User talk:Jeppiz/Archives/2014/September

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I'll ask you to keep in mind Wikipedia's WP:PERSONAL policy: "Comment on content, not on the contributor". --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 03:17, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks to go at this discussion: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents Sesto Elemento (talk) 21:35, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your heads-up, and glad that you've been keeping an eye on that page. Could you tell me a bit more about your suggestion? Cheers. THEPROMENADER 23:09, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I got your message on the Paris talk page; I thought you were suggesting doing something personally, that's what confused me. I'll consider it, though. Thanks! THEPROMENADER 23:17, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I think I'm going to take you up on your advice. Ten years of repetition is killing me. THEPROMENADER 19:02, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Done, sir. THEPROMENADER 19:59, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

(after looking a Paris talk page) Yeah, well. I really don't know what to say about the lack of attention the article, and the three pleas for help on admin boards, is getting. In my mind I'm imagining a flurry of behind-the-scenes e-mails sent to battle-fatigued admins who had the bad luck to leave a comment in any of them, and that they get so tired of it that they don't even want to look any more. That would fit with the 'usual' patterns, anyway, and that's the only explanation I can come up with. Do you know of any way to check on this? Paris-article complaints have always been left ignored or to stagnate, and I'd really like to know why. But thanks for your input these past days. THEPROMENADER 18:13, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to European Conservatives and Reformists may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• After the [[European Parliament election, 2009|2009 elections] the group was described in the media as [[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:16, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Subdivisions of Switzerland may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Lucerne]]), ''Amtsbezirke'' ([[Canton of Bern|Bern]]), ''district'' (in French) or ''distretto'' ([[Ticino] and part of [[Canton of Graubünden|Graubünden]]). The Bezirke generally provide only

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:26, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your lessons. --. HombreDHojalata.^talk 22:20, 28 September 2014 (UTC)