This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
You have not explained the rationale behind the revertation of my edits, as all I did was to update the sources and cleared up the article with WP:COMMONNAME. Please do so in the talk section of the article. Thank you. C-GAUN ( talk) 00:05, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:10, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sioux City, Iowa weather. Since you had some involvement with the Sioux City, Iowa weather redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Stefan2 ( talk) 22:05, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Addis Ababa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gangwon ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Dear Sir, please stop removing relevant references from articles such as:
I would also suggest that you use the standard signature in comments, instead of isolating yourself from feedback.
Thank you - CultureArchitect ( talk) 02:11, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
You did a revert, with an edit summary saying something about "implicit promises to retire". What is that about? To whom is it addressed?
After the revert, you restored a category that had been removed by the revert. In addition, the revert changed "Margin of victory" back to "Margin". Was this your intention? Bruce leverett ( talk) 17:12, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
I was stressed at time of requestingSo, you could have quietly stepped away from Wikipedia instead of throwing temper tantra left and right. You should know better than to edit under a cloud. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 16:55, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
On 2018-12-06, you've reverted my edit on the Chrystia Freeland page with a remark "overt POV-pushing by pro-Svoboda" IP.
- First of all, I'm probably as far removed from being "pro-Svoboda" as possible.
- Second, your remark shows that you most likely have no idea what you're talking about.
- Third, and finally, why not revert the original edits which clearly show a pro-Russian-propaganda bias?
All this is, of course, assuming that you've acted in good faith, and are not a part of the Russian propaganda effort.
This is not the first time I come across your Chinese-state sponsored, wumao activity on Wikipedia. So before I report you, I ask you to stop removing facts and events that are uncomfortable for you and your Party. I know it is embarrassing to fail after claiming several world records, but if other countries can face criticism, then China should do so as well. Otherwise is just a pathetic abyss of hidden shoddy constructions. 125.196.63.109 ( talk) 09:37, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
You left the following message on my talk page:
I have been a Wikipedia editor for over thirteen years, and have never been accused of deliberately introducing "incorrect information". While you may disagree with my edit (sources differ on whether Yunnan is more correctly described as "southwest" or "south central" China, and this disagreement is a sincere one), your disagreement does not make my edit vandalism. Indeed, from a purely geographical standpoint, it is clear that "south central" is more accurate than "southwest", but I recognize that there are historical reasons for the widespread use of "southwest" to describe its location. So to be clear, you have erred in falsely accusing me of vandalism. If you cannot tell the difference between vandalism and a reasonable edit with a clearly explained edit summary, then perhaps we need to take this difference of views to a third party for some intervention. As to the matter of the edit in question, had the edit merely been reverted, I would have been unaffected. I do not have strong feelings about this matter, and in fact, have learned that many see the matter differently than I do. I may, when I have more time, investigate the matter further, but I just cannot do that right now. My solitary objection at this time is to your slanderous accusations of vandalism, and it is on that matter alone that I am considering further action. The tone of your response will be the primary factor determining my next steps. Un sch ool 03:57, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
far southwestis correct with the interpretation that it is both in the southwest region and the southernmost province in the region, and in fact, the province containing the southernmost point outside of Guangdong and Hainan. As an aside, the U.S. Census does define the Southern U.S. as extending to West Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. lists the
Hi. I used to own 211.27.126.189. From that IP I posted a message on your talk page which you thought was spam (see [1] and [2] as that section is now archived - these links in this message aren't spam themselves). There's no spam. I don't get how there's spam. Thank you. 211.27.115.246 ( talk) 09:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Dear Sir, please stop removing relevant references from articles such as:
I would also suggest that you use the standard signature in comments, instead of isolating yourself from feedback.
Thank you - CultureArchitect ( talk) 02:11, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Dear Sir, you can find the official UN ICERD country report for China here: https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/SessionDetails1.aspx?Lang=en&SessionID=1196. This is in agreement with press articles quoted. Have a good read! CultureArchitect ( talk) 08:01, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
You should have checked my edits, before undoing them. I am fixing redirects. 95.253.203.9 ( talk) 16:09, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
So, in other words, you'd prefer to never see updates or changes to weather boxes, am I reading this correctly? Literally every single field and figure used in my edit can be directly sourced. Weather data, of all data, should not remain stagnant, as can very easily be witnessed in how the numbers changed between the 1981-2010 and 1981-2019 sets. Don't know what you want, other than nothing at all. — Huntster ( t @ c) 12:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
But you're saying none of the changes I made are acceptable?The addition of both the normal monthly mean temperatures and mean daylight hours has remained.
I reverted your edit on Coral Gables, Florida. The temps listed in the 'Climate' section are not the same of those given by the Weather Channel for either Miami or the Miami Airport. In addition, you also deleted the 'Surrounding areas' section below the Climate section. - Donald Albury 17:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Please read Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Uncertainty_and_rounding, which states, "The number of decimal places should be consistent within a list or context (The response rates were 41.0 and 47.4 percent, respectively, not 41 and 47.4 percent), unless different precisions are actually intended." - Donald Albury 19:10, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Chinese administrative divisions by GDP per capita#Inclusion of Taiwan. Vontheri ( talk) 23:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Chinese administrative divisions by GDP#Inclusion of Taiwan. Vontheri ( talk) 23:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Chinese administrative divisions by highest point#Inclusion of Taiwan. Vontheri ( talk) 23:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Please do not introduce incorrect coordinates into Wikipedia, as you did with Raikoke. 29' is not the same thing as .29°. Abductive ( reasoning) 04:42, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- Ad Orientem ( talk) 17:27, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at WP:ITNC, you may be blocked from editing. I strongly advise you to remove, strike or otherwise modify your comment which is highly offensive and inappropriate. If it is still there in 10 minutes you will be invited to explain/defend it at ANI. Ad Orientem ( talk) 17:03, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Hi, would you like to engage in a discussion regarding my changes on the talk page of Xinjiang re-education camps? This serial reverting is not helpful to the article. - Divzsd 23:31, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Liu Qiangdong, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sina ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:26, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Excuse me, but what I left was not disruptive. The PRC has used the OBOR to leverage countries to see their position many times before, which makes the lack of response from heavy OBOR participants like Pakistan completely plausible, especially after the PRC used their veto power to stop the UNSC from labeling that Pakistani terrorist as a terrorist. Indonesia is desperately poor and begging for Chinese investment, which makes their lack of response also completely plausible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.219.189 ( talk) 23:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Titular means holding or constituting a purely formal position or title without any real authority. and there was no treaty port. Please source these facts if you're going to edit them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.185.219.5 ( talk • contribs)
I have already posted this on the Talk page of the redirect earlier, but the page in question to be moved was already at the previous title at Administrative divisions of Taiwan. I was simply reverting another controversial and also undiscussed page move, which seemed to be contesting the WP:COMMONNAME of the territory. Please refer to the edit history of the original page for more information. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 16:58, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Your last edit appears to have pushed you over the WP:3RR brightline on this infobox. How about you self-revert and come to talk so I don't have to go to WP:3RR/N. Simonm223 ( talk) 16:04, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Suzhou High School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sina ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 07:34, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Horse Eye Jack. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. Horse Eye Jack ( talk) 17:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. In particular see Talk:List of Chinese administrative divisions by highest point were you state “Indeed, a disclaimer would clear it all. Only the most militant, Sinophobic, pan-Green partisans and their neocon sympathisers in the West would differ but their opinion should be considered both criminal and extreme." Horse Eye Jack ( talk) 17:36, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi,
As an Uyghur myself, the information on the page is not correct and biased towards China's Communist Party propaganda. That is why I added correct information about Uyghurs and let the world know who we are. Please restrain from undoing my edits.
Thank you. 1watwat ( talk) 16:28, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
I have granted your account an exemption from IP blockingfor three months. This will allow you to edit the English Wikipedia through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in. I have determined that you will be affected by certain blocks and have given you this so that it will not affect your ability to edit.
Please read the page
Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on
IP block exemption conditions. Inappropriate usage of this user right may result in revocation. I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption.
—
Berean Hunter
(talk)
23:44, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your recent edit to the Portland Maine weatherbox, adding new data. I am just curious, though, why you also deleted the middle temperature row? While it's easy to do the math, sometimes it's even easier to just have those numbers already in place. — Soap — 03:41, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello, CaradhrasAiguo! I want to warn you about your recent editing at the article Xinjiang re-education camps. You have removed the same content four times over the past couple of days. It has been restored by three different people. That should give you the message that there is not a consensus to include it. Time to stop inserting it and go to the talk page to discuss it. Your editing may not meet the red-line definition of edit warring, but that's what it is nevertheless. If you continue this behavior, you could be blocked from editing. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:56, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jo Platt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Grundy ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 08:43, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
Any reason for this edit, and specifically the flagicon-->flagdeco change? I've undone it because it completely broke the page but just wanted to give you a heads up in case you've got someone set up in AWB that you don't want. Nole ( chat· edits) 05:33, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
flagdeco image
. Flagicon for the states themselves is an arguable case of
WP:OVERLINK for most states except for perhaps Kosovo, South Sudan, and the Pacific / Caribbean island states. CaradhrasAiguo (
leave language)
18:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)Hi, Why I changed your edit to begin with was you deleted a ref without saying anything so it was not obvious why you did it. That is why nothing to do with not being competent WP:CIR. I except it was a mistake of mine and there was another ref in your follow up edit. Please make sure when you remove references in the future state why in the reason for editing box. CHCBOY ( talk) 12:41, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Don't ever do this again [1] Acroterion (talk) 23:29, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
Your edit summary here is in violation of don't be a jerk and don't bite the newcomer, even if an edit is editing from an IP address, there are still as much an editor as you and should be treated and addressed the same way as any other editor. If this one editor happed to be introducing bad edits that's one thing, but saying that an editor is "inferior" simply for not registering, is simply bad behavioral etiquette. Jonatan Svensson Glad ( talk) 23:41, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
The diffs here and here are inappropriate. Even if someone is an SPA, you cannot shrink their entire comment by using the small tag. Tagging with Template:Single-purpose account is enough. It is not appropriate to apply formatting changes to minimize someone else's opinion. It is disrespectful and rude. I have reverted your formatting changes for this reason. Chess (talk) Ping when replying 06:51, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
disrespectful, it matters not as respect is something that has to be earned, on or off Wikipedia. I did the minimum by not re-factoring or removing their comments entirely. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 06:59, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I made an ANI-notice for User:Horse Eye Jack. You can find it here. Your input would be appreciated. Best regards, Jeff5102 ( talk) 13:24, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited China Airlines Flight 334, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Taoyuan ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 16:08, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, you removed the following sentence I added to 2019–20_coronavirus_outbreak#Criticism_of_official_statistics:
The regular quadratic growth is compared to previous research describing how Chinese organ donation statistics was falsified using a simple quadratic equation.
I believe this is factual and relevant information. Why did you remove it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pipe42 ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm posting this on your talk page so as to not bother HEJ too much, which I worry is starting to be the case. I'm sorry, but for privacy reasons I have made the decision to not link my email to my account, and I am strict in keeping my Wikipedia interactions to only on the site itself. I'd be lying if I said that I understand why you won't present diffs publicly though. Surely admins would need to use the evidence if you were to file a report? That said, I don't belie your right to not bring up a case if you don't wish to do so. Sincerely, Darthkayak ( talk) 05:21, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for you guide about the useful tool below.:)
/info/en/?search=User:Citation_bot/use Goodtiming8871 ( talk) 01:27, 13 March 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 the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy. 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.
NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 13:48, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi there. I noticed you reverted several changes of mine but I accept your decision because you have mentioned one, which I failed to follow it. From now on, I will. Anyway, thanks for your advice. -- cyrfaw ( talk) 19:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
To CaradhrasAiguo,
Hello,
I saw and edited the content about Sansha on Wiki because the text and images contains many wrong and fake information about the history of South China Sea area. Sansha is a city-level unilaterally declared by the PRC's government to make their claim on disputed South China Sea in reality. In fact, the legitimate issues of South China Sea water and its islands have not been resolved by the international law. Thus, publishing such a bias in a global platform of knowledge like Wikipedia is an inappropriate action and should be removed.
Reverted action without any discussion with the reader has violated the basic principle about freedom of speech.
I solemnly request you to delete this section or I will do it.
Best,
Kim Dang — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khiem Dang ( talk • contribs) 07:09, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- Ythlev ( talk) 16:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello CaradhrasAiguo, thanks for your anti-vandalism work. I would like to give two tips:
I hope this helps. Best, MrClog ( talk) 16:23, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
But but it will tilt the balance towards registered users" whine. As if semi-protection doesn't prevent them from simply creating an account. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 16:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Removing harmful posts, including personal attacks, trolling, and vandalism.CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 16:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Oppose. This user has reverted the sourced info five times and semi-protection will be the big advantage for him in the dispute where he is absolutely wrong.") would constitute any of these things? Even if they have engaged in any of these activities outside RfPP, that does not justify removing this specific comment. -- MrClog ( talk) 16:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Furthermore, don't try intimidating other editors with warning templates like you did here! Favonian ( talk) 17:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.178.235.125 ( talk) 17:30, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Concerning this edit. Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Canterbury Tail talk 17:33, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
NinjaRobotPirate (
talk)
19:04, 25 March 2020 (UTC)CaradhrasAiguo ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The dispute at Candidates Tournament 2020 which led to the conflict with the AN/I reporter has already dissipated with the page in question being semi-protected, and constructive discussion occurring at the talk page. Given the last article interaction between myself and the IP occurred at 15:35 UTC today, and the timing of the two edit summaries raised in the complaint ( 15:45 UTC and 15:23 UTC), it was unlikely that any further personal snipes would occur; see my criticisms of the IP's conduct above at #Two tips in which no personal attacks were made. I would accept a topic ban on any Administrators' noticeboard and a local block at Candidates Tournament 2020, where the flare-ups occurred, in lieu of what is objectively not a preventative block. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 19:20, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Saying "it was unlikely that any further personal snipes would occur" is not sufficient, especially not when you were continuing making personal attacks in a report about your personal attacks. I think we would need to see an active commitment from you to cease your personal attacks, in all situations and on all pages. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 19:37, 25 March 2020 (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.
@
CaradhrasAiguo: if it wasn’t apparent, it’s a bit inappropriate to call other editors neo-fascist
and partisan
s, or to assert that other editor’s concerns are revolving around tone-policing rather than substance
. Recognize that these are personal attacks as clearly described in
WP:WIAPA. —
MarkH21
talk
20:56, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
poking the bearremark is not needed. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 21:13, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Can you demonstrate within that thread, which criticisms I made about other users were personal attacks and not merely criticism of their conduct? If I am missing something here (everybody can improve in terms of self-awareness), I ought to know.
You can file a complaint at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement when you're unblocked, but it doesn't seem like a big deal to me. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 18:59, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
not (be) a big deal. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 19:06, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Your removal was not clearly explained. Please make sure you explain all of your changes clearly and cogently. El_C 16:00, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
You have not explained the rationale behind the revertation of my edits, as all I did was to update the sources and cleared up the article with WP:COMMONNAME. Please do so in the talk section of the article. Thank you. C-GAUN ( talk) 00:05, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:10, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sioux City, Iowa weather. Since you had some involvement with the Sioux City, Iowa weather redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Stefan2 ( talk) 22:05, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Addis Ababa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gangwon ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Dear Sir, please stop removing relevant references from articles such as:
I would also suggest that you use the standard signature in comments, instead of isolating yourself from feedback.
Thank you - CultureArchitect ( talk) 02:11, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
You did a revert, with an edit summary saying something about "implicit promises to retire". What is that about? To whom is it addressed?
After the revert, you restored a category that had been removed by the revert. In addition, the revert changed "Margin of victory" back to "Margin". Was this your intention? Bruce leverett ( talk) 17:12, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
I was stressed at time of requestingSo, you could have quietly stepped away from Wikipedia instead of throwing temper tantra left and right. You should know better than to edit under a cloud. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 16:55, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
On 2018-12-06, you've reverted my edit on the Chrystia Freeland page with a remark "overt POV-pushing by pro-Svoboda" IP.
- First of all, I'm probably as far removed from being "pro-Svoboda" as possible.
- Second, your remark shows that you most likely have no idea what you're talking about.
- Third, and finally, why not revert the original edits which clearly show a pro-Russian-propaganda bias?
All this is, of course, assuming that you've acted in good faith, and are not a part of the Russian propaganda effort.
This is not the first time I come across your Chinese-state sponsored, wumao activity on Wikipedia. So before I report you, I ask you to stop removing facts and events that are uncomfortable for you and your Party. I know it is embarrassing to fail after claiming several world records, but if other countries can face criticism, then China should do so as well. Otherwise is just a pathetic abyss of hidden shoddy constructions. 125.196.63.109 ( talk) 09:37, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
You left the following message on my talk page:
I have been a Wikipedia editor for over thirteen years, and have never been accused of deliberately introducing "incorrect information". While you may disagree with my edit (sources differ on whether Yunnan is more correctly described as "southwest" or "south central" China, and this disagreement is a sincere one), your disagreement does not make my edit vandalism. Indeed, from a purely geographical standpoint, it is clear that "south central" is more accurate than "southwest", but I recognize that there are historical reasons for the widespread use of "southwest" to describe its location. So to be clear, you have erred in falsely accusing me of vandalism. If you cannot tell the difference between vandalism and a reasonable edit with a clearly explained edit summary, then perhaps we need to take this difference of views to a third party for some intervention. As to the matter of the edit in question, had the edit merely been reverted, I would have been unaffected. I do not have strong feelings about this matter, and in fact, have learned that many see the matter differently than I do. I may, when I have more time, investigate the matter further, but I just cannot do that right now. My solitary objection at this time is to your slanderous accusations of vandalism, and it is on that matter alone that I am considering further action. The tone of your response will be the primary factor determining my next steps. Un sch ool 03:57, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
far southwestis correct with the interpretation that it is both in the southwest region and the southernmost province in the region, and in fact, the province containing the southernmost point outside of Guangdong and Hainan. As an aside, the U.S. Census does define the Southern U.S. as extending to West Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. lists the
Hi. I used to own 211.27.126.189. From that IP I posted a message on your talk page which you thought was spam (see [1] and [2] as that section is now archived - these links in this message aren't spam themselves). There's no spam. I don't get how there's spam. Thank you. 211.27.115.246 ( talk) 09:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Dear Sir, please stop removing relevant references from articles such as:
I would also suggest that you use the standard signature in comments, instead of isolating yourself from feedback.
Thank you - CultureArchitect ( talk) 02:11, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Dear Sir, you can find the official UN ICERD country report for China here: https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/SessionDetails1.aspx?Lang=en&SessionID=1196. This is in agreement with press articles quoted. Have a good read! CultureArchitect ( talk) 08:01, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
You should have checked my edits, before undoing them. I am fixing redirects. 95.253.203.9 ( talk) 16:09, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
So, in other words, you'd prefer to never see updates or changes to weather boxes, am I reading this correctly? Literally every single field and figure used in my edit can be directly sourced. Weather data, of all data, should not remain stagnant, as can very easily be witnessed in how the numbers changed between the 1981-2010 and 1981-2019 sets. Don't know what you want, other than nothing at all. — Huntster ( t @ c) 12:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
But you're saying none of the changes I made are acceptable?The addition of both the normal monthly mean temperatures and mean daylight hours has remained.
I reverted your edit on Coral Gables, Florida. The temps listed in the 'Climate' section are not the same of those given by the Weather Channel for either Miami or the Miami Airport. In addition, you also deleted the 'Surrounding areas' section below the Climate section. - Donald Albury 17:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Please read Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Uncertainty_and_rounding, which states, "The number of decimal places should be consistent within a list or context (The response rates were 41.0 and 47.4 percent, respectively, not 41 and 47.4 percent), unless different precisions are actually intended." - Donald Albury 19:10, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Chinese administrative divisions by GDP per capita#Inclusion of Taiwan. Vontheri ( talk) 23:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Chinese administrative divisions by GDP#Inclusion of Taiwan. Vontheri ( talk) 23:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Chinese administrative divisions by highest point#Inclusion of Taiwan. Vontheri ( talk) 23:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Please do not introduce incorrect coordinates into Wikipedia, as you did with Raikoke. 29' is not the same thing as .29°. Abductive ( reasoning) 04:42, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- Ad Orientem ( talk) 17:27, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at WP:ITNC, you may be blocked from editing. I strongly advise you to remove, strike or otherwise modify your comment which is highly offensive and inappropriate. If it is still there in 10 minutes you will be invited to explain/defend it at ANI. Ad Orientem ( talk) 17:03, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Hi, would you like to engage in a discussion regarding my changes on the talk page of Xinjiang re-education camps? This serial reverting is not helpful to the article. - Divzsd 23:31, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Liu Qiangdong, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sina ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:26, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Excuse me, but what I left was not disruptive. The PRC has used the OBOR to leverage countries to see their position many times before, which makes the lack of response from heavy OBOR participants like Pakistan completely plausible, especially after the PRC used their veto power to stop the UNSC from labeling that Pakistani terrorist as a terrorist. Indonesia is desperately poor and begging for Chinese investment, which makes their lack of response also completely plausible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.219.189 ( talk) 23:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Titular means holding or constituting a purely formal position or title without any real authority. and there was no treaty port. Please source these facts if you're going to edit them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.185.219.5 ( talk • contribs)
I have already posted this on the Talk page of the redirect earlier, but the page in question to be moved was already at the previous title at Administrative divisions of Taiwan. I was simply reverting another controversial and also undiscussed page move, which seemed to be contesting the WP:COMMONNAME of the territory. Please refer to the edit history of the original page for more information. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 16:58, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Your last edit appears to have pushed you over the WP:3RR brightline on this infobox. How about you self-revert and come to talk so I don't have to go to WP:3RR/N. Simonm223 ( talk) 16:04, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Suzhou High School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sina ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 07:34, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Horse Eye Jack. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. Horse Eye Jack ( talk) 17:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. In particular see Talk:List of Chinese administrative divisions by highest point were you state “Indeed, a disclaimer would clear it all. Only the most militant, Sinophobic, pan-Green partisans and their neocon sympathisers in the West would differ but their opinion should be considered both criminal and extreme." Horse Eye Jack ( talk) 17:36, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi,
As an Uyghur myself, the information on the page is not correct and biased towards China's Communist Party propaganda. That is why I added correct information about Uyghurs and let the world know who we are. Please restrain from undoing my edits.
Thank you. 1watwat ( talk) 16:28, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
I have granted your account an exemption from IP blockingfor three months. This will allow you to edit the English Wikipedia through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in. I have determined that you will be affected by certain blocks and have given you this so that it will not affect your ability to edit.
Please read the page
Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on
IP block exemption conditions. Inappropriate usage of this user right may result in revocation. I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption.
—
Berean Hunter
(talk)
23:44, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your recent edit to the Portland Maine weatherbox, adding new data. I am just curious, though, why you also deleted the middle temperature row? While it's easy to do the math, sometimes it's even easier to just have those numbers already in place. — Soap — 03:41, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello, CaradhrasAiguo! I want to warn you about your recent editing at the article Xinjiang re-education camps. You have removed the same content four times over the past couple of days. It has been restored by three different people. That should give you the message that there is not a consensus to include it. Time to stop inserting it and go to the talk page to discuss it. Your editing may not meet the red-line definition of edit warring, but that's what it is nevertheless. If you continue this behavior, you could be blocked from editing. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:56, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jo Platt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Grundy ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 08:43, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
Any reason for this edit, and specifically the flagicon-->flagdeco change? I've undone it because it completely broke the page but just wanted to give you a heads up in case you've got someone set up in AWB that you don't want. Nole ( chat· edits) 05:33, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
flagdeco image
. Flagicon for the states themselves is an arguable case of
WP:OVERLINK for most states except for perhaps Kosovo, South Sudan, and the Pacific / Caribbean island states. CaradhrasAiguo (
leave language)
18:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)Hi, Why I changed your edit to begin with was you deleted a ref without saying anything so it was not obvious why you did it. That is why nothing to do with not being competent WP:CIR. I except it was a mistake of mine and there was another ref in your follow up edit. Please make sure when you remove references in the future state why in the reason for editing box. CHCBOY ( talk) 12:41, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Don't ever do this again [1] Acroterion (talk) 23:29, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
Your edit summary here is in violation of don't be a jerk and don't bite the newcomer, even if an edit is editing from an IP address, there are still as much an editor as you and should be treated and addressed the same way as any other editor. If this one editor happed to be introducing bad edits that's one thing, but saying that an editor is "inferior" simply for not registering, is simply bad behavioral etiquette. Jonatan Svensson Glad ( talk) 23:41, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
The diffs here and here are inappropriate. Even if someone is an SPA, you cannot shrink their entire comment by using the small tag. Tagging with Template:Single-purpose account is enough. It is not appropriate to apply formatting changes to minimize someone else's opinion. It is disrespectful and rude. I have reverted your formatting changes for this reason. Chess (talk) Ping when replying 06:51, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
disrespectful, it matters not as respect is something that has to be earned, on or off Wikipedia. I did the minimum by not re-factoring or removing their comments entirely. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 06:59, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I made an ANI-notice for User:Horse Eye Jack. You can find it here. Your input would be appreciated. Best regards, Jeff5102 ( talk) 13:24, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited China Airlines Flight 334, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Taoyuan ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 16:08, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, you removed the following sentence I added to 2019–20_coronavirus_outbreak#Criticism_of_official_statistics:
The regular quadratic growth is compared to previous research describing how Chinese organ donation statistics was falsified using a simple quadratic equation.
I believe this is factual and relevant information. Why did you remove it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pipe42 ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm posting this on your talk page so as to not bother HEJ too much, which I worry is starting to be the case. I'm sorry, but for privacy reasons I have made the decision to not link my email to my account, and I am strict in keeping my Wikipedia interactions to only on the site itself. I'd be lying if I said that I understand why you won't present diffs publicly though. Surely admins would need to use the evidence if you were to file a report? That said, I don't belie your right to not bring up a case if you don't wish to do so. Sincerely, Darthkayak ( talk) 05:21, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for you guide about the useful tool below.:)
/info/en/?search=User:Citation_bot/use Goodtiming8871 ( talk) 01:27, 13 March 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 the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy. 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.
NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 13:48, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi there. I noticed you reverted several changes of mine but I accept your decision because you have mentioned one, which I failed to follow it. From now on, I will. Anyway, thanks for your advice. -- cyrfaw ( talk) 19:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
To CaradhrasAiguo,
Hello,
I saw and edited the content about Sansha on Wiki because the text and images contains many wrong and fake information about the history of South China Sea area. Sansha is a city-level unilaterally declared by the PRC's government to make their claim on disputed South China Sea in reality. In fact, the legitimate issues of South China Sea water and its islands have not been resolved by the international law. Thus, publishing such a bias in a global platform of knowledge like Wikipedia is an inappropriate action and should be removed.
Reverted action without any discussion with the reader has violated the basic principle about freedom of speech.
I solemnly request you to delete this section or I will do it.
Best,
Kim Dang — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khiem Dang ( talk • contribs) 07:09, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- Ythlev ( talk) 16:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello CaradhrasAiguo, thanks for your anti-vandalism work. I would like to give two tips:
I hope this helps. Best, MrClog ( talk) 16:23, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
But but it will tilt the balance towards registered users" whine. As if semi-protection doesn't prevent them from simply creating an account. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 16:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Removing harmful posts, including personal attacks, trolling, and vandalism.CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 16:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Oppose. This user has reverted the sourced info five times and semi-protection will be the big advantage for him in the dispute where he is absolutely wrong.") would constitute any of these things? Even if they have engaged in any of these activities outside RfPP, that does not justify removing this specific comment. -- MrClog ( talk) 16:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Furthermore, don't try intimidating other editors with warning templates like you did here! Favonian ( talk) 17:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.178.235.125 ( talk) 17:30, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Concerning this edit. Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Canterbury Tail talk 17:33, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
NinjaRobotPirate (
talk)
19:04, 25 March 2020 (UTC)CaradhrasAiguo ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The dispute at Candidates Tournament 2020 which led to the conflict with the AN/I reporter has already dissipated with the page in question being semi-protected, and constructive discussion occurring at the talk page. Given the last article interaction between myself and the IP occurred at 15:35 UTC today, and the timing of the two edit summaries raised in the complaint ( 15:45 UTC and 15:23 UTC), it was unlikely that any further personal snipes would occur; see my criticisms of the IP's conduct above at #Two tips in which no personal attacks were made. I would accept a topic ban on any Administrators' noticeboard and a local block at Candidates Tournament 2020, where the flare-ups occurred, in lieu of what is objectively not a preventative block. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 19:20, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Saying "it was unlikely that any further personal snipes would occur" is not sufficient, especially not when you were continuing making personal attacks in a report about your personal attacks. I think we would need to see an active commitment from you to cease your personal attacks, in all situations and on all pages. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 19:37, 25 March 2020 (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.
@
CaradhrasAiguo: if it wasn’t apparent, it’s a bit inappropriate to call other editors neo-fascist
and partisan
s, or to assert that other editor’s concerns are revolving around tone-policing rather than substance
. Recognize that these are personal attacks as clearly described in
WP:WIAPA. —
MarkH21
talk
20:56, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
poking the bearremark is not needed. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 21:13, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Can you demonstrate within that thread, which criticisms I made about other users were personal attacks and not merely criticism of their conduct? If I am missing something here (everybody can improve in terms of self-awareness), I ought to know.
You can file a complaint at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement when you're unblocked, but it doesn't seem like a big deal to me. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 18:59, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
not (be) a big deal. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 19:06, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Your removal was not clearly explained. Please make sure you explain all of your changes clearly and cogently. El_C 16:00, 4 April 2020 (UTC)