See User:Dream_Focus#AfD_comments where Black Kite criticizes you about civility.
Commpare with this, [1] with Black Kite advertising that you comments are "clueless" Ikip ( talk) 23:55, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I suggest you read Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions before participating in an AfD debate again. DJ 10:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Dreamfocus: I suggest you pick up the March 2010 issue of Comic Buyer's Guide and read the column "But I Digress." I think you will appreciate it. Padguy ( talk) 00:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree 90% with you! Bearian ( talk) 16:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree 100% with your newest essay. Bearian ( talk) 16:45, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Wherever I go on Wikipedia, your username seems to pop up (maybe I notice it because of the colors (or should I say colours) but I notice anyway). Although we obviously have different points of view I like the way that you battle for the freedom of speech and information on Wikipedia. Keep up the good work! (Or is that to British?). But the real reason why I am here is that, maybe in future, I would like to quote some of your statements in my user section. Would you be comfortable with that? -- JHvW (talk) 15:05, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
At least I feel understood! I have changed the Title of my article as you suggested, thanks FC 18:07, 17 March 2011 (UTC) Note: Moved from userpage by me. Airplaneman ✈ 18:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Please click here to find the answers to the questions you ask at the autoconfirmation RFC. Don't overlook the more recent/shorter time frame update on its talk page. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 22:07, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Dream, you probably don't know me, but I wanted to ask you something. I first encountered your tag on AfDs, which is the only thing I occasionally peruse now. From there, I found your user page, and that is when I was convinced that you are definitely a kindred spirit in heart. I used to be quite active on Wikipedia, but after an incident involving a deletionist (nominating hundreds of articles a day after tagging them with every notability tag possible - including ones that made no sense), I lost heart. A lot of work is now gone, perhaps forever, over just not being able to keep up with what he was doing. I did save one! - ( Bunnies & Burrows) - but others of equal references went bye-bye in ways you describe on your user page. So, now that I've given a little background, I have a question for you. How do you keep on going? In the past, I was passionate about trying to help Wikipedia. I took a break after the Gavin incident, and after two years, he has finally been banned. However, hundreds (maybe thousands) of articles are now gone - and each one could have been saved. I am just not sure I want to even try anymore. What would be the point? Wikipedia has changed - and I am not sure I want to be part of the environment it has become. Yet, you strive forward - and try to make a difference. Feel free to reply on my talk page if you like - or keep it here. I look forward to reading your response. (Interesting note, I had to comment on some AfDs really quick to get my recent posts high enough to post this here) Turlo Lomon ( talk) 17:41, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the detective work to find the editnotice page. Now I will not forget again. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:47, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Dream. I got impressed for the polemic produced in that debate, and seemed very, very unlikely the deletion of the article. In cases like that is it not obvious that any article should be kept? How is possible one admin taking that final decision? It is clear that a neutral committee should decide that. It seems pretty much a contestable act over there, therefore a clear case to the Deletion review. My main problem is finding time to all this, however I will be there if you or some else do the request. By the way, thanks for all; you are a true knight. Excalibursword ( talk) 14:33, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Kudos for having the guts of putting List of pedophiles for DRV. Your arguments make lots of sense. It's too bad that looks like the mix of BLP paranoia and deletionism trumps everything else again. -- Cyclopia talk 01:25, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Also, I nominated you to receive a t-shirt! Keep on the good work. -- Cyclopia talk 20:40, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
When there are that many people piling up on the other side of an issue, it's useful to contemplate what that means, I have found. It might have been better to let this one go, I think. Herostratus ( talk) 16:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
On the cusp of another award to added to your sizeable collection of awards.
Thank you man. Spoildead ( talk) 21:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Just a quick note to express my appreciation on your comments regarding what I view as a coordinated attack on ARS. Keep it up. Faustus37 ( talk) 08:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
˜ danjel [ talk | contribs ] 06:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Regarding a t-shirt nomination :) Jalexander-- WMF 02:43, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Article Rescue Squadron and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks,-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 22:10, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
This is a courtesy notice to inform you that a request for arbitration, which named you as a party, has been declined. Please see the Arbitrators' opinions for potential suggestions on moving forward.
For the Arbitration Committee, — ΛΧΣ 21 16:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
What part of "unsourced fancruft" is everyone failing to grasp here? An article that long should not have only four sources. And where is the out of universe notability? I'm not seeing it. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 19:02, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
— Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 01:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi! I recreated the article about the Danish band PPOT. WhisperToMe ( talk) 23:02, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Regarding comment on template:VAP when you said there was little there gender-specific, I would like to remove anything which is gender-specific and was wondering if you had suggestions for something there which should be removed? Ranze ( talk) 21:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dream Focus. Your edit comment here when you re-added a very surprising medical assertion needs to be backed up by the provision of the promised reliable sources. For such medical assertions, the standard to meet is wp:MEDREV. A television news spot doesn't come close to being good enough. LeadSongDog come howl! 04:52, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't think we were quite ready for that move yet - I had just proposed that we do that as an alternative to simply merging the variations into the main Sega Genesis article, and we're in the middle of discussing that. I would recommend reverting that move until we figure out which direction we want to go with it. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 23:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Tribune Entertainment shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's
talk page to work toward making a version that represents
consensus among editors. See
BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant
noticeboard or seek
dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary
page protection.
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Spshu ( talk) 13:37, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
I'd appreciate if you would take another look at the RfC discussion on the Shooting of Trayvon Martin. As you may be aware, I proposed specific text for consideration on 16 Aug in the discussion thread. I hope you will comment on that specific proposal. Dezastru ( talk) 20:35, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
A while ago, in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Persecution of Serbs and other non-Albanians in Kosovo, you said the subject was referenced, but didn't address the issue of improper synthesis. Would you be interested in working on that subject in a less contentious scope? I noticed we don't have a human rights in Kosovo article yet, and a lot of that content sounds like it might fit there. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 11:03, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Dream Focus. I'm in the process of completing a feature on the topic of "List article management" for WP:VG's newsletter and I was hoping to make this article include views from Wikipedians of several different perspectives. I've contacted a number of editors with whom I've interacted in the past (both in conflict and in cooperation), and several of them have agreed to help provide views for the article. I was hoping for two views at the very start to introduce the idea that inclusive "list of..." articles are one of the things that set Wikipedia apart (in a good way) from traditional encyclopedias. Sadly only one of the editors I contacted about this issue was available to provide a view. I've seen your arguments at AfD in favor of keeping "List of..." articles, and I think you might be well-suited to writing a few sentences covering this topic if you have the time. The newsletter is due out by October 3 so I apologize for springing this on you at the last second, but if you are interested in helping then you can find a draft of the article in my sandbox: User:Thibbs/Sandbox7. The part where I need one more quote is up at the top and you can just replace the dummy name "User:XXXXX" with your name. Please don't feel pressured, though, because I can always rework the article's top half if need be. I completely understand if you don't have time. Either way, thanks. - Thibbs ( talk) 21:46, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
This is an special invitation for experienced editors to the discussion in WikiProject Volleyball about the proposal for Notability Guide for Volleyball Players. Your wise and kind participation will be highly appreciated. Osplace 20:39, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm hiding from you.
Androzaniamy (
talk) 12:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
You're not almost always right.
Hello Dream Focus,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged ThunderCats (1985 TV series)/Editnotice for deletion, because it seems to be a test. Did you know that the Wikipedia Sandbox is available for testing out edits?
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Vanjagenije ( talk) 17:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Oops. It looks like I got a little carried away when editing Kill screen, and I didn't look very closely at your edit. It seems as though we were both trying to add the same Ars Technica article as a source at the same time, and I assumed that you were simply reverting the page. My version uses citation templates and has minimalist, stubby language culled directly from the sources, instead of the original text, which is not currently supported by the citations offered. It's not an issue to me, though. I'll self-revert to your version, if you want. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 22:40, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Are you sure you didn't want to combine it with the existing one, exactly 2 sections above yours? ES &L 09:59, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Northamerica1000 (talk) 12:50, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of film clichés, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chase ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:46, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Haha. You can never be too careful, can you. Martinevans123 ( talk) 23:32, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I've received your message but given that it's now over 24 hours since the last vandalism I'm not sure it needs semi-protection for now. For the record I'm only about intermittently at the moment so you'll probably get a quicker response on WP:AIV or WP:ANI than on my talk page. Lankiveil ( speak to me) 11:13, 31 October 2013 (UTC).
I was wondering, is there a limit to the number of times someone can repeatedly attempt to re-merge or delete an article. While Ryulong did the AFD and subsequent merge at Dragon Ball after twice blanking and redirecting it out, we've already gone through at least 4 merge battles over Ghost in the Shell and the latest is no different. He dropped out of mediation and went right back to the argument after it was already discussed for 100 pages in length. I simply do not know what to do. It's such a waste of time and Ryulong repeatedly deletes improvements. The Dragon Ball page is likely going to be kept, but this battle over every single page is really disruptive and damaging. I don't know what options I have left. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 12:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Interesting Topic | |
Thank you for introducing the Wikipedia Community to an interesting topic, International Military Antiques Inc! Olowe2011 ( talk) 17:00, 10 November 2013 (UTC) |
Lucia has just merged the Ghost in the Shell manga to the original contested page. [5] [6] Unless I am reading the !votes and arguments wrong, this is the third time it was no consensus this year. And if anything the discussion on the disamb is still in limbo. Given her comments at Talk:Ghost in the Shell (film) and the fact the manga is going to become a GAN when this is over and the game IS at GAN, I think a DISAMB is the best route. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 01:43, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of fish species that protect their young, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Suckermouth catfish ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:04, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Ryulong is trying to merge the Bleach (anime) page again; he's currently blocked for 24 hours for edit warring over at Knockout (violent game) which resulted in yet another RFC break down for a completely unrelated issue. ArbCom looks inevitable, but I worry about A&M's future. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 00:17, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
The editor that you reverted I can tell is going to edit war and he has a upper hand on the 3rr in West Monroe, Louisiana so please help me out with what seems to be bias and not liking it for a personal reason that we will probably never tell. Jhenderson 777 20:34, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
If you can put this on this on the watchlist or expand on this. Please do so. It's possible that it can be a victim of AFD. Jhenderson 777 14:45, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Reactions to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reactions to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Beerest 2 talk 02:42, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thanks for accumulating so much information on your user page. And also thank you for just being around. Perkohesisht ai i vjetri ( talk) 18:55, 9 January 2014 (UTC) |
"GA nonsense" is not 100% accurate. Many of the most broad articles are not GA, but many specific ones are GA or higher, including many military ones. While 99% of articles are not GA, the amount of work that goes into each article not at GA is not insignificant. It is not a good measurement stick to go by. Also, the GA process requires a full peer review of sorts and that is bottlenecking the process. I've done more than 50 in the last two weeks and that is completely insane. With that being said, I am sure I could do a GA a day if I needed to, but it takes 3+ months just to get the review started. That's such a broken process that the GAN system is the reason it so few people do it. I can try to fix that, but its something Wikipedia has made as its own barrier. Do you agree? ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 18:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Yum! Thanks for all of your work on Talk:Steve Jobs bojo1498 talk 20:08, 28 January 2014 (UTC) |
Part of the problem is that he is not apparently part of any "anti-abortion movement" per se, and is "against abortion" but linking to any movement might be not actually called for. The headline using :anti-abortion" is not part of the source, and the source only says "against abortion." Which is likely the proper term to use, and not wikilinked to something which might convey an erroneous impression. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 20:00, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
I guess you saw the signpost request for an ARS expose (if not it's here). Strange you were not notified. I am new to ARS and really like the idea of it and editors involved. However it seems like there are others out there who would like to see it closed down. I thought about replying but the questions led me to answers that I'm afraid could antagonize deletionists and/or draw attention to myself as an inclusionist to be knee-jerk resisted. And since this group has so few active members, a small handful, it's not clear bringing attention is going to harm or hurt. As such I'll add the page to my watchlist and follow not lead on the best way forward. I think a careful reply here could be beneficial to bringing in new users, but I don't know enough about the history of the project or where the fault lines are. Just some ideas it could be better suited to a reply by committee with a re-do of the questions (for example why the group was founded), basically using it as a recruitment platform. Or maybe ignored entirely. -- Green C 17:20, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Your interview was mentioned: User_talk:Buffbills7701#Upcoming signpost wikiproject interview. X Ottawahitech ( talk) 00:16, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
hi Dream Focus, I actually contributed to look for the sources by editing Achal Prabhala's article. I find that the abundance of sources clearly state the notability of this person. After the discussion was closed I even posted a note on the noticeboard of biographies of living persons (maybe not the right place) because I was surprised on how quickly it was closed. I obviously think the articles is a "keep" but I am not sure I should state it on the AFD; I have no COI but I know this person. Thanks for your work, -- Iopensa ( talk) 21:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I notice you've been trying to stir up opinions against my username in various places. If you've got a problem with me, my username, or my conduct, I'd appreciate you taking it up directly with me personally. ✄ ( talk) 12:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Regarding User:Dotarray, I revisited the talk page and noticed that she'd already been given a final warning. The account has now been indefinitely blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:47, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Doom 4 is now Doom. Too. -- Niemti ( talk) 12:59, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
So I've come back from a little breather in the A&M space and found that tons of issues still remain. While I've been cleaning up a large amount of them, it still totals over 9000 issues. 1/3 articles in the project have some issue. Obviously, I can't do all the work, no one really could keep it all up, but I want a bunch of GAs in the area. Should we fix the issues to improve widely the problem - or should a focus on perfecting individual pages? ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 02:01, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5 t c csd new 00:51, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Dream Focus, with respect to this edit of yours at Dragons of Summer Flame, you are quite simply wrong. There's been extensive discussion of which parameters are appropriate to infoboxes, and the agreement reached was publisher and release date should indeed be on the same line. (The month a book was published is unnecessary information). If you don't believe me, then try asking Randkitty, who is an experienced editor, or ask for help from WikiProject Books. FreeKnowledgeCreator ( talk) 22:08, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
New comment.
/info/en/?search=Talk:Racism_in_the_United_States#Pointiness
Evildoer187 ( talk) 18:33, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your help at Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency, much appreciated.
I've added a small bit to the lede, per your prior edit summary note request.
Cute bunny.
— Cirt ( talk) 20:55, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi. In case you didn't already know, Asgardian has been unblocked. Just thought you should know. Nightscream ( talk) 23:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Girls with guns is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Girls with guns (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Schmidt, Michael Q. 08:13, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
I undid your edit to that talk page. If theweek.com is a "high traffic" web site, consider putting the {{ high traffic}} template right above the first comment. If it is not a high-traffic site, then just leave it alone. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 18:55, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
You're right; a bomb and a bell aren't connected in normal thought. The connection is that naming the bomb the Tsar Bomba was analogous to the naming of the the other two well-known "tsars" in Russian history: the Tsar Bell and the Tsar Cannon (I don't know anything about a Tsar Tank). However, I'm content with your edit. SkoreKeep ( talk) 01:37, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Windows Calendar. Thanks. Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 18:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Its a search engine so you put in [ http://web.archive.org/web/20050401000000*/http://silverbulletcomicbooks.com/reviews for reviews ..silverbulletcomicbooks.com/news for news etc. As you find each use of the site as a reference just determine what it is and then search by clicking on the years that the review is from and then the months come up. As long as you know what it is and the date it isn't that difficult to locate the old reviw or news item.-- Mark Miller ( talk) 07:38, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Category:Keynote speaker, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich ( talk) 00:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
I am notifying everyone who participated in the Solar Roadways DRN that there is an open RfC at Talk:Solar_Roadways#RfC:_Should_the_cost_to_cover_the_entire_USA_be_included.3F if you have an interest in participating. Thanks. -- Green C 20:28, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I'm okay with This edit and am stopping by just to point out that your use of "notable" in the edit summary suggests you don't know the difference between WP:NOTABILITY and WP:WEIGHT. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 23:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Actually, no I was not ok with the edit. You restored without discussion. That's edit warring. I'll start the thread at talk. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 23:08, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Nikkimaria ( talk) 20:06, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm inviting you to take part in this discussion to detail the fate of Danielle Judovits' page as you had partook in some discussions for some other voice actors. -- Rtkat3 ( talk) 00:30, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Just want to say that I really appreciate your strong Keep votes on the deletion on most of the Actor pages including Catherine Taber. I don't know if Binksternet is a true Wikipedia admin or not. He/She seems to be on everybody's nerves including mine. - FilmandTVFan28 ( talk) 00:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Hey Dream Focus, just wanted to remind you that I sent an email 5 days ago detailing how to get access to BNA through The Wikipedia Library, please make sure to follow those instructions and complete the Google Form. Thank you, Sadads ( talk) 16:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
You were mentioned on
Jimbo's talk page, and going through your talk page I can quickly say that you definitely deserve another barnstar to adorn your rather oversized collection...
I wish you good luck in your Wiki-Career. Um, yes. Enjoy the barnstar! -- k6ka ( talk | contribs) 20:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC) |
Hey Dream Focus, I have approved your access to Wikipedia:Keesings but need you to follow the instructions in the email I sent a week ago. Sadads ( talk) 14:17, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
hi, any thoughts on how best to deal with this? /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Deletion_review#List_of_chess-related_deaths -- Zymurgy ( talk) 16:48, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Instead of reverting you at the draft page again, if you could provide the actual quotes and time of videos where HL3 is mentioned, I can leave it. I can only see the sources saying it might be part of the Half-Life series, nothing else.
You may be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Wolverine article moved. 68.57.233.34 ( talk) 10:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 August 16#File:Hearts XP.png. Thanks. Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 12:27, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
The Socratic Barnstar | ||
That userpage! Antrocent ( ♫♬) 20:09, 24 August 2014 (UTC) |
I think this maybe of interest to you I created Stinkor and Moss Man if you feel you can improve it I would appreciate it and I have contemplated creating more Masters of the Universe characters if you agree or disagree I have started a discussion at Talk:List of Masters of the Universe characters. Dwanyewest ( talk) 22:02, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
I wanted to let you know that the ALS IBC participants article was deleted after all. The closing admin accepted my request of userfy-ing it to User:AmaryllisGardener/List of Ice Bucket Challenge participants. Regards, -- AmaryllisGardener talk 17:20, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
[14]. It took me a while to work out what had happened. (I think this is a rare case where removing your comment was justified, but if you disagree then please restore it.) The editor who uses the pseudonym " JamesBWatson" ( talk) 20:15, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
..probably won't survive. Can I use this as a test case for uploading to your cultural phenomenon site, is it open to outside contributors? Might as well use a central place. -- Green C 18:01, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I want to create a request for comment with some long term members of the Article Rescue Squadron.
This request for comment would argue that the only way to reverse the negative trend of deleting other editors good faith edits would be for Jimmy Wales to step down.
Please e-mail me if you are interested. Walterruss ( talk) 08:03, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Wikiproject volleyball would like to hear your opinion in this discussion. Thanks, Osplace 21:14, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Very sad to see this Dream. For almost a decade you've been a talisman to the rescue squad and all those who've held true to Wikipedia's original values. I so wish I could give you a reason to return to your old activity levels, but sadly I think you're right. This project has devolved into an elitist's playground. Deletionists, serial reverters, witch-hunters, permabanners, tag bombers... These are the folks who now control the project. A few years back a many of us decided the best way to preserve our few remaining treasures was to disengage from AfD and the like, apart from a few sporadic token votes. Deprived of the chance for battle they love so much, deletionists would just move onto to others things out of boredom. This has met with some success, but it's only a holding tactic at best. As you say, no way to bring back the golden age of old. It's been a real privilege and an honor to have worked with you saving articles from destruction over the years, and I know many others feel the same. Perhaps one day with both get our enthusiasm back for this project. Until then take care my friend, and may all your best dreams come true. FeydHuxtable ( talk) 18:30, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey! How are you? Happy New Year! Thanks for adding more examples to bad call. Do you think you could add the references to those examples? Thanks! Bananasoldier ( talk) 14:59, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
As someone who has been active on the talk page, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walter O'Brien. -- Rob Sinden ( talk) 09:38, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Florence Colgate, I've reviewed some sources such as this and this. Though for a BLP, she may need to more sourcing to show lasting notability doesn't appear she became a model, but I do wonder if the AfD focused more on sources if this would pass. Valoem talk contrib 19:41, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Dream Focus,
I recall that in the past, we had discussed, possibly edit warred, an Ultima-related article. For this reason, I'm posting this message on your talk page to inform you of a couple of discussions which you may have some interest:
Any input is appreciated. Thanks! Steel1943 ( talk) 23:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Nikkimaria ( talk) 05:10, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Wikipedia Library Users,
You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thank you. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) at 16:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
If his maps are accurate and useful, what does it matter that he added the link? The maps are accurate, of the monastery and environs, and locating Shrewsbury in England. SPAM is selling something, he is not selling anything. He is sharing information on the topic, and what I read on his site all appeared to be accurate for the main themes of the series of novels. It is simply an external link, not supporting any point in the article like a reference. Some of the books have maps in them, very helpful to the reader. I have linked copies of the maps from websites in the articles on individual books, as part of the article, to show historical accuracy in the novels, as well as make the plot clearer. I understand that you do not like the author putting up his own site for an External Link, but I might have done so had I still been working on the Cadfael articles, hunting for sources. It seems not a big deal to me, and maps are often useful additions to Wikipedia articles about historical novels / historical mysteries in my view. That is why I reverted your action. Now it is over. -- Prairieplant ( talk) 10:42, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
For medical content we use refs per WP:MEDRS. We do not use popular press. Best Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 07:26, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
One, please go back and sign it.
Two, please be aware of these notes in WP:SPATG: "The following is a list of common misuses of the single-purpose account tag. You should under no circumstance consider anything that falls into the below categories as evidence for warranting an SPA tag. [...] Frequency of edits: A user should not be tagged as an SPA just because they only have a handful of edits." (emphasis added) Jeh ( talk) 02:09, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that back in 2009 you commented on the talk page for Brooke Greenberg, where you said that "Immortality is something worthy of an article." [15]. With that in mind, I thought to draw your attention to this: A68 protein. I happened to notice this protein during my medical studies recently, as it is said to be proof of the existence of reincarnation, because people with Alzheimer's disease *ALWAYS* have this protein, as do *ALL* infants and neonates, and it is said to be a possible explanation for why children don't remember much when they are little and nor do people with Alzheimer's disease. This is certainly food for thought! I tried to create a big article about it but it kept being knocked back due to it being "speculation". Perhaps you have something to add to it. Immortality is always worthy of an article, and the current article just doesn't do that pursuit justice. Mister Sneeze A Lot ( talk) 03:39, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
No, it's not as simple as that. Lincoln clearly stated, in confidence and in speeches, that he had no plans to interfere with slavery where it already existed. He supported only the measures that prevented it from spreading, starting this way as a congressman. His Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 was a clear departure from this, using war powers granted to the president to declare slavery in the rebellious states to be illegal. Furthermore, if this was his intention from the beginning, he would have done it much sooner, but it happened only as the political ramifications of the war changed. He clearly had an evolving opinion on slavery reflective of these changes. Ashrzr ( talk) 15:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!
With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:
Send on behalf of
The Wikipedia Library using
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I'm far from finished. This is a long-term project. I hope to have most of it done by the end of the day. I prefer to do it in stages - less chance of a mistake that way. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 20:16, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
You're relying on Sara C. Nelson as a reliable source? Ludicrous. Try to find at least someone marginally credible. Suggestions such as this should be topic-bannable offenses. jps ( talk) 03:15, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
There simply are not any high-quality sources which identify crop circles as being caused by natural forces. Using HuffPo as a go-to is just indicative of the low-quality sourcing that we have for this claim. jps ( talk) 18:17, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello! We already have an article here: Steve Jobs (film). Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 18:26, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey, how do you like I've done on The 100 trilogy page?-- NeoBatfreak ( talk) 07:28, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words about my Quality improvement efforts to Wikipedia, in your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Last Voyage of the Starship Enterprise.
A couple updates:
1. The discussion closed as Keep.
2. The Wikipedia article The Last Voyage of the Starship Enterprise is now rated Good Article quality.
Thanks again ever so much for acknowledging my efforts to improve the Quality of articles on Wikipedia in this manner.
—
Cirt (
talk) 03:20, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello Dream Focus. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Penetration Angst, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: not a valid speedy criterion, and A7 doesn't apply to films. Consider PROD or AfD. Thank you. JohnCD ( talk) 18:59, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
We've reached five million!!
The English Wikipedia now has over 5,000,000 articles! Woo-hoo! Feel free to pass this message on! You can never celebrate too much. Eman235/ talk 17:52, 1 November 2015 (UTC) |
Template:Atari game lists by platform has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Soetermans. T / C 16:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Ugghh Peter vasan ( talk) 00:26, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 16:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Merry Christmas, Dream Focus, and may your holidays be merry and bright . . . . Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 06:15, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi - the existence of this redirect has been brought up at Talk:Muslim Massacre (video game)#Electric Retard. I agree with the view that it doesn't make a lot of sense. Doug Weller talk 15:46, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on The World's Billionaires requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=BNnVCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA4&lpg=PA4&dq=Billionaire+Breakdown:+A+Look+at+the+Wealthiest+People+in+the+World&source=bl&ots=pMFV3uKOLs&sig=sVloiRUUEbCSO56jlwLcaTv-mQM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjaw97g0NTLAhUIaxQKHUZIBn0Q6AEIIzAB#v=onepage&q=Billionaire%20Breakdown%3A%20A%20Look%20at%20the%20Wealthiest%20People%20in%20the%20World&f=false. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 15:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of most profitable video games ever. Since you had some involvement with the List of most profitable video games ever redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 ( talk) 23:01, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:48, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I see that you commented at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/London_Buses_route_153. You may be interested in commenting at this new Article for Deletion nomination Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Buses route 53. Best wishes, jcc ( tea and biscuits) 09:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
(Another user) has posted a question for you there. North America 1000 04:29, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Notifying all named accounts who have edited this article this year. There is a discussion of whether this article should contain foreign language palindromes. If you would like to comment the thread is Talk:Palindrome#Non-English_palindromes_2 Meters ( talk) 20:59, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Dear DreamFocus: in this edit, you are obviously making a charge at some editors of POV editing--even of censorship, "whitewashing". Please refrain from using such terminology: it violates AGF and is needlessly inflammatory. Thank you. Drmies ( talk) 14:38, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Dream Focus. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
So I got a little bored this afternoon and needed something to do... TJRC ( talk) 00:04, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Brave Witches episodes#Episode summaries. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 01:06, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about the Punisher thing. That was pretty immature of me, I've been really frustrated recently by all the fans who don't read recent comics coming in being "not my Punisher" about the fact that the mainstream 616 version of him is now a Iraq veteran. Sorry. ★Trekker ( talk) 16:09, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
I have read your article that you left for me. As the Shinma on the Manga Wiki are considered MOTD, they would go well in the same category as the monsters from Sailor Moon, Tokyo Mew Mew, and any other anime that uses MOTD. -- Rtkat3 ( talk) 19:49, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
I am seeking independent and neutral viewpoints on the article ThoughtAudio, which is being considered for deletion. If you have a few minutes to review it, I would appreciate your article contributions and opinion on the decision as to whether it merits being retained and improved, or deleted. ThoughtAudio was targeted by the same editor that made a failed attempt to delete the wikiquote article Michael Scott Gallegos. There are only 3 reviews/votes so far. I am hoping that a minority viewpoint as to the worthiness of the article will not prevail. My work is mainly in the creation of new wikiquote articles @ ELApro and time is rarely spent in unproductive controversy. I am a long time editor for Wikipedia, but have not created many articles here. I would much appreciate your advice and/or contributions with regard to the process. ELApro ( talk) 23:26, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi,
You said you doubted that any of the stuff 2A02:C7D:4500:2200:2550:8859:C74:8A7F added is true, so I thought I'd let you know that I know the stuff about Pocket Racer is true. Not that the section was needed though, as it was already mentioned. Adam9007 ( talk) 00:06, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Your edits of over 3 years ago need to reverted. First of all, Tv.com is a legitimate external link for television episodes. They shouldn't have been removed. Some of the other links to scifi.com and a Outer limits page were fine.
But your links to Hulu.com aren't per both WP:ELNO and WP:ELREG.
ELNO says- "Sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content, unless the site itself is the subject of the article, or the link is a convenience link to a citation.[5] See § Sites requiring registration." Hulu isn't the site itself.
ELREG says- "A site that requires registration or a subscription should not be linked unless the website itself is the topic of the article (see § Official links) or the link is part of an inline reference (see Wikipedia:Citing sources)."
So the Hulu links are all wrong and the tv.com links need to be restored. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:59, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I have undone your changes on the “ Army Men: RTS” page. Tan units is not tank units. It is a fictional Tan Republic's army units. Type “Army Men Tan Republic” into Google for more info. Thanks. Disket01 ( talk) 18:22, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Re: recent comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fuji Food, namely here. Careful, now, stay on point, no personal attacks. See WP:Civility. -- Bejnar ( talk) 03:03, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Dream Focus.
You are invited to join
WikiProject Organized crime, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to
Organized crime. |
Sorry, I've done so many revdels recently relating to hiding revisions with copyright violations in them that I hit the button to hide the edit contents rather than the edit summary on those two. They're gone now. Hut 8.5 20:09, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Robert McClenon ( talk) 16:36, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I know you and Hijiri88 also seem to be having content issues in addition to the copyright issues, so I want to leave a note personally without the clutter of questions or the back and forth with another editor. You are clearly trying to paraphrase, that is good. The issue is that you are engaging in what we call close paraphrasing, which constitutes a violation of our copyright policy, even in very short amounts. You must right everything in your own words, full stop. If paraphrasing is too difficult, try to summarize. Any content that is a copyright violation must be hidden from the archives via revision deletion. Please also be very careful going forward with this.
I know you are trying, but repeated copyright violations lead to blocks, and most copyright blocks are indefinite (not infinite) until we can work out a plan with the user on how they can avoid the issues in the future (and I'm not saying I'm going to block you now, I just want you to be aware of the situation going forward). I'll take a closer look, but I think that at this point, there is enough to open a WP:CCI to try to see if there are anything in older articles that has been missed over the years. Please be very careful going forward not to lift text from online sources and only superficially change it. TonyBallioni ( talk) 16:23, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
The picture book is being published as part of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)'s efforts in India. You said
[...] it was released in Hindi and English translation in New Delhi, India, as part of the Japan International Cooperation Agency efforts in India.That last clause is a pretty unique grammatical construction, as the only difference is that you removed the acronym. This is an issue because you copied 58% of the source text's sentence and it accounted for 40% of the sentence in question. There are some things that you cannot restate in your own words (I gave you an example from my own content work the other day), but this was something where it was very easy to fix so as not to be a close paraphrase. TonyBallioni ( talk) 17:02, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm renaming the categories to bring them in line with the film score categories ("Films scored by John Williams," etc.), and for clarity—video games aren't composed, the music and scores for the games are composed. Trivialist ( talk) 17:10, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Template:Article Rescue Squadron Code of Conduct shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog ( talk) 19:34, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
I noticed you reverted by addition of a disambiguation note for Crown on Super Mario Bros, commenting that it is in the reference. I have looked at the ref but I'm no clearer if this should be Crown (headgear), Crown (heraldry) or what.— Rod talk 21:12, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you add defamatory content to Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. -- John ( talk) 17:14, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Did you disagree with this close as no consensus? Valoem talk contrib 20:29, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
You're an experienced editor. I'm disappointed that you appear not to be familiar with WP:TPO, which states:
Section headings: Because threads are shared by multiple editors (regardless how many have posted so far), no one, including the original poster, "owns" a talk page discussion or its heading. It is generally acceptable to change headings when a better heading is appropriate, e.g., one more descriptive of the content of the discussion or the issue discussed, less one-sided, more appropriate for accessibility reasons, etc. To avoid disputes, it is best to discuss a heading change with the editor who started the thread, if possible, when a change is likely to be controversial. It can also sometimes be appropriate to merge entire sections under one heading (often preserving the later one as a subheading) if their discussions are redundant. In order to ensure links to the previous section heading (including automatically generated links in watchlists and histories) continue to work, one should use one of the following templates to anchor the old title:
- Thread retitled from "{{{1}}}"., {{{1}}}, . Link (or template) markup may be removed from section headings, but the link should be recreated at the first use of the term, or in a hatnote.
Your heading of that section goes beyond any useful description of its topic to present a POV and disparaging slant on the section topic. Please put a more neutral, descriptive, and succinct header on the section -- I don't care whether it's the one I used or an even better one of your own choosing. Your revert was disruptive. Thanks SPECIFICO talk 14:06, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello — I've pulled the comments from the talk page after attempting to bring them in line. The issue here is that the user's addition contains a big mishmash of markup that isn't easily corrected. I'll give it another try, but veteran users should be well aware that talk page text needs to be easy to follow and approach. :bloodofox: ( talk) 20:32, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
The List of YouTubers is being nominated for deletion again. I don't know why. It's been nominated so many damn times. Take a look here. Mr. C.C. Hey yo! I didn't do it! 00:47, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Dream Focus, As you commented on the last BLPN just letting you know the article's back at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Kirsty_Gallacher for the exact same reason as before, Just thought I should let you know, Many thanks, – Davey2010 Talk 18:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
The article Mottainai Grandma has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Hijiri 88 (
聖
やや) 07:23, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Re [30]: FYI, "YouTube" can be cited "as a reliable source" just fine. It depends on the context. Oftentimes, as appeared to be the case here, the "YouTube video" being linked is a bootleg copy of some copyrighted material, in which case we are not allowed link per WP:ELNEVER, but that has nothing to do with the reliability of the source: citing, say, a National Geographic documentary as a source that you only know from a bootleg YouTube upload is still, normally, fine, as long as you don't link it. ( Assuming the documentary is legally available somewhere.) The lead of our Saint Peter article has cited a YouTube video for years. Note that I'm not saying you were wrong to remove that particular piece of text (you weren't) or that that particular YouTube video was a reliable source (it wasn't), just that your edit summary appeared to indicate you do not understand the policy. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 23:18, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Why did you remove the Facebook links to Rick' s pages? He wants them added. Who are you? Retrokimmer ( talk) 09:27, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Puzzle Puppers, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the confirms on the
Articles for Creation template atop the page.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk) 08:48, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Puzzle Puppers is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Puzzle Puppers until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 11:21, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
For having rescued "Learning by teaching". Jeanpol ( talk) 11:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
To all those who actually click a link offered and read through the entire thing, instead of just glancing at some random things taken out of context and a distorted description of them, thank you. The system only works if people do that. Dream Focus 22:27, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Stay away from Hijiri88, and abandon your combative behavior. The next block for this type of disruptive behavior will be much longer. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:34, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
You are using this template in the wrong namespace. Use this template on your talk page instead.
User escaped sanctions at ANi because only a warning was requested. He posted User_talk:TonyBallioni#Hijiri88_violated_your_instructions (archived) and this block is warranted. Just serve out the block and then leave the other user alone already per my advice on Tony's talk page. Legacypac ( talk) 06:20, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
I tried to warn you, but you didn't listen. So you've got the second ANI thread on you in as many months. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 20:38, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
The next time one of your countless obsessive disputes with Hijiri88 erupts on to the noticeboards, I will block you for a very lengthy period of time. The community is completely fed up with your disruptive behavior. Consider this a formal warning, and adjust your behavior accordingly. I have given the other editor a very similar warning. Please take my warning seriously. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:07, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Your battleground mentality regarding Hijiri88 has become disruptive behavior. Please abandon that combative behavior before you return to editing. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
You are using this template in the wrong namespace. Use this template on your talk page instead..
@ Cullen328: I'm happy to unblock, as long as Dream Focus takes the following advice - Do not talk to or about Hijiri 88 anywhere on Wikipedia. Don't bring him up in conversation, don't post about him on any noticeboard or talk page. If Hijiri 88 comes to your talk causing hassle, there are plenty of admins looking at this issue who can deal with it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:02, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Clarification. Is he allowed to bring me up and talk about me as he did at: User_talk:TonyBallioni#DF_and_"illlegal_Latinos" (archived) and many other times and places in the past? Can he follow me to an article talk page such as he just did yesterday at Talk:Healthcare_availability_for_illegal_immigrants_in_the_United_States? As I have said before, I support a no interaction ban between us. Dream Focus 19:22, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
I have punted this to ANI : Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Dream Focus and Hijiri88 (again) (archived) - we can debate the merits of an interaction ban there; I want this nipped in the bud right now. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:11, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
User:Dream Focus, sorry to see this. We've done good work together in the past. I think the issue here is basically no one has the time or energy to deal with two adults arguing all the time so it's easier to just block it out and move on to other problems. Trust that if H behaves badly enough, long enough, he will get his due. It's out of your hands now, every post you make causes boomerang. I guess if you can't handle H's behavior (ie. ignore him) then you can't handle being on Wikipedia; I hope that is not true. We all have run-ins with difficult people. I had one notorious follow me around for over 3 years, voting contrary to my every consensus vote, hyper-tagging articles I wrote with inline and top hat complaints, reverts, nasty snide remarks etc.. it was hellish but kept in check by ignoring the baits. IMO an old-shool unblockable playing the long-game is unwinnable, but in the mean time we need your continued support for ARS. -- Green C 16:38, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Dream Focus ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
UTRS appeal #22088 was submitted on Jul 16, 2018 17:38:23. This review is now closed.
-- UTRSBot ( talk) 17:38, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Per your ANI statement of: ""Ignore them as if they did not exist. If they misbehave in any way, let others deal with it.". So I did report him to that administrator." Right there is your problem. When someone says "ignore them as if they don't exist", that means don't ever EVER mention them again. Period. "If they miss behave in any way, let others deal with it" does NOT mean that YOU report their behavior. It means SOMEONE ELSE WILL. It's really not that hard to understand. -- Tarage ( talk) 18:29, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Perhaps it would be a good idea if this matter was laid to rest so things can simmer down for a while. Just a thought. AryaTargaryen ( talk) 03:46, 17 July 2018 (UTC)AryaTargaryen
In response to your email request that you be permitted to remove material from this talk page, along with your promise not to repeat the actions that got your talk page access removed, I have restored your ability to edit here. Remember, you know what not to do! Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 11:45, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Goatman: Flesh or Folklore? is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Goatman: Flesh or Folklore? until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. :bloodofox: ( talk) 23:43, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
I am still retired so please don't post on my talk page unless it actually has something to do with me. Also don't ping me if you know there is an interaction ban that keeps me from responding, and kindly don't accuse me or others of something ridiculous and insulting without any evidence to back it up. Dream Focus 22:41, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Note that I have no idea who the IP that posted on my talk page was, and it certainly wasn't me since if I was trying to hide behind an IP I wouldn't post on my own talk page. When I got an email saying someone had posted on my talk page, I came here and reverted them and asked them not to do that. [40] Their sentence structure seems to be of someone who is not a native English speaker, and they don't use Firefox browser like I do or all their typos and spelling errors would be highlighted and they could've fixed it before posting.
After I had reverted it, I end up with a ping from someone who watches my talk page for whatever reason, who read it in the history of the page, and decides to accuse me and many others he has argued with in the past of being possible trolls. I find that rather offensive and posted so here. I check and see his response, and its still there, along with some statement I feel the need to clarify.
I retired from Wikipedia to get away from having to deal with this person. Once he was blocked, I went to the Article Rescue Squadron as I have been active with that for many years now, and edited other things on Wikipedia for awhile as well. Once he talked his way out of his ban, I retired from Wikipedia again, since I'm under IBAN restriction where I can not participate in the ARS wikiproject if he is able to post there. That was back in August. Three months later I end up editing again, on my talk page only, to revert the IP posting here and assumed that'd be the end of it, but alas, dragged into his nonsense yet again somehow.
I had assumed with me gone he'd stop talking about me. I would not have noticed if he hadn't pinged me. I checked now to see if he started his previous patterns, and I see this: [41] I find it ridiculous that someone can accuse me of being a troll, despite there no possible reason that could be me, and complain someone is hounding him despite him admitting in the past to following me around for months commenting on every little thing, that irritating me to no end. And of course here [42] he makes the accusation again. So once more he can say any nonsense he wants about me, and I am not allowed to respond where he is saying it because of the one sided IBAN in effect. Ridiculous. Dream Focus 03:46, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
And its still going I see. [43] And also at [44]. So I must once again defend myself from these slanderous attacks against my person. In my long time period on Wikipedia, I have never done this no matter who I was arguing with and how irritating they were. Look at the post made by this person. [45] Broken English, no spellchecker, not the type of thing I'd write.
He claims he thinks its me because the person called him a "self-proclaimed japanese expert" and links to where I once said "Odd that the Prime Minister of that nation, various news sources in that country, and a bestselling writer from there all say the word is a real thing, but a couple of Wikipedia editors who claim to experts on Japanese insist it isn't". [46]. I believe he argued recently with someone else who said that, but can't find it. Hijiri88 previously argued with someone about Japanese articles, claiming it was his "area of interest/expertise", [47] and that person is now banned, and apparently sent him an unwanted email recently. [48] I searched for Hijiri's name and the word "expert" and found that. So maybe its him. I also see at [49] Necrothesp did tell him Ah, the arrogance of the self-proclaimed "expert", mocking anyone he thinks is less knowledgeable than himself.. Probably more instances out there, and it could just be someone who read something, or just used the same words others had.
The post also accuses him of "Anti-semitism". I haven't seen any post of his mentioning Jews, but apparently he got in an argument somewhere with someone about something. If anyone got blocked for that, and is in Malaysia, which is where the IP address used is from, I Googled it and saw that, then maybe that'll help you find out who it is.
The last person to post something like this on my talk page was blocked for being a sockpuppet of User:Jenulot [50], he posting a rant against Hijiri88 also here, and I reverted it. Not sure if a trace would show they came from the same nation or not. It could be either of them or a lot of other people. I don't know how many banned users he has been in conflict with in the past have resulted so sockpuppetry in the past, but it is probably one of those people, and if anyone actually cares to do a IP trace on them and their known socks, they'll be able to determine who is doing this. It certainly isn't me, and I find it revolting someone can accuse me of something in places and I can't respond to them do to a one sided interaction ban. I got an email about the post and immediately reverted it, this happening 14 minutes after it was made on my talk page. Whoever it is, please take your conflict elsewhere, I don't want to be bothered with this. I have other things to do in my life other than Wikipedia these days. Dream Focus 14:40, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
I just noticed the person posting here pinged a number of people, including me. Why were those names chosen? Did he argue with all of them? I honestly don't see the point in this. Since as soon as I got the email someone posted on my talk page, and instantly reverted it, no one had time to see it, nor would anyone even hear about it unless some obsessed editor kept following my talk page and every action I do and decided to look at the history and then comment on it. Seriously, stop mentioning my name, and just leave me be. This is ridiculous. Dream Focus 19:54, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
I retired to get away from a certain person following my contributions constantly to find something to criticize, talking negatively about me every chance they got all over the place, and arguing nonstop with me. Since they aren't around for awhile I can edit again peacefully. Dream Focus 11:12, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
And here we go again. :( Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Dream_Focus_requesting_two_way_interaction_ban_with_Hijiri88 Dream Focus 06:54, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Per consensus of the community, you are banned from interacting with Hijiri88, subject to the usual exceptions. The discussion and decision are recorded here. Thank you.
Please also note that your signature does not currently contain a link to your talk page, only your user page. In case you want to correct that. Ivanvector ( Talk/ Edits) 14:15, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Your presence at Article Rescue Squad and your activities protecting existing content say it all. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 18:07, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
Thanks for reporting the problems with Jade Love Kids Foundation. In the future, it's best to handle situations like that by making a request following the instructions at Wikipedia:Oversight.
Also, I'm not sure how involved you've been with this and related articles, but there appears to be some larger problems. I don't know when I'll have time to look closely, but wanted to let you know in case you're already looking. -- Ronz ( talk) 18:17, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
It's not worth getting into an edit war over something this basic, but the cite for the definition is to the 2008 printed edition of the Oxford dictionary, and it is quite possible and not surprising that the 2019 online edition may vary from an older print edition. I don't have ready access to the 2008 edition, but unless you do and can verify that an editor "made up the definition, you should assume in good faith that they correctly stated what the Oxford 2008 edition said. wbm1058 ( talk) 11:28, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
BGG (the IMDB of board games) lists 5,000 board games with rules for solo or are solo-only [51] but I suspect the search is maxed as it stops at an even number of 5,000. It is true video games are way more popular than board games (like movies are to novels) but at least in the world of board games solo is popular. There are also board gamers who play multi-player games solo but that is a finer distinction (though more common than one might suspect). There are also solo card games, etc.. -- Green C 17:03, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi, wondering if you know why the afd has been relisted for the third time. Not by you, but someone else. As an editor, this is deflating.
Lubbad85 ( talk) 01:52, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
grrrr: it appears we will keep voting until the desired result is achieved. This is clearly not Wikipedia's policy. Lubbad85 ( talk) 03:11, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
Don't ever change! Lubbad85 ( ☎) 02:23, 13 April 2019 (UTC) |
On 23 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Derrick Morris, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when Derrick Morris received a new heart in 1980 his chances of survival were slim, but he lived another 25 years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Derrick Morris. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Derrick Morris), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:01, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
The article The Choices We Made: Twenty-Five Women and Men Speak Out About Abortion has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
There does not seem to be any clear evidence that this book is notable.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
DGG (
talk ) 08:39, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
The Civility Barnstar | ||
Keep up the great work! I appreciate your efforts on the project! Lubbad85 ( ☎)( Edits) 19:57, 21 June 2019 (UTC) |
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Government shutdowns in the United States. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navarre0107 ( talk • contribs)
The last time I edited that article [52] was 21 February 2019. My edit summary for removing the pointless poll was (A poll of only 788 people in a nation of over 300 million people done by a newspaper that hates Trump is not really relevant here. Why 788? Did they keep polling until they got the percentage they were looking for then stop?). It is not vandalism to remove nonsense. You can find a poll anywhere to support what you personally want to believe is true, and just as easily find another news source with a poll that says the opposite. No reason to have that in the article. Dream Focus 13:43, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
With so many other edits to that article since I made mine, why did you suddenly come here and post a ridiculously inappropriate template? Your block log says you were blocked before for sockpuppets [53]. The last edit I made was asking Special:Contributions/Lotusbloom if they had other accounts. Are you socking again? Dream Focus 13:50, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Neon Genesis Evangelion episodes#Home media?. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 05:52, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
I appreciate your contributions! Thanks for continuing to make Wikipedia a productive space. Lightburst ( talk) 20:14, 28 July 2019 (UTC) |
Hi there, could you direct me to the discussion regarding the Twitter account. Regards, Willbb234 ( talk) 15:57, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi,
Just a heads up:
Your edit here: [54] broke two refs (the Bellingcat and Heavy refs) as you can see in the References section for that revision. I've copied the relevant ref info from that older revision and added them back.
Thanks. David O. Johnson ( talk) 17:54, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
The article List of crimes involving a silicone mask has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Zero notability, no source covers this as a coherent topic so it fails WP:LISTN
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Reywas92
Talk 21:37, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I have had to suppress part of your message at User talk:Alex Shih, as the link you posted was a violation of WP:OUTING and WP:HARASS. Further, your post to ANI is clearly a violation of WP:NPA. Do not restore the material that has been suppressed, and comment on content, not contributors. ST47 ( talk) 22:08, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | ||
Sometimes editors deserve a star! You earned it! Keep on working! Your contributions are appreciated. Lightburst ( talk) 00:43, 7 November 2019 (UTC) |
I got to say. I am neutral on the whole articles to be deleted or not. Sometimes they don’t pass and sometimes they IMO. But I miss the times like editors like you took a stance on keeping the articles and the times you were active. I myself feel like like I am the inclusionist on AFD's like this one. I appreciate your hard work even though some didn’t. Also if you are still active can I maybe place the article on the rescue page? Jhenderson 777 14:26, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
On 17 December 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ms. Monopoly, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ms. Monopoly replaces properties with inventions women contributed to, such as Wi-Fi, chocolate chip cookies, and modern shapewear? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ms. Monopoly. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Ms. Monopoly), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
--valereee ( talk) 00:02, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia needs more people like you. Too many editors are delete happy it seems. You help keep that in check. Bluedude588 ( talk) 23:14, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
When I said
WP:HEYMAN this bad boy
, I meant add as much sources as possible, you know,
WP:BEFORE? It's not enough to just say spinoff to keep them. You need to find sources, don't care if they're primary. That you find sources at all will allow it to pass
WP:V and allow the articles to be kept.
ミラ
P 03:09, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
For Dabie Mountain Regional Medical Centre article,
"And stop trying to delete hospital articles when everyone you nominate ends in overwhelming KEEP." --> thank you so much ~ :D
Chongkian ( talk) 02:11, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
On 29 March 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article S.W. Randall Toyes and Giftes, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after 50 years in business, S.W. Randall Toyes and Giftes is both a landmark and a stop on "Haunted Pittsburgh" tours? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/S.W. Randall Toyes and Giftes. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, S.W. Randall Toyes and Giftes), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile ( talk) 00:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
As far as Wikipedia role models go, you are definitely mine. I aspire to be like you. I will strive to do my best to stop pages from getting deleted on Wikipeida. TwinTurbo ( talk) 00:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, the article Frenzo Harami is nominated for deletion and it would be much appreciated if you could participate in the discussion here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frenzo Harami. :) Mr. Apollo ( don't talk to me) 13:03, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
On 3 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Democracy Manifest, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that " Democracy Manifest" is a top Australian viral video and meme? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Democracy Manifest), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:03, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
O3000 ( talk) 17:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
I saw your edit here but I don't understand the question. Or the placement? Cheers. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 02:29, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Martland Act is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martland Act until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rogermx ( talk) 19:53, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Dreamfocus, regarding this: that COI tag wasn’t added by someone else. It was part of the initial post by Ekpyros, [57] for what reason I can’t imagine unless it was a mistake. This was not an accusation made by anybody, and there is nothing to suggest Ekpyros has a COI of some kind. That’s why I removed it. -- MelanieN ( talk) 16:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
Hey, if you are interested in actually working on that article, I can point you to better source material. But sources, especially old ones, have to be read in context and proper nuance applied. There’s a lot of dubious source material out there and the bias in both directions (Colonialism or too flowery) can just make you cringe. I still am dubious if it belongs in mainspace, but a WP:HEY is possible. Montanabw (talk) 17:47, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Artificial moon is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artificial moon until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Paisarepa ( talk) 05:35, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Tsistunagiska (
talk) has given you a
Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{ subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. |
I am in love with your colors. I actually have a version of my name as a rainbow. I made it fit here but got scared to push the button thinking it may blow up the hydrogen collider in Europe and create a super massive black hole that will suck us into another universe where lizard people control everything. Tsistunagiska ( talk) 17:22, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Vader immortal.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ytoyoda ( talk) 04:10, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Vader immortal.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ytoyoda ( talk) 04:11, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
I have taken your words from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piraya Film and created a comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies) (without credit at them moment - wasn't sure how you'd want to handle this), with the hope that after some discussion, there can be an RfC/Proposal based on this. — Ad Meliora Talk∕ Contribs 22:08, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | |
Thanks for your teamwork help working together with the research to successfully save the article Mango (Saturday Night Live) from deletion! Right cite ( talk) 19:10, 6 November 2020 (UTC) |
See here, here, here, here, here, here and here and you will know what I mean. Jhenderson 777 14:54, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for commenting at the recent AfD for the above list. There is now an ongoing discussion around the best way to split the list, if any, if you wish to comment further. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:39, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elizabeth Harrin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elizabeth Harrin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jorm ( talk) 01:24, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi, please check out these articles Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daisy the Great, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EyeMan and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur Harvey Davidgoodheart. ( talk) 23:05, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Learning by teaching Could you please look at this? Somebody wants to merge "peer-Learning" and "learning by teaching". I don't understand why "Learning by teaching" ever is menaced! Thank you very much! /info/en/?search=Talk:Learning_by_teaching Jeanpol (talk) 09:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC) Jeanpol ( talk) 09:37, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
I know I haven't edited for nearly a year, but this article is probably notable [59] and has been nominated into Afd and resulted in keep [60]. do you think it would be restored even created by a blocked user?. 49.151.167.255 ( talk) 23:42, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Regarding this reversion, I agree that notability is not temporary. My change - which added "sustained" as a requirement (and linked to text further down on the page), was designed to say just that. Did I somehow end up saying just the opposite? Butwhatdoiknow ( talk) 16:15, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Thanks.
You should know by now that "a wikilink is not a reliable source." verbatim WP:UGC. You are far from correct when you said If there is a blue link that's all you ever need. Did you just make that up? Toddst1 ( talk) 15:36, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Dream Focus I saw your draft on the lab leak [62]. Please be aware that there already was such an unpublished draft that was deleted [63], and a published article that was blanked and forwarded [64]. There is a small band of activists who will seek to have it deleted and will also try to get you topic banned or even site banned. [65] [66] [67]. Please be careful. CutePeach ( talk) 14:21, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
I’d like to encourage you to leave personhood behind in favor of “editors” here. These are a time of language sensitivity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_female_supervillains_(4th_nomination)&curid=68720197&diff=1045324359&oldid=1044507747&diffmode=visual —¿philoserf? ( talk) 01:51, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
The article Star Wars Theory has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Page was nominated for deletion by @Ohnoitsjamie and the page was deleted after discussion. Apparently the page creator @Dream_Focus wasn't notified at the time so the page has been restored. Little has changed and I don't see enough depth-of-coverage to meet WP:WEB or WP:GNG.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Nemov (
talk) 18:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star Wars Theory until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Nemov ( talk) 18:36, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
See:
Dronebogus ( talk) 10:22, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
The Socratic Barnstar | ||
For your powerful ivote rationales Lightburst ( talk) 16:35, 29 October 2021 (UTC) |
The Teamwork Barnstar | |
Seed-counting machine. Good job! 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 17:33, 29 October 2021 (UTC) |
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Conduct at Articles for Deletion and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:27, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Integrity | ||
For your help, I appreciated it. Lightburst ( talk) 14:27, 4 November 2021 (UTC) |
An arbitration request that you are party to, Conduct in Articles for Deletion, has been declined by the Arbitration Committee. The arbitrators felt that the community had made progress toward resolving the dispute in the recently-closed ANI thread, making arbitration unnecessary at this time. GeneralNotability ( talk) 00:58, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
We're going to disagree here, which is precisely why I value you as a trusted wikipedian. I'll confess a personal attachment to a gaming hobby, and when I look at the webpages of these struggling but still active rail-related clubs it reminds me of my experience with my hobby. So tough to get media coverage for a non-profit hobby club. When one does garner coverage it's for an event, not the org. I certainly wasn't threatening to AFD any of the remaining list entries but do bemoan the dearth of sources applied. BusterD ( talk) 19:26, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Great user page :)
Ideaguy3d (
talk) 22:46, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Re this comment: no I hadn't really thought of that, so thanks for bringing it to my attention. Still, I'm not sure I understand this:
Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability.
Maybe you can help me here. Can you give an example of a list that fulfills "recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes" but does not meet notability requirements? I can't think of any such examples. Thanks again. VR talk 05:39, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
Hey! Would just like to thank you for your edits on List of Squid Game characters! I have also noticed that you've been editing Wikipedia since 2009, which is an incredible accomplishment. Keep up the good work here!
I would also like to take the time to apologise. I am the same person that was blocked on the Taylor Swift Wiki. I have not come here to ask to be unblocked, I have come here to apologise once and for all, as I have absolutely nothing against you. I also want to make it clear that I do not own any Fandom Wiki sockpupppets, the only account I have is my main one, I just changed my username with it back in August. Since the block, I have reflected on the decisions I made on the Taylor Swift Wiki and fully admit that I was in the wrong, and apologise again for what happened. On Wikipedia I use original research and do not copy from elsewhere, and I will only use original research when editing Fandom Wikis as well.
I would also like to wish the best of luck to you on the Taylor Swift Wiki and here, and Happy Holidays. -- InPursuitOfAMorePerfectUnion ( talk) 09:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Season's greetings and Merry Christmas to you and your family. Have a wonderful holiday season. Cheers! RV ( talk) 03:12, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Hello,
Thank you for arguing to keep the article, "List of games with ray tracing support". I've consulted on occasion and also fixed/added to a time or two, so I was a bit surprised and annoyed when I discovered that it was deleted. I wonder if those who favored deleting it would also want to delete "List of games with support for high-fidelity image upscaling", another growing list I sometimes consult. I'm new to Wikipedia's editing process. Is it rare for a deleted article to be undeleted? Bobobob2 ( talk) 23:55, 25 December 2021 (UTC) |
Thank you for disagreeing with me in the deletions. I mean it. From one another's perspective, we may be both be "pests", but as long our disagreements are in a collegial, polite fashion, that's good for the project. I don't always (to say the least) agree with you, but I find your arguments and stance valuable, and I am glad you are able to participate in this topic area. Merry XMAS,
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 10:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
Is there a reason you're following my XFD actions so closely? Sometimes you're there literally seconds after I nominate or redirect something, and it's really starting to feel like you're trying to prove a point and/or outright wiki-stalking me. I don't think you are, but it's really getting uncanny just how closely you're managing to tail me. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 02:04, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on DeHorizon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 19:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi. The third opinion process is not suitable for the dispute at User_talk:MrsSnoozyTurtle#why_do_you_keep_reverting? because the issue should be thoroughly discussed on the article's talk page first. — LauritzT ( talk) 22:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
At
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional deities (2nd nomination), you said There is an option you can unlock that makes blue links that are only redirects appear green instead of blue
. Can you tell me how to turn that on? I poked around in preferences but couldn't find it.
Argento Surfer (
talk) 17:18, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Your contributions speak for themselves. Res ipsa loquitur 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 12:55, 12 June 2022 (UTC) |
There is no precedent whatsoever for including a singles table in album articles. MOS:ALBUM makes no mention of doing so whatsoever, and I have yet to see a GA- or FA-class album article that does include a singles table. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 20:49, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi there. Please remember that links to ANI threads are not useful to arbitrators. Instead, please post diffs with context to explain how and why something is true. -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 21:38, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
I've noticed that you are one of the participants on the Wikiprojects page for Popular culture. I've made a nomination for the popular culture music group BTS for featured article. Any interest in participating and maybe making some comments? ErnestKrause ( talk) 15:46, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
An editor has submitted one or more edits that were made by you or relate to you as evidence in an ongoing arbitration case. Please note that the editor is not requesting that the Committee add you to the case as a party. You may review the evidence submission at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct in deletion-related editing/Evidence § Evidence presented by Scottywong. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 18:39, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
An editor has submitted links that relate to you as evidence in an ongoing arbitration case. Please note that the editor is not requesting that the Committee add you to the case as a party. You may review the evidence submission at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct_in_deletion-related_editing/Evidence#Deletion_Disputes_Are_Divisive. Robert McClenon ( talk) 02:20, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Dream Focus
Thank you for creating List of covered bridges in the United States.
User:Bruxton, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for starting the list. The references are putting off an error, perhaps you can check.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bruxton}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
.
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Bruxton ( talk) 14:42, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Higher Earth (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:49, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Seasons greetings! | |
Wishing you joyous holiday spirits, Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year |
|
RV ( talk) 12:23, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Happy Holidays | ||
Hello, I wish you the very best during the holidays. And I hope you have a very happy 2023! Bruxton ( talk) 02:01, 26 December 2022 (UTC) |
Yeah, thanks for that fix.i was working on that,but you got there first and that's fine, it's solved. However, I was concerned that the "Actually, no" section would look like another vote. Does your fix take care of that? If so great, and sorry for the hassle. I try not to break things but in keeping with my theme in this RfA I like to own it, when clearly I have. Elinruby ( talk) 18:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Brittany Venti. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Jamiebuba ( talk) 11:58, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Dream Focus,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Brittany Venti for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
el.ziade ( talkallam) 18:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brittany Venti until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Kzkzb ( talk) 13:45, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:ZELDA OCARINA OF TIME 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:41, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
T G & Y was soon ran out of business after an off-duty sheriff shot and killed a young mother for stealing baby formula! But as the infamous erasing of history goes, the ONLY place you'll find it is in the newspaper archives of the Oklahoma City library, September 1985. But yeah you keep thinking you can just google or wikipedia info like that! Your whole existence can be called into question and you just accept it because...whoa democracy and all. There's no words for the disgust I feel for the totally ignorant and oblivious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.183.69.95 ( talk) 12:34, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
The article Ballerina Farm has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Sounds overly WP:PROMO and does not seem to have any WP:SUSTAINED coverage.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
(Oinkers42) (
talk) 04:32, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freight Farms until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Uhooep ( talk) 13:45, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FaceGen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
-- ferret ( talk) 20:27, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:The Infinite Sea.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 02:42, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The 5th Wave (series), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 05:46, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fearless Photog until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Kung Fu Man ( talk) 15:54, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
Hey Dream Focus, I'm checking in here because I recently noticed the discussion at the Cisgenderism AfD and your comments about the article creator seem unusual, particularly given my general impression of your thoughtful and civil participation at AfD. I am wondering if you are maybe having an off day, and perhaps took your view on the state of the article a bit too far when commenting on the personal characteristics of the article creator as part of this analysis. So I am writing to encourage you to reconsider your comments, consider striking them and apologizing, to help promote a more collaborative environment at AfD. Thank you, Beccaynr ( talk) 14:28, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Using someone's affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views—regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream, and I want to step lightly here, because I am concerned your follow-up comment in the AfD [82] could be read as suggesting that because someone identifies as queer, non-binary, and trans, they might be biased. That is why I showed up here, because this seems to be an unconstructive development in the discussion.I have no objection to making content-based challenges in the AfD or at the article talk page; however, conflation of an editor's personal identity with their content work seems generally contrary to core principles of collaborative editing. Beccaynr ( talk) 15:53, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
derogatory phrasebased on gender identity and/or sexual orientation
directed against another editor or a group of editorsdescribed in the section above the one I quoted as an example.From my view, your disagreement about some article content does not support using an editor's disclosed personal characteristics to suggest the disputed edits occurred due to a conflict of interest, particularly when this editor may happen to be familiar with the vast amount of secondary sources on this contentious topic, and Wikipedia is a work in progress. I think the last thing we would want to happen is for AfD to devolve into routine gender checks, with discussion about which editors should be excluded from discussion and article editing because of who they are.From my view, you have tread onto a very sensitive area, so I wanted to express my concern about how your comments may be coming across, regardless of your intent. And ultimately, we know AfD turns on the sources, guidelines, and policies, so for what appears to be a draftify or WP:TNT-style argument based on the state of the article, I still do not see how the personal characteristics and inferred beliefs of the article creator is relevant to the AfD discussion. You can express your view without commenting on the personal characteristics of the article creator; the dispute resolution and NPA policies encourage this, as does the etiquette guideline. If you have a concern about conduct issues, there are other forums available. Beccaynr ( talk) 17:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Sent by NPP Coordination using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi Dream Focus. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers
" user group. Please check back at
the permissions page in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as
patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the
New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at
New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the
deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the
new page reviewer talk page or ask via the
NPP Discord. In addition, please remember:
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. – Joe ( talk) 11:29, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Beck Spring Dolomite, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 15:54, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Beck Spring Dolomite, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:10, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Counterparts (novel). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and Single ref insufficient notability per WP:NAUTHOR. . I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. scope_creep Talk 23:42, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
WP:NAUTHOR is for an author, not their bestselling book. Dream Focus 01:11, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{ Ctopics/aware}} template.
== Introduction to contentious topics ==
You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{ Ctopics/aware}} template.
19:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC) Elinruby ( talk) Elinruby ( talk) 19:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
The notices say the topics are contentious, not your edits. If you read them you'll find that they tell you how you can mark yourself as aware of contentious topic restrictions. And yes, considering what's going onat the AfD I am giving them to everyone who has not done so. Regardless of the position they have taken. This is a routine template that is required before any enforcement takes place. Your incivility above in response to a routine template is an example of something that is a bigger problem because of the topic area, and and really? Lack of notability is a ridiculous reason for a prod? AGF says I should assume that's a bad joke, but imho you should strike that too as it raises CIR concerns in my mind. Your call though. You may delete this section if you choose but at this point you have been notified that you are in a contentious topic twice over, and should take care to follow policy, and deleting the section will not change that. I am not really available for Wikipedia purposes right now but I am considering an AfD for the articles about the books, and since you apparently hadn't read the notice yet I am going to let the incivility slide as well as the OR about it being a best seller Elinruby ( talk) 22:21, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
This is blatant canvassing. Don't try pulling any more of that or we'll be taking a trip to ANI. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 12:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The War on Children, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 04:07, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi, all five of the references you removed mentioned DVD Talk. They date from when the article was created by a respected editor who is now an admin, Atlantic306 ( talk) 21:55, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Counterparts (novel) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Karma1998 ( talk) 13:51, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to 1794 in Ukraine. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Jalen Folf (talk) 19:51, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Miassite, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 05:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello Dream Focus,
Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.
Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.
Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.
It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!
2023 Awards
Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!
WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.
Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.
Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.
Reminders:
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
Toadette ( Let's talk together!) 19:20, 2 April 2024 (UTC)Hello, can you give more comments in Yuuki's AFD? 2806:103E:13:75A1:E52E:FD07:E95B:247A ( talk) 14:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines: "Large talk pages are difficult to read and load slowly over slow connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 kB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." – this talk page is 392.8 kB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{ help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 12:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)