My Talk Archives

/Archive1 /Archive2 /Archive3 /Archive4 /Archive5 /Archive6 /Archive7 /Archive8 /Archive9 /Archive10

This user is one of the 4000 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

My talk page.

Welcome!

Hello, Biscuittin, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  Gwernol 16:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I have been a Wikipedia:WikiGnome for some years but I am now leaving because I am disillusioned with the way Wikipedia is being run. It is no longer the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Biscuittin ( talk) 23:36, 15 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi there. I read some of your edits and I found them interesting and brave. Thank you for contributing. I agree with your sentiment expressed above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.176.124.196 ( talk) 02:46, 14 August 2016 (UTC) reply

I've removed the vague attempt at outing from the ANI thread. Please don't attempt to "out" other editors. Recurrence will lead to an indefinite block. -- Euryalus ( talk) 09:10, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Actually, I haven't outed anybody. Biscuittin ( talk) 09:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

That is incorrect, and these notification violate WP:CANVASS: 1 + 2 + 3 because they alert editors perceived to be opponents of your target. Johnuniq ( talk) 09:44, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

I repeat that I have not outed anybody. As a gesture of goodwill, I have removed my edits 1,2,3. Biscuittin ( talk) 11:03, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Here is a comment which includes "As another Admin told Biscuittin, it will be an indefinite block", and the above includes "Recurrence will lead to an indefinite block". And you have no doubt at all about your position? In fact, you added the misleading heading "Censorship again" above the post by Euryalus ( diff). Thanks for removing the edits, but the phrase "gesture of goodwill" suggests that you do not believe the notifications were canvassing—they were for the reason I mentioned above. Johnuniq ( talk) 11:38, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Also please note that having opinions is not a conflict of interest. -- OpenFuture ( talk) 09:12, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

It depends who holds the opinion. Some Wikipedians are more equal than others. Biscuittin ( talk) 09:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Articles at Wikipedia are based on reliable sources, not the opinions of fringe groups. Johnuniq ( talk) 09:44, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

It does not depend on who holds the opinion. A conflict of interest means you have some sort of personal interest in, that you for example are *payed* to push a specific opinion, or you work for a company, etc. Opinions are not WP:COI. -- OpenFuture ( talk) 10:12, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Holding an opinion is one thing. Being an active campaigner for or against a particular cause is quite another. Biscuittin ( talk) 11:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

No. -- OpenFuture ( talk) 11:32, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked from editing for abuse of editing privileges in relation to information which has been removed from Wikipedia's public records.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then email the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-enwikimedia.org.

---

Administrators: Information which has been oversighted was considered when this block was placed. Therefore the Oversight team or the Arbitration Committee must be consulted before this block can be removed. Administrators undoing oversight blocks without permission from an oversighter risk having their administrator rights removed by the Arbitration Committee (per this announcement).

 -- --  GB  fan 12:03, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

You were warned if you continued to make edits like the ones that were removed at ANI, you would be blocked. Your edits at User talk:Liz were identical. So now you are blocked. --  GB  fan 12:09, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

No problem. I shall pursue this matter through other channels. Biscuittin ( talk) 14:03, 27 March 2016 (UTC) reply

I've removed talkpage access as you were using it to repost the outing threat. As this will impede any block appeals, point of this post is to let you know that if you do wish to appeal the right venue is UTRS. If preferred, it's possible oversight blocks can also be appealed to Arbcom. -- Euryalus ( talk) 10:39, 28 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Biscuittin,
After a discussion on the functionaries email list, we agreed that this should not be an Oversight-only block (one reviewable only by oversighters) because the information you threatened to publish was actually available on Guy's talk page. The blocking admins (and, it appears, you) didn't know this at the time. As a result, the visibility of your posts that were originally oversighted have been restored to page histories, but remain blanked due to their inappropriate nature.

However, your behavior leading up to, and after, the block is still considered block-worthy, based on its inherent battleground attitude, and the fact that you clearly thought you were threatening to out someone if they didn't do what you demanded they do. You'll need to address this in any potential unblock request. Since you repeated the threat to attempt to out someone after being blocked, your talk page access has not been been restored. But you can appeal this through UTRS, and any special rules about Oversight-only blocks no longer apply. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 17:57, 29 March 2016 (UTC) reply

FYI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Biscuittin, courtesy of Jytdog.

If there's any defence of yourself you would like to add to this, I would be happy (per WP:EVADE) to cross post it. Andy Dingley ( talk) 19:37, 18 April 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Biscuittin,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Mayan Astronomers should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayan Astronomers .

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, Daniel kenneth ( talk) 15:03, 8 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Biscuittin. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Alcalá de Henares railway station, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Daniel kenneth ( talk) 16:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Please see my proposal to speedily rename Category:Spain military-related lists to Category:Spanish military-related lists per C2C Hugo999 ( talk) 12:48, 10 September 2016 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Ruthven (born 1783) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Ruthven (born 1783) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — This, that and the other (talk) 00:37, 29 October 2016 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article UK Rail Leasing is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UK Rail Leasing until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Nordic Nightfury 07:58, 18 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Biscuittin. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) reply

The article Rating (electrical) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Transwiki'ed but deleted from Wikitionary. WP:NOTDICTIONARY

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —  Train2104 ( t •  c) 02:19, 23 February 2017 (UTC) reply

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Delta connection. Since you had some involvement with the Delta connection redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{( talk) ( contributions) ( logs)} 08:09, 12 April 2017 (UTC) reply

An article that you have been involved in editing— Heat bending of wood—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. E x nihil ^{( talk)} 07:01, 25 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Category:Materials handling, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:27, 11 February 2018 (UTC) reply

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	wow. Endercase ( talk) 19:46, 12 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Category:Anti-corruption non-governmental organizations, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder ( talk) 09:52, 6 April 2018 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Selection box is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Selection box ‎ until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Prakshit Rangasamudram ( talk) 13:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello, Biscuittin

Thank you for creating List of Community Rail members.

User:Boleyn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Please add your sources.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Boleyn ( talk) 13:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Common Sense Party (UK) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common Sense Party (UK) (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. doktorb _words ^deeds 22:53, 15 July 2020 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Category:Compact overhead powerlines requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:04, 19 October 2020 (UTC) reply

The article Utrecht School of Law Clinical Programme on Conflict, Human Rights and International Justice has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This can not be fixed nor merged to an existing target

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian ( talk) 17:05, 18 December 2020 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Soft coal. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 27#Soft coal until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:56, 27 December 2020 (UTC) reply

See /info/en/?search=Talk:Richard_Middlemore. I know you're blocked but maybe some other reader may take it up. Robin Patterson ( talk) 00:48, 6 January 2021 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ipswich railway station (disambiguation)). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 24#Ipswich railway station (disambiguation)) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 ( 𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:34, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Vitrite (software). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 27#Vitrite (software) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 16:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi. Please see above cat for discussion on renaming. Semper Fi! FieldMarine ( talk) 19:38, 16 June 2022 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Electrical polarity is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electrical polarity until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Tiger ( Talk) 15:40, 28 June 2022 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Corkickle requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Mattdaviesfsic ( talk) 19:29, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

The redirect Grant Ritchie (actor) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 17 § Grant Ritchie (actor) until a consensus is reached. Leschnei ( talk) 13:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

The redirect 2-cycle has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 3 § 2-cycle until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 14:46, 3 September 2023 (UTC) reply

The article Igam has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article contains dubious information. No sources where found to back information. "Igam" does not appear to be a legitimate location. This article appears to be an orphan

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:00, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Magnetism and temperature has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Magnetic properties do depend on temperature, but this text is based on 1911 Britannica, i.e. on a source written before quantum mechanics was developed. Hard to see that this would develop into anything useful.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jähmefyysikko ( talk) 17:11, 18 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Category:Electrosurgery has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:08, 24 February 2024 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Standard database management analysis is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Standard database management analysis until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The redirect Rail transport in Socotra has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 25 § Rail transport in Socotra until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 00:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply