User talk:A H Butt

A H Butt, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi A H Butt! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Masumrezarock100 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Infobox modules

Hi, thank you for your edits to Alec Douglas-Home. Unfortunately the infobox in use there only supports up to 16 sets of office parameters, and your attempt to add a 17th caused the infobox div to fail to close, causing the entire article to be wrapped in it (because the 17th, containing the closing markup, wasn't displayed). This limitation is presumably why the infobox used modular infoboxes, so it would be wise to leave the modules in place. I've changed its usage so each module resets numbering from 1, which should make it more straightforward to add more offices without causing things to break. Hairy Dude (talk) 11:21, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Andrew Adonis, Baron Adonis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department for Education and Skills (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Military infoboxes

Hi - I am not sure that it makes sense to change the military infoboxes for senior military personnel to officeholder infoboxes. Sir Nick Carter is notable as soldier and should therefore have a military infobox. While the Chief of Defence Staff is indeed an office holder, to be consistent, you would need to change the military infoboxes for all previous chiefs of defence staff, all previous Chiefs of the General Staff, all previous Chiefs of the Air Staff, all previous Sea Lords etc which would take a huge amount of time and would be a great shame. The officeholder infoboxes contain no new information (and are repetitive) as the succession details are already in the succession boxes. Thoughts welcome. Dormskirk (talk) 11:20, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Turkish-Islamic synthesis (March 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by PrussianOwl was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Turkish-Islamic synthesis and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Turkish-Islamic synthesis, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and will be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

PrussianOwl (talk) 15:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eluned Morgan, Baroness Morgan of Ely, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alun Davies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alun Michael, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of Trade and Industry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide edit summaries

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:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

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! --Inops (talk) 15:22, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About linking and capitalization

Hello.

Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

You recently made this change. I have seen you doing the same change in another article that I have since corrected. I'd like to point out two things for you:

The word "peerage" is not a proper noun, and so should not be capitalized per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters.
The linking style of [[Life peer]]age is preferred over [[Life peerage]], because it leads to the linked article directly, not over a redirect. Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#Style.

Please do not do these types of changes again.

Thanks, and all the best

HandsomeFella (talk) 09:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again.

Please stop making changes like the one I described above, such as this one.

HandsomeFella (talk) 07:21, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Stop your disruptive editing, or be reported. HandsomeFella (talk) 06:03, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Links should be to articles, not redirects. This is very disruptive.Slatersteven (talk) 11:33, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been reported

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. HandsomeFella (talk) 11:12, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. You've been asked not to make edits like these[1][2] and they are the subject of discussion at WP:ANI, but you're continuing to make them and refusing to contribute to the discussion. Such behavior is disruptive. When other editors complain about your edits, you are required to desist and discuss them. DrKay (talk) 13:50, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been reported again.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. HandsomeFella (talk) 11:15, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:54, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hope to be able to unblock your account soon. But please take time to respond to queries from other editors on your talk page. This is a collaborative project and communication is not optional. Thank you — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:55, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]