User talk:Monk Bretton
Have at it
[edit]Style
[edit]Excuse-me, why did you revert everything I had just done to the Didsbury Women's Circle just after I did it? I was trying to make the header style comply to Wikipedia's standards, and for some reason you made it all back. Any reasons? Thank you.--Kaonashi 02:17, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I didn't 'revert' so much as change the article. I think there was an edit conflict in there somewhere. If I did 'revert' it, it was by accident. Sorry about that. I keep coming up with edit conflicts on that article, so I am going to leave it alone for a bit. It was madly POV is it stood. Monk Bretton 02:22, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
(Actually since the didsbury wadjamacallit returns 4 (four) hits on google it looks like the thing ought to be deleted anyway. So "trying to make the header style comply to Wikipedia's standards" is probably a waste of time. Cheers. --Monk Bretton 02:25, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Well, alright then. I'm sorry. And about its content, I didn't really pay attention to that. My bad.--Kaonashi 02:29, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I got rather carried away trying to edit the contents (it refered to the British government as 'fascists'!) that I didn't notice that someone had made a genuine effort to correct some of the formatting. So I cocked up. It was basically an edit conflict. Cheers --Monk Bretton 02:39, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Ahahaha, that's pretty bad. I didn't even notice it, since I'm always doing formatting edits like that. But it's alright. Carry on.--Kaonashi 03:48, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Music
[edit]Regarding Music, see Wikipedia:Style#Article_titles: "Follow the normal rules for italics in choosing whether to put part or all of the title in italics." When discussing music the word "music" need not be italicized or quoted, but when discussing the word it need be. Thanks. Hyacinth 18:21, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Ah, right, yes, I see what you mean. The first sentence of that article really needs to be rewritten then, in my opinion, since the subject of the first sentence ought to be the same as the subject of the article. In this case it isn't. --Monk Bretton 18:37, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
'Lick' shouldn't be italised at the start of this article (Lick (music)) though, should it? --Monk Bretton 18:44, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Articulist
[edit]I´ve only now seen your question on Talk:Diogo_Mainardi. Apparently, "articulist" is indeed not a word. How do we call then one who writes articles? Cheers from Brazil. Doidimais Brasil 04:37, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. 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 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Monk Bretton. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]Hello, Monk Bretton. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)