Baronedimare

  Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

 

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you.

  Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing →   Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Jklamo (talk) 20:35, 25 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi. The source you added for Liechtenstein at {{Same-sex marriage opinion polls worldwide}} does not check out. I dbl checked because the numbers did not add up. So I'm removing Liecht. If you still know the source, could you fix please? Meanwhile, I'm checking the other sources you used. Thanks. — kwami (talk) 02:11, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

I also deleted Albania, as it failed verification. I corrected the numbers for Costa Rica and New Zealand, both of which were wrong. I've now checked the figures for 4 countries you've added, and all 4 were wrong! I've tagged El Salvador, as I can't verify it either. — kwami (talk) 06:54, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, like I said in the talk page of that template, I took them from another wiki page: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Opini%C3%B3n_p%C3%BAblica_sobre_el_matrimonio_entre_personas_del_mismo_sexo_por_pa%C3%ADs

I don't know who added them in the first place--Baronedimare (talk) 19:58, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

That explains it. No prob -- I've done that kind of thing myself. I suspect there's a lot of it on WP. — kwami (talk) 05:27, 22 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Where are you getting your figures from? E.g. the change you just made for Costa Rica -- the previous figures were correct, though simplified, and the raw figures are not what you reported. — kwami (talk) 23:25, 22 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

From the source (?), page 9. Where did you find the numbers you added? I can't find them in the source.--Baronedimare (talk) 08:30, 23 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

The page history makes it look like I reverted your edit, but I just reverted the same IP you had. — kwami (talk) 18:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I really like how you put detailed effort and reversed the whole 'LGBT Rights in Vatican City' page's Summary Table and I like your work towards the Wikipedia

Link- https://wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Vatican_City

But I do recommend you to go and check the Summary table and review the content published The content can be wrong as there are no Surrogacy or IVF treatment available in Vatican City as well as there is no adoption center or blood donation services

So maybe some content of that Summary Table showed need a review so that People on the page can see best information about LGBT rights in Vatican City Rex30 (talk) 03:27, 19 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, even if there are no facilities for those treatments (I am not sure, but I'll take your word for it), there could be a one-time event (I'm talking mainly about blood donation here) and the current law forbids lgbt people from accessing them. Also, Vatican City law prohibits them for their citizens even outside its territory where they are available.--Baronedimare (talk) 07:24, 19 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Same-sex marriage opinion polls sub-nations has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Unconstructive editing in List of natural disasters by death toll destroying its format. Your edits have all been reverted. Please have a proper talk page discussion and seek consensus. You have been warned about Vandalizing other articles in the past, here it clearly says List of natural disasters EXCLUDING PANDEMICS. Do you not understand English? If you are patient and scroll down the article already has a list of death tolls due to pandemics, but the top most list is the list of highest estimated death tolls without counting pandemics and famines, please keep that in mind. This is the format of the article and you and all others including myself must comply with it. If I broke it I too deserve a warn. As you have received previous warnings for such behavior on other articles, next time you will be reported and may be blocked from Editing Wikipedia. Wishing you a good day and please do not go on doing such in future. Dilbaggg (talk) 14:09, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

The title of the article is "List of natural disasters by death toll". The lead of the article is "A natural disaster is a sudden event that always causes widespread destruction, major collateral damage, or loss of life, brought about by forces other than the acts of human beings. A natural disaster might be caused by earthquakes, flooding, volcanic eruption, landslide, hurricanes, etc. To be classified as a disaster, it will have profound environmental effects and/or human loss and frequently causes financial loss". The "excluding pandemics" you talk about is just in some tables, which weren't removed or modified by my edits. I just added another table which took into account all possible natural disasters, so maybe you should be the one checking what "vandalizing" in English means. Also, what are you talking about exactly when you say I have have been warned about vandalizing other articles in the past? thomasmazzotta 14:20, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

You were warned about vandalizing a same sex article above, and this list may be based on deaths by natural disaster but its not a single list it has multplple lists, and if we include pandemics they will overshadow all other disasters such as Earthquakes, floods , cyclones and all that caused so much damage. And WP:RS es agree 1931 flood is the deadliest natural disaster ever with highest estimated death toll 4 million, no Wp:RS puts pandemics on the list of natural disasters, microbes are living beings that cause diseases not natural phenomenon like earthquake, flood and cyclones. Anyway tthis was all discussed in past consensuses. There is a separate list ofof deadliest pandemics below, while the top list is a list based on "natural disasters according to highest estimated death toll excluding pandemics and famines" it was a format agreed based on proper consensus, and if you want to change it please seek WP:RfC consensus from other editors. i too want to add back the 1556 Earthquake but can't cause I don't have time to engage in consensus voting at the moment. Lastly I want to apologize, my phrase "do you even know English" was pretty rude however please do not make changes to a format agreed based on consensus, pandemics are caused by living microbes unlike say Earthquakes and pandemics over shadow/undermine all other natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods, cyclones that is why we agreed on the format "natural disasters according to highest estimated death toll excluding pandemics and famines", please do not go against the consensus. Best wishes then mate. Dilbaggg (talk) 16:34, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

If you read carefully the above topic about same sex marriage, it's about an user asking me to help him stop other users vandalizing that page. I wasn't the one who was vandalizing. Back to the main topic, it was not stated in the article's title nor in its lead that that page would not take into account pandemics and famines, so I just added another table without changing or editing the others. To avoid more confusion in the future, I think it should be clearly stated at the beginning of the article, and not just on single tables. Kind regards thomasmazzotta 16:45, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect List of least polluted (and most polluted) cities by particulate matter concentration has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 5 § List of least polluted (and most polluted) cities by particulate matter concentration until a consensus is reached. GnocchiFan (talk) 12:21, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply