Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 15 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 10.

ZimZalaBim, my edit was factual and I can show you some sources, your message on my talk page violates my talk page rules John George III (talk) 22:49, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to peruse Holy_Roman_Emperor#List_of_emperors and the multitude of other sources that reflect the fact that lothair III preceded Frederick I as HRE. --ZimZalaBim^talk 22:52, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

im talking about my image and also may you address your violation of my talk page rules John George III (talk) 22:55, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

wikipedia is not a reliable source and serious reliable sources state that Frederick's uncle, Conrad III was his predescessor John George III (talk) 22:57, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not as Holy Roman Emperor. Check your sources. --ZimZalaBim^talk 22:59, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

King of Germany just upgrades ing HRE John George III (talk) 03:30, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The full version of that image already exists on the page. I'd suggest you engage in discussion there if you think the infobox image should be changed. And I suggest you read WP:OWNTALK: "purpose of user talk pages is to draw the attention or discuss the edits of a user". Feel free to remove messages, but you cannot prevent other editors from communicating with you. --ZimZalaBim^talk 22:58, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i'm not trying to not communicate, but I want other editors to follow my talk page rules which do follow the rules John George III (talk) 03:31, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

have u even read my talk page rules John George III (talk) 03:43, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and I find your declaration that "If a post does not follow these rules it will be deleted and ignored" counter to the collaborative nature of this project. --ZimZalaBim^talk 03:51, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

other editors have made the same declaration and are just fine(ex. SounderBruce). + it isn't that hard to follow the rules. John George III (talk) 03:53, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fear you are misinterpreting his talk page header. He asks users to keep content-related discussions on the respective talk pages to avoid WP:DISCUSSFORK. That's quite different than your demand of a particular format for talk page comments (which runs counter to many of our standard talk page templates and warnings). --ZimZalaBim^talk 03:58, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ok then back to main subject Conrad III came before Federick I John George III (talk) 03:59, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Conrad III of Germany was never the Holy Roman Emperor. If you want to argue your case, do it on the article's talk page, not here. --ZimZalaBim^talk 04:06, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ur the one who brought it up Zim John George III (talk) 04:13, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All lines are down. Beta users have been down 45 days. Users who have been with the company a decade, including myself, are also down. The filing will be public tomorrow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2025-34452-40 (talk) 03:51, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced rants don't belong in an encyclopedia. --ZimZalaBim^talk 03:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is this article good for deletion link here, I want a view from an experienced editor such as you John George III (talk) 05:03, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You should bring up any concerns on the article's talk page. Be sure the check out WP:DEL-REASON. --ZimZalaBim^talk 13:33, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks John George III (talk) 15:09, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Zim, you reversed my edit on the Internet Culture page, but I am not sure why you did so. I checked the validity of my sources (that I got from Google Scholar) before I edited the page. --Hithisismeandmywikiusername (talk) 17:12, 19 November 2025 (UTC)hithisismeandmywikiusername[reply]

If you are referring to this revert then my edit summary explains my reason. I'd be quite surprised if Google Scholar provided publications that were from rtatel.com or www.be-ys-outsourcing-services.com. --ZimZalaBim^talk 19:36, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused about the message you added to to my talk page Zim, mind elaborating. John George III (talk) 20:31, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit you inserted personal commentary of "In act it is even bigger than some small countries!" into the text of an article. This is inappropriate (and not grammatically correct, I might add). --ZimZalaBim^talk 20:41, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

act was a typo for fact and that is a verifiable fact John George III (talk) 20:42, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ex. Russia & Italy John George III (talk) 20:43, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While you might find it interesting -- perhaps even exciting -- that California's economy is larger than some countries, we don't insert our personal opinions into articles, especially in such a way that lacks an encyclopedic tone. --ZimZalaBim^talk 20:45, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

its not an opinion John George III (talk) 20:46, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Take it up on the article's talk page, not here. That's where content discussions belong. --ZimZalaBim^talk 20:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I never the WP:THE policy in your info. John George III (talk) 02:30, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you are trying to say here. (And feel free to just reply to messages on your own talk page, rather than splitting the conversation.) --ZimZalaBim^talk 02:45, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was deleting discussions we have concluded Zim John George III (talk) 02:59, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As the warning I left on your page noted, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. --ZimZalaBim^talk 03:02, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

then may u archive it John George III (talk) 03:07, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

lowercase sigmabot III will take care of that automatically. --ZimZalaBim^talk 03:13, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks mind archiving this conversation as well John George III (talk) 03:29, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't help but feel that your watching of their talk page and contributions might be overly off-putting, which can have the unintended consequence of making that editor frustrated, which we all know will make it harder for them to acclimate to editing. Specifically, this revert on London, Midland and Scottish Railway comes across as rote: While that user's edit was not, in fact, needed, it did not do any harm to the article, and would have been a good one to leave alone, to give them a 'win'.

As you yourself pointed out, this editor seems to be young. We should expect a bit of incompetence, and it would benefit the project more if we assisted them in gaining competence, rather than punishing them for an incompetence which is very likely out of their hands. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:41, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. --ZimZalaBim^talk 15:45, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Criticism of Yahoo, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Yahoo until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]