User talk:Denimadept

Thanks for your comment at Talk:Nantucket, Massachusetts#Requested move 6 January 2018, Denimadept. Would you consider adding Support to the same discussion? Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 14:11, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done sure! - Denimadept (talk) 20:48, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mary Avenue Bridge is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Avenue Bridge until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Billhpike (talk) 02:25, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About Special:Diff/854889775: Would you propose using Template:FFDC instead? 84.250.17.211 (talk) 14:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@84.240.17.211: No, as the permissions on the file allow this, as does the fact that it was "Own work". - Denimadept (talk) 14:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please be advised that there is a proposal to move the Nantucket article back to "Nantucket, Massachusetts" at Talk:Nantucket#Requested move 7 January 2019. Note that the current name was determined by consensus a year ago at Talk:Nantucket#Requested move 6 January 2018. HopsonRoad (talk) 00:45, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please be advised that there is a proposal to move the Nantucket article back to "Nantucket, Massachusetts" at Talk:Nantucket#Requested move 7 January 2019. Note that the current name was determined by consensus a year ago at Talk:Nantucket#Requested move 6 January 2018. HopsonRoad (talk) 00:49, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hadley Corner is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadley Corner (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MB 22:11, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I see you haven't edited in a few months, but thought I'd try my luck here before going to TFD. I noticed you crated two unusual templates a while ago: Template:User:Denimadept/Da-not1 and Template:User:Denimadept/Da-vandal1. Did you intend to create those in your userspace rather than in templatespace? If so, I'd be happy to move them to your userspace without leaving redirects. Alternately you could move them yourself and tag the resulting redirects for G7 deletion. Or is there a reason for them to be in templatespace? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 22:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: They were originally in public space, but someone felt they should be in my private space, so they moved them. Apparently, they were clumsy enough to leave redirects for "subst" templates. :-D - Denimadept (talk) 14:18, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged these template-space pages for speedy deletion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh, so now I need to restore them. - Denimadept (talk) 19:37, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you recreated these personal templates in Template space instead of in your User space. Would you like help moving them to your User space? – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:01, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95: No. They're supposed to be where they are, in user template space. - Denimadept (talk) 17:05, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such namespace as "user template". There is User, like User:Denimadept/Da-delete1, and there is Template, which is where Template:User:Denimadept/Da-not1 currently lives. You already have User:Denimadept/Da-not1 and User:Denimadept/Da-vandal1, so there is no reason for Template:User:Denimadept/Da-not1 and Template:User:Denimadept/Da-vandal1 to exist. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:14, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95: - Using Template space allows for subst to work. - Denimadept (talk) 08:20, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Subst works fine with pages in user space. I just substed {{subst:User:Denimadept/Da-not1}} into my sandbox, and it worked perfectly. This is getting tiresome; I have opened a TFD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:56, 16 December 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) 00:17, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User:Denimadept/Da-not1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:57, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User:Denimadept/Da-vandal1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:58, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:User:Denimadept/Da-vandal1 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 December 16#Template:User:Denimadept/Da-vandal1. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Elli (talk | contribs) 07:53, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Template:Da-delete1 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 12#Template:Da-delete1 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:10, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The correct date for the photo is mentioned here: c:Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Tom_Lehrer_in_1950s.jpg. It's from 1962, not 1950s. FunnyMath (talk) 06:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@FunnyMath: Whoops! - Denimadept (talk) 16:25, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Mistakes happen. :P FunnyMath (talk) 23:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...when you posted this. This is inappropriate. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 04:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LilianaUwU: I'm sorry that you feel that way. Perhaps you should borrow a sense of humor. More to the point, the whole discussion I put that on is irrelevant. - Denimadept (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No it's not, not when the content dispute being discussed has resulted in the page being protected. Disruptive humor is disruptive; in this case "getting out the popcorn" publicly comes off as a clear attempt to WP:POKEBEAR and is really unnecessary.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:02, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Denimadept. Thank you for your work on General John Stark Memorial Bridge. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 07:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted a number of edits to Trinity Bridge, Crowland including my only edit, characterising them in the edit summary as "vandalism", and left a note on my talk page warning me about "nonconstructive" edits. These edits were constructive. I'd like to remind you of Wikipedia's behavioural guideline to assume good faith. It is a serious attack on the reputation of an editor to accuse them of vandalism. What is your basis for these accusations? Hairy Dude (talk) 14:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hairy Dude: A divergence is when two waterways split. This was a convergence, as the article already stated. Same thing with "distributary" versus "tributary". Your edits were backwards. Now you've started edit warring. This is not good. - 15:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC) Denimadept (talk) 15:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon, it wasn't you that reverted me. - 15:33, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

This is incorrect, it was a divergence and the other channel was a distributary. Even if I was wrong, a mistake is not vandalism, just a mistake. I am asking you again to justify your accusation. Hairy Dude (talk) 13:47, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You got one. You're replying to it. - Denimadept (talk) 15:09, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]