User talk:Viewmont Viking

Hello Viewmont Viking, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. McDoobAU93 23:30, 10 June 2012

Solved by Indian doctor, i try to update.The doctor is 'member of indian medical association '

Actually more twin births in Particular municipality have no specific reason.

Just probability of Chance.

Please read my subject if possible try to update

Thanq

అరుణ (talk) 18:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Viking,

You made a very substantial removal of material from List of euphonium players. Your edit summary simply reads as "NN". What does this mean? This is a lot of content to remove without explanation. I would like to know if this edit was made in error or not and if it should be reverted. Thank you for all your contributions.

-VanNate VanNate (talk) 01:11, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NN means non-notable, most lists of people should only include individuals who already have a Wikipedia article about them. This is explained on the talk page of the article. --VViking_TalkEdits 14:00, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wassup viking i wonder if i could change my name on wikipedia. And if i can, how?

Hi Viking,

Thank you for your continued contributions to improving article quality across Wikipedia.

I noticed that a significant portion of content was recently removed from the Truxton Trust article with the note that it was "poorly sourced." I wanted to kindly follow up, as the sections in question were supported by citations from the company’s investor relations site, news articles (e.g., Nashville Post), and reputable business publications.

In reviewing comparable articles such as Northern Trust and Bessemer Trust, I observed that similar information particularly detailed service descriptions and executive history is included and has not been removed. I understand every article is unique, but I’d appreciate any clarification on how Truxton’s article could better meet sourcing or neutrality standards to include comparable detail.

Would you be open to revisiting whether the removal was necessary, or perhaps advising how the content might be adjusted to meet Wikipedia’s expectations?

Thanks so much for your time and guidance. Webslngr99 (talk) 21:21, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]