User talk:xDanielx

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Introduction · Review · Résumé · Contact

Hey there! I'm xDanielx (talk contribs count logs page moves block log email), a student from California and an admin on the English Wikipedia. I'm often busy with academics, so I may be late in reading messages posted here, but feel free to email me if you need my attention.

I am the owner/maintainer of fuBot. If you were redirected here from the bot's talk page, please leave your message here so I'll be more likely to see it promptly.

RFA Thanks[edit]

Wikipedia has a second Carlos admin[edit]

[edit]

Hello, XDanielx. You have new messages at Mendaliv's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter (September 2009)[edit]

The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter
Issue 2 (January 2010)

Previous issue | Next issue

Content

WikiProject Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter[edit]

Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter

Volume I, Issue III
February 2012

To contribute to the next newsletter, please visit the Newsletter draft page.
ARS Members automatically receive this newsletter. To opt out, please remove your name from the recipients list.


Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Edit that don't respect NPOV[edit]

Hello,

This is a polite observation that some of your edits appear to not respect WP:NPOV. This edit isn't neutral. You removed peer-reviewed scientific studies from the lead, even though these are given considerable attention in the article. Your edit summary "Attempt at a more neutral lede with less details" doesn't make sense. The lead is not too big at all (according to MOS:LEADLENGTH) so why would you want the lead to have less details? Indeed earlier you had added opposing viewpoints to the lead. Your edits seem to be violating WP:FALSEBALANCE as they seem to equate the majority of sources that find GHM figures credible with those that don't. VR (Please ping on reply) 22:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]