User talk:MSincccc
|
Archives |
|
Feb 2022-May 2024
|
|
This page has archives. Topics inactive for 20 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 6. |
| This is MSincccc's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 20 days |
| story * music * places |
|---|
Laughter for Christmas: thank you for your support and improvements, and enjoy the season! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:43, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On 5 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fashion of Catherine, Princess of Wales, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the fashion of Catherine, Princess of Wales, reportedly boosted the British fashion industry by up to PS1 billion within a year in 2021? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fashion of Catherine, Princess of Wales. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Fashion of Catherine, Princess of Wales), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.
spadesPMCspades (talk) 00:03, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi MSincccc, thanks for all your good work on FACs. I noticed your edit to Architecture of New York City, removing the link to New York City as an overlink. However, I should emphasize that an exception applies if the link is particularly relevant to the context in the article
; for example, a link to New York City would generally be relevant in "X in New York City"-style articles. - Epicgenius (talk) 15:02, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for pointing that out to me. I will be more careful in the future while making similar revisions. MSincccc (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @MSincccc. Please see Special:PageInfo/Louis Abramson#Page protection. I was removed it, but the page protection is already expired like this edit. Please self-revert. Thank you. --KuyaMoHirowo (talk * contribs) 09:25, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
| The Premium Reviewer Barnstar | ||
| For outstanding work reviewing the bridge article, and helping it become what it is. And all the other reviews you've done on my FA nominations, and other editors' FACs. It is appreciated! Noleander (talk) 18:35, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] |
- Thank you. I appreciate it. MSincccc (talk) 04:13, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I've had the strange feeling for a while that you're following me around, editing the articles I edit, reviewing the articles I review, getting involved in the conversations I'm having. This morning, you popped up on Dorothy Olsen. Just now, you showed up at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Josef Hoop/archive2, pointing somebody to an essay I've been working on in my userspace which I haven't yet decided if I was going to publish or not. Given the topic of the discussion, had I thought my essay was ready to be shared, I would have done so myself. I haven't mentioned it anywhere, so the only way you could know it existed is if you've been watching my contributions.
Everything we do on-wiki is public, but to be honest, what you're doing is a bit creepy. I'm sure it is well-intentioned, but still creepy. And, as you've already been told by @Elli, not a good thing to be doing. As I was puttering around today trying to figure out if I was overreacting, I was reminded of this thread from last year and came to the conclusion that my feeling was correct. I'm going to add my voice to that of @SchroCat and @PMC who have already asked you not to do that anymore. Please leave me alone. Thanks. RoySmith (talk) 14:51, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]