W
Active Editors
Back to Profile

User Talk: Doremo

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

'''''Archives'''''


{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K
|counter = 7
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(31d)
|archive = User talk:Doremo/Archive %(counter)d
}}

I have sent you a note about a page you started



Hi Doremo. Thank you for your work on President of the National Assembly of Slovenia ↗. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol ↗ and left the following comment:

{{Bq|1=Thank you for your work on this article. Please add more secondary coverage and establish notability as per WP:NORG ↗. Thanks and have a wonderful day!}}

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{code|<nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>Mariamnei<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}. <small>(Message delivered via the Page Curation ↗ tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)</small><!-- Template:Sentnote-NPF -->

Mariamnei (talk) 12:19, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Lauri Kettunen (linguist) ↗



Hi, just curious. Why did you specify MDY dates in the article when, in Finland, DMY dates are standard? Regards Denisarona (talk) 08:43, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

:Thank you for your message. I used MDY because it is the dominant pattern in the variety of English that I use. Because the article is written in English, the date format used in Finnish is irrelevant on English WP. Please see WP:DATEOVER ↗ (note at Point 2) for a summary regarding non-English-speaking countries. Doremo (talk) 09:44, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

DM



Hi, is the DM not the correct post-nominal for the Doctor of Music? It seems to be indicated as such on the Wikipedia article "Doctor of Music".

Tennisedu (talk) 03:37, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

:Please see MOS:CREDENTIAL ↗: "Post-nominal letters for academic degrees following someone's name (such as Steve Jones, PhD; Margaret Doe, JD) may occasionally be used within an article where that person is not the subject, to clarify their qualifications concerning some part of the article, although this is usually better described in wording. Avoid this practice otherwise." Doremo (talk) 03:40, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice.Tennisedu (talk) 03:42, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

July 2026



30px|alt=Stop icon ↗ You appear to be engaged in an '''edit war ↗'''&#32;at :Egil Ulateig ↗. An ''edit war'' occurs when editors who disagree about the content of a page repeatedly revert each other's changes. Please '''do not revert or undo''' the edits made by other editors when your changes are reverted. Instead, use the '''talk page ↗''' to discuss how the page can represent consensus ↗ among the editors involved. Here is some advice on how to do this ↗. If discussions get stuck, you can request a third opinion ↗, ask for help at a relevant noticeboard ↗, or seek dispute resolution ↗.

'''Edit warring can result in being blocked from editing ↗''', especially if you violate the three-revert rule ↗, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts ↗ within 24 hours on one page. Undoing any other editor's work, in whole or in part, involving the same or different material, is a revert. You can still be blocked for edit warring '''even if you do not violate the three-revert rule''' should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr -->
:Hi {{ping|Doremo}}, I'm disappointed to have to leave this message as you're a very established user on here and have even won editor of the week award. Nonetheless, you have started edit warring on the Egil Ulateig, rather than engaging constructively. I've already stated legitimate reasons why mdy date formats should not be used on the page of a Norwegian subject but I'm getting little constructive counter, just quick reverts to your preferred revision. Additionally, rather than just change the date formats you're also reverting the rest of my edit – including my reduction in WP:OVERLINKING ↗ and some other minor style and grammatical changes – without giving any reason at all. Rather than blanket revert, individually changing the specific thing you agree with is editing in better faith and should be encouraged. For now I'm going to restore my edit WITHOUT the changes to the date format, which is where we disagree, and instead begin a discussion on the subject's talk page. I'd like to invite you to engage with me in this so we can reach a consensus. Thanks
Jkaharper (talk) 20:55, 5 July 2026 (UTC)