User talk:FieldOfWheat

Hello, FieldOfWheat, and Welcome to Wikipedia!   

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zimbabwean cricket team in New Zealand in 2000–01, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alistair Campbell. 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) 06:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bangladeshi cricket team in South Africa in 2002–03, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Benoni.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1998 Coca-Cola Triangular Series, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Devendra Sharma.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @FieldOfWheat:! This may be a bit late, but I appreciate the edits you've made to articles like the 1896 Michigan gubernatorial election, adding information from newspapers of the time. I had a question for you: How did you go about searching this information? As far as I can tell, there isn't any way to search the text of these newspapers on the Library of Congress website, as they are images. I'd love to add more information from contemporary newspapers as you have done to Michigan election articles, among others, but I am not sure how to find information efficiently. I was wondering if you had any tips for me.RoundSquare (talk) 01:28, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1945 UK General Election Results.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Lewis Cawte (Talk) 22:15, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For all of your great contributions to Wisconsin and United States election articles! Thank you for all of your edits! JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 13:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Matthew Barber (politician) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Barber (politician). When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:50, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Thanks for the new pages you're creating - it looks like some great work. When making articles, it helps to add WikiProject templates to the talk page to allow interested editors to find the page. You can also give your articles a cursory assessment to help with the backlog of unassessed articles (see the Elections WP backlog). If you need any help, just reply using {{ping|Gazamp}} at the start of your message. Happy editing, Gazamp (talk) 16:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FieldOfWheat

Thank you for creating 1808 Connecticut gubernatorial election.

User:Celestina007, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Celestina007}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Celestina007 (talk) 06:21, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I noticed the images sizes in the infoboxes of the election articles you are creating are very inconsistent. Rather than setting the size as 100px, they should be 100x100px (or probably 150x150px). This ensures the images have the same height. You can also set this by simply adding | image_size = 150x150px and adding the file names without links or size settings (see e.g. this change). Note that you'll still have to set the size of blank images manually as otherwise they become too wide. Cheers, Number 57 21:48, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @FieldOfWheat: Why did you revert this page again? It is customary to provide a reason for reverting an article, particualrly after it has been reviewed at NPP. We are not blind mice wandering about in empty church. Conversation and back and forth is the lifeblood of the place. If you keep reverting in this manner, I'm going to start issuing warnings, then I'm going to ask for page protetion because your currently edit warring, then an admin is going to get involved, which can lead to blocking. That is usual pattern. They was a reason the page was reverted, because are crap. Don't revert it again. scope_creep^Talk 08:16, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly don't issue these braggadocio threats against me. Especially when you are in the wrong. You were wrong to delete the page 1962 United States Senate election in Kentucky and try to send it back to a redirect. The references were good,not "crap". It is you who had no reason to revert the page back to a redirect. Your moronic references to blind mice were just that: moronic. Your officious insidious references to warning me or blocking me were more nonsense. Now, don't revert the page back to a redirect again and don't insult me further with your idiocy.FieldOfWheat (talk) 22:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you for your contributions. Just a quick note to remind you that it's usually not necessary to bypass redirects like this. Most are harmless, and some are actually better than direct links to the articles. Further details: WP:NOTBROKEN. Thanks again, Certes (talk) 19:38, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wonder if you can fix this minor goof in the police interrogation section on Lee Harvey Oswald article: the current words, “went downstairs where he encountered Baker” give the impression Oswald said the encounter took place at the second floor lunchroom but Holmes clarifies that Oswald was talking about encountering the officer at the vestibule on the first floor by the front entrance. Holmes describes two set of doors which were in the building vestibule (which were a front lobby between two set of doors). I propose the paragraph could be rewritten to reflect Holmes’ testimony something like: “Oswald said he was at the first floor vestibule by the front entrance and wanted to see what the “commotion” was when he encountered an officer.”213.107.85.98 (talk) 08:46, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I'm just inquiring if you knew my great uncle Kenneth I'm try to trace more of our family history please get back to me if you could my email is Shivamitimber@gmail.com Thanks John Brooke 2A00:23C5:A497:5201:415B:AB0C:C1AD:D4EE (talk) 12:46, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FieldOfWheat,

A new account made an edit to this article that you created. I reverted it, based on other edits they have made, but I'm hoping you could review it and ensure that it was inappropriate. It was unsourced which made it more suspicious to me. Thanks for your help. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Belated thanks. The sources for the Republican result (of which I added a number) give no candidate by the name of Wolf so you were right to revert it. FieldOfWheat (talk) 13:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from http://www.olympedia.org/athletes/17975, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please let me know if you have any questions. — Diannaa (talk) 13:26, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It obviously wasn't cited from there as a reference was given to https://olympics.com/en/athletes/walter-adolph-mccreery And I have no idea what you've done that the edit is crossed through on the article history. FieldOfWheat (talk) 13:46, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Identical prose appears on both websites. This is not unusual. The part I removed starts "As a polo player,..." and ends "... Friz Hill in 1904." — Diannaa (talk) 14:11, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from 2022 T20 Blast into 2023 T20 Blast. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:34, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Grow up. No attribution is needed.FieldOfWheat (talk) 22:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not. Perhaps you could explain? — Diannaa (talk) 01:19, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's a completely separate article and 95% of the content is completely, observably, new content. The fact that Derbyshire will play Lancashire at Edgbaston on 20 May 2023 has nothing to do with the 2022 T20 Blast. Besides, the text of the 2022 competition is in illiterate English; I flatter myself I can do better than that.FieldOfWheat (talk) FieldOfWheat (talk) 20:54, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, 2004 NatWest International, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are six references in the article, if you read it. It's just references are not there in the usual way. A reference marked '[Scorecard]', as it is, is still a reference, just not in the usual manner. Someone really needs to talk to WP:CRICKET about this. FieldOfWheat (talk) 20:42, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

No improvement since being moved from mainspace.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:2004 NatWest International and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

Greenman (talk) 09:01, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FieldOfWheat! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Greenman (talk) 09:01, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FieldOfWheat. Thank you for your work on 1859 Rhode Island gubernatorial election. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hey there! Hope you're having a great day. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia with your article. I'm happy to inform you that your article has adhered to Wikipedia's policies, so I've marked it as reviewed. Have a fantastic day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:14, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SportingFlyer were:

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.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:2004 NatWest International and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

SportingFlyer T·C 19:51, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FieldOfWheat. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2004 NatWest International, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FieldOfWheat. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "2004 NatWest International".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:44, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm slightly bemused by your edit on Luke Akehurst here: [1] I came onto this talk page assuming that this juvenile edit had been done by a vandal not an experienced editor such as yourself. Please do not do this again. Thanks Michaeldble (talk) 16:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised you - or anyone - would pop up to defend an awful human like Luke Akehurst, who has no connection at all with County Durham, who was a Hackney Labour councillor for a while and who cared for nothing but internal Hackney Labour CLP politics, and who turns up in County Durham as an MP because Labour thinks they can shoe-horn anyone they like in on the local plebs. Very few councillors draw public notice by the publication of a parody blog; most councillors are anonymous people. Akehurst was so bad members of his own Labour party published a parody blog. Some people are just awful. I don't know who you are, but I don't need you turning up here to defend an awful human being, a complete hack with no redeeming features whatsoever.

I see you're based in County Durham so perhaps you're unfamiliar with Hackney councillor Akehurst. That's no bad; Akehurst himself knew nothing at all of County Durham until June this year. The idea some middle-class London lobbyist would represent a mining community when Akehurst has as much idea of mining as he does digging a potato out of his garden (he declined to do so because he had no marigold gloves). Akehurst has no redeeming features at all. If you live in County Durham you must know this. FieldOfWheat (talk) 15:52, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly I don't give a shit about Akehurst but Wikipedia isn't the place to insert your personal commentary. Start a blog or a Twitter account if you want to vent about what an 'awful human being' he is or about the Labour Party selection process. Thanks Michaeldble (talk) 22:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]