Misplaced Pages

User talk:HiLo48: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 05:36, 19 August 2024 editHiLo48 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers91,237 editsm Reverted edit by 27.96.195.135 (talk) to last version by ClueBot IIITags: Replaced Rollback← Previous edit Revision as of 05:48, 23 August 2024 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,378,593 editsm Archiving 2 discussions to User talk:HiLo48/Archive 2. (BOT)Next edit →
Line 19: Line 19:
*] *]
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] your messages on ]s using four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on {{#if:|]|my talk page}}, or ask your question on this page and then place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> before the question. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome --> -- ]\<sup>]</sup> 07:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC) I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] your messages on ]s using four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on {{#if:|]|my talk page}}, or ask your question on this page and then place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> before the question. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome --> -- ]\<sup>]</sup> 07:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

== James Harrison ==

Just trust me on this the math makes zero sense and people had already discussed on the talk page a literal decade ago that millions of lives saved does not make sense mathematically and that an article from the Australian red cross claimed 10,000 saved which is at least in the realm of possibility https://web.archive.org/web/20150614002241/http://www.donateblood.com.au/all-about-blood/inspiring-stories/james-harrison-the-man-with-the-golden-arm Please revert my edit back. ] (]) 07:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
:] - As I wrote in my Edit summary, the claim is backed by a . I also said you need to take your concerns to the article's Talk page, not here. ] (]) 08:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
::And as I said it was already mentioned on the talk page a literal decade ago ] with a from the Australian red cross, the people actually taking and using the blood. That's why I called it a persistent myth. ] (]) 08:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
:::I decided that I would just make the reversion myself because this has already been discussed in the talk pages. ] (]) 09:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
::::Fine, but I wish you would stop seeing me as the enemy and/or arbiter here. The article's Talk page was the place to discuss this, not here, nor in Edit summaries. Yours are essays, not summaries. And do try to be a little less confrontational over this. ] (]) 10:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I love your work ] (]) 21:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
|}

== WikiProject Scouting Newsletter: May 2024 ==

{| style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" |
|rowspan="2" |
|style="padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em; |]'''<big>]</big>''' '''|''' <small>May 2024</small>
<br />
'''Notes for May:'''<br>
*Looking for something to work on? Try looking at, ].
:Some important articles that need help: ], ], ], ], ]
* We are working to develop a featured portal, ].<br />
*Looking for a new project? perhaps authoring an article on'' ]''

'''Other ways to participate:'''
* ] '''|''' ]
* ] '''|''' ] '''|''' {{watch|Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Scouting/Article alerts}}
|}
--]&nbsp;<sup>(])</sup> May 22, 2024
<!-- Message sent by User:TheDoctorWho@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Scouting/Members/delivery&oldid=1223364509 -->



== AFL players worthy of a blurb at ITN == == AFL players worthy of a blurb at ITN ==

Revision as of 05:48, 23 August 2024

Archiving icon
Archives
Index
Archive 1Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Welcome!

Hello, HiLo48, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Longhair\ 07:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

AFL players worthy of a blurb at ITN

I would be interested in your views on this talk page discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news/Candidates#Blurb_versus_Recent_Death:_Jim_Brown,_Jerry_West,_Bill_Russell Chrisclear (talk) 01:08, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

question

Hi I've created this article Draft:OneStream Live can you check the content and sources and what is your idea to be in main space Editorjummy (talk) 07:59, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edit on my talk page (User talk:Historyday01)?

I'm talking about this edit. You didn't explain a reason. I will gladly restore the content if you give a good reason. I was only doing some cleanup, that's all. Historyday01 (talk) 00:22, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Historyday01 Sorry. I have no idea what happened there. I don't even recall going near that page. Please feel free to restore all you believe is necessary. My apologies again. HiLo48 (talk) 00:36, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Recent Māori issues

Kia ora there,

Had this guy Roger 8 Roger reverting a few of my edits to do with Māori recently, and I stumbled upon your conversation with him. "Artificial use" of Māori instead of the "normal" English by "officially controlled bodies". "Academic or youth elite" using Māori "is seen as somehow right and proper". This editor clearly has some attitudes and isn't good at hiding them. Dhantegge (talk) 04:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Dhantegge - Yes, I'm Australian, and here we have a sub-class of racists here who object to any attempt to give places their original Aboriginal names in place of the names of white people. Mr "Roger" reminded me of them. It's sad that you have them in NZ too. HiLo48 (talk) 05:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
We call them closet ACT supporters (translation - Pauline Hanson's One Nation or perhaps Clive Palmer's racket). His latest is an attempt to go to war against something I added to the page about the Colony of New Zealand. I added a paragraph referring to the very well established historical consensus that there was a transition of nominative sovereignty to substantive sovereignty (the British declaring they controlled New Zealand in 1841 when they didn't versus 40-60 years later, when the Crown was secure), as well as the argument that Māori did not mean to cede their sovereignty (which has been found repetitively by the Waitangi Tribunal). He reverted this, presumably because he views British law as the only law which means anything and terra nullius as legitimate. In his mind, this means that the New Zealand colony existed with absolute legitimacy immediately after it was proclaimed by a handful of colonial figures, despite Aotearoa then having an almost entirely Māori population, in which they owned all the land and controlled the economy.
Roger's only comment was "no improvement - go to talk", which I did. Surprise, surprise, he ignores it. So these people win by default. Dhantegge (talk) 00:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

POV caution

Characterising media and major commentators in boxing saying that a judging result is unacceptable as "fans being upset" is so close to lying on both fronts of who (significant people) and what (criticising judges, not merely being upset), that it looks like a POV edit because you DONTLIKEIT. To insist on only this one thing, when there are many actual examples of fans just being upset (the opening ceremony 'controversy' for one) there, further makes it seem like you have something against a specific inclusion. If that's not the case, I invite you to explain yourself - and without the shouting this time, hey. Kingsif (talk) 03:28, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

  • I also suggest taking up invitations to discuss before you find yourself section-blanking without a reason (personal disagreement with inclusion is not sufficient for section-blanking) - not to mention the edge of edit warring. Consider this message warnings for both. Kingsif (talk) 03:36, 30 July 2024 (UTC)'
Drop the threats. They will never convince me I'm wrong. Is that the way you always discuss things? HiLo48 (talk) 03:49, 30 July 2024 (UTC)