Please do not
attack other editors, as you did at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giorgi Kulua. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please
stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.
Sir Sputnik (
talk) 21:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bachana Arabuli. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 22:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
The warnings above were found to be invalid at WP:ANI, so I have stricken them. 86.17.222.157 ( talk) 20:25, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bachana Arabuli.
Sir Sputnik (
talk) 20:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Please see my closing rationale. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 15:23, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your work in removing inappropriate CSD tagging. In most cases I agree with you, but in the case of Hilton Cowie I see no indication of significance: He is a race car driver, which surely does not in itself indicate significance. He took part in some races but did not qualify. And he has a profile in a database which seems to profile all drivers. Where is the significance? — teb728 t c 22:54, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 12:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
We discussed deletion reviews being started by IP editors recently, near the top of this page. I think that in most cases, as an IP editor, you would have standing to begin a deletion review, but in this particular case you're (1) starting a deletion review, (2) as an IP editor, (3) about a WMF figure. I would suggest you use an account with a checkable history.— S Marshall T/ C 20:04, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Just a tip: You're wasting your breath. He won't listen to criticism, even when it's clear, polite, and sustained; he dismisses it as drama and incivility. He's been getting clear pushback over his sloppiness since at least his failed RfA, yet he hasn't learned a thing from it. He's here to click buttons and provide "me, too!" comments. (We've both seen him at AfD.) Even after being taken to the cleaners at AN/I last week, he's still patrolling badly, leaving barely-intelligible AfD votes, and being very unhelpful to novice editors who ask for feedback about his AfC rejections. I previously thought this was mere stubbornness on his part, but I actually think he can't help it. I'm not sure if he's struggling with reading comprehension or a learning deficiency, but it's the only thing that explains his behavior—and I'm not pointing it out to be cruel, quite the opposite: I feel bad watching him struggle, and I actually like him and admire his dedication. But I think the community needs to address this: it's not going to go away no matter how much he's warned, and, unlike sloppy editing, others can't just make it right with an edit.
Also, in dealing with this sort of thing, it would help immensely if you logged in. In every discussion in which I see you participate, your views are only acknowledged to dismiss them—yet you are far more experienced than I am. We both know the Florence Devouard AfD and DRV would have turned out much differently if your opinion had been tied to a respectable account. I understand the point you're trying to make, but, by my count, you're not making any headway. How many debates are you willing to sacrifice for a hopelessly lost cause?
Respectfully, Rebb ing 20:49, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Please do not remove
speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you.
Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (
talk) 20:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I apologize for removing your contesting on the speedy deletion, and I have restored your revision. I'm not sure what I was thinking at the time. Sincerely, Lovkal ( talk) 20:52, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Dicky Ryan. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Cahk ( talk) 07:26, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Please note you cannot remove the IP notice per WP:UP#CMT. "A number of important matters may not be removed by the user—they are part of the wider community's processes ... "For IP editors, templates and notes left to indicate other users share the same IP address and/or to whom the IP is registered." If you prefer not to be identified by your ISP, then you may wish to create an user account.-- Cahk ( talk) 08:01, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your message at User talk:JamesBWatson/Open. I have answered there. The editor who uses the pseudonym " JamesBWatson" ( talk) 19:32, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at Safety Cap's talk page.
Hello. You have a new message at Safety Cap's talk page.
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but in this recent edit you removed a speedy deletion tag from Etruscan literature, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. CAPTAIN RAJU ( ✉) 20:03, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a
speedy deletion tag from
Bernard Cousino. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's
talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you.
GigglesnortHotel (
talk) 17:21, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that's why I reverted myself. Happy editing. GigglesnortHotel ( talk) 17:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
The article has been tagged for lack of notability since 2010. The tagging has not been contested. No counter argument has been initiated since the tagging. No discussion was started! There comes a time that we have to clean up an article or do away with it, as the case might be. Six years is arguable an adequate period of time. If, even at this last hour, you object to the deletion proposal because you believe the subject of the article is sufficiently notable please argue against the deletion in the appropriate forum. Thanks. - The Gnome ( talk) 13:58, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Mike1901. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BuddyPress— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mike1901 ( talk) 20:45, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, first of all please let me thank you for your comment on the deletion page of Pal Milkovics I am very new to wikipedia and this is my first article and it seems to me I could be responsible for the page to be deleted. Can you help me with your advise how to avoid (how to improve) the deletion of the page? I have no interest at all to do any PR to Milkovics (as someone suggested it), I have just updated and article of which is there since 8 years with new information. I am not sure how is the voting for deletion works, but I got no real feedback (except from you). Thank you for your time. Pikipaki2222 ( talk) 07:56, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
− − Chat shit get banged
Hi 86.17.222.157,
We're involved in the deletion discussion of JonTron at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JonTron (5th nomination). I noticed you're changing Wiki mark-up on other people's comments. Per WP:TPO, that is discouraged to do so. You're adding another asterisk (this little thing: *) on comments that aren't yours. I personally think that an asterisk should be used for a !vote, so it's easier to pickout votes and/or comments. Please don't take this the wrong way, as I don't think you're doing it intentionally, let alone to harm the discussion. Thanks, and happy editing. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
P.S.
On a sidenote, why don't you create an account? An account isn't bound to a single IP address, and it allows for personal customization. Editing from an account is also anonymous in the sense that nobody can automatically know your real identity (unless you dedice to share that information of course). soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JonTron (5th nomination), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Describing other editors as having a "clearly misogynistic agenda" is blatantly unacceptable. [1] ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 22:30, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Hope you don't mind that I'm moving the rest of our conversation to your talkpage, but the length of text on the AfD about the AfD was growing a bit unwieldy in comparison to what was being said about the article's subject and his (admittedly obvious) notability. True on the part about life being boring otherwise. Agree that the article is miles away from being a deletion candidate, but the amount of coverage alone isn't necessarily an indication when one can't speak the language to check how many of them also are reliable and independent. (I've seen some subjects with absolutely massive amounts of coverage that all boil down to little more than the same few press-releases re-repeated across venues, yet that on numerical value alone look impressive. Highly so, even.) In either case, the article was in such a messy state that I can well understand how someone could list it at AfD—the great majority of similar articles with similar starts and similar states after the promo-speak is removed are indeed definitely *not* notable, and at least on AfD, the idea that this subject lacks notability can be easily and clearly disproven (and if necessary, later linked to). I can understand your stance, though. If the article hadn't had such a messy start, I would have been rather confused at what it was doing at AfD. AddWittyNameHere ( talk) 22:38, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey just a note that I had to revert part of your edits to the discussion. (look at these diffs: [2] [3]). While they look like vandalism, due to their repetitive look and considering your other contributions, I'm going to assume good faith in that it was some kind of technical error on your part. Please examine any tools you are using so that none misbehave, and I also suggest reading the full diffs in the future to catch stuff like that. Happy contributing. Opencooper ( talk) 21:02, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Anigouran. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. This is what I got. Marvellous Spider -Man 01:51, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
You are right. I meant WP:NOTE, not WP:NOT. Will update notices accordingly. Coderzombie ( talk) 20:07, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I have removed the {{ prod}} tag from The Klingon Way, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{ prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! noychoH ( talk) 22:06, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that you've noticed a vicious cycle by now - you're an IP user, and as such, whenever a problem arises, you'll be the first to be scapegoated as opposed to registered users. I'll give you my honest opinion - if you can't be bothered to create an account, then I'm not sure why you're even hanging around on this encyclopedia. I really do hope you understand that a lot of your kind are vandalisers and trolls, and we most certainly don't appreciate them. Can you really blame the majority of the Wikipedia body for reinforcing the "impression that unregistered editors are treated like 'something nasty sticking to your shoe', or a 'piece of shit'"? No, you can't. I'm sorry, but when you said that abandoned your old account, it sounds like you're just making a sorry excuse. I can't possibly think of any plausible reason that you'd rather let others continue to scapegoat you instead of getting a NAME for yourself. Also, it's highly insulting when people like you, that can't even be bothered to make an account, lecture people with NAMES. You have NO NAME, being corrected by a NO NAME (aka NOBODY) is DAMAGING to our pride. Go on, keep dreaming that the majority of the Wikipedia body will someday respect IP users on the same level as registered users. Well, get this - it'll never happen. So say goodbye to your dreams. I wish you in becoming a happy scapegoat. Yeah, no. Just create an account and get this over with. Your kind should NEVER, I mean NEVER be permitted to participate in any activity that the Big Boys (registered users) do. Creating an account is only a few procedures, and then you're done. You must be out of your mind if you think the alternative is actually better for you. -- Sk8erPrince ( talk) 16:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Please take a glance at Carlos Avery, which you opined about at Articles for Deletion. I've sourced out and rewritten from the ground up. Thanks. —tim /// Carrite ( talk) 22:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Please stop. Continuing to remove file deletion tags from file description pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to may be considered
vandalism. Further edits of this type may result in your being
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Aru@baska
❯❯❯ Vanguard 05:39, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
86.17.222.157 ( talk) 07:04, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
JarrahTree 10:44, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
You feel all this is patronizing and condescending, and therefore uncivil. I actually think it's patronizing to ask "Could you point to some of that ongoing coverage?" when the AfD provides a convenient link to Google News where the ongoing coverage is right there. Nobody likes being told they're wrong, and that leads to feelings of incivility. But sometimes there's just no way to deliver the message without someone's feathers getting ruffled
. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 21:21, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 02:46, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College of Medicine, Lagos State University. Thank you. — Oluwa2Chainz »» ( talk to me) 12:17, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Whatever your personal thoughts about the deletion policy and the way it is implemented, it is abundantly clear that all unssourced biographies of living people MUST be tagged for deletion. Please remember, again, to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do in the article summary at Bilal Akbar. Incidentally, this article remains at risk of deletion since the single reference provided does not demonstrate notability. Senior officers in the armed forces are not inherently notable and notability must be demonstrated through reputable, independedent sources. Velella Velella Talk 01:47, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
RSTech1. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of
your recent contributions —the one you made with
this edit to
China Rehabilitation Research Center— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
RSTech1 (
talk) 15:52, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Erroneous warning removed. RSTech1 ( talk) 16:09, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 21:40, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
There are extremely good reasons why I (and possibly many others) accord less weight to he comments of anonymous users. I have noticed on several occasions that you throw your weight around a lot on Wikipedia, in fact less than 30%of your edits are spent adding content. WADR, if you want to act like a forum moderator, I suggest you register an account, edit for a few years, then run at RfA. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 21:51, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Owan— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Serols ( talk) 12:20, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't think that is fair, taking a swipe like that. Everybody does their best. Every editor has their preference. I will be putting it through Afd. scope_creep ( talk)
Hi, there is a Official source to name The Voice Project for Atena Daemi
I don't understand English more, and I want of you (( If you know the complete rules of how to work with Wikipedia )) that please add this resource and text about Atena Daemi in this article (Atena Daemi).
Source Address http://voiceproject.org/takeaction/drop-the-charges-against-atena-daemi
There are References here:
Thank you. -- Aliresajavann ( talk) 00:40, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello! I've seen some of your edits, and I really appreciate the contributions you're making to Wikipedia. I'm glad you're helping the project! You may wish to consider creating an account. It's quick, free, and anonymous (you don't have to give away any real-world information about yourself).
When you're logged in, you can do many things that unregistered users cannot, such as creating new pages, uploading media content, moving pages and keeping track of changes to articles you edit frequently. It helps the community, too — Wikipedians will be more likely to remember who you are when you have an account name!
If you want more information on the benefits of creating an account, click here. And once you've registered, please drop me a message and say hi! Don't forget to sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~). 2600:1:B14B:FF61:2CB5:68B4:2CE0:FCAE ( talk) 2600:1:B14B:FF61:2CB5:68B4:2CE0:FCAE ( talk) 19:54, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page
Gaurav Tower, Jaipur has been reverted.
Your edit
here to
Gaurav Tower, Jaipur was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our
external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (
https://jaipurshoppy.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/jaipur-is-a-very-famous-place-for-shopping-and-you-can-spend-a-lot-of-time-in-shopping-for-more-information-logon-to-www-jaipurshopy-com/,
https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Gaurav_Tower,_Jaipur&url=https://jaipurshoppy.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/jaipur-is-a-very-famous-place-for-shopping-and-you-can-spend-a-lot-of-time-in-shopping-for-more-information-logon-to-www-jaipurshopy-com/&oldid=757758040,
https://jaipurshoppy.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/jaipur-is-a-very-famous-place-for-shopping-and-you-can-spend-a-lot-of-time-in-shopping-for-more-information-logon-to-www-jaipurshopy-com/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an
external link that does comply with our
policies and
guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to
undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's
external links guideline for more information, and consult my
list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see
my FAQ page. Thanks! --
XLinkBot (
talk) 15:51, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
If this is a shared
IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.
I see that at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sabrina P. Ramet you wrote, in connection with the editor signing "Quis separabit?", "I'm rather shocked that such a long-standing administrator doesn't understand that fundamental point about the way that Wikipedia works, and, if I could be bothered, would make a proposal that admins should have to go through reconfirmation after a number of years." In fact, the editor who signs as "Quis separabit?" (and whose user name is "Rms125a@hotmail.com") is not an administrator, as you can see here, and I don't know how you got the impression that he or she is one. I certainly agree, though, that if an administrator were to create such a totally inappropriate deletion discussion, it would raise questions about his or her suitability to continue as an administrator. The editor who uses the pseudonym " JamesBWatson" ( talk) 09:53, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Giving you a heads up since you deproded Stop Normalizing Alt Right Chrome extension. If you feel like commenting you can here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stop Normalizing Alt Right Chrome extension. TonyBallioni ( talk) 19:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Please note that you should not remove the proposed deletion notice from a unsourced biography of a living person without providing a reliable source. See WP:BLPPROD. I have therefore restored the notice to János Besenyő, by reverting to the version that was proposed for deletion. If you have a reliable source then please add it, and the notice can be removed. But do not do so again without one.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 20:59, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Milk fat globule membrane while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. — IVORK Discuss 21:46, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
I may have started what turned out to be a round of insults. I should not have made those first personal remarks that touched things off. I apologize for that and the other insults that followed. I am redacting the personal remarks that I made. I usually don't get into these kinds of contests. I was wrong to begin making it personal, and did not see it at that time. I will chalk this up to experience. Good luck with your editing on Wikipedia. I see that you do have a lot of experience. And like anyone else, you are entitled to your interpretation of guidelines, policies, and so on. ---- Steve Quinn ( talk) 22:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your efforts and contributions on Wikipedia.
It is kind notice about my reply on AfD
Peace Treaty with North Korea
Please refer to the initial version of
Peace Treaty attached between U.S. and North Korea:
Agreed Framework
It was the part of North Korea Nuclear deal. - page #3 , U.S. promised to provide North Korea with the
formal
assurance of peace and Security to North Korea.
From my understanding, the current nuclear & ICBM issue would have been removed already, if the agreement was proceeded,
I was able to figure it out this information just only a few days ago because of the news release from Former U.S. President
Jimmy Carter (Press Release Date: 5 Sept 2017)
[1] — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Goodtiming8871 (
talk •
contribs)
First off, let me say (even though I'm sure you've heard the whole bit before) you should register an account! I can understand why you may not want to, but if there is at least one practical reason that you should it is that as an IPeditor, I cannot send you thanks for deprodding
Best Get Going and
KRO-NCRV (which are my PRODs). Not to say that I want to undermine what you said above I did have an account several years ago, but decided to stop using it, which is completely compliant with policy, partly because I was concerned with the way that unregistered editors were treated like something nasty sticking to your shoe, and I wanted no part of that
and I think you're not wrong on that front. There are several other deprods you've done I think are in good form.
To refute your points, though, 1. One does not need to understand Chinese to be able to determine notability of a Chinese language topic. We do, after all, have this very useful guide If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list
. Coverage is largely in blogs or brief episode coverage. Your contesting of that is fine, my explanation was not as thorough as it normally is. 2. I don't think many of the sources cover GNG, but you could easily find it to be notable under
WP:BROADCAST - which I had somehow not found when PRODing it.
Thank you for your contributions, if in the future you determine that you need the assistance of a registered user feel free to drop by my talk page or email me and I'll see what I can do. :) menaechmi ( talk) 14:15, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello. You recently removed a Biographies of Living Persons PROD, from Habul Chakraborty, without adding a reliable source. Please don't remove these Biographies of Living Persons PRODs from articles unless they contain at least one reliable source. If this was a mistake, don't worry, it has been replaced. If you oppose the deletion of an article under this process, please consider adding reliable sources to the article or commenting at the respective talk page. Thank you. jd22292 ( Jalen D. Folf) ( talk) 21:47, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
I'd like to thank you for going through my PROD log and making good changes where necessary. jd22292 ( Jalen D. Folf) ( talk) 15:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC) |
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Hispanic neighborhoods are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. jd22292 ( Jalen D. Folf) ( talk) 13:18, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
I know we haven't seen eye-to-eye on everything but credit where credit's due: Wang Ziyun.
DrStrauss
talk 19:21, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
DrStrauss talk 22:42, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
-- XXN, 15:47, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Now that the ANI is closed and anyone who should be blocked is blocked ( twice, actually!) Basically, if I'd looked at this page first I would never have come to the errrrroneous conclusion I did. Unfortunately the rest of your edits kind of- tied in elsewhere. Not your fault or responsibility. But, this page would have been absolutely convincing (and, indeed, is)- and imagine how embarassing it is to dishcover our previous (and I hope I can say) respectful and mutually-supportive interaction (a context to which I earnestly hope we can return relations). That thought wish and desire being paramount in my mind and guiding my hand as I write, I officially and befittingly apologise to you for everything I am responsible for between the spectra and gamut of spoiling a nice weekend to the heinous accusation of being a long-term abuser of wikipedia whose intent is solely to disrupt and discombobulate the running of the encyclopaedia and the good relations between its volunteers. None of whch have been, are, or will ever be the case I know, and should have known if I had paused slightly over the mouseclick, and would have known if I had, and will have known in the future when looking back. I am a great advocate, in general, of WP:IPHUMAN, but I admit there is a piece of me that on occasion does want our best IP contributors to open accounts- a suggestion which, of course, I'm equally sure that you have considered and rejected beforetimes. Anyway, thanks for reading, and I hope you are keeping well. Take care! — fortuna velut luna 14:43, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
DrStrauss talk 11:31, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
I appreciate you defending me earlier this month. I was accused of being Abnormallylong then some London editor then you; Lol. I still feel that IP's are discriminated against. Maybe we need a taskforce or something dedicated to IP's. 79.67.91.250 ( talk) 10:40, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
In light of your comment, perhaps I was mistaken. Chris Troutman ( talk) 04:05, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
I saw you Unprodded 2 articles about chinese departements saying that they are likely to be notable. Do you know which ministry they are departements of? Have you found any references? Are you sure that the departements even exist? Unprodding without addressing the problems is allowed but it is a shame not to make the effort to find the sources yourself. Domdeparis ( talk) 13:31, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello,
I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether The Department of European-Central Asian Affairs (People's Republic of China) should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Department of European-Central Asian Affairs (People's Republic of China) .
If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
Thanks,
Domdeparis ( talk) 13:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello,
I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether The Department of West Asian and North African Affairs (People's Republic of China) should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Department of West Asian and North African Affairs (People's Republic of China) .
If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
Thanks,
-- Domdeparis ( talk) 13:50, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Regarding removing the BLPPROD tag at Apoorva Muralinath: While there now are sources they don't seem to support any of the statements in the article. From my reading all the three articles would support is that Muralinath is a basketball player for the Indian Railways team, which is not mentioned in the Wikipedia article. Perhaps I've missed something. Gab4gab ( talk) 15:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
The 'thanks' feature does not work on IP accounts. Are you sure you don't want to register? The kind of work you are doing for Wikipedia would be easier for you with the access to some tools. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk)
Re your edit on my talk page. You might want to read WP:BRD. It is up to you to raise your contested edit on the article talk page and attempt to get consensus before you restore a contested edit. My talk page is not the appropriate place to discuss a content dispute, since any other interested editors are unlikely to see it there. Your initial removal of the material was inappropriate, as I explained, and whether you understood my explanation of not your restoration of it was also inappropriate. Since the article has now been merged to Niche insurance and that material has been dropped it's moot. You didn't get the point the first two times, so let me make this clearer. Stay off my talk page. I am not interested in discussing anything with you on my talk page. Meters ( talk) 03:22, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
I could not find the sources you provided in the articles you recently deproded. Could you provide links? Septrillion ( talk) 18:05, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Please don't remove speedy deletion tag. Let the admin who can actually delete the page decides its validity. – Ammarpad ( talk) 19:30, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
I reverted your removal of the speedy deletion tag at Patrick Little (disambiguation), because it "disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic)". Patrick Little is the primary topic. Patrick Little (Senate Candidate) is the sole disambigated title. A hatnote to Patrick Little (Senate Candidate) on the former is sufficient, per WP:ONEOTHER. --Animalparty! ( talk) 07:26, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
This is the
discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's
IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may
create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users.
Registering also hides your IP address. |
Please do not
attack other editors, as you did at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giorgi Kulua. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please
stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.
Sir Sputnik (
talk) 21:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bachana Arabuli. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 22:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
The warnings above were found to be invalid at WP:ANI, so I have stricken them. 86.17.222.157 ( talk) 20:25, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bachana Arabuli.
Sir Sputnik (
talk) 20:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Please see my closing rationale. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 15:23, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your work in removing inappropriate CSD tagging. In most cases I agree with you, but in the case of Hilton Cowie I see no indication of significance: He is a race car driver, which surely does not in itself indicate significance. He took part in some races but did not qualify. And he has a profile in a database which seems to profile all drivers. Where is the significance? — teb728 t c 22:54, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 12:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
We discussed deletion reviews being started by IP editors recently, near the top of this page. I think that in most cases, as an IP editor, you would have standing to begin a deletion review, but in this particular case you're (1) starting a deletion review, (2) as an IP editor, (3) about a WMF figure. I would suggest you use an account with a checkable history.— S Marshall T/ C 20:04, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Just a tip: You're wasting your breath. He won't listen to criticism, even when it's clear, polite, and sustained; he dismisses it as drama and incivility. He's been getting clear pushback over his sloppiness since at least his failed RfA, yet he hasn't learned a thing from it. He's here to click buttons and provide "me, too!" comments. (We've both seen him at AfD.) Even after being taken to the cleaners at AN/I last week, he's still patrolling badly, leaving barely-intelligible AfD votes, and being very unhelpful to novice editors who ask for feedback about his AfC rejections. I previously thought this was mere stubbornness on his part, but I actually think he can't help it. I'm not sure if he's struggling with reading comprehension or a learning deficiency, but it's the only thing that explains his behavior—and I'm not pointing it out to be cruel, quite the opposite: I feel bad watching him struggle, and I actually like him and admire his dedication. But I think the community needs to address this: it's not going to go away no matter how much he's warned, and, unlike sloppy editing, others can't just make it right with an edit.
Also, in dealing with this sort of thing, it would help immensely if you logged in. In every discussion in which I see you participate, your views are only acknowledged to dismiss them—yet you are far more experienced than I am. We both know the Florence Devouard AfD and DRV would have turned out much differently if your opinion had been tied to a respectable account. I understand the point you're trying to make, but, by my count, you're not making any headway. How many debates are you willing to sacrifice for a hopelessly lost cause?
Respectfully, Rebb ing 20:49, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Please do not remove
speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you.
Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (
talk) 20:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I apologize for removing your contesting on the speedy deletion, and I have restored your revision. I'm not sure what I was thinking at the time. Sincerely, Lovkal ( talk) 20:52, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Dicky Ryan. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Cahk ( talk) 07:26, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Please note you cannot remove the IP notice per WP:UP#CMT. "A number of important matters may not be removed by the user—they are part of the wider community's processes ... "For IP editors, templates and notes left to indicate other users share the same IP address and/or to whom the IP is registered." If you prefer not to be identified by your ISP, then you may wish to create an user account.-- Cahk ( talk) 08:01, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your message at User talk:JamesBWatson/Open. I have answered there. The editor who uses the pseudonym " JamesBWatson" ( talk) 19:32, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at Safety Cap's talk page.
Hello. You have a new message at Safety Cap's talk page.
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but in this recent edit you removed a speedy deletion tag from Etruscan literature, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. CAPTAIN RAJU ( ✉) 20:03, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a
speedy deletion tag from
Bernard Cousino. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's
talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you.
GigglesnortHotel (
talk) 17:21, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that's why I reverted myself. Happy editing. GigglesnortHotel ( talk) 17:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
The article has been tagged for lack of notability since 2010. The tagging has not been contested. No counter argument has been initiated since the tagging. No discussion was started! There comes a time that we have to clean up an article or do away with it, as the case might be. Six years is arguable an adequate period of time. If, even at this last hour, you object to the deletion proposal because you believe the subject of the article is sufficiently notable please argue against the deletion in the appropriate forum. Thanks. - The Gnome ( talk) 13:58, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Mike1901. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BuddyPress— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mike1901 ( talk) 20:45, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, first of all please let me thank you for your comment on the deletion page of Pal Milkovics I am very new to wikipedia and this is my first article and it seems to me I could be responsible for the page to be deleted. Can you help me with your advise how to avoid (how to improve) the deletion of the page? I have no interest at all to do any PR to Milkovics (as someone suggested it), I have just updated and article of which is there since 8 years with new information. I am not sure how is the voting for deletion works, but I got no real feedback (except from you). Thank you for your time. Pikipaki2222 ( talk) 07:56, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
− − Chat shit get banged
Hi 86.17.222.157,
We're involved in the deletion discussion of JonTron at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JonTron (5th nomination). I noticed you're changing Wiki mark-up on other people's comments. Per WP:TPO, that is discouraged to do so. You're adding another asterisk (this little thing: *) on comments that aren't yours. I personally think that an asterisk should be used for a !vote, so it's easier to pickout votes and/or comments. Please don't take this the wrong way, as I don't think you're doing it intentionally, let alone to harm the discussion. Thanks, and happy editing. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
P.S.
On a sidenote, why don't you create an account? An account isn't bound to a single IP address, and it allows for personal customization. Editing from an account is also anonymous in the sense that nobody can automatically know your real identity (unless you dedice to share that information of course). soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JonTron (5th nomination), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Describing other editors as having a "clearly misogynistic agenda" is blatantly unacceptable. [1] ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 22:30, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Hope you don't mind that I'm moving the rest of our conversation to your talkpage, but the length of text on the AfD about the AfD was growing a bit unwieldy in comparison to what was being said about the article's subject and his (admittedly obvious) notability. True on the part about life being boring otherwise. Agree that the article is miles away from being a deletion candidate, but the amount of coverage alone isn't necessarily an indication when one can't speak the language to check how many of them also are reliable and independent. (I've seen some subjects with absolutely massive amounts of coverage that all boil down to little more than the same few press-releases re-repeated across venues, yet that on numerical value alone look impressive. Highly so, even.) In either case, the article was in such a messy state that I can well understand how someone could list it at AfD—the great majority of similar articles with similar starts and similar states after the promo-speak is removed are indeed definitely *not* notable, and at least on AfD, the idea that this subject lacks notability can be easily and clearly disproven (and if necessary, later linked to). I can understand your stance, though. If the article hadn't had such a messy start, I would have been rather confused at what it was doing at AfD. AddWittyNameHere ( talk) 22:38, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey just a note that I had to revert part of your edits to the discussion. (look at these diffs: [2] [3]). While they look like vandalism, due to their repetitive look and considering your other contributions, I'm going to assume good faith in that it was some kind of technical error on your part. Please examine any tools you are using so that none misbehave, and I also suggest reading the full diffs in the future to catch stuff like that. Happy contributing. Opencooper ( talk) 21:02, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Anigouran. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. This is what I got. Marvellous Spider -Man 01:51, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
You are right. I meant WP:NOTE, not WP:NOT. Will update notices accordingly. Coderzombie ( talk) 20:07, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I have removed the {{ prod}} tag from The Klingon Way, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{ prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! noychoH ( talk) 22:06, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that you've noticed a vicious cycle by now - you're an IP user, and as such, whenever a problem arises, you'll be the first to be scapegoated as opposed to registered users. I'll give you my honest opinion - if you can't be bothered to create an account, then I'm not sure why you're even hanging around on this encyclopedia. I really do hope you understand that a lot of your kind are vandalisers and trolls, and we most certainly don't appreciate them. Can you really blame the majority of the Wikipedia body for reinforcing the "impression that unregistered editors are treated like 'something nasty sticking to your shoe', or a 'piece of shit'"? No, you can't. I'm sorry, but when you said that abandoned your old account, it sounds like you're just making a sorry excuse. I can't possibly think of any plausible reason that you'd rather let others continue to scapegoat you instead of getting a NAME for yourself. Also, it's highly insulting when people like you, that can't even be bothered to make an account, lecture people with NAMES. You have NO NAME, being corrected by a NO NAME (aka NOBODY) is DAMAGING to our pride. Go on, keep dreaming that the majority of the Wikipedia body will someday respect IP users on the same level as registered users. Well, get this - it'll never happen. So say goodbye to your dreams. I wish you in becoming a happy scapegoat. Yeah, no. Just create an account and get this over with. Your kind should NEVER, I mean NEVER be permitted to participate in any activity that the Big Boys (registered users) do. Creating an account is only a few procedures, and then you're done. You must be out of your mind if you think the alternative is actually better for you. -- Sk8erPrince ( talk) 16:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Please take a glance at Carlos Avery, which you opined about at Articles for Deletion. I've sourced out and rewritten from the ground up. Thanks. —tim /// Carrite ( talk) 22:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Please stop. Continuing to remove file deletion tags from file description pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to may be considered
vandalism. Further edits of this type may result in your being
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Aru@baska
❯❯❯ Vanguard 05:39, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
86.17.222.157 ( talk) 07:04, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
JarrahTree 10:44, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
You feel all this is patronizing and condescending, and therefore uncivil. I actually think it's patronizing to ask "Could you point to some of that ongoing coverage?" when the AfD provides a convenient link to Google News where the ongoing coverage is right there. Nobody likes being told they're wrong, and that leads to feelings of incivility. But sometimes there's just no way to deliver the message without someone's feathers getting ruffled
. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 21:21, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 02:46, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College of Medicine, Lagos State University. Thank you. — Oluwa2Chainz »» ( talk to me) 12:17, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Whatever your personal thoughts about the deletion policy and the way it is implemented, it is abundantly clear that all unssourced biographies of living people MUST be tagged for deletion. Please remember, again, to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do in the article summary at Bilal Akbar. Incidentally, this article remains at risk of deletion since the single reference provided does not demonstrate notability. Senior officers in the armed forces are not inherently notable and notability must be demonstrated through reputable, independedent sources. Velella Velella Talk 01:47, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
RSTech1. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of
your recent contributions —the one you made with
this edit to
China Rehabilitation Research Center— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
RSTech1 (
talk) 15:52, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Erroneous warning removed. RSTech1 ( talk) 16:09, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 21:40, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
There are extremely good reasons why I (and possibly many others) accord less weight to he comments of anonymous users. I have noticed on several occasions that you throw your weight around a lot on Wikipedia, in fact less than 30%of your edits are spent adding content. WADR, if you want to act like a forum moderator, I suggest you register an account, edit for a few years, then run at RfA. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 21:51, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Owan— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Serols ( talk) 12:20, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't think that is fair, taking a swipe like that. Everybody does their best. Every editor has their preference. I will be putting it through Afd. scope_creep ( talk)
Hi, there is a Official source to name The Voice Project for Atena Daemi
I don't understand English more, and I want of you (( If you know the complete rules of how to work with Wikipedia )) that please add this resource and text about Atena Daemi in this article (Atena Daemi).
Source Address http://voiceproject.org/takeaction/drop-the-charges-against-atena-daemi
There are References here:
Thank you. -- Aliresajavann ( talk) 00:40, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello! I've seen some of your edits, and I really appreciate the contributions you're making to Wikipedia. I'm glad you're helping the project! You may wish to consider creating an account. It's quick, free, and anonymous (you don't have to give away any real-world information about yourself).
When you're logged in, you can do many things that unregistered users cannot, such as creating new pages, uploading media content, moving pages and keeping track of changes to articles you edit frequently. It helps the community, too — Wikipedians will be more likely to remember who you are when you have an account name!
If you want more information on the benefits of creating an account, click here. And once you've registered, please drop me a message and say hi! Don't forget to sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~). 2600:1:B14B:FF61:2CB5:68B4:2CE0:FCAE ( talk) 2600:1:B14B:FF61:2CB5:68B4:2CE0:FCAE ( talk) 19:54, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page
Gaurav Tower, Jaipur has been reverted.
Your edit
here to
Gaurav Tower, Jaipur was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our
external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (
https://jaipurshoppy.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/jaipur-is-a-very-famous-place-for-shopping-and-you-can-spend-a-lot-of-time-in-shopping-for-more-information-logon-to-www-jaipurshopy-com/,
https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Gaurav_Tower,_Jaipur&url=https://jaipurshoppy.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/jaipur-is-a-very-famous-place-for-shopping-and-you-can-spend-a-lot-of-time-in-shopping-for-more-information-logon-to-www-jaipurshopy-com/&oldid=757758040,
https://jaipurshoppy.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/jaipur-is-a-very-famous-place-for-shopping-and-you-can-spend-a-lot-of-time-in-shopping-for-more-information-logon-to-www-jaipurshopy-com/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an
external link that does comply with our
policies and
guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to
undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's
external links guideline for more information, and consult my
list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see
my FAQ page. Thanks! --
XLinkBot (
talk) 15:51, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
If this is a shared
IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.
I see that at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sabrina P. Ramet you wrote, in connection with the editor signing "Quis separabit?", "I'm rather shocked that such a long-standing administrator doesn't understand that fundamental point about the way that Wikipedia works, and, if I could be bothered, would make a proposal that admins should have to go through reconfirmation after a number of years." In fact, the editor who signs as "Quis separabit?" (and whose user name is "Rms125a@hotmail.com") is not an administrator, as you can see here, and I don't know how you got the impression that he or she is one. I certainly agree, though, that if an administrator were to create such a totally inappropriate deletion discussion, it would raise questions about his or her suitability to continue as an administrator. The editor who uses the pseudonym " JamesBWatson" ( talk) 09:53, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Giving you a heads up since you deproded Stop Normalizing Alt Right Chrome extension. If you feel like commenting you can here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stop Normalizing Alt Right Chrome extension. TonyBallioni ( talk) 19:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Please note that you should not remove the proposed deletion notice from a unsourced biography of a living person without providing a reliable source. See WP:BLPPROD. I have therefore restored the notice to János Besenyő, by reverting to the version that was proposed for deletion. If you have a reliable source then please add it, and the notice can be removed. But do not do so again without one.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 20:59, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Milk fat globule membrane while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. — IVORK Discuss 21:46, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
I may have started what turned out to be a round of insults. I should not have made those first personal remarks that touched things off. I apologize for that and the other insults that followed. I am redacting the personal remarks that I made. I usually don't get into these kinds of contests. I was wrong to begin making it personal, and did not see it at that time. I will chalk this up to experience. Good luck with your editing on Wikipedia. I see that you do have a lot of experience. And like anyone else, you are entitled to your interpretation of guidelines, policies, and so on. ---- Steve Quinn ( talk) 22:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your efforts and contributions on Wikipedia.
It is kind notice about my reply on AfD
Peace Treaty with North Korea
Please refer to the initial version of
Peace Treaty attached between U.S. and North Korea:
Agreed Framework
It was the part of North Korea Nuclear deal. - page #3 , U.S. promised to provide North Korea with the
formal
assurance of peace and Security to North Korea.
From my understanding, the current nuclear & ICBM issue would have been removed already, if the agreement was proceeded,
I was able to figure it out this information just only a few days ago because of the news release from Former U.S. President
Jimmy Carter (Press Release Date: 5 Sept 2017)
[1] — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Goodtiming8871 (
talk •
contribs)
First off, let me say (even though I'm sure you've heard the whole bit before) you should register an account! I can understand why you may not want to, but if there is at least one practical reason that you should it is that as an IPeditor, I cannot send you thanks for deprodding
Best Get Going and
KRO-NCRV (which are my PRODs). Not to say that I want to undermine what you said above I did have an account several years ago, but decided to stop using it, which is completely compliant with policy, partly because I was concerned with the way that unregistered editors were treated like something nasty sticking to your shoe, and I wanted no part of that
and I think you're not wrong on that front. There are several other deprods you've done I think are in good form.
To refute your points, though, 1. One does not need to understand Chinese to be able to determine notability of a Chinese language topic. We do, after all, have this very useful guide If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list
. Coverage is largely in blogs or brief episode coverage. Your contesting of that is fine, my explanation was not as thorough as it normally is. 2. I don't think many of the sources cover GNG, but you could easily find it to be notable under
WP:BROADCAST - which I had somehow not found when PRODing it.
Thank you for your contributions, if in the future you determine that you need the assistance of a registered user feel free to drop by my talk page or email me and I'll see what I can do. :) menaechmi ( talk) 14:15, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello. You recently removed a Biographies of Living Persons PROD, from Habul Chakraborty, without adding a reliable source. Please don't remove these Biographies of Living Persons PRODs from articles unless they contain at least one reliable source. If this was a mistake, don't worry, it has been replaced. If you oppose the deletion of an article under this process, please consider adding reliable sources to the article or commenting at the respective talk page. Thank you. jd22292 ( Jalen D. Folf) ( talk) 21:47, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
I'd like to thank you for going through my PROD log and making good changes where necessary. jd22292 ( Jalen D. Folf) ( talk) 15:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC) |
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Hispanic neighborhoods are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. jd22292 ( Jalen D. Folf) ( talk) 13:18, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
I know we haven't seen eye-to-eye on everything but credit where credit's due: Wang Ziyun.
DrStrauss
talk 19:21, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
DrStrauss talk 22:42, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
-- XXN, 15:47, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Now that the ANI is closed and anyone who should be blocked is blocked ( twice, actually!) Basically, if I'd looked at this page first I would never have come to the errrrroneous conclusion I did. Unfortunately the rest of your edits kind of- tied in elsewhere. Not your fault or responsibility. But, this page would have been absolutely convincing (and, indeed, is)- and imagine how embarassing it is to dishcover our previous (and I hope I can say) respectful and mutually-supportive interaction (a context to which I earnestly hope we can return relations). That thought wish and desire being paramount in my mind and guiding my hand as I write, I officially and befittingly apologise to you for everything I am responsible for between the spectra and gamut of spoiling a nice weekend to the heinous accusation of being a long-term abuser of wikipedia whose intent is solely to disrupt and discombobulate the running of the encyclopaedia and the good relations between its volunteers. None of whch have been, are, or will ever be the case I know, and should have known if I had paused slightly over the mouseclick, and would have known if I had, and will have known in the future when looking back. I am a great advocate, in general, of WP:IPHUMAN, but I admit there is a piece of me that on occasion does want our best IP contributors to open accounts- a suggestion which, of course, I'm equally sure that you have considered and rejected beforetimes. Anyway, thanks for reading, and I hope you are keeping well. Take care! — fortuna velut luna 14:43, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
DrStrauss talk 11:31, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
I appreciate you defending me earlier this month. I was accused of being Abnormallylong then some London editor then you; Lol. I still feel that IP's are discriminated against. Maybe we need a taskforce or something dedicated to IP's. 79.67.91.250 ( talk) 10:40, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
In light of your comment, perhaps I was mistaken. Chris Troutman ( talk) 04:05, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
I saw you Unprodded 2 articles about chinese departements saying that they are likely to be notable. Do you know which ministry they are departements of? Have you found any references? Are you sure that the departements even exist? Unprodding without addressing the problems is allowed but it is a shame not to make the effort to find the sources yourself. Domdeparis ( talk) 13:31, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello,
I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether The Department of European-Central Asian Affairs (People's Republic of China) should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Department of European-Central Asian Affairs (People's Republic of China) .
If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
Thanks,
Domdeparis ( talk) 13:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello,
I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether The Department of West Asian and North African Affairs (People's Republic of China) should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Department of West Asian and North African Affairs (People's Republic of China) .
If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
Thanks,
-- Domdeparis ( talk) 13:50, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Regarding removing the BLPPROD tag at Apoorva Muralinath: While there now are sources they don't seem to support any of the statements in the article. From my reading all the three articles would support is that Muralinath is a basketball player for the Indian Railways team, which is not mentioned in the Wikipedia article. Perhaps I've missed something. Gab4gab ( talk) 15:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
The 'thanks' feature does not work on IP accounts. Are you sure you don't want to register? The kind of work you are doing for Wikipedia would be easier for you with the access to some tools. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk)
Re your edit on my talk page. You might want to read WP:BRD. It is up to you to raise your contested edit on the article talk page and attempt to get consensus before you restore a contested edit. My talk page is not the appropriate place to discuss a content dispute, since any other interested editors are unlikely to see it there. Your initial removal of the material was inappropriate, as I explained, and whether you understood my explanation of not your restoration of it was also inappropriate. Since the article has now been merged to Niche insurance and that material has been dropped it's moot. You didn't get the point the first two times, so let me make this clearer. Stay off my talk page. I am not interested in discussing anything with you on my talk page. Meters ( talk) 03:22, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
I could not find the sources you provided in the articles you recently deproded. Could you provide links? Septrillion ( talk) 18:05, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Please don't remove speedy deletion tag. Let the admin who can actually delete the page decides its validity. – Ammarpad ( talk) 19:30, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
I reverted your removal of the speedy deletion tag at Patrick Little (disambiguation), because it "disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic)". Patrick Little is the primary topic. Patrick Little (Senate Candidate) is the sole disambigated title. A hatnote to Patrick Little (Senate Candidate) on the former is sufficient, per WP:ONEOTHER. --Animalparty! ( talk) 07:26, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
This is the
discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's
IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may
create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users.
Registering also hides your IP address. |