keine gab. Flughafen, Albertstadt etc. lagen ja weit draussen vor der Innenstadt, und es war ja auch offizielles Ziel gewesen, den Willen der Bevölkerung durch "moral bombing" zu brechen. Was nachweislich nicht funktionierte.

1386: 866: 1671: 1776: 1218: 1690:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 1564: 225:, you would see he has been involved in a number of edit wars regarding information/wording of VMI stuff. Always, when pointed to wiki policies, he gets defensive, and sometimes, offensive, complaining that changes that reduce what other editors call peacock terms is due to jealousy and harrassment by " 1344:

Mir ist nicht klar, wo deine Position ist, aber mich ärgert es maßlos dass man in diesem Artikel Dinge über Dresden schreibt, die einfach nicht stimmen. Und mich würde interessieren wie du dazu stehst. Mich ärgert es maßlos, dass die Alliierten nicht zugeben dass auch sie Verbrechen begangen hatten,

1189:

Somehow we seem to have got back to the old map pointing at New England, not Europe. Can you manage to get the other map back? I think we may have to accept that the New England version stays as well, otherwise some one will insist on changing back again. It is not my habit to watch other people's

202:

No big on the misunderstanding. Hall's numbers should never have been there cuz they only account for North America. I overlooked that before putting it there. My bad. Lovejoy's take into account all of the Americas. I think his numbers would be more appropriate for the overall article. I might

453:

Looks like we both stuck our noses into that at around the same time; I type slow. I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but the comment you left on WikiDragon's talk page was essentially taunting him. I share your lack of enthusiasm for organized religion, but that comment doesn't do anybody

584:

where the nominator is attempting to overturn the "keep" decision at . This discussion is linked to 3 others the previous day, where the author of the articles is attempting to use the "keep" at Kari Schull to overturn the rejection of his other similar articles. Interesting potential precedents

624:, and so they got in; he doesn't like the guidelines as discussed, though, so he keeps forking the data, and I keep flipping his new pages to redirects as I find them. I've left two messages now asking him to stop this with no response. If you're willing to help me watch him, I'd appreciate it. 431:

is a program that repots to whom an IP address belongs. The Knowledge article, that is under the link, explains much more detail. But it is a useful tool for discovering somthing about who is editing the pages when instead of creating an account they use an IP address. All I have done is put the

1742:

experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a

1149:

because I think it should e debated in public, and I invite you to take it to AfD. I have explained my reasons on the talk page; I do not mean to imply that the speedy was incorrect, that your arguments are wrong, or that the article is notable, just that a community page is the place for the

192:

It had a really good table about the entry and exit of Africans during the slave trade. I usually don't bother with net stuff, but the tables are pulled from reputable publishers. I've already used one of the tables to update some of my previus data on African exit points (different coast:

479:

Yeah, "a bit over" is right. Not a big deal, and I almost didn't say anything because I didn't want to make a mountain out of a molehill. It's mostly that I get the sense from their talk and user page and the village pump note that they're kind of spoiling for a fight with someone.

1788:

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.

432:

output of the whois program onto the talk page of an IP address so that someone can see to whom it belongs. As this information is applicable to all users of that IP address I think it should be at the top of the talk page. I did this because of the history of recent edits from

193:

senegambia, bight of benin, etc.) Would you mind incorporating the data from its destination points into your section on New World Destinations. I like your graph. I would've made the change myself, but didn't want to step on any toes. hit me back when u can. PEACE :)

1542:

Can you have a look at this article? It seems to have had substantial edits from people without a broad enough knowledge of the subject. I am not sure my depth of knowledge is enough to put it back to an acceptable state, without the loss of good recent additions.

729:

Ouch! I saw him as the first in the page history and didn't realize that makes him the "undoer" instead of the one who moved the article. Thanks alot for notifying me. I have removed the section and apologized to Halaqah. Hope that clears it up. Thanks again!

526:

3)He tells to go ahead and edit it, then he deletes the reason for the changes on his talkpage, then he writes me up for vandelism, it looks like he set me up to get me banned, which he's known to do that. I say he should be banned for setting someone up for

1190:

talk page: I suggest this conversation should continue on the article talk page, if necessary. Do you know how to get the page protected against alteration by those not logged in? It is one of a small number that I watch that suffers continual vandalism.

1224:

Hello, Malc82! I'd like to call your attention to the WikiProject Germany and the German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board. I hope their links, sub-projects and discussions are interesting and even helpful to you. If not, I hope that new ones will be.

608: 142:. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Knowledge's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate 381:

Hi and thanks for your question, I answered on my talk page but I can repeat the answer in short here. No, my comment was in no way inteded at your posts, it just happens to come after it. It's only directed at the nominator. Have a nice day!

262: 229:" military colleges. He, and at least other editor have been flagrant about their disregard for wiki policies, if adherence to those policies makes VMI look less important than they (VMI grads) want to make it look.-- 611:

at least twice because he can't get consensus to add the leagues he wants to it. The leagues he wants to add were there for a while and made that page a nasty mess; I did a complete rewrite about 3 months ago with a

776:

Hello there.. thank you for your note. It is amazing how wiki articles will take you into familiar and new territory. Just saw your notes in page history, was why I wrote you. Kind Regards and have a wonderful

1629:. 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 1816: 1517:. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Knowledge policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted. 469:

Yes I know it was a bit over the line, on the other hand the edit summary was a smiley (and since my edit will show up anyway, I'll just go add the smiley to the statement itself). Thanks for metioning it.

272:. I have revised the article, with references, to a more balanced description; and argue that it is notable (referred to in a UK broadsheet newspaper article, and a US educational website) and potentially 248:

The Chipping Norton is normally run at Warwick Farm in Sydney. It would be rare, if ever, for a Sydney race to be run in Melbourne. I can't recall this happening, however you might want to check with

1800:. 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 1115: