Hello, Websurfer2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Politrukki ( talk) 08:50, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Sorry to be a pain but can you add the US gov website you got this PDF from? ShakespeareFan00 ( talk) 08:50, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Regarding this:
He just repeated fake news. --
BullRangifer ( talk) PingMe 20:16, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
The rule is, reliable independent secondary sources. Primary is provisionally OK for uncontroversial content, but here we have a well known crank ranting on a far-right website, and that needs a secondary source to demonstrate objective significance. Guy ( Help!) 21:28, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Websurfer2. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Websurfer2. I moved your "September 20" 2018 edit to Russian interference in the 2016 Brexit referendum#Timeline. As space is getting tigher on the "2016", (2017), and (2018) articles; I will attempt to move items to the parallel Timeline for Brexit, that are more specifically just located there. Some items might be in both Timelines, of course. X1\ ( talk) 01:17, 29 November 2018 (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 recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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 any 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.
Lord Roem ~ ( talk) 08:43, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
I am working on un-cluttering Talk:Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Is it okay for me to Archive "Purported made-up citation" now? X1\ ( talk) 01:15, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
By adding the name= parameter inside the <ref> for the 1987 L.A.Times article in the "Career" section, I was able to re-cite that same ref in the "Awards" section without redefining it—note the two lower-case letter jump-to-cite flags in front of it in the "References" section. That left room for me, without increasing the number of references, to add the L.A.Times ref for the 1988 Gerald Loeb Award. IMHO that ref makes the The New Yorker and UCLA Anderson School of Management refs superfluous, but I've left them in for you to delete if you want. DovidBenAvraham ( talk) 02:15, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Gerald Loeb Award winners for Magazines.
I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
Hey, Nice work - Good thing I knew about this award before I saw the article! Jeez, you have been busy, fantastic list of citations. Keep up the good work
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hughesdarren}}
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
.
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Hughesdarren ( talk) 06:33, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Websurfer2,
Thanks for creating Gerald Loeb Award winners for Magazines! I edit here too, under the username Hughesdarren and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-
Earwig copyvio detector tool is picking up the article up as Violation Suspected at 83.1% , which I think is a result of the names of the pieces winning the award being the same. I'm going to pass this along to an admin who has more expertise in this area. Cheers and Regards
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hughesdarren}}
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
. For broader editing help, please visit the
Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Hughesdarren ( talk) 06:40, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Was this what was intended here? X1\ ( talk) 20:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Many thanks for your recent additions of details excerpted from the Mueller Report to the Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Finally facts! — JFG talk 10:12, 26 April 2019 (UTC) |
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding the appropriate scope of our timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is " Talk:Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — JFG talk 21:36, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
On 28 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lawrence Minard, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lawrence Minard has a business journalism award named after him? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lawrence Minard. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Lawrence Minard), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:03, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
The Minor Barnstar | ||
Good to see you back! X1\ ( talk) 21:02, 18 July 2019 (UTC) |
It appears after three months Talk:Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2019)#" these stories are about Facebook privacy, not Trump/Russia" is being revisited. X1\ ( talk) 00:23, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Are you still active a wp? X1\ ( talk) 00:39, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Anchor 20190330 points to/from where? X1\ ( talk) 20:04, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Websurfer2, you thanked me for one of my recent edits, so here is a heart-felt... YOU'RE WELCOME! It's a pleasure, and I hope you have a lot of fun while you edit this inspiring encyclopedia phenomenon! X1\ ( talk) |
00:01, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
An article you recently created, List of people named in the Mueller Report, does not have enough sources and citations, and is missing most of the necessary content to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. ( ?)
I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
The Mirror Cracked (
talk)
03:08, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
@ The Mirror Cracked: Thanks. I intended to create it in my sandbox. Websurfer2 ( talk) 03:11, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
As the top editor of Timeline (2018), courtesy notice: I plan to split the year into two halves relatively soon, as it is in the top ten of longest articles now. Is there a date window of a few of days that are better for your editing in which I can make the change? I plan to redirect the original page to the (new) first half page, and then sift through the old wikilinks to correct the connections. X1\ ( talk) 19:42, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
For your, see "Excised text". X1\ ( talk) 00:47, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
TonyBallioni ( talk) 01:37, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Currently on Special:LongPages:
9) Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections [423,303 bytes] (with #11 being Topical timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections [422,692 bytes])
and 38) Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2017) [411,288 bytes]
It will only take off about 20K, but what do you think about moving the List of "Relevant individuals and organizations" to its own page and transcluding it to "2016" (See Draft:Relevant individuals and organizations to Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections) ?
X1\ ( talk) 23:34, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Update, currently on Special:LongPages:
X1\ ( talk) 00:12, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
We aren't adding tons of content anymoreis a perfect time to stabilize these, now two, pages. The only way to do that is by the Split.
Thank you for restoring that source on the Mónica Villamizar page! It appears that I removed it inadvertently, I have no idea how. Glad you caught it! Mwanner | Talk 00:32, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Let's say a WP article discusses a government report. A page in the report refers to a person only by their surname. A WP:RS article discussing the same exact subject matter and events lists the person's full name. Is it a WP:BLP violation to cite the RS article to establish the full name of the person even though the RS article doesn't mention the report? Websurfer2 ( talk) 09:31, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Let's say editor listed as the author of a private filter deletes content from a (different) page and provides a questionable edit summary, but reverting the edit is blocked by the private filter. What is the remedy and complaint procedure that should be followed? Websurfer2 ( talk) 09:39, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you trigger the edit filter. Guy ( help!) 10:07, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Let's sweep these three sections and responses into one, for simplicity.
You have been caught up in the management of long-term abuse. That's not a judgment on you, but it is a risk for you. You need to know that, because sometimes people will just see a load of filter hits and wade in with a block. You are framing this as abuse by me, but it's just a side-effect of long-running abuse of Wikipedia by trolls, and you're (at this point) an innocent victim. Guy ( help!) 11:01, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Reinforcing Guy's warning, you will be blocked if you persist in attempting to evade the edit filter. I've deleted the revision where you went ahead and posted the name of the whistleblower in the edit filter reporting page. It's very easy - don't do that again. This is by consensus a serious violation of the BLP policy, and now that you understand that, I'm sure you'll respect our advice. Acroterion (talk) 13:14, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Acroterion:, @ JzG: This entire spat could have been avoided by a simple but clear WP:ES. My vandalism note stems from the ES being worded like common vandalism ESs, with things made worse by heavy-handed actions made without explanation other than cryptic references to WP:BLP, claims that a widely recognized RS is not an RS, and referrals to a discussion I am not privy to. No, I did not know who this person is claimed to be, and, as can be seen by the date in the citation and the edit log for the draft page that has now been conveniently deleted, the citation is from 2017 and had nothing to do with the Trump–Ukraine scandal. And, @ Acroterion:, you could have reverted my edit and given a simple but clear ES instead of deleting the entire page making the edit history unavailable to anyone who tries to respond to the complaint I filed. Websurfer2 ( talk) 17:40, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Websurfer2. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! TonyBallioni ( talk) 14:49, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you for all your significant contributions to the Timelines of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections and journalist articles! (From User:X1\) Firestar464 ( talk) 05:00, 25 October 2020 (UTC) |
Hi Websurfer2! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Members, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 3 months.
Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Members.
Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Websurfer2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Politrukki ( talk) 08:50, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Sorry to be a pain but can you add the US gov website you got this PDF from? ShakespeareFan00 ( talk) 08:50, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Regarding this:
He just repeated fake news. --
BullRangifer ( talk) PingMe 20:16, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
The rule is, reliable independent secondary sources. Primary is provisionally OK for uncontroversial content, but here we have a well known crank ranting on a far-right website, and that needs a secondary source to demonstrate objective significance. Guy ( Help!) 21:28, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Websurfer2. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Websurfer2. I moved your "September 20" 2018 edit to Russian interference in the 2016 Brexit referendum#Timeline. As space is getting tigher on the "2016", (2017), and (2018) articles; I will attempt to move items to the parallel Timeline for Brexit, that are more specifically just located there. Some items might be in both Timelines, of course. X1\ ( talk) 01:17, 29 November 2018 (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 recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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 any 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.
Lord Roem ~ ( talk) 08:43, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
I am working on un-cluttering Talk:Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Is it okay for me to Archive "Purported made-up citation" now? X1\ ( talk) 01:15, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
By adding the name= parameter inside the <ref> for the 1987 L.A.Times article in the "Career" section, I was able to re-cite that same ref in the "Awards" section without redefining it—note the two lower-case letter jump-to-cite flags in front of it in the "References" section. That left room for me, without increasing the number of references, to add the L.A.Times ref for the 1988 Gerald Loeb Award. IMHO that ref makes the The New Yorker and UCLA Anderson School of Management refs superfluous, but I've left them in for you to delete if you want. DovidBenAvraham ( talk) 02:15, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Gerald Loeb Award winners for Magazines.
I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
Hey, Nice work - Good thing I knew about this award before I saw the article! Jeez, you have been busy, fantastic list of citations. Keep up the good work
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hughesdarren}}
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
.
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Hughesdarren ( talk) 06:33, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Websurfer2,
Thanks for creating Gerald Loeb Award winners for Magazines! I edit here too, under the username Hughesdarren and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-
Earwig copyvio detector tool is picking up the article up as Violation Suspected at 83.1% , which I think is a result of the names of the pieces winning the award being the same. I'm going to pass this along to an admin who has more expertise in this area. Cheers and Regards
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hughesdarren}}
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
. For broader editing help, please visit the
Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Hughesdarren ( talk) 06:40, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Was this what was intended here? X1\ ( talk) 20:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Many thanks for your recent additions of details excerpted from the Mueller Report to the Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Finally facts! — JFG talk 10:12, 26 April 2019 (UTC) |
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding the appropriate scope of our timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is " Talk:Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — JFG talk 21:36, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
On 28 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lawrence Minard, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lawrence Minard has a business journalism award named after him? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lawrence Minard. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Lawrence Minard), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:03, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
The Minor Barnstar | ||
Good to see you back! X1\ ( talk) 21:02, 18 July 2019 (UTC) |
It appears after three months Talk:Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2019)#" these stories are about Facebook privacy, not Trump/Russia" is being revisited. X1\ ( talk) 00:23, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Are you still active a wp? X1\ ( talk) 00:39, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Anchor 20190330 points to/from where? X1\ ( talk) 20:04, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Websurfer2, you thanked me for one of my recent edits, so here is a heart-felt... YOU'RE WELCOME! It's a pleasure, and I hope you have a lot of fun while you edit this inspiring encyclopedia phenomenon! X1\ ( talk) |
00:01, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
An article you recently created, List of people named in the Mueller Report, does not have enough sources and citations, and is missing most of the necessary content to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. ( ?)
I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
The Mirror Cracked (
talk)
03:08, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
@ The Mirror Cracked: Thanks. I intended to create it in my sandbox. Websurfer2 ( talk) 03:11, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
As the top editor of Timeline (2018), courtesy notice: I plan to split the year into two halves relatively soon, as it is in the top ten of longest articles now. Is there a date window of a few of days that are better for your editing in which I can make the change? I plan to redirect the original page to the (new) first half page, and then sift through the old wikilinks to correct the connections. X1\ ( talk) 19:42, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
For your, see "Excised text". X1\ ( talk) 00:47, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
TonyBallioni ( talk) 01:37, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Currently on Special:LongPages:
9) Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections [423,303 bytes] (with #11 being Topical timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections [422,692 bytes])
and 38) Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2017) [411,288 bytes]
It will only take off about 20K, but what do you think about moving the List of "Relevant individuals and organizations" to its own page and transcluding it to "2016" (See Draft:Relevant individuals and organizations to Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections) ?
X1\ ( talk) 23:34, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Update, currently on Special:LongPages:
X1\ ( talk) 00:12, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
We aren't adding tons of content anymoreis a perfect time to stabilize these, now two, pages. The only way to do that is by the Split.
Thank you for restoring that source on the Mónica Villamizar page! It appears that I removed it inadvertently, I have no idea how. Glad you caught it! Mwanner | Talk 00:32, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Let's say a WP article discusses a government report. A page in the report refers to a person only by their surname. A WP:RS article discussing the same exact subject matter and events lists the person's full name. Is it a WP:BLP violation to cite the RS article to establish the full name of the person even though the RS article doesn't mention the report? Websurfer2 ( talk) 09:31, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Let's say editor listed as the author of a private filter deletes content from a (different) page and provides a questionable edit summary, but reverting the edit is blocked by the private filter. What is the remedy and complaint procedure that should be followed? Websurfer2 ( talk) 09:39, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you trigger the edit filter. Guy ( help!) 10:07, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Let's sweep these three sections and responses into one, for simplicity.
You have been caught up in the management of long-term abuse. That's not a judgment on you, but it is a risk for you. You need to know that, because sometimes people will just see a load of filter hits and wade in with a block. You are framing this as abuse by me, but it's just a side-effect of long-running abuse of Wikipedia by trolls, and you're (at this point) an innocent victim. Guy ( help!) 11:01, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Reinforcing Guy's warning, you will be blocked if you persist in attempting to evade the edit filter. I've deleted the revision where you went ahead and posted the name of the whistleblower in the edit filter reporting page. It's very easy - don't do that again. This is by consensus a serious violation of the BLP policy, and now that you understand that, I'm sure you'll respect our advice. Acroterion (talk) 13:14, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Acroterion:, @ JzG: This entire spat could have been avoided by a simple but clear WP:ES. My vandalism note stems from the ES being worded like common vandalism ESs, with things made worse by heavy-handed actions made without explanation other than cryptic references to WP:BLP, claims that a widely recognized RS is not an RS, and referrals to a discussion I am not privy to. No, I did not know who this person is claimed to be, and, as can be seen by the date in the citation and the edit log for the draft page that has now been conveniently deleted, the citation is from 2017 and had nothing to do with the Trump–Ukraine scandal. And, @ Acroterion:, you could have reverted my edit and given a simple but clear ES instead of deleting the entire page making the edit history unavailable to anyone who tries to respond to the complaint I filed. Websurfer2 ( talk) 17:40, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Websurfer2. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! TonyBallioni ( talk) 14:49, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you for all your significant contributions to the Timelines of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections and journalist articles! (From User:X1\) Firestar464 ( talk) 05:00, 25 October 2020 (UTC) |
Hi Websurfer2! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Members, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 3 months.
Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Members.
Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)