User talk:Tacyarg
Add topic
Your edit reversion on Scots College ( Sydney)
[edit]Hey there,
I noticed that you reverted my edit on the Scots College page on the basis that the incident did not occur on school grounds. I understand the reasoning, but I don't think the location of the incident is necessarily enough to determine whether it is relevant to the school or belongs in a section discussing controversies associated with it.
For example, Knox Grammar School has been associated with a 2022 controversy involving students who participated in a Discord group containing racist and sexually abusive material. The activity itself took place online rather than on school grounds, but it was nevertheless reported as a controversy involving the school because of the involvement of its students. Thus, the incident is relevant to the Scots College article because the students involved were students of the school and the incident received attention in connection with the school.
lmk what you think Mikirrie320 (talk) 05:15, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
- Hi, @Mikirrie: Thanks for your note. I tend to disagree - there's only a brief mention of the school in the news article. If it gets more attention as for instance being related to the culture of the school, that would be different. In the Knox example, the school itself took action about the chatroom, despite as you say it not being directly related to them, so that feels a bit different. But I understand your point of view, and won't argue if you want to put it back in. I would say, though, it needs a better section heading than "Controversies". I would name what it is, something like allegation of sexual abuse by pupils. Best wishes, Tacyarg (talk) 07:02, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
- ah ok I understand now, I agree with you, I won't put it back until more comes out and/or the school gets more involved. I'll see if I can write a longer section about it, under your suggested heading.
- Cheers, Mikirrie320 (talk) 02:19, 15 August 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. Another editor has put it back, I think. Tacyarg (talk) 17:19, 15 August 2026 (UTC)
New pages patrol September 2026 Backlog drive
[edit]| September 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol | |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
Categories
[edit]Hi Tacyarg, did you figure out what's going on with category entries? The guy who deleted lots of them didn't answer when asked about it. Now someone else is doing it. Paul Matthews (talk) 17:44, 3 September 2026 (UTC)
Editing AKS Lytham
[edit]Thank you for your help with the AKS Lytham page. You helped me once before. I'm hoping that it won't be long before I can access that seminal article in Oxford Music on line so that I can add something to the article on Francisco Tarrega. It's frustrating not being able to read an article that you know is useful. Jaarn9 (talk) 15:57, 7 September 2026 (UTC)
Please do not change the names of files in articles. It breaks the link to the file. I have corrected the mistake. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask on my talk page, or to post at the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Sumanuil. (talk to me) 21:13, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
- @Sumanuil: thanks for correcting this. However, this was not originally me, but happened in this edit. You reverted those changes which corrected the spelling, including the change to the image name. I went back to that version and didn't notice that the other editor had changed the filename. Thanks again for picking it up; I did consider asking you about your reversion at the time. Tacyarg (talk) 21:19, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
