Hello, Docentation, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Marvellous Spider-Man 16:16, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Salimfadhley. Docentation, thanks for creating Ingando!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. You cannot use Wikipedia (or any other Wiki site) as a source for a Wikipedia article.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Salimfadhley (talk) 00:14, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Docentation, Jarrvis here. You're quite right - 'self-contradictory' can appear a harsh label. However, what I suggested was self-contradictory was not the use of two different sources with two different claims. If anything, that would be sound academic practice, to point out the diversity of views. What I suggest is self-contradictory was the claim that the Ingando camps were first used in a particular context (even before the Rwandan Civil War), and then an immediate follow-up claim (with no effective caveats made whatsoever) that they were post-Civil War instruments.

Regarding your second question, it appears clear that where conflicting views from the sources exist, the views ought to be clearly set out (along with the supporting source material). Having reviewed the alleged "sources", I can find little evidence that the deleted one is genuinely any support for the claim it purportedly made. The link was at best tenuous, and quite simply superfluous. In this context, its being elided appeared eminently justifiable to me.

Jarrvis (talk) 07:24, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Docentation, I have edited your recent contribution to Aberporth. See [1]. Cheers! Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 17:26, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Gareth Griffith-Jones:; thank you for changing that. May I ask whether it’s standard practice? (I ask because it seems to be to be slightly more inelegant to have Welsh: x (y) than “the Old Welsh a (b), c (d)” &c.) If it is I shall rectify my other additions—it just occurred to me that my copy of Place-Names of Great Britain and Ireland is useful for something other than joking about possessing boring books to friends, so I intend to upload most of the etymological information from it to Wikipedia in the fullness of time. Docentation (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! No, not standard practice, but if a template is available, I tend to use it. I suppose it was the "old" that I took notice—seemed redundant as modern Welsh applies too. Does that make sense? Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 17:40, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see, @Gareth Griffith-Jones:; I have a feeling that the template was intended to be used slightly differently, though I share the desire to use templates where they exist. The example given at Template:Lang-cy is “Thuringia (German: Thüringen)”, which is different from “Welsh: aber (mouth)”; the former seems to be a reasonable use of punctuation, the latter not. As for Welsh and Old Welsh, I think that it is useful to distinguish between the two for etymological purposes, even if the words are the same. I don’t feel too strongly about this so I shan’t interfere with Aberporth. Docentation (talk) 17:58, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear back from you. Cannot disagree. Have fun with the etymology! Don't worry about pinging—you're on my watchlist since 18:26. Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 18:03, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Glad we reached consensus; I’ll revert the change to Aberporth if that’s all right with you. Docentation (talk) 18:23, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is. Wishing you a pleasing week! Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 11:13, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Docentation, hope you're doing well

Just wanted to drop you a note about National People's Congress Decision on Hong Kong national security legislation and the {{current}} template, as I saw you reverted my bot's removal of the template from there. {{current}}, per its documentation, is meant to be used in those extraordinary occasions that many editors (perhaps a hundred or more) edit an article on the same day, and not to mark an article that merely has recent news articles about the topic; if it were, hundreds of thousands of articles would have this template, with no informational consequence. Therefore, what my bot does is remove the {{current}} template from any article that's not been edited in more than five hours, because the need for the template is removed - the indication that "this article isn't stable because it's still developing" isn't necessary.

I hope that makes sense, let me know if you have any questions - the bot is still going through approval with the Bot Approvals Group, and your input is welcome!

All the best, Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 16:50, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Naypta: I see; I should have read the documentation. Thank you for pointing this out. Docentation (talk) 16:53, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I've just reviewed Johan Velde van der Merwe and wanted to thank you for creating such an informative and well-sourced article. Happy editing! Mccapra (talk) 12:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Public Finance Ordinance, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 14:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, High Court Ordinance, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 14:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Probate and Administration Ordinance, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 14:16, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Ordinance, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 14:16, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:49, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Docentation. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Public Finance Ordinance".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:27, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Docentation. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "High Court Ordinance".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:48, 8 January 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) 00:50, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Docentation! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor 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. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 21:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonathan A Jones: yes, fair enough—he who drafts inebriated had better (finalise) edit(s) sober. I suppose, apropos, that congratulations are in order. Docentation (talk) 23:32, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anti-Homosexuality Bill, 2023, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Kirby.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]