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) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

C. James online wikipedia forum.

Your welcome to say hi or something cool, bye.

Having blocked account issue on and off a while now, because VPN apparently, but fixed now thanks.

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:

Please issue a split request for this at Street League Skateboarding. This doesn't need to be separately drafted, but if you need an article name suggestion, it can be Street League Skateboarding World Tour or SLS World Tour

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Street League Skateboarding, world tour results and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Street League Skateboarding, world tour results, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:45, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cltjames! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:45, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, have amended SLS webpage to include split request, the reason I resubmitted the request is because even after reading instructions I was unaware of the process, I think I got it right this time. (talk) 17:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Please learn to respect WP:CITEVAR and do not change article citation formats without obtaining a consensus. Your edits to the HMS Hood article will be reverted, thus wasting my time and yours.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:18, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you referenced "Unofficial Royalty" (a group blog) and "Genealogics" (a blog) in this edit; per WP:SPS, self-published sources such as blogs should not be used for non-BLPs unless the authors are extremely well-respected as topical experts, and should never be used for living people. Thanks, JoelleJay (talk) 03:11, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, understood. - Cltjames, 19/11/2021, 22:29. Cltjames (talk) 03:29, 20 November 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) 00:28, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In Wikipedia articles, please use surnames after the initial use of the full name. See MOS:SURNAME for details and exceptions. Cheers. Schazjmd (talk) 23:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, got it thanks. Cltjames (talk) 00:30, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that you didn't read MOS:SURNAME very well, because your very next edit, you added "Mr." to a surname. Please read and follow the Manual of Style guidance that I linked you to. Schazjmd (talk) 00:57, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Partially, force of habit, kinda playing it by the ear but also know what is being suggested; I wasn't too sure if MOS:Surname is applicable to the whole of the article, or just specific sections. I think I've covered my tracks for now, thx again, long day. Cltjames (talk). 20:07, 23 November 2021.

Hello, Cltjames. You have new messages at Psiĥedelisto's talk page.
Message added by Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 10:13, 25 November 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Please do not use all caps. If there is a technical problem with the app, that should be reported and you may temporarily use Wikipedia in a browser on your device, instead of altering articles. 331dot (talk) 13:55, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I used all caps to get someone's attention for this particular reason... I don't know why people are ignorant like this waiting for the page to be removed as the main article and rudely reverting, when there is a problem identified a revert is not the answer.Cltjames (talk) 08:59, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The best approach is to explain the problem you are seeing on the talk page (Talk:Jaguar) rather than get into edit wars. This pages has got 150000 views in the last month and no problem has been reported. Can you explain the problem in more detail. What device, operating system and wikipedia skin are you using? I can't see any problem in mobile view, but don't use the app. Describe exactly what you see and what is wrong, as that is the only way to diagnose the problem. —  Jts1882 | talk  15:22, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks, the problem wasn't necessary mobile view, it was when the Jaguar made front page for wikipedia there was an edit where it was written like this.... jaguar () .... So the idea was with text inserted into the empty bracket which was coding only it removed the bracket entirely from the article introduction.Cltjames (talk) 10:27, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That helps, I can see the problem in the page preview feature (when you hover the mouse over Jaguar in another article). This usually removed the scientific name in parenthesis, but it has trouble handling two consecutive parenthetic terms, i.e. (a)(b). I assume the front page used a similar preview method. I'll see if I can find a fix or find someone who can. —  Jts1882 | talk  15:57, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the initiative, it's true, I didn't know how to approach the problem. Cltjames (talk) 15:59, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've been editing Wikipedia for some ten years, just thought I'd chip in with some thoughts about your messages.

• The wide variety of allowed referencing styles is a source of considerable contention. They are very personal, and all have pros and cons. As regards HMS Hood: this is a WP:Featured Article, which means that an exceptional amount of effort has been expended to achieve that gold star. Likewise WP:Good Articles. These types of articles are usually jealously guarded to maintain their status. The general idea is that the originating editor of the article chooses a reffing style, which should be continued for ever unless a wp:Consensus for change is reached on the talk page. Some people can be very forthright about their preferences. See User talk:MinorProphet#Referencing for one editor's views, which I completely respect, by the way. There are further lengthy discussions with other experienced editors if you click the links at User talk:MinorProphet#Further thoughts on referencing.
• My personal preference, learned over many years, is for {{sfn}}s, which integrate very well with the templates of {{cite book}}, {{cite web}} etc. I don't know if you are aware of the mouse 'hovering' function which means you can hover the mouse over an {sfn} to show the short reference, and then hovering over that pops up the entry in the bibliography if it's been made with {cite book}. This is done by clicking on Special:preferences → Gadgets and disable 'Navigation popups' and enable 'Reference Tooltips'. This has recently been made the default, but you may not be aware of it.
• {sfn}s are great when they work, but a pig when they don't. You just have to learn the {cite} and {sfn} templates and the many ways they can go wrong. Failed sfns and cites can be highlighted in orange or red by a javascript. All you need to do is copy and paste importScript('User:Svick/HarvErrors.js'); // Backlink: [[User:Svick/HarvErrors.js]] to your common.js page.
• DPL bot will point out links you make to disambiguation (dab) pages such as Nannau. These are usually unintentional. It's amazing how many dab pages there are for subjects you think are unique. To highlight dab pages, click on Special:preferences → Gadgets, and enable 'Display links to disambiguation pages in orange'. This does what it says on the tin, and alerts you to such links. I have raised this point with the creator/maintainer of DPL bot, but the message only contains opt-out instructions, rather than a link to the gadget. The only way to make sure that the link is the one you really mean is to click on it, physically copy the article's title and paste it back into the link. Some pages aren't actually dab pages, but still contain links to multiple articles. In other words, click and test every single link you create.
• Being wp:Bold is fine, but it's often a disheartening learning process. There a are a large number of experienced and helpful editors on Wikipedia. If you have an issue with anything in a particular article, raise it on the corresponding talk page. Don't be in too much of a hurry. Someone will usually reply within a day or two (or less), often an editor who has made considerable contributions to the article. Many people actively use their wp:Watchlist to monitor pages they are interested in. There's always the WP:Help desk if you get stuck.
• You can quite happily delete any old messages from ArbCom (I call it Admin spam). As the messages say, to opt out from the notices, just add at the top of this talk page, it doesn't display anything.

I hope some of this has been useful. WP is an ongoing learning process, it doesn't stay still for long. You can ping me with {{re|MinorProphet}}. Happy editing. MinorProphet (talk) 06:40, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the insight MinorProphet, it's been really interesting to learn the coding, and I hope to help out when I can. Cltjames (talk) 14:20, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, C. James – If you have time, could I ask you to give an opinion on this talk page about the current World Rugby Sevens Series? There is some contention over the standings points to be carried over from the Great Britain side to England (and potentially Scotland and Wales) if/when they play in the competiton next month.

The issue is there's no source for the speculated calculations used in the article on Wikipedia. Because England have not even played the competition yet, my proposal is to remove them (and other potential future teams) from the standings list until after they have actually joined the competition (and when there's a reliable source for their carried-over points). Can you can add any thoughts on that? Thanks for your contributions. -- Ham105 (talk) 21:13, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the scoring list for team GB, and the home nations (Wales, England, Scotland); I know this system is based on an Olympic qualification system, so GB represents 3 nations playing. As for your query about how England scored points, then maybe there could also be an error in the webpage.

But as for how teams are calculated in a table, normally in sports it's ok to leave a team with 0 games and 0 points and just have them at the bottom of the table with 0 as representation and have the table show all the teams playing, irrespective of if they've already begun the tournament or not, just to explain the format better as to who qualified. Cltjames (talk) 21:38, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks for this. I hope you don't mind, but I have pared it down from your very nice Welsh medieval castle situated on a rock overlooking the sea near Criccieth to the rather less elegant C13 Welsh coastal castle. If you have a look, please, at WP:SHORTDESC you will see why, including the rather depressing fact that we are supposed to try to keep them down to about 40 characters! So we are always looking for a bit of a shorthand way of saying things without it becoming incoherent ... certain things are obvious, like Criccieth's redundancy in the short description, and others we just have to busk a bit. I hope this helps, and thank you for your edits. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 08:56, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cltjames! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Hywel Dda 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 Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, my thinking process was I did 2 edits, therefore I wanted to introduce one edit as potentially a minor edit, this is because I didn't alter anything direct in the article, only external links. But thanks for the info. Cltjames (talk) 17:44, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your message - 'rv' just stands for 'revert'. Your point is valid, however, and I have re-added the key info with better sourcing. GiantSnowman 14:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just cleaned up nearly 1,000 cites you did incorrectly, example. Looking through your edit history I see can there are many more than need further cleanup. Such as Embedding a google book template inside a cite book template. What's happening? -- GreenC 03:47, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]