User talk:Resequent

February 2023

Hi, you wrote on my page about the Paula method, which is a reputable and disseminated approach. The previous article took one poorly-defined research paper and used it to discredit the method. In other languages, the method is widely disseminated, but due to a culture of secrecy, it hasn't reached worldwide acceptance. That being said, I can assure you from personal experience with the method that it's an awesome practice. I'm sorry I couldn't build the article out more. Paula Method. Ray Solano (talk) 08:29, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ray Solano thank you for your message. There's no need to apologise, you've done nothing wrong! Remember you are free to re-create the article in the future once it has enough reliable sources to back it up. I would suggest using WP:AFC which allows you to submit an article for review to ensure it meets Wikipedia's standards. Resequent (talk) 10:43, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article has previously existed several times with plenty of reliable sources. What if you contributed instead of deleting? shame Ray Solano (talk) 12:55, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ray Solano I didn't delete the page I WP:PRODed it. I did first try to improve the article but couldn't find any reliable sources about it - either in favour or against. The only sources I could find were self-published primary sources. You are free to add these reliable sources you refer to and submit it to the draft process. Resequent (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Hello, I'm ButterCashier. I noticed that you recently removed content from Pied Piper of Hamelin without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ButterCashier (talk) 13:03, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ButterCashier, I removed a large uncritical list of 40+ adaptions of the pied piper and left a link to a page dedicated to that Pied Piper of Hamelin in popular culture and a small summary sentence to improve the readability of the page. I also left the edit summary 'clean up long list of media' Resequent (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was probably better, I just reverted hastily. Thanks for editing! ButterCashier (talk) 13:51, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No harm done! Resequent (talk) 13:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]