→Pulled Larry King: cmt |
LotteryGeek (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 336: | Line 336: | ||
As a courtesy wanted to let you know I've pulled Larry King because 5 of the 6 responses after posting were opposes and pull requests, so we probably need more discussion. Consensus may develop to post, but for now it's more proper to take it off. -- [[User:Fuzheado|Fuzheado]] | [[User talk:Fuzheado|Talk]] 22:48, 23 January 2021 (UTC) |
As a courtesy wanted to let you know I've pulled Larry King because 5 of the 6 responses after posting were opposes and pull requests, so we probably need more discussion. Consensus may develop to post, but for now it's more proper to take it off. -- [[User:Fuzheado|Fuzheado]] | [[User talk:Fuzheado|Talk]] 22:48, 23 January 2021 (UTC) |
||
:{{u|Fuzheado}} Thanks for the heads up, although I obviously disagree. I think on strength of arguments posting won out, but we will see. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot#top|talk]]) 23:31, 23 January 2021 (UTC) |
:{{u|Fuzheado}} Thanks for the heads up, although I obviously disagree. I think on strength of arguments posting won out, but we will see. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot#top|talk]]) 23:31, 23 January 2021 (UTC) |
||
== Alex Jones and Cannabis == |
|||
Do you agree with what I have to say about Alex Jones and cannabis? |
Revision as of 04:05, 25 January 2021
User dispute
I am respectfully requesting admin assistance in resolving a dispute over a minor edit between myself and Surtsicna (User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]). User:Mr305worldwide (Mr305worldwide)
- The issue is this edit. Mr305worldwide is refusing to seek consensus for an edit that goes against WP:NOPIPE and WP:NOTBROKEN. Surtsicna (talk) 20:22, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- Surtsicna is engaging in harassing and insulting behavior and has refused to permit the Third Opinion Project to resolve this matter when advised that it would be referred to said project.
- Admins do not settle content disputes. If this has been referred to dispute resolution that should be allowed to proceed by everyone involved. 331dot (talk) 20:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- It should not have been referred to dispute resolution before being discussed on the talk page. WP:3O says that an issue must be "thoroughly discussed on the article talk page" before being submitted, and Mr305worldwide is explicitly refusing to do so. Surtsicna (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- Then that should be brought up in the dispute resolution process, and it will likely be summarily dispensed with. Mr305worldwide, this is a collaborative project and you must discuss issues when there is a dispute. 331dot (talk) 21:26, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- I have no issues with discussing it, however the user above has also engaged in systemic reversion of edits I have made to improve the quality of the article, in an attempt to get his way
- Also it is my contention that after reverting multiple edits of the same nature, an attempt should be made by the party reverting to make contact with the party who made jt asking why it was made. That way an edit war is avoided because it is clear to both parties as to why the edit was made, and why it was reverted. That’s not too much to ask.
- Then that should be brought up in the dispute resolution process, and it will likely be summarily dispensed with. Mr305worldwide, this is a collaborative project and you must discuss issues when there is a dispute. 331dot (talk) 21:26, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- It should not have been referred to dispute resolution before being discussed on the talk page. WP:3O says that an issue must be "thoroughly discussed on the article talk page" before being submitted, and Mr305worldwide is explicitly refusing to do so. Surtsicna (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- Admins do not settle content disputes. If this has been referred to dispute resolution that should be allowed to proceed by everyone involved. 331dot (talk) 20:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- Surtsicna is engaging in harassing and insulting behavior and has refused to permit the Third Opinion Project to resolve this matter when advised that it would be referred to said project.
Yo Ho Ho
Please help me with Wiki Page for Corey Johnson
Hello 331dot, I was working on an article - Corey Johnson (Music producer) and I need help with choosing the right references and rewriting the article so it can stay on Wikipedia
--Marquis Newell (talk) 10:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
ps- I have a list of references and press for Corey Johnson
--Marquis Newell (talk) 10:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
- I will better answer you later but I'm wondering what your interest is in this subject. 331dot (talk) 11:40, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
A Joyous Yuletide to You!
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021! | |
Hello 331dot, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Blocked IP User:1.242.84.212
They are quite talkative on their talk page. Would you care to get them to shut it?--Quisqualis (talk) 20:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
TPA
Because of Special:Diff/996313254, you might want to revoke talk page access. Not only was it spammy, it was a copyvio of https://www.yugantarpravah.com/content/page/about-us. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:03, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Santa took care of it. Bishonen | tålk 22:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC).
Trouted
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
You've been trouted for accusing me of introducing inappropriate pages when I was not. WP:AGF.Nononsense101 (talk) 22:13, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
- Nononsense101 I did not do otherwise. That you may have created the page in good faith does not change the fact that it was inappropriate. I stand by my notification. 331dot (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
How is the page inappropriate?Nononsense101 (talk) 22:13, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Deletion of account
331dot, plz I am just requesting u to give the note to developer as I said. If the developer wants, he will add the feature to delete account else he will not do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarika9140 (talk • contribs) 08:22, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
- Sarika9140 As I said, there are legal reasons that accounts cannot be deleted as well. All edits must be attributable to an account. You are not the first person to make such a suggestion. 331dot (talk) 08:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
User:GoodTimeGypsy
(GoodTimeGypsy (talk) 01:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC))
I feel we meet these criteria as I've seen others that are on Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Stalker_(band)&oldid=997096750
How do I get this article out of the 'draft' mode? or does it need to be reviewed first?
Thanks in advance for your time and patience — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoodTimeGypsy (talk • contribs) 01:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) That revision had copyright problems so it may be revision-deleted by the time you see this, but the content is very close to the prose text found here starting at
Stalker is an American rock band
and continuing down toto more misses
. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 02:26, 30 December 2020 (UTC)- GoodTimeGypsy It will need to be submitted as a draft, but it is nowhere close to being acceptable at this time. If you just want to tell the world about your old band, you should use social media, a personal website, or other outlet where that is permitted and may have less stringent inclusion requirements. Wikipedia isn't just for documenting things; it summarizes only what independent reliable sources state. If you see other articles like your draft, please point those out so they can be addressed. As this is a volunteer project, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us; we can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 07:53, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
examples: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_Bones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippo_Campus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Pe%C3%B1ate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psapp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_(band) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuck_(band) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Local_Band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsigned_band_web
the idea is not to post an old band but from a local new jersey music scene standpoint, there is relevance for documenting the history of a movement and the musicians that were involved that encompasses a generation of underground music lovers around the world. wikipedia encompasses the idea of learning about people, places, and things not often found so easily. i understand that a subjective topic is a discrete piece of content that is about a specific subject, needs an identifiable purpose, and can stand alone. thanks again and happy new year!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoodTimeGypsy (talk • contribs) 18:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC) (talk)
Bye Debate
Please assume good faith and don't attack others, as doing otherwise can disrupt Wikipedia. < Sorry for any disruption this has caused. Please stop the on and off debate. Many people may [weasel words] say so if the debate flares. Nononsense101 (talk) 19:41, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Your response at the UAA
Hi 331dot, apologies for rushing to report the accounts. I wasn't aware that there could be other reasons why they might create accounts. Thank you for your advice. I'll make sure not to repeat the same mistake. Have a very happy new year. Ashleyyoursmile! 13:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- Ashleyyoursmile Happy new year as well. There are rare cases where a username can be reported (and blocked) without having edited, but those are usually limited to the most extreme vulgar words/phrases and WP:BLP violations. 331dot (talk) 13:45, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, noted. I will keep that in mind. :) --Ashleyyoursmile! 13:47, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
User:Carl Carlton
Please unblock this user. Their account is verified in OTRS. Thanks, Sam-2727 (talk) 17:37, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
tones and I
Hi, but how am i supposed to know which is a reliable source and which isn't?Sarmiento 007 (talk) 20:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- Sarmiento 007 A reliable source is that which has a reputation of fact checking and editorial control. Another way to put it is, the source does not make stuff up and can support what it publishes. A guide to how many sources are treated on Wikipedia can be found at WP:RSP. 331dot (talk) 21:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).
|
|
- Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.
- You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes)
. The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason). - Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
Please can you help me I am trying to edit in the correct fashion but I am just not succeeding...
Below is the entry I wish to publish for The British School of Paris. i have tried my best to keep it factual and have added a reference for the history at thee end. What is wrong with it? please could it be posted by someone who knows what they are doing? I have been trying for several weeks. Any help will be graatefully received. Thank you for your expertise.
The British School of Paris has a long history as a provider of British education in Paris. It is an independent fee-paying school with around 700 pupils, representing well over 50 nationalities. The BSP is one of the largest and longest-established British international schools in the world. The educational programme is based on the National Curriculum for England and Wales and its Patron is the serving British Ambassador to France. The school is located in the western suburbs of Paris in the small market town of Croissy-sur-Seine. Founded by Mary J. Cosyn in 1954, the then 'English School of Paris' quickly moved from its original Parisian address to the Chateau de Monte Cristo, the former home of Alexander Dumas, in Le Pecq just west of Paris. The majority of pupils in the early years were British, American and Canadian with parents employed mainly at the Supreme Headquarters of the Allied Powers in Europe (SHAPE). In 1964, the School moved again to its current home Llesna Court, 38 quai de l'Ecluse, Croissy-sur-Seine. By 1973 the continued rise in pupil numbers lead to the purchase of a second property in Bougival, specifically to house the Junior School pupils. In 1980 the school was transferred from private ownership and established under French law as the equivalent of a British charitable trust - a ‘not-for-profit’ association. With this change of status a Board of Governors was appointed with responsibility for overseeing the running and development of the School. By 1981 the school was officially renamed as The British School of Paris. During the intervening years expansion of both facilities and pupil numbers culminated in 2010 with the opening of a purpose-built Junior School just along the river from the Senior School campus. Campus development at the Senior School also evolved significantly, a refurbished multipurpose hall (the Kett Building) was inaugurated in December 2018 and an outdoor learning space will be completed by Spring 2021.
Reference French Lessons - The Story of The British School of Paris by Vicky Honour
91.90.97.124 (talk) 16:29, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- If you represent the school, you must review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you must make. This is easier to do with an account, but an account is not required. I gather you represent the school from the nature of the text you propose above.
- The text you propose sounds like a promotional brochure for the school. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a subject. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources have chosen to write about a topic, showing how that topic meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability, in this case, the definition of a notable organization. Wikipedia is not interested in what a subject wants to say about itself; the school is free to do that on its own website. Wikipedia is only interested in what others have decided on their own to write about the school(not staff interviews, press releases, routine announcements, the school website, or other primary sources). This text you propose has no sources at all and would not be accepted. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Revert
Hello 331dot, The cited content is about an actor Rajinikanth not about Maridhas. 157.51.22.191 (talk) 11:55, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
- Okay; however, since your edits leave not much behind, the article should probably be proposed for deletion. 331dot (talk) 11:57, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
The Architecture, Culture, and Spirituality Forum (ACSF) Logo
Hi, Thanks for your note. I am doing this as a volunteer position for the ACSF group. So what exactly should I do? I am wondering how does other organization create articles such as companies. I am new to all of this and it is very confusing. I really appreciate if you just tell me what i need to do to make sure the page is published correctly and accepted by Wikipedia. Thanks again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esmaeili.nooshin (talk • contribs) 00:31, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
- Esmaeili.nooshin Organizations do not typically create articles(not "pages") about themselves due to the conflict of interest. If you just want to tell the world about your organization, you should use social media, your own website, or other alternative where that is permitted. I've said what you need to do in response to your previous inquiry. 331dot (talk) 00:37, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
TH question
Hi 331dot. You blocked the person who asked WP:THQ#Editors to neutralize a page! as a SOCK. Do you want to nuke the TH post or should it just be left alone. FWIW, the same editor submitted the draft to AfC for review as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:02, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
- I would probably leave it for now; this whole situation is being discussed on their user talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
- ...but I now see that it was removed; and if it's okay with them it's okay with me. 331dot (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Ahrtoodeetoo Unblock Request
Hey, I thought I'd continue this here in order to try to reduce the temperature, since Ahrtoodeetoo is clearly pretty bothered by your messages.
I get what you mean - It might not hurt to update the block log.
I was leaning towards an unblock offer after assurances that it was a one-time issue, and won't happen again - now I think I'm going to remove that page from my watchlist. SQLQuery me! 19:46, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
- SQL I appreciate your wisdom and I will do so. 331dot (talk) 19:49, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
- I'd just like to note that I would object to an unblock of r2 at this time and in fact think this should be a ban given his years of incivility and inability to collaborate. There's a slew of PAs in the last few years, combined with his combative "it's not my fault" behavior that leads me to believe he's not actually here to contribute so much as argue and berate people. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 20:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
331dot, I have copied Ahrtoodeetoo's appeal to ANI per their request. Politrukki (talk) 14:10, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not certain why that is necessary for their unblock request, but it's not something I outright oppose. 331dot (talk) 14:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- Neither am I, but that was their will, I believe. I see some of their comments on their user talk page are beyond pale, but I still somehow believe they can be reasoned with. Thank you for your patience and thanks for everyone who have tried to steer Ahrtoodeetoo to the right path. They certainly have not made it easy. Apologies to everyone involved in advance on my behalf. Politrukki (talk) 16:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
331dot, some unsolicited advise: I consider WP:NOTHERE to be a fairly narrow subset of WP:DE, with the latter usually serving as my default (most common, by far) block reasoning, overall (though, in this case, WP:NPA is definitely apt, too). El_C 00:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
- SQL, makes sense. It is probably the widest (blanket) reasoning available. Also noting that I just declined Ahrtoodeetoo's unblock request. El_C 00:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Confused
With this did you mean -author? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:20, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Concerned and Confused
Hello 331dot, I was wondering if you could help me out with a certain situation on my user talk page. Overall I was contacted by another User in regard to my activity on Wikipedia with a valid concern from them. However, I was told to not do anything on Wiki by this User with a nick Jack Frost, until I reply to their message. Thing is, I looked into their user page, and they don't seem to be a moderator, much less an admin. I have replied to their concern, but they didn't reply for 2 days now, and I feel prevented from being able to use Wikipedia due to this. If you could look into my user talk page, and give me your input on this, I would be very much obliged. Kind regards MartinOrl087 (talk) 08:06, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- MartinOrl087 Any user may issue a warning to another user; that's what Jack Frost did. I don't speak for them, so you could ask them directly, but it is possible that your answer satisfied them and they saw no need to comment further, or that they simply haven't seen it yet. I would suggest asking them directly.
- If you were editing for a friend, it is still a conflict of interest that you should formally disclose, even if you weren't paid by the friend. If you work in SEO, I must be honest and tell you that it looks very suspicious to edit about a company and then say "I wasn't paid for that one" as we have no way to know that for certain. I have no evidence to the contrary, so I will assume good faith and believe you. But it is going to likely cause you much grief and suspicion if you keep editing about companies. My suggestion would be to avoid editing about non-clients so as long as you are in the SEO field, or to at least clearly disclose who you work for on your user page and clearly log the edits you make that are just a conflict of interest.
- I would correct you in that Wikipedia is not merely a database; it is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about the subject, that the subject meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability, in this case, that of a notable company. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- 331dot thank you very much for this clarification on the subject, wanted to be in the clear on this situation overall. Regarding the subject of me working in SEO, I can clearly see how it might be viewed on the outside by others, though nothing I can do about it really as I simply work as a freelance by trade. Any activity on the Wiki coming from me though is completely unrelated to my freelance work as I know better than to try to get stuff on wiki for search engine optimization, it's simply too much of a chore for very little gain, as there are numerous better ways to optimize websites. The article I wrote is strictly a contribution that goes according to on paid contributions without disclosure. Specifically the very first question. I assumed things regarding paid advocacy don't really relate to me as I made an article strictly as an unpaid volunteer. If I might be so bold to correct you, it wasn't even editing for said friend as he never asked me to do so, I simply contributed the article on my own, while being completely unrelated to the company in question. I did get their approval before posting, to not have them later send me complains and this is pretty much all there is to this case, just a guy adding to the encyclopedia, expanding it. You don't have to worry though, I don't plan to add/edit about more companies if there can be issues like this and if the company I have added wants an edit, I will only post it via "suggest an edit". If you could point me in the right direction though, if I made the article as an unpaid volunteer is there still any COI in this situation and do I have to disclose it regardless? It is a bit confusing and I would want to have a clean record here. On the subject of notability you have mentioned I am a bit confused on this as well, because if you browse list of companies who manufacture scooters List of scooter manufacturers many of them lack any notability on wikipedia page. An example from the very top is Aeon Motor, no references but their own website. To be honest, when I was writing an article, I did research on how others have written simialr articles for companies like this, as a point of reference, and have noticed that most don't have notability at all on the Wiki. This leaves me completely confused so if you could be so kind as to explain it to me, I would be most grateful for the knowledge for future use on wiki.MartinOrl087 (talk) 13:05, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- MartinOrl087 Please accept my apology for my misinterpretation of your comment. If no one asked you to write the article, it is not a COI, although again, people are going to see that you work in SEO and frankly be suspicious, though they should assume good faith. You can mitigate any suspicion somewhat by being completely open about your editing and answering questions honestly(not that you have done otherwise, just saying).
- Regarding other articles, it is entirely possible that those articles are themselves problematic and simply have not been addressed yet. (the Aeon Motor article has existed since 2007, for example, but I've tagged it as problematic) As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us, and with over 6 million articles and only several thousand regular participants, it's hard to address every problematic article quickly. We can only address what we know about, but everyone does what they can do. Standards have also changed over time, and what was once acceptable may no longer be. 331dot (talk) 13:15, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- 331dot now I get it, thank you for clarification, I will try to be more open about my edits/contributions in the future to avoid any situation where someone might see my activity as suspicious. I can imagine it is hard to manage Wikipedia, with so many daily users as this project is in constant motion. Still I want to do what I can and when I can to contribute positively, one thing might be providing translation in my native language to the article I wrote, since Veleco is a European based brand. If this were something small-time in one country, I myself would most likely not bother writing any article at all, but if something is this big and lacks an article I found it surprisingly lacking and decided to contribute. I will make those contributions via suggestions though to not get accused of any misconduct here. In spare time I might also review other scooter manufacturers since now I'm more familiar with the subject and maybe mark them in some way if they don't meet Wikipedia's standards, because that list is quite messy.MartinOrl087 (talk) 13:29, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Notice
You are hereby notified that our dispute has been taken to WP:ANI as you suggested. I'm unable to notify Drmies since his talk page is protected. 2601:245:4003:2530:1D7E:563A:399F:49E8 (talk) 19:31, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
WFG
You're totally a WFG tool, aren't ya? It's a pyramid scheme bro. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.59.73.203 (talk) 06:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
- What matters is not what you or I think, but what independent reliable sources state. If you have independent sources that describe the group that way, please offer them. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
A cute doggo for ye!
Thank You for being a cool wikipedian! | |
Thank you so much for your contributions and support for wikipedia! -- KindCowboy69 ☮ 07:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC) |
Asking
I was asking why I was blocked can you explain why I was blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.173.249.59 (talk) 18:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
- I don't know who you are by your IP address, but posting while logged out is considered block evasion. Please return to your account to request unblock. 331dot (talk) 18:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
My IP changed because I'm on a hotspot and I made the edit on cellular. The block passed as it was a 31 hour block and it's been more than 31 hours since I was blocked. Why was I blocked. Also my IP was 2600:1003:B00D:7948:8056:F218:9D7D:468D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.173.249.59 (talk) 18:33, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
- Please post at the bottom instead of the top of the page. If your IP changed because you moved from one network to another, you may need to clear your browser's cache as cookies could cause Wikipedia to "think" you are still on the blocked IP. 331dot (talk) 19:06, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Is this an example of canvassing?
Hey, I saw your name pop up at in this list and I'm contacting you because of the wise advice given at WP:ANI: Want to skip the drama? Check the Recently Active Admins list for admins who may be able to help directly.
I want to ask if the following is an example of canvassing? If not, I apologize for taking everyone's time. buidhe and I are in a content dispute at Talk:Turkey and the Holocaust. Recently we also disagreed at Talk:Jews of Libya during the Holocaust, where Watchlonly agreed with buidhe but disagreed with me. Following that buidhe invited Watchlonly to "a related discussion" at Talk:Turkey and the Holocaust. But the discussions at the two talk pages aren't related. One was a move request and the other is an NPOV dispute. Buidhe also invited another user to the dispute using a non-neutral message (Wikipedia:Canvassing#Campaigning). It my opinion that this form of messaging is inappropriate and if buidhe really wants community input, they should use WP:NPOVN, WP:3O or something.
If I have misread the situation then I'd appreciate if you could point out the error in my thinking.VR talk 21:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
- As I repeatedly told VR, I have no idea what Watchonly would think of this dispute, but since they were editing a related page, I wanted to get their input. (Both of these articles concern impacts of the Holocaust in the Mediterranean region.) Brigade Piron had previously expressed interest in the article, as you can see from discussion at my user talk page. (t · c) buidhe 21:23, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
- The two discussions both involve an aspect of the Holocaust, so there is a relation there. I respectfully am also not seeing what is non-neutral about the message Buidhe made, and they don't seem to be soliciting like-minded editors who share their views. It is not canvassing- as far as I am aware- to notify potentially interested editors of discussions related to their interest, as long as they are not simply notifying people to come to a particular discussion and advocate for or support a particular viewpoint. 331dot (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
- The "non-neutral" part is referring to buidhe inviting someone to a discussion about the reliability of Stanford Shaw, but calling Shaw "basically a work of fiction" in that message. To me that sounds like buidhe wanted the user to support their viewpoint (which is what the user ended up doing).
- Thanks for your input!VR talk 21:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
- The two discussions both involve an aspect of the Holocaust, so there is a relation there. I respectfully am also not seeing what is non-neutral about the message Buidhe made, and they don't seem to be soliciting like-minded editors who share their views. It is not canvassing- as far as I am aware- to notify potentially interested editors of discussions related to their interest, as long as they are not simply notifying people to come to a particular discussion and advocate for or support a particular viewpoint. 331dot (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Please revoke TPA
The answers never shock is definitely Evlekis. They've been targeting that CVUA page over and over again. Pahunkat (talk) 13:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Requesting your Assistance on Block
Hello, My Account was Blocked due to my actions including Copyright Infringement, edit warring. I had uploaded various images from third-party sites without knowing the usage license. Now I am aware of the same and understand that using copyrighted images are seriously prohibited. Please help me get back my account as i feel the block is no longer necessary as I will abide by the rules of Wikipedia. Can you please assist me with the same . Eldhose Talk 14:17, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
- To be unblocked from your Article/Draft space block, please make another unblock request on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Request for change.
I would like to request the below change. Could you please let me know if you can assist? Thank you in advance. Kerlouche83 (talk) 19:23, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Change request to UNFCU page Information to be added: CEO- John Lewis Information to be added: Executive Vice President- Pamela Agnone Information to be removed: CEO- William Predmore
- Explanation of issue: William Predmore retired on 31st December 2020 and John Lewis has been named as the new CEO of UNFCU as of January 1st 2021
- References supporting change: https://www.unfcu.org/leadership/
- Kerlouche83 Please make an edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, Talk:United Nations Federal Credit Union. 331dot (talk) 23:12, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Some baklava for you!
Hello! Seems like you are interesting! 11Jasejusttestingzapppp (talk) 01:07, 21 January 2021 (UTC) |
Campbell X
Hi there, thanks for your message. I am not involved in an edit war: I was part of the group that created the page as part of [[1]], and have been asked by the subject to delete the page, and as part of the team that created it, I think this should be possible (the actual creator is no longer active on Wikipedia but I have contacted her offline). As I can't delete the page, I have made changes that the subject asked for, deleting links and references that deadname him. I have left a message with the helpdesk asking for the page to be deleted, and flagged it for deletion, on the same basis.
Another user reverted the page after my edits, which deleted links and references containing deadname and incorrect pronouns (this is as per Wikipedia's own Gender Identity guidelines). The page should be deleted as per my request, as it is causing the subject severe mental distress. Not everyone can transition in public view like the Wachowskis, so "publicly available information" is not a good standard test in the case of transition. The page's existence is causing active harm, and this should be considered as a reason for immediate deletion.
Please feel free to push this request to a senior editor or administrator, as I don't have that access. I don't want to be involved in an "edit war," I am trying to act ethically on behalf of a person in pain that is being exacerbated by Wikipedia. Sophiemayer (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:06, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
- Sophiemayer There are no "senior editors", we are a single community. Even administrators like me have no higher status than others. I have said how you can proceed; you need to start an articles for deletion discussion and argue that the person is not notable; I truly regret to say that we have many articles that are upsetting to various people, and while we take such pain seriously(and I cannot know that pain personally) we can't delete articles just for that reason if they are based on publicly available information. As you have a conflict of interest, you should not directly edit the article, but you may make formal edit requests on the talk page. You cannot keep editing the article to your preferred version; that is considered edit warring.
- The article should reflect the pronouns appropriate for the person, per MOS:GENDERID. 331dot (talk) 14:26, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
This is really confusing, I'm afraid: I started a deletion discussion, and it was deleted/reverted. I changed the pronouns to reflect the appropriate usage, and it was reverted: I'm not sure what more I can do, as I am getting stonewalled at every turn. The article should be deleted. Sophiemayer (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:58, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
- Sophiemayer I'm sorry; your edit where you tried that was not the way to start a discussion. I would be willing to do so as a courtesy.
- The pronouns were only reverted because they were part of a larger edit. 331dot (talk) 15:03, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
All of the edit is valid: the pronouns on the page should be he/him, and all references from before 2020 should be deleted. The page should be deleted. I'm responsible for the creation of the page as part of a wiki-a-thon and am now asking for it to be removed. If you're willing to re-enter the tag for proposed deletion as a courtesy, I'd be very grateful. Deletion is the final goal and preferred outcome. Sophiemayer (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:55, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
- I will do so fairly soon. I will simply create the discussion and leave you to put in a statement. 331dot (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Italics
I appreciate that note; I'm kind of a stickler for formatting. I removed them once already, but I wasn't going to drop an indef-block for italic abuse. I do think that "fuck you and the horse you rode in on" is a wonderful expression. And people say Americans don't contribute anything to the beauty of the world! Ha! (and there's Häagen-Dazs too...) Drmies (talk) 22:57, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
331 loses to 666
My username wasn't blatant nor serious. It is my real name which I had already said. This seemed more like personal out of taste. Which you seriously try to injure beyond repair without any justification to truly try to ease. Using all your power to banish and suppress. One doesn't justify all. Perhaps in your little world. A Note, which was weak. I didn't wish anything, and you damn right I was pissed. All I did was try to help and correct an obvious error and this caused a ban? A Ban? For helping? Be serious. Of course I wouldn't like to be blocked for trying to contribute over something so insignificant. Had I not tried to help I wouldn't have been Blocked. Your mark is weak and your attitude poor. Dot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Threesom666 (talk • contribs) 10:50, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
- Threesom666 I accept the judgement of the community on this matter, and will use it as a learning experience going forward. I don't see it as a win or lose matter and it's not about power. I had responded to a good faith report about your username. There was nothing personal about it and I had never heard of you before this that I can recall. It was a soft block allowing you to create a new account so if I was suppressing you I did a bad job. I understand why you might feel as you do but please don't ascribe motives to me or the user that reported you that I don't have, and try to put yourself in the other's shoes and at least understand why they saw it that way. I understand that you might not feel the same, but I wish you well on your future participation here. 331dot (talk) 13:34, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Pulled Larry King
As a courtesy wanted to let you know I've pulled Larry King because 5 of the 6 responses after posting were opposes and pull requests, so we probably need more discussion. Consensus may develop to post, but for now it's more proper to take it off. -- Fuzheado | Talk 22:48, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
- Fuzheado Thanks for the heads up, although I obviously disagree. I think on strength of arguments posting won out, but we will see. 331dot (talk) 23:31, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Alex Jones and Cannabis
Do you agree with what I have to say about Alex Jones and cannabis?