User talk:47.19.150.58

You are correct on the Kingdom of Munster I guess Sarah777 (talk) 22:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello! I noticed your contributions to Geoffrey of Monmouth and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

Create an account

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Necctaylor (chat) 19:12, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Local People's Congress elections

Hello, thank you for correcting things on the page for Elections in China. I was curious if block voting should be removed all together, or is the electoral system both block voting and combined approval voting? It seems me mentioning it as block voting is incorrect, or at least superfluous/unnecessary. --Criticalthinker (talk) 10:57, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@Criticalthinker: At least from what I can see, the system is a bit complicated. On the ballot, you have three options listed for each candidate (approve, disapprove, abstain; Article 40 of the electoral law) which matches combined AV, but unlike the normal version (where you can vote for as many candidates as you like), you only get as many votes as there are positions available (Article 43 of the electoral law), and you then have to deal with the rule requiring a 50% majority and a turnout over 50% to be elected, otherwise run-offs are required (Article 44 of the electoral law), and in that run-off you only need one-third of the vote. It appears that provinces technically also get a say as to exactly what voting system will be used (Article 14 of the electoral law), and the number of deputies in each local people's congress seems complicated, especially since urban and rural districts appear to be treated differently (Article 11 of the electoral law), so I'm not sure exactly how the system can be described in a concise manner. 47.19.150.58 (talk) 13:31, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

I believe you are correct on this. After looking more closely at it, it does look like the general system is a combination of block voting and combined approval voting. Like you said only getting to vote for as many candidiates as are there are seats is block voting. But getting to vote for, against, abstain - or write-in another candidate entirely - is a very peculiar brand of combined approval voing (CAV), but CAV, nonetheless. So, it really is both. This is all very interesting. This was my first time learning about approval voting, which is what was confusing me as I'd never heard of it. --Criticalthinker (talk) 09:40, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

July 2021

Hello, I'm Meters. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Courtenay Griffiths, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Meters (talk) 19:06, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

August 2021

Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Uri Party—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Serols (talk) 17:57, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, please note Wikipedia:Article_titles#Use_commonly_recognizable_names. --Serols (talk) 18:04, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to Volt Europa, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello 47.19.150.58! Your additions to Loxley Pacific have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 13:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

March 2022

Hello, I'm Oopsemoops. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to National Unity Party (Myanmar) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Oopsemoops (talk) 15:15, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

---