|
|
( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
This means that now you can only read what I write, or you can ignore it. The choice is yours. I hope you stay. One thing. Don't create another account or try to edit logged out. You will be spotted and blocked again quickly. The people who do that sort of thing are really good at it. Give that thought up now. They are not mad at you and I am not mad, perhaps disappointed. You can prove you are reading this by NOT trying to edit from another account and get blocked. I will know.
What do I do now?
I'm going to tell you some things. I am going to give you some reading assignments. Many of them we'll read together here, if you like. I can only hope you choose to read what I write and try to do what I ask. If you follow my instructions over the next month or so, I will request you be allowed to work in draft space, under my supervision only, while we continue to learn. I you agree, then don't try to log in or go around the system. If I see that behavior, I will stop posting here. Remember, don't edit while logged out, don't create new account. That will mean you agree.
Understand? Good. We'll start right away. BusterD ( talk) 19:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
"The purpose of Wikipedia is to create a high-quality, free-content encyclopedia in an atmosphere of camaraderie and mutual respect among contributors. Contributors whose actions are detrimental to that goal may be asked to refrain from them, even when these actions are undertaken in good faith; and good faith actions, where disruptive, may still result in sanctions." Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Portals#Purpose_of_Wikipedia, Passed 15 to 0 at 21:46, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
There are many versions but they all say the same thing. This means we are all here for the same reason. To make a book. The biggest book you can imagine. A book so gigantic it will never be complete. A book which lists everything a human being needs to know about every topic. A book written in every language. A book which is free to everyone who can find it. One of the most important books ever written. And you were editing it.
I take that seriously. And so do my many friends.
If you feel mad right now because you were blocked, I feel your pain because I was blocked once myself. But you were blocked because you were interfering with the Purpose of Wikipedia, not because you were making mistakes. The people you want to help, my friends the wikipedians, had to spent time on you and your disruptive edits. That was taking them away from making the book. Do you think mankind should have a book like the one we're all building together? If you do, read The Five Pillars of Wikipedia. Don't just go there, read it. Read it again. Click on every link and read every one. Then go back to The Five Pillars, and read it again.
I'll be back tomorrow. BusterD ( talk) 19:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The general rule is one editor, one account. The creation or use of an additional account or IP address to conceal an editing history, to evade a block or a site ban, or to deceive the community, is prohibited. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather#Sockpuppetry, Passed 12 to 0 at 02:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Since you've chosen to break with my recommendations, I will not present a lesson tomorrow. Every time you break the rules, I will not give a lesson.
Sockpuppetry is one of the worst mistakes some users will make on Wikipedia. Read about it. Editing under multiple accounts is really bad, People who do this are telling me they don't care about the pillars and the policies which spring from them. Without policy, we don't have time to create the book. So you've disappointed a number of people today including yourself. I'm not mad, but because of your actions I choose not to help you tomorrow. I will give a lesson on Thursday, IF YOU STAY OFF WIKIPEDIA UNTIL THEN. If not, I have better ways to serve. BusterD ( talk) 21:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers, an important guideline, reminds us that "Wikipedia articles are improved through the hard work of both regular editors and newcomers. Remember: all of us were new editors at Wikipedia once.... New members are prospective contributors and are therefore Wikipedia's most valuable resource. We must treat newcomers with kindness and patience—nothing scares potentially valuable contributors away faster than hostility. It is very unlikely for a newcomer to be completely familiar with Wikipedia's markup language and its myriad of policies, guidelines, and community standards when they start editing...".
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RHaworth#Treatment of new editors; Passed 14 to 0 at 05:36, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Why am I trying to help you even when you are blocked?
The fourth pillar is respect and civility. We demonstrate respect to others because it is their due. We act kindly to each other because manifesting such trust is a superior platform to help us write our book. It's always about the book. Nothing is more important here. Plus, none of us knows when "our great gettin' up mornin'" is gonna be. I can only speak for myself, but I prefer to be treated as a person, not as an objective, a tool, a data point, an anecdote. As a wikipedian, I'm a serious person doing serious work. In my seriousness, sometimes I get over focussed and need a friend to remind me I am mortal and all glory is fleeting.
Needing a friend involves having friends to count on. Some folks keep their own company, and I've been that guy. On Wikipedia, you will meet people. You can't avoid it. Some of them will be kind and others will not. For me making true wikifriends is one of my stronger motivations for staying. I have noticed that not everyone who tries to edit Wikipedia is great at it. Twenty years ago, nobody was an expert here. I turn wiki-17 in July. It's possible you are making fun of me by your edits, maybe you're trying to cause trouble, perhaps you have been dishonest with me. I choose to assume good faith. I choose to believe I'm helping a wikipedian who hasn't found their voice quite yet.
I'm helping you because it's the right thing to do. And that's how me and my friends roll. Call me naive, but just sign your post with four tildes.
Another lesson soon. BusterD ( talk) 10:27, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
In certain limited circumstances, formal mentorship and similar voluntary and involuntary arrangements, may be suitable to provide advice and support to people involved in disputes, or needing advice on how to work collaboratively on Wikipedia. The long-term aim of such arrangements should be for those involved to improve their conduct and work collaboratively without the need, or with a reduced need, for such advice. Such mentorships or similar arrangements may be agreed to as an alternative to more serious remedies, such as bans or paroles, or they may be an end result of the dispute resolution process itself. Users may voluntarily place themselves under such arrangements, or be placed under such arrangements by the community, or by a ruling of the Arbitration Committee. Any such formal arrangements should be recorded and documented in an appropriate place.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse#Mentorship and similar arrangements; Passed 10 to 0 at 04:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
People learn in different modalities. Some best get material through reading, some pickup quicker with visuals, charts and descriptive images. I like things explained to me. Because there are so many possible ways of learning, it's useful to try several to see what works best for you. I like the mentor-mentee relationships. I choose to exercise my behavior based on models which which work for others. I look to editors I admire, usually people who have demonstrated trust in me.
While most of us try to keep our real-life identities quiet, it's not because we are afraid of outing (a real concern especially for youngsters). I choose to use a pen-name, a Wikipedia-only name, to keep my focus on principles, not personalities (I think this is a twelve-step thing.) I'm not here for the glory or any merit badges; I'm here for the labor, the work. In this, I reveal my idealism, which I think a healthy approach (again, especially for youngsters).
So I am here. I am offering to mentor you. I am qualified and I am willing. I will teach, and you will learn. My mentorship is offered as a way OUT of your indefinite block. If you agree, you will be compelled to act under my supervision. That means if you choose to act in a flakey manner, it will reflect badly on ME. If you choose not to agree, that's okay too. This may not be the time.
We will start by requesting returning your ability to edit your talk page. I will request your talk page access be returned for a very limited time, for two hours. The door will open and it will be closed again. This will happen this Sunday May 1, between 14:00 and 16:00 UTC, the time of the week when you have been most active. I have no assurances my request will be granted, but under the terms of a mentorship, I suspect I can gain the support of the blocking admin and the broader group of interested parties.
What we will accomplish in those two hours is up to you, but I have one objective: that you say whether or not you will abide by my rules in a mentorship agreement. If we agree, I will ask your talk page access restored again, with no time restriction.
You will need to still yourself. I will find little things to do which allow you to contribute, but you would ONLY be able to edit your talk page and in draft space.
I see you are interested in the field of autism. I see you have created a draft article about Jacob Barnett. If you agree with our mentorship, you and I will work on that article together, remaining in draft space only. Getting such an article to main space will be a challenge; it has been previously deleted. Reading the older version of the article, the one deleted, and adding newer sources (and there seem a large number) we may be able to publish this page again.
This will be our first project. Through doing projects together, you will learn how to get along and use your smarts for good, not mere experimentation. It will not be easy. You will have to control your own impulses and that's a challenge for every human.
Think about this. This offer is not a stick of candy or a toy, this is more like getting the keys to a used car--the responsibilities sometimes outweigh the benefits. I will meet you here this Sunday.
Signal your willingness by NOT socking. Understand? Good. More lessons to follow. BusterD ( talk) 17:07, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
And that can happen to the best of us even on our best days. My work schedule escalated and I was unable to produce the lesson this morning. Too tired and not enough time. I could just post something, but I want to be able to be honest with you when we communicate, and I have a reason for introducing these lessons in order. I'll be back later tonight and will produce the next lessons I want to cover before Sunday at 14:00 UTC. BusterD ( talk) 20:50, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Administrators are trusted members of the community, and are expected to perform their duties to the best of their abilities; to behave in a respectful and civil manner in their interactions with others; to follow Wikipedia policies; to lead by example; and to learn from experience and from justified criticisms of their actions. Occasional mistakes are entirely compatible with adminship; administrators are not expected to be perfect.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/OccultZone and others#Administrators; Passed 12 to 0 at 11:36, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Administrators are human beings, not bots. We select our admin corps from the universal set of all wikipedians. People just like you. We breathe, we eat, we sleep, we take positions, we make mistakes. The process for selecting Wikipedia administrators is necessarily restrictive. As of this date stamp, there's a request for adminship which has gone south for an otherwise acceptable candidate because she made statements and holds positions with which a number of wikipedians justifiably disagree. My even mentioning that process here (in what I consider a private conversation) may have an impact there. We're human; much is connected beyond our powers to understand and predict.
The community is not handing out advanced permissions to just anybody. Wikipedians deserve responsible mature adults as referees in dispute. This is not an age thing; this is a trustworthiness thing. Requests for advanced permissions from new editors are refused. If a contributor hasn't demonstrated they are here to build an encyclopedia, they should have no reason to expect additional tools (although the tools available to non-admins are formidable).
Administrators are expected to lead by example and to behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others. While such an ideal applies to interactions with all editors, it is particularly relevant to interactions with newer and inexperienced users, as in those cases, administrators provide a public face to both the broader administrative corps and to Wikipedia as a whole.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung#Leading by example; Passed 10 to 0 at 22:44, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
This need for trustworthiness applies to all of us. As an administrator selected by the community, I have a responsibility to try harder to do the right thing every time. In spite of my best efforts and best intentions, I often fall short of my own expectations, much less the community's. When the community fails to trust me, my advanced permissions and tools are useless. Trust is my only armor and my only true instrument.
Stop asking. Stop pleading. Don't complain about it. Please stop saying you're sorry and asking for another chance. Stop now. You've got to demonstrate trust and trustworthiness first. You're not there yet. This is no slam on you; this is just me speaking to you honestly.
Another lesson before tomorrow's talk. As homework I'd like you to go over to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Principles and read a bit. Look at the subjects and pick out three which would help you understand Wikipedia better. When we talk tomorrow, you'll point out where I can educate further. BusterD ( talk) 17:10, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
All Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view, with all relevant points of view represented in reasonable proportion to their importance and relevance to the subject-matter of the article. Undue weight should not be given to aspects that are peripheral to the topic. Original research and synthesized claims are prohibited. Use of a Wikipedia article for advocacy or promotion, either in favor of or against an individual, institution, or idea that is the subject of the article, is prohibited.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing#Neutral point of view; Passed 12 to 0 at 04:47, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
When we discussed the Purpose of Wikipedia, we talked about the book. It's a lofty goal, creating a book which details every important subject known to humankind. Building and improving the book is the only reason we're all gathered here. That means we not only need to do the physical writing, editing, illustrating, but we need to perform all that work while keeping all our work neutral, as best we can. It is perfectly fine that we ourselves have biases, preferences, tendencies. Humans are like that. We are not perfect creatures. But humans can strive. We can wish. We can desire. We can advocate. These are good things and part of what makes each of us unique and possible. It is unavoidable we will make choices which reflect our personal views. We should neither hide this or be ashamed of this.
Creating a book completely free of biases is impossible. The more isolated we find ourselves, the more likely our personal preferences will be reflected in our work. It is only through the collaboration between each other that we may if we are very careful, reflect a neutral, encyclopedic view and produce work which will endure. When I edit and click the submit button, I accept that others will come along and change what I've written. This was an eye-opener for me. Sometimes I have written an article or section of one in which I left an intentional error, like I was fishing for a helper, looking for a writing partner, hoping someone would correct it. I'm not looking for a fight; I just like the clash of ideas.
The system of trusting other editors and permitting them to help and correct is fundamental to what we do here. Learning to trust is important; bringing your best game is crucial. I try to learn from the corrections and different choices made by others. I embrace those changes. I feel validated when others help my work to improve. It causes me to trust others more fully.
Working towards a book with a neutral point of view is like skating on the edge of a knife, balancing, hanging on, not falling. Sharing that worthy struggle with others, that's a blast, that's invigorating, exhilarating; that's more fun than I deserve. I love it. BusterD ( talk) 14:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I teach, you learn. Do you agree? BusterD ( talk) 14:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I must apologize for the delay; communications between human beings is always more complicated than it might be. At this moment, if you wish, you can talk on this page only. BusterD ( talk) 16:22, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Carletteyt, please concentrate on BusterD's work with you. Don't ask him to make edits for you as your proxy. As long as you are blocked, such actions by him are forbidden. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 17:18, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Being silly is not the agreement. I'm not touching the draft. I set that as a lofty goal we might get to in several weeks. Now you're typing in a style designed to elicit some effect in me. You're making fun of the lessons I'm giving you. I'm not impressed. Our two hours are almost up. I'll let you know when we'll turn talk back on. No more begging and pleading. If you keep at it, I'll just add more lessons and not interact with you for a while. We haven't even gotten to the quizzes.... BusterD ( talk) 18:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello there. I have noticed that you have been blocked from the English Wikipedia, as well as having had your talk page access revoked. Now, I shall give you the standard offer: 1) go half a year without editing on the English Wikipedia 2) edit on another Wikipedia (I suggest the Simple English Wikipedia, for it is a lot less complicated than this Wikipedia) 3) using the WP:UTRS, show them that you can edit constructively, prove it to them using your SEWP logs as proof, and then promise to never again create a sockpuppet that is for evading your block.
Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 14:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
When I was a very young man we went to a play one Sunday afternoon at a community theater. It was a very funny show and afterwards we stayed and helped strike the set, move props back to storage, disassemble the flats and sweep and mop the bare thrust stage. Then everyone including the cast met in the greenroom and had a little celebration. My friend Wes and I felt an accepted part of the production, as if we'd been working backstage the entire run. We were invited back to volunteer for the next show, a dazzling musical about Jacques Brel. The theater complex was a place of magic, with the larger thrust for big productions, a more intimate arena stage for smaller ones, and a large rehearsal complex for auditions and study.
We painted flats, we used skills recently learned in woodshop class, we swept the floor a lot.
One day Wes and I had some extra time and we were farting around in the arena house, and we came across the soda dispenser. He being the mischievous one, he started pressing the various levers and enjoying watching the soda come out, not drinking any. I joined in, generally wasting money and making a mess.
The technical director, Robert, walked up behind us and in a trained theatrical voice boomed: "Gentlemen!" We were busted. We froze. "Come here!" he commanded. We respected the guy but were suddenly overawed by Robert's vocal power. "Why are you here?" he demanded, "Why are you here?" They were ambiguous questions but they required of us much. Why were we at the coke machine? Why were we in the arena instead of returning to the shop? Why was I at the theater complex anyway, besides enjoying time working backstage and hanging with my friend. It seemed like I had to make a decision and make it at that exact moment.
"I'm here to volunteer," said it.
"Volunteering doesn't mean doing what you want," Robert commented. "If you are here, you follow MY rules. If you can't, then you can go home. We are serving "theater", and we aren't your babysitters."
I felt bad. I really liked being a part of that situation and wanted to continue. I wanted to serve "theater." It seemed so lofty. That it might be taken from me was something I hadn't considered.
The next day Wes didn't show but I went to the theater anyway. I just went to work. Did what I was told. Never left.
I learned to hang and adjust ellipsoidals and fresnels, how the various connectors made connections reliable, how to patch the right circuits and test them, how to warm the board and work inside the booth during the show, how to operate the follow spot. How to do technical theater work in a way that was largely invisible. Robert moved on to another company and the new TD was Roger. I didn't like him as much but I had already learned my lesson.
Roger become another mentor to me. I ended up with five summers of stock theater before graduating with a theater degree. Sixty bucks a week working for Dale. Getting PAID to do what I would do for free. Changed my life.
Years later I learned Robert had taken his own life. I might have asked myself, "Why was HE here?"
But I knew.
Unlocking talk page privileges. BusterD ( talk) 16:07, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Why are you here? BusterD ( talk) 16:10, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Carletteyt ( talk) 16:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Glad to see you're still interested. I did talk about this last week but I'm not sure what I'm seeing from you. I have asked you to discuss the purpose of Wikipedia but haven't seen you write an answer where the question was asked. What is purpose of Wikipedia? BusterD ( talk) 16:26, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Carletteyt ( talk) 16:32, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
When you post multiple times in a row, you're interrupting me. BusterD ( talk) 16:35, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Do you see why I told my personal story today? How does it relate to the Purpose of Wikipedia? BusterD ( talk) 16:42, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Can you edit User talk:Carletteyt/Sandbox1? BusterD ( talk) 16:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Do me a favor. Look at my story, the one I posted today, and wiki link a few terms which might improve the story, things that you might need to look up. I'll give you a few minutes. Try to stick to the most important ones. I am giving you permission to edit my story. Okay? BusterD ( talk) 16:54, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. Me too. This is much tougher via mobile, I think. (which IS a problem) Try to avoid editing the text itself unless you find an error (I see a missing word in the second sentence, a small word). Good call on flats and ellipsoidal. What's a fresnel? BusterD ( talk) 17:15, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
A diff is a way to easily compare versions of any page's history. It's an important tool which allows us to convey a complicated subject to others. Here's a diff which allows you to see the change I made today to add the story. Page history is very important in creating our book, because this way we can see attribution. BusterD ( talk) 17:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
I have some family stuff to do today (in the US this is Mother's Day). Is Sunday morning good for you? If we do this another two weeks I'll request draftspace UNDER MY SUPERVISION. I need you to ask yourself why you are here, why YOU want to edit wikipedia. If you can be of help then you are welcome. If you become troublesome I won't be able to help you. Understand? BusterD ( talk) 17:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
See you next week at the same time. Appreciate your efforts. We're going to get you some success. I can see you want it. BusterD ( talk) 18:06, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Today we're going to look at an existing article. I'd like you to look at Autism, since this seems to be a subject which interests you. BusterD ( talk) 16:15, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
By using the outdent template I can maintain a long thread without starting a new subthread. Do you follow? Looking at the pages, can you find a link to the merge discussion itself? BusterD ( talk) 16:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Yes dude Carletteyt ( talk) 16:31, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Pelase i want to start right now Carletteyt ( talk) 16:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Of course my wish is continue editing. Carletteyt ( talk) 16:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I’m not an obstacle. Carletteyt ( talk) 16:50, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) I will continue without your response. How many participants are in this discussion? Who are they? What do the links of these users and their user talk pages say about them, their expertise, their experience? Do you fully follow the conversation? Some of it is way over MY head, I'll confess. BusterD ( talk) 17:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Yes i’m enjoying us but i need to know when we are going to start editing about autism and another subject i love is astronomy and string theory, actually i am with a friend editing a document about time travel and worm holes. I love physics too Carletteyt ( talk) 17:05, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I’m still interesed in create the article about Jacob Barnett. Carletteyt ( talk) 17:10, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
@busterD i’ m following conversation , i learnt about outdent and refactor. Carletteyt ( talk) 17:14, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
@BusterD i did read about discussion page of autism spectrum Carletteyt ( talk) 17:22, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I just read about discussion page of autism spectrum sorry for gramatical error. Carletteyt ( talk) 17:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Sorry i didn’ t find yogur questions Carletteyt ( talk) 17:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Today when you and I are finished, I'm going to try something different. I'm going to leave your talk page access ON. This means you will be able to do anything you want ON YOUR OWN TALK PAGE ONLY. Please do not ping anybody. I will come back to look from time to time but on your own page you should be able to do what you want. We will also archive all this older talk, so that your all page is cleaner and still retains all content for others to read if they look. Does that sound good to you? BusterD ( talk) 17:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks hoy for the lesson of today i wait talk with you soon Carletteyt ( talk) 17:50, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Keeping these privileges will be entirely up to you. I urge you not act in a manner designed to draw attention to yourself. I (and others) will be watching. BusterD ( talk) 18:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi Carletteyt ( talk) 18:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Good choices on the sources; in my opinion you have in front of you significant coverage directly detailing from diverse and reliable sources independent of the subject. IMHO, the subject meets GNG, but it's not entirely up to me, or you. We definitely have what I call page-subject "anchors". If I were looking, I'd next try to find the newest stuff I could. If you can find the same quality, great; if not so good, still note them--we might need missing pieces. I saw a blog which I could never use as RS but looks verifiable and certainly says much to which the AfD didn't have access. Next, we should look back at the previous AFD to see what was wrong with the first incarnation. What went wrong? Why did AfD consensus conclude "delete"? Great work today. BusterD ( talk) 08:16, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Nothing wrong Carletteyt ( talk) 09:09, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
I can’t find more recent sources Carletteyt ( talk) 09:13, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Focus on the 4th deletion procedure but read them all: Jacob Barnett. BusterD ( talk) 16:37, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
If you're still around watch Robb Elementary School shooting. As of this datestamp this fits on one line. I expect it to grow. These events are always awful and I hate seeing them, but as an example of what Wikipedia sometimes can do well (and how important our work can be), watchlist or keep refreshing this page. BusterD ( talk) 20:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Carletteyt. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Jacob Barnett, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 01:01, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Carletteyt. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Jacob Barnett (mathematician), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 00:02, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Carletteyt. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
User:Carletteyt/sandbox, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 11:02, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Carletteyt. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Jacob Barnett".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:12, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Carletteyt. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Jacob Barnett".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. The page User:Carletteyt/sandbox has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.
Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Liz Read! Talk! 03:28, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
|
|
( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
This means that now you can only read what I write, or you can ignore it. The choice is yours. I hope you stay. One thing. Don't create another account or try to edit logged out. You will be spotted and blocked again quickly. The people who do that sort of thing are really good at it. Give that thought up now. They are not mad at you and I am not mad, perhaps disappointed. You can prove you are reading this by NOT trying to edit from another account and get blocked. I will know.
What do I do now?
I'm going to tell you some things. I am going to give you some reading assignments. Many of them we'll read together here, if you like. I can only hope you choose to read what I write and try to do what I ask. If you follow my instructions over the next month or so, I will request you be allowed to work in draft space, under my supervision only, while we continue to learn. I you agree, then don't try to log in or go around the system. If I see that behavior, I will stop posting here. Remember, don't edit while logged out, don't create new account. That will mean you agree.
Understand? Good. We'll start right away. BusterD ( talk) 19:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
"The purpose of Wikipedia is to create a high-quality, free-content encyclopedia in an atmosphere of camaraderie and mutual respect among contributors. Contributors whose actions are detrimental to that goal may be asked to refrain from them, even when these actions are undertaken in good faith; and good faith actions, where disruptive, may still result in sanctions." Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Portals#Purpose_of_Wikipedia, Passed 15 to 0 at 21:46, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
There are many versions but they all say the same thing. This means we are all here for the same reason. To make a book. The biggest book you can imagine. A book so gigantic it will never be complete. A book which lists everything a human being needs to know about every topic. A book written in every language. A book which is free to everyone who can find it. One of the most important books ever written. And you were editing it.
I take that seriously. And so do my many friends.
If you feel mad right now because you were blocked, I feel your pain because I was blocked once myself. But you were blocked because you were interfering with the Purpose of Wikipedia, not because you were making mistakes. The people you want to help, my friends the wikipedians, had to spent time on you and your disruptive edits. That was taking them away from making the book. Do you think mankind should have a book like the one we're all building together? If you do, read The Five Pillars of Wikipedia. Don't just go there, read it. Read it again. Click on every link and read every one. Then go back to The Five Pillars, and read it again.
I'll be back tomorrow. BusterD ( talk) 19:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The general rule is one editor, one account. The creation or use of an additional account or IP address to conceal an editing history, to evade a block or a site ban, or to deceive the community, is prohibited. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather#Sockpuppetry, Passed 12 to 0 at 02:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Since you've chosen to break with my recommendations, I will not present a lesson tomorrow. Every time you break the rules, I will not give a lesson.
Sockpuppetry is one of the worst mistakes some users will make on Wikipedia. Read about it. Editing under multiple accounts is really bad, People who do this are telling me they don't care about the pillars and the policies which spring from them. Without policy, we don't have time to create the book. So you've disappointed a number of people today including yourself. I'm not mad, but because of your actions I choose not to help you tomorrow. I will give a lesson on Thursday, IF YOU STAY OFF WIKIPEDIA UNTIL THEN. If not, I have better ways to serve. BusterD ( talk) 21:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers, an important guideline, reminds us that "Wikipedia articles are improved through the hard work of both regular editors and newcomers. Remember: all of us were new editors at Wikipedia once.... New members are prospective contributors and are therefore Wikipedia's most valuable resource. We must treat newcomers with kindness and patience—nothing scares potentially valuable contributors away faster than hostility. It is very unlikely for a newcomer to be completely familiar with Wikipedia's markup language and its myriad of policies, guidelines, and community standards when they start editing...".
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RHaworth#Treatment of new editors; Passed 14 to 0 at 05:36, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Why am I trying to help you even when you are blocked?
The fourth pillar is respect and civility. We demonstrate respect to others because it is their due. We act kindly to each other because manifesting such trust is a superior platform to help us write our book. It's always about the book. Nothing is more important here. Plus, none of us knows when "our great gettin' up mornin'" is gonna be. I can only speak for myself, but I prefer to be treated as a person, not as an objective, a tool, a data point, an anecdote. As a wikipedian, I'm a serious person doing serious work. In my seriousness, sometimes I get over focussed and need a friend to remind me I am mortal and all glory is fleeting.
Needing a friend involves having friends to count on. Some folks keep their own company, and I've been that guy. On Wikipedia, you will meet people. You can't avoid it. Some of them will be kind and others will not. For me making true wikifriends is one of my stronger motivations for staying. I have noticed that not everyone who tries to edit Wikipedia is great at it. Twenty years ago, nobody was an expert here. I turn wiki-17 in July. It's possible you are making fun of me by your edits, maybe you're trying to cause trouble, perhaps you have been dishonest with me. I choose to assume good faith. I choose to believe I'm helping a wikipedian who hasn't found their voice quite yet.
I'm helping you because it's the right thing to do. And that's how me and my friends roll. Call me naive, but just sign your post with four tildes.
Another lesson soon. BusterD ( talk) 10:27, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
In certain limited circumstances, formal mentorship and similar voluntary and involuntary arrangements, may be suitable to provide advice and support to people involved in disputes, or needing advice on how to work collaboratively on Wikipedia. The long-term aim of such arrangements should be for those involved to improve their conduct and work collaboratively without the need, or with a reduced need, for such advice. Such mentorships or similar arrangements may be agreed to as an alternative to more serious remedies, such as bans or paroles, or they may be an end result of the dispute resolution process itself. Users may voluntarily place themselves under such arrangements, or be placed under such arrangements by the community, or by a ruling of the Arbitration Committee. Any such formal arrangements should be recorded and documented in an appropriate place.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse#Mentorship and similar arrangements; Passed 10 to 0 at 04:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
People learn in different modalities. Some best get material through reading, some pickup quicker with visuals, charts and descriptive images. I like things explained to me. Because there are so many possible ways of learning, it's useful to try several to see what works best for you. I like the mentor-mentee relationships. I choose to exercise my behavior based on models which which work for others. I look to editors I admire, usually people who have demonstrated trust in me.
While most of us try to keep our real-life identities quiet, it's not because we are afraid of outing (a real concern especially for youngsters). I choose to use a pen-name, a Wikipedia-only name, to keep my focus on principles, not personalities (I think this is a twelve-step thing.) I'm not here for the glory or any merit badges; I'm here for the labor, the work. In this, I reveal my idealism, which I think a healthy approach (again, especially for youngsters).
So I am here. I am offering to mentor you. I am qualified and I am willing. I will teach, and you will learn. My mentorship is offered as a way OUT of your indefinite block. If you agree, you will be compelled to act under my supervision. That means if you choose to act in a flakey manner, it will reflect badly on ME. If you choose not to agree, that's okay too. This may not be the time.
We will start by requesting returning your ability to edit your talk page. I will request your talk page access be returned for a very limited time, for two hours. The door will open and it will be closed again. This will happen this Sunday May 1, between 14:00 and 16:00 UTC, the time of the week when you have been most active. I have no assurances my request will be granted, but under the terms of a mentorship, I suspect I can gain the support of the blocking admin and the broader group of interested parties.
What we will accomplish in those two hours is up to you, but I have one objective: that you say whether or not you will abide by my rules in a mentorship agreement. If we agree, I will ask your talk page access restored again, with no time restriction.
You will need to still yourself. I will find little things to do which allow you to contribute, but you would ONLY be able to edit your talk page and in draft space.
I see you are interested in the field of autism. I see you have created a draft article about Jacob Barnett. If you agree with our mentorship, you and I will work on that article together, remaining in draft space only. Getting such an article to main space will be a challenge; it has been previously deleted. Reading the older version of the article, the one deleted, and adding newer sources (and there seem a large number) we may be able to publish this page again.
This will be our first project. Through doing projects together, you will learn how to get along and use your smarts for good, not mere experimentation. It will not be easy. You will have to control your own impulses and that's a challenge for every human.
Think about this. This offer is not a stick of candy or a toy, this is more like getting the keys to a used car--the responsibilities sometimes outweigh the benefits. I will meet you here this Sunday.
Signal your willingness by NOT socking. Understand? Good. More lessons to follow. BusterD ( talk) 17:07, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
And that can happen to the best of us even on our best days. My work schedule escalated and I was unable to produce the lesson this morning. Too tired and not enough time. I could just post something, but I want to be able to be honest with you when we communicate, and I have a reason for introducing these lessons in order. I'll be back later tonight and will produce the next lessons I want to cover before Sunday at 14:00 UTC. BusterD ( talk) 20:50, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Administrators are trusted members of the community, and are expected to perform their duties to the best of their abilities; to behave in a respectful and civil manner in their interactions with others; to follow Wikipedia policies; to lead by example; and to learn from experience and from justified criticisms of their actions. Occasional mistakes are entirely compatible with adminship; administrators are not expected to be perfect.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/OccultZone and others#Administrators; Passed 12 to 0 at 11:36, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Administrators are human beings, not bots. We select our admin corps from the universal set of all wikipedians. People just like you. We breathe, we eat, we sleep, we take positions, we make mistakes. The process for selecting Wikipedia administrators is necessarily restrictive. As of this date stamp, there's a request for adminship which has gone south for an otherwise acceptable candidate because she made statements and holds positions with which a number of wikipedians justifiably disagree. My even mentioning that process here (in what I consider a private conversation) may have an impact there. We're human; much is connected beyond our powers to understand and predict.
The community is not handing out advanced permissions to just anybody. Wikipedians deserve responsible mature adults as referees in dispute. This is not an age thing; this is a trustworthiness thing. Requests for advanced permissions from new editors are refused. If a contributor hasn't demonstrated they are here to build an encyclopedia, they should have no reason to expect additional tools (although the tools available to non-admins are formidable).
Administrators are expected to lead by example and to behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others. While such an ideal applies to interactions with all editors, it is particularly relevant to interactions with newer and inexperienced users, as in those cases, administrators provide a public face to both the broader administrative corps and to Wikipedia as a whole.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung#Leading by example; Passed 10 to 0 at 22:44, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
This need for trustworthiness applies to all of us. As an administrator selected by the community, I have a responsibility to try harder to do the right thing every time. In spite of my best efforts and best intentions, I often fall short of my own expectations, much less the community's. When the community fails to trust me, my advanced permissions and tools are useless. Trust is my only armor and my only true instrument.
Stop asking. Stop pleading. Don't complain about it. Please stop saying you're sorry and asking for another chance. Stop now. You've got to demonstrate trust and trustworthiness first. You're not there yet. This is no slam on you; this is just me speaking to you honestly.
Another lesson before tomorrow's talk. As homework I'd like you to go over to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Principles and read a bit. Look at the subjects and pick out three which would help you understand Wikipedia better. When we talk tomorrow, you'll point out where I can educate further. BusterD ( talk) 17:10, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
All Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view, with all relevant points of view represented in reasonable proportion to their importance and relevance to the subject-matter of the article. Undue weight should not be given to aspects that are peripheral to the topic. Original research and synthesized claims are prohibited. Use of a Wikipedia article for advocacy or promotion, either in favor of or against an individual, institution, or idea that is the subject of the article, is prohibited.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing#Neutral point of view; Passed 12 to 0 at 04:47, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
When we discussed the Purpose of Wikipedia, we talked about the book. It's a lofty goal, creating a book which details every important subject known to humankind. Building and improving the book is the only reason we're all gathered here. That means we not only need to do the physical writing, editing, illustrating, but we need to perform all that work while keeping all our work neutral, as best we can. It is perfectly fine that we ourselves have biases, preferences, tendencies. Humans are like that. We are not perfect creatures. But humans can strive. We can wish. We can desire. We can advocate. These are good things and part of what makes each of us unique and possible. It is unavoidable we will make choices which reflect our personal views. We should neither hide this or be ashamed of this.
Creating a book completely free of biases is impossible. The more isolated we find ourselves, the more likely our personal preferences will be reflected in our work. It is only through the collaboration between each other that we may if we are very careful, reflect a neutral, encyclopedic view and produce work which will endure. When I edit and click the submit button, I accept that others will come along and change what I've written. This was an eye-opener for me. Sometimes I have written an article or section of one in which I left an intentional error, like I was fishing for a helper, looking for a writing partner, hoping someone would correct it. I'm not looking for a fight; I just like the clash of ideas.
The system of trusting other editors and permitting them to help and correct is fundamental to what we do here. Learning to trust is important; bringing your best game is crucial. I try to learn from the corrections and different choices made by others. I embrace those changes. I feel validated when others help my work to improve. It causes me to trust others more fully.
Working towards a book with a neutral point of view is like skating on the edge of a knife, balancing, hanging on, not falling. Sharing that worthy struggle with others, that's a blast, that's invigorating, exhilarating; that's more fun than I deserve. I love it. BusterD ( talk) 14:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I teach, you learn. Do you agree? BusterD ( talk) 14:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I must apologize for the delay; communications between human beings is always more complicated than it might be. At this moment, if you wish, you can talk on this page only. BusterD ( talk) 16:22, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Carletteyt, please concentrate on BusterD's work with you. Don't ask him to make edits for you as your proxy. As long as you are blocked, such actions by him are forbidden. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 17:18, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Being silly is not the agreement. I'm not touching the draft. I set that as a lofty goal we might get to in several weeks. Now you're typing in a style designed to elicit some effect in me. You're making fun of the lessons I'm giving you. I'm not impressed. Our two hours are almost up. I'll let you know when we'll turn talk back on. No more begging and pleading. If you keep at it, I'll just add more lessons and not interact with you for a while. We haven't even gotten to the quizzes.... BusterD ( talk) 18:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello there. I have noticed that you have been blocked from the English Wikipedia, as well as having had your talk page access revoked. Now, I shall give you the standard offer: 1) go half a year without editing on the English Wikipedia 2) edit on another Wikipedia (I suggest the Simple English Wikipedia, for it is a lot less complicated than this Wikipedia) 3) using the WP:UTRS, show them that you can edit constructively, prove it to them using your SEWP logs as proof, and then promise to never again create a sockpuppet that is for evading your block.
Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 14:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
When I was a very young man we went to a play one Sunday afternoon at a community theater. It was a very funny show and afterwards we stayed and helped strike the set, move props back to storage, disassemble the flats and sweep and mop the bare thrust stage. Then everyone including the cast met in the greenroom and had a little celebration. My friend Wes and I felt an accepted part of the production, as if we'd been working backstage the entire run. We were invited back to volunteer for the next show, a dazzling musical about Jacques Brel. The theater complex was a place of magic, with the larger thrust for big productions, a more intimate arena stage for smaller ones, and a large rehearsal complex for auditions and study.
We painted flats, we used skills recently learned in woodshop class, we swept the floor a lot.
One day Wes and I had some extra time and we were farting around in the arena house, and we came across the soda dispenser. He being the mischievous one, he started pressing the various levers and enjoying watching the soda come out, not drinking any. I joined in, generally wasting money and making a mess.
The technical director, Robert, walked up behind us and in a trained theatrical voice boomed: "Gentlemen!" We were busted. We froze. "Come here!" he commanded. We respected the guy but were suddenly overawed by Robert's vocal power. "Why are you here?" he demanded, "Why are you here?" They were ambiguous questions but they required of us much. Why were we at the coke machine? Why were we in the arena instead of returning to the shop? Why was I at the theater complex anyway, besides enjoying time working backstage and hanging with my friend. It seemed like I had to make a decision and make it at that exact moment.
"I'm here to volunteer," said it.
"Volunteering doesn't mean doing what you want," Robert commented. "If you are here, you follow MY rules. If you can't, then you can go home. We are serving "theater", and we aren't your babysitters."
I felt bad. I really liked being a part of that situation and wanted to continue. I wanted to serve "theater." It seemed so lofty. That it might be taken from me was something I hadn't considered.
The next day Wes didn't show but I went to the theater anyway. I just went to work. Did what I was told. Never left.
I learned to hang and adjust ellipsoidals and fresnels, how the various connectors made connections reliable, how to patch the right circuits and test them, how to warm the board and work inside the booth during the show, how to operate the follow spot. How to do technical theater work in a way that was largely invisible. Robert moved on to another company and the new TD was Roger. I didn't like him as much but I had already learned my lesson.
Roger become another mentor to me. I ended up with five summers of stock theater before graduating with a theater degree. Sixty bucks a week working for Dale. Getting PAID to do what I would do for free. Changed my life.
Years later I learned Robert had taken his own life. I might have asked myself, "Why was HE here?"
But I knew.
Unlocking talk page privileges. BusterD ( talk) 16:07, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Why are you here? BusterD ( talk) 16:10, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Carletteyt ( talk) 16:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Glad to see you're still interested. I did talk about this last week but I'm not sure what I'm seeing from you. I have asked you to discuss the purpose of Wikipedia but haven't seen you write an answer where the question was asked. What is purpose of Wikipedia? BusterD ( talk) 16:26, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Carletteyt ( talk) 16:32, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
When you post multiple times in a row, you're interrupting me. BusterD ( talk) 16:35, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Do you see why I told my personal story today? How does it relate to the Purpose of Wikipedia? BusterD ( talk) 16:42, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Can you edit User talk:Carletteyt/Sandbox1? BusterD ( talk) 16:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Do me a favor. Look at my story, the one I posted today, and wiki link a few terms which might improve the story, things that you might need to look up. I'll give you a few minutes. Try to stick to the most important ones. I am giving you permission to edit my story. Okay? BusterD ( talk) 16:54, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. Me too. This is much tougher via mobile, I think. (which IS a problem) Try to avoid editing the text itself unless you find an error (I see a missing word in the second sentence, a small word). Good call on flats and ellipsoidal. What's a fresnel? BusterD ( talk) 17:15, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
A diff is a way to easily compare versions of any page's history. It's an important tool which allows us to convey a complicated subject to others. Here's a diff which allows you to see the change I made today to add the story. Page history is very important in creating our book, because this way we can see attribution. BusterD ( talk) 17:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
I have some family stuff to do today (in the US this is Mother's Day). Is Sunday morning good for you? If we do this another two weeks I'll request draftspace UNDER MY SUPERVISION. I need you to ask yourself why you are here, why YOU want to edit wikipedia. If you can be of help then you are welcome. If you become troublesome I won't be able to help you. Understand? BusterD ( talk) 17:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
See you next week at the same time. Appreciate your efforts. We're going to get you some success. I can see you want it. BusterD ( talk) 18:06, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Today we're going to look at an existing article. I'd like you to look at Autism, since this seems to be a subject which interests you. BusterD ( talk) 16:15, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
By using the outdent template I can maintain a long thread without starting a new subthread. Do you follow? Looking at the pages, can you find a link to the merge discussion itself? BusterD ( talk) 16:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Yes dude Carletteyt ( talk) 16:31, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Pelase i want to start right now Carletteyt ( talk) 16:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Of course my wish is continue editing. Carletteyt ( talk) 16:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I’m not an obstacle. Carletteyt ( talk) 16:50, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) I will continue without your response. How many participants are in this discussion? Who are they? What do the links of these users and their user talk pages say about them, their expertise, their experience? Do you fully follow the conversation? Some of it is way over MY head, I'll confess. BusterD ( talk) 17:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Yes i’m enjoying us but i need to know when we are going to start editing about autism and another subject i love is astronomy and string theory, actually i am with a friend editing a document about time travel and worm holes. I love physics too Carletteyt ( talk) 17:05, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I’m still interesed in create the article about Jacob Barnett. Carletteyt ( talk) 17:10, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
@busterD i’ m following conversation , i learnt about outdent and refactor. Carletteyt ( talk) 17:14, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
@BusterD i did read about discussion page of autism spectrum Carletteyt ( talk) 17:22, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I just read about discussion page of autism spectrum sorry for gramatical error. Carletteyt ( talk) 17:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Sorry i didn’ t find yogur questions Carletteyt ( talk) 17:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Today when you and I are finished, I'm going to try something different. I'm going to leave your talk page access ON. This means you will be able to do anything you want ON YOUR OWN TALK PAGE ONLY. Please do not ping anybody. I will come back to look from time to time but on your own page you should be able to do what you want. We will also archive all this older talk, so that your all page is cleaner and still retains all content for others to read if they look. Does that sound good to you? BusterD ( talk) 17:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks hoy for the lesson of today i wait talk with you soon Carletteyt ( talk) 17:50, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Keeping these privileges will be entirely up to you. I urge you not act in a manner designed to draw attention to yourself. I (and others) will be watching. BusterD ( talk) 18:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi Carletteyt ( talk) 18:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Good choices on the sources; in my opinion you have in front of you significant coverage directly detailing from diverse and reliable sources independent of the subject. IMHO, the subject meets GNG, but it's not entirely up to me, or you. We definitely have what I call page-subject "anchors". If I were looking, I'd next try to find the newest stuff I could. If you can find the same quality, great; if not so good, still note them--we might need missing pieces. I saw a blog which I could never use as RS but looks verifiable and certainly says much to which the AfD didn't have access. Next, we should look back at the previous AFD to see what was wrong with the first incarnation. What went wrong? Why did AfD consensus conclude "delete"? Great work today. BusterD ( talk) 08:16, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Nothing wrong Carletteyt ( talk) 09:09, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
I can’t find more recent sources Carletteyt ( talk) 09:13, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Focus on the 4th deletion procedure but read them all: Jacob Barnett. BusterD ( talk) 16:37, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
If you're still around watch Robb Elementary School shooting. As of this datestamp this fits on one line. I expect it to grow. These events are always awful and I hate seeing them, but as an example of what Wikipedia sometimes can do well (and how important our work can be), watchlist or keep refreshing this page. BusterD ( talk) 20:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Carletteyt. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Jacob Barnett, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 01:01, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Carletteyt. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Jacob Barnett (mathematician), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 00:02, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Carletteyt. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
User:Carletteyt/sandbox, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 11:02, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Carletteyt. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Jacob Barnett".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:12, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Carletteyt. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Jacob Barnett".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. The page User:Carletteyt/sandbox has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.
Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Liz Read! Talk! 03:28, 26 October 2022 (UTC)