Hello, AlanLertreader, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Yann ( talk) 14:34, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
The article The Wee Blue Book has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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.
Jmorrison230582 (
talk)
18:26, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Wee Blue Book 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/The Wee Blue Book 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. Jmorrison230582 ( talk) 14:02, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Are you able to explain why your deletions were regarded as a non-neutral point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:B00A:6600:4582:2CF8:FE47:D5AB ( talk) 14:52, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
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.
Jmorrison230582 (
talk)
17:23, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Please read WP:BLP, particularly the sections linked to by WP:BLPREMOVE and WP:BLPSPS. Your edit looks like an attack on the subject. Jmorrison230582 ( talk) 17:10, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Stop inserting an attack section into a BLP. If you continue to do this I will have to file a report at WP:ANI and/or WP:3RR. Jmorrison230582 ( talk) 13:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Jmorrison230582 (
talk)
14:02, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi. The normal process for disputed content is to conclude discussions and consensus first, before re-adding the content (if that is what consensus establishes). You don't edit war to keep the addition in until discussion concludes. Thanks. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:56, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Black Kite (talk) 14:11, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Clearly the blocks you received last time you tried to insert this material did not have the desired result; to persuade you to desist. If you insert the material again, I will block you again for a longer period of time. Black Kite (talk) 12:03, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Black Kite (talk)
10:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
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. The thread is
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Anna Lertreader reported. Thank you.
NeilN
talk to me
16:24, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Anna Lertreader. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Anna Lertreader. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (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)
01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi you forgot to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), regards -- Devoke water 12:47, 23 April 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)
00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
In an edit summary you said "Kindly identify on the Talk page any grounds for undoing these edits as NPOV"
and you are right. The editors reverting your obvious vandalism, which seems to be motivated by an extreme personal grudge against Wadhwa, should have posted a warning here. I was a few seconds too late to be the one to revert your first spree but I did get your third one so here is the message you requested:
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's
neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at
Mridul Wadhwa. Wikipedia is not the place to pursue personal grudges against the subjects of articles. Also, you are edit warring which is separate grounds for a block if it continues. --
DanielRigal (
talk)
23:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, 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.
Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ ( talk) 23:20, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
ScottishFinnishRadish (
talk)
23:22, 20 January 2024 (UTC){{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
ScottishFinnishRadish (
talk)
23:24, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Anna Lertreader ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
This block is hilariously ridiculous. I made a series of proper, factual and fully cited edits, correcting a massively NPOV article full of basic errors and unsupported factual assertions, and have been subjected instantly to a deluge of abuse and reversions without discussion or justification. My attempt to calmly and rationally discuss the edits was not only locked but *deleted*. It is apparently "disruptive" to add a link to a candidate's election results, or to request a source for a contentious and defamatory claim. Anna Lertreader ( talk) 23:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I'm glad you are amused. I'm not amused. Your attack was unacceptable. At a minimum, you will not be unblocked to participate in gender related topics, as it seems unlikely you can set aside your personal bias against trans human beings, so you will need to tell us what edits you will make instead. The sockpuppetry doesn't help, either. I am declining your request. 331dot ( talk) 09:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Goodness me, I see the transactivists are out in force and reason is impossible. I'll leave you to it. Anna Lertreader ( talk) 19:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, AlanLertreader, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Yann ( talk) 14:34, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
The article The Wee Blue Book has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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.
Jmorrison230582 (
talk)
18:26, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Wee Blue Book 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/The Wee Blue Book 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. Jmorrison230582 ( talk) 14:02, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Are you able to explain why your deletions were regarded as a non-neutral point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:B00A:6600:4582:2CF8:FE47:D5AB ( talk) 14:52, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
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.
Jmorrison230582 (
talk)
17:23, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Please read WP:BLP, particularly the sections linked to by WP:BLPREMOVE and WP:BLPSPS. Your edit looks like an attack on the subject. Jmorrison230582 ( talk) 17:10, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Stop inserting an attack section into a BLP. If you continue to do this I will have to file a report at WP:ANI and/or WP:3RR. Jmorrison230582 ( talk) 13:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Jmorrison230582 (
talk)
14:02, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi. The normal process for disputed content is to conclude discussions and consensus first, before re-adding the content (if that is what consensus establishes). You don't edit war to keep the addition in until discussion concludes. Thanks. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:56, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Black Kite (talk) 14:11, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Clearly the blocks you received last time you tried to insert this material did not have the desired result; to persuade you to desist. If you insert the material again, I will block you again for a longer period of time. Black Kite (talk) 12:03, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Black Kite (talk)
10:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
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. The thread is
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Anna Lertreader reported. Thank you.
NeilN
talk to me
16:24, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Anna Lertreader. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Anna Lertreader. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (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)
01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi you forgot to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), regards -- Devoke water 12:47, 23 April 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)
00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
In an edit summary you said "Kindly identify on the Talk page any grounds for undoing these edits as NPOV"
and you are right. The editors reverting your obvious vandalism, which seems to be motivated by an extreme personal grudge against Wadhwa, should have posted a warning here. I was a few seconds too late to be the one to revert your first spree but I did get your third one so here is the message you requested:
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's
neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at
Mridul Wadhwa. Wikipedia is not the place to pursue personal grudges against the subjects of articles. Also, you are edit warring which is separate grounds for a block if it continues. --
DanielRigal (
talk)
23:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, 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.
Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ ( talk) 23:20, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
ScottishFinnishRadish (
talk)
23:22, 20 January 2024 (UTC){{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
ScottishFinnishRadish (
talk)
23:24, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Anna Lertreader ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
This block is hilariously ridiculous. I made a series of proper, factual and fully cited edits, correcting a massively NPOV article full of basic errors and unsupported factual assertions, and have been subjected instantly to a deluge of abuse and reversions without discussion or justification. My attempt to calmly and rationally discuss the edits was not only locked but *deleted*. It is apparently "disruptive" to add a link to a candidate's election results, or to request a source for a contentious and defamatory claim. Anna Lertreader ( talk) 23:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I'm glad you are amused. I'm not amused. Your attack was unacceptable. At a minimum, you will not be unblocked to participate in gender related topics, as it seems unlikely you can set aside your personal bias against trans human beings, so you will need to tell us what edits you will make instead. The sockpuppetry doesn't help, either. I am declining your request. 331dot ( talk) 09:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Goodness me, I see the transactivists are out in force and reason is impossible. I'll leave you to it. Anna Lertreader ( talk) 19:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC)