User Talk: Orxenhorf

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

A belated welcome!

thumb|The welcome may be belated, but the cookies are still warm! {{smiley}} ↗

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Orxenhorf! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions ↗. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Introductory tutorial ↗

Contributing to Wikipedia ↗

The Teahouse ↗

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center ↗.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian ↗! Again, welcome! Nyakase🐈‍⬛‍ (talk • guestbook) 11:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

{| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | 100px ↗
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Minor barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | For an unsung copyeditor and wikignome ↗. Thank you for 1000 edits of typo hunting, citation fixing, and copyediting. Your work is much appreciated! GreenLipstickLesbian💌 ↗🦋 ↗ 02:58, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
|}

Cody Wilson's page

Hey there! I noticed that you reverted the edits I made to the article for Cody Wilson. Roughly one year ago, myself and others raised concerns about potentially misleading description of his charges and the series of events surrounding it in the Talk Page, but there hasn't been much discussion on it since. The point of contention, from what I understand, seems to be centered on the nature of his current status as a "registered sex offender", noting that according to a Vice article in 2023, he completed his probation in 2022.

In my most recent edit, I tried to word it in such a way that avoided speculation on that (for which it seems there is scant recent reporting), but instead summarizing what had been reported about these events in chronological order. I actually didn't add any new sources for this, but rather paraphrased from the articles that had already been linked.

Since these sources (which appear to be reputable outlets) were already in use, I figured the reporting and content wouldn't be in dispute.

The larger context that these sources provided wasn't adequately described in the article, potentially misleading readers. I also reodered the chronology of events, which was written out of order.

In addition, I felt that the sexual assault case being buried at the end of a general "Personal Life" section among details about his education and fraternity membership, rather than being given appropriate weight as a significant legal matter, was inappropriate given the notoriety of the case and the widely publicized international manhunt.

Is there anything in particular that stood out as problematic - or perhaps libelous - in the revision?

I'd love to get some fresh eyes on the issue, so thank you in advance. Gcollins94 (talk) 06:24, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Haha, whoops -- I misread the log and saw that Iljhgtn was actually the person who reverted it. In any case, since you've contributed to the article, would you mind sharing your own thoughts on the matter via the Talk Page? Gcollins94 (talk) 06:31, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
::Correct, I did not revert anything on that page. I don't know much of the subject and only came by initially because somewhere out there is a 'citation generator' that thinks articles from the Los Angeles Times were written by X, Instagram, Email, and Facebook instead of a person. I noticed that the references in general for the article were a mess of missing author names, team names written as "last, first" person names, and people written out as "first last". I'm not particularly happy with having to redo all of that work because using an incremental undo was too much effort. Orxenhorf (talk) 06:05, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Charles Grey page

hey @Orxenhorf. Thanks for correcting my mistakes at page Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey ↗. i'm aware of my poor editing and i apologise for it. i would like to correct in the right way but i have to study for my o/l examinations next february 2026. so i dont have much time editing everything. so i could use your help in editing other articles as well add info necessary. would you be open to that? VictorTheVictorious (talk) 02:45, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

:VictorTheVictorious, I've pretty much hit the limit of what I can do with it. I've gone through the whole article and gotten all the typos, missing/extra words, or punctuation issues I could find. In the Appointment and cabinet ↗ section however, without going to a physical library, I can't check the Pearce and Smith citations to know what they should be as they both seem to be 'no preview available' on Google Books. Orxenhorf (talk) 03:10, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello Orxenhorf, Thank you for correcting ↗ my mistake ↗ in 2025 Lion City Sailors Women season ↗. I used citer tool ↗ to create citation and the tool generated a future date as <code class="tpl-para" style="word-break:break-word; ">|access-date=</code>. I will take care of such things in future. Happy Editing––KEmel49(📝,📋 ↗) 13:16, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi @Orxenhorf ! Thanks so much with your edit on Tablets of Stone page. You fixed a source for me. I'm still new to wikipedia, and trying to learn and do my best. Can you please explain what I did wrong with those sources with the wrong dates? I see this happenes to me a lot. I'd like to do better. TIA! BananaNotes (talk) 09:17, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

:{{re|BananaNotes}} The wikipedia software considers dates in the numeric format "YYYY-MM" ambiguous and will flag them with "Check date values in: ..." written in red in the references section of the article. They could be an incomplete or broken up "YYYY-MM-DD" format ("2025-12 -30") or a year range in the same century ("2004-08" vs. "2004-2008" and "August 2004"). MOS:DATE ↗ has a list of the formats it will accept and flag as errors. Orxenhorf (talk) 18:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
::@Orxenhorf That's very helpful. I'll try to look out for that. Thank you!! BananaNotes (talk) 19:31, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing my mistakes on the Billings airport article Montanaplaneguyy (talk) 03:50, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Signing your comments

Hey, just remember to sign your comments (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:~2026-57481-2&diff=prev&oldid=1335061700 ↗), had a bug in one of my scripts and was able to trace it back to comments being unsigned. Thanks, – LuniZunie(talk) 16:07, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

:Thanks. I just put one on it. I don't always remember which templates auto-sign and which don't, and by that point my brain was saying "sleep". Orxenhorf (talk) 17:47, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
::@Orxenhorf All good! – LuniZunie(talk) 17:55, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

syntax error

{{:cite web ↗}} generally worked without issue. i think "improper" would be a much better term, as calling it errant may be inaccurate. User "Oreocooke" (speak of the sun and it shines ↗) 20:35, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

:That the system tolerates a partial cross-wiki link in that location does not make it correct. Orxenhorf (talk) 06:28, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
::what exactly makes it a {{tq|partial cross-wiki link}}? User "Oreocooke" (speak of the sun and it shines ↗) 20:30, 16 March 2026 (UTC)