Hello! Please leave new messages at the bottom of this page.
Don't forget to sign your posts by typing four tildes (~), like this: ~~~~.
Welcome!
Hello, Grayfell, 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:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome! --
Elkman
(Elkspeak) 04:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
You appear to have dealt with the Saint Thomas Christian sockpuppeter before. I ask for comment on another suspected set of accounts for cross-reference: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Qaumrambista ~ Pbritti ( talk) 07:18, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
What do you think we should do about this editor? I’ve reported their five copyright-violating photos and they’ve been removed, but they continue to add copyrighted materiel to a draft page, as well as edit war—all while adding no comments. ~ Pbritti ( talk) 14:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi Grayfell, I noticed you had put a note on the Peter Brimelow talk page so I thought you might be able to help with a different article. I ran across True North Centre for Public Policy today, and in the edit history, saw that there's a user named Bigbluenet whose edits are almost exclusively to that article, and they appear to be designed to remove any unflattering information about the group, even if it's sourced. I reverted their edits to what I saw as the "last good version", and was almost immediately reverted back by the same user. As I'm not familiar with the group or the article (yet), I was hoping you could offer some input? Thank you. Fred Zepelin ( talk) 23:17, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I reviewed the articles I cited. These articles have been republished on 30+ websites. Would it make you more comfortable if I choose a Yahoo version of the article in the future, even though they're also a republisher yet they serve ads (and video ads!) throughout the page? I fail to see "spam" in the links I cited. Those pages don't even have AdSense. I fail to see what they have to gain by my minor citations.
I don't mind you changing the links. But labelling a website as spam just because they're not popular/commercialized by ads, even if the republished content is the same as commercial websites and written by leaders in their respective fields, seems disingenuous. Articles are republished all the time. The author is what makes them credible.
I appreciate your contributions to Wiki. I am also trying to help improve the page with more updated content. You don't seem to have an issue with the substance of my updates. But I also don't want the sources I find labelled as spam just because you haven't heard of them, when they're republishing quality content without annoying ads. This should be encouraged not discouraged. 104.158.121.12 ( talk) 05:36, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I am a random wikipedia fan who does not contribute. I just wanted to say thank you for fighting the good fight w/r/t racialists and pseudoscientific enablers of White Supremacy. I saw many of your talk page posts and admire your candor and persistence.
71.175.33.102 ( talk) 18:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC) mitch
It's only tangentially related to True North Centre for Public Policy, but I made a few additions (sourced) to the Lindsay Shepherd article. I was quickly reverted by someone named Springee. I took a quick look at Springee's contributions page and I saw they are very experienced and often weigh in on right-wing figures' articles, usually to remove things that might be considered negative, whether sourced or unsourced. I though I might ask you to take a look at my additions and offer an opinion. Thank you! Fred Zepelin ( talk) 21:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Good call there. But should the {{ cn}} tag also be removed too? DMacks ( talk) 14:08, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Heads up, I removed the multi-level section of Affiliate marketing after I noticed that 2 of the original paragraphs were borderline copyvio from a self-published source, and that of the two sources you added, one doesn't back up that they're truly related (merely that they have similar scopes), and one (Ze Zook) was later updated to remove the claim that MLM and AM are equivalent. Since I no longer see any source tying the two subjects together, and given the context that MLMers have been trying to claim the (better) reputation of affiliate marketing for themselves for years, I've removed it. I'm absolutely inclined to discuss this (I promise I'll be concise!) on that talk page. Cheers DFlhb ( talk) 17:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of CryEngine games 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.
Respiciens ( talk) 12:44, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Regarding: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Solana_(blockchain_platform)&oldid=1114696668
Cryptocurrency do not have a formal ISO 4217 alpha-3 code (See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/BTC#Translingual for more context.)
“SOL” like other cryptocurrency tickers BTC, ETH etc. are informal only, though used widely across all platforms that track cryptocurrency, like https://coinmarketcap.com/ as well as products like https://coinbase.com/.
It seems important to include this basic detail on Wikipedia, so people know which ticker is the correct one (so they don’t buy the wrong cryptocurrency).
Thanks,
Aarongillett ( talk) 00:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification 🙂 Aarongillett ( talk) 06:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi Greyfell, (I'm pretty new to making edits to Wikipedia)
I have a question regarding the following revert: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=StepMania&oldid=prev&diff=1127284429
Stapmania hasn't seen any recent updates, but the fork known as Project OutFox is in active development. (And therefor this may be relevant information for new players)
Since the Project OutFox page does not exit yet, I figured changing that internal link to an external link, may have been better.
If that's not desirable, then it's probably better to make sure the Project Outfox page *does* exist. What are your thoughts about this? Thanks in advance! Frankkie12345 ( talk) 15:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your clarification! I'll go have a look at all the articles you've linked. Frankkie12345 ( talk) 20:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
I like it. Bishonen | tålk 22:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC).
Grayfell,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. See
this for background context.
—
Moops ⋠
T⋡ 16:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠ T⋡ 16:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thanks for removing primary references. However it seems very odd to remove, say, information on the Shaq and Brave partnerships but keep references to Melania Trump using Solana, or a reference to an security on a specific Solana wallet application to be the much more vague 'the Solana ecosystem had been targeted by hackers', as you did in https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Solana_(blockchain_platform)&diff=1131876867&oldid=1131876267. Before 2023 the Solana Wikipedia page is mainly edits by people that wish to discredit the chain - hence 'Melania Trump' being the most notable item on the page. I have recently added items that more more positive, but kept the referenced negative information. Removing only the positive information is against NPOV.
Mikemaccana ( talk) 10:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Please don't get me wrong here, I didn't want to amplify anything. My intention was to simply notify you about that comment, which I recognized as a personal attack as well, and give you the opportunity to respond to it. Nothing more, nothing less than that. — Sundostund mppria ( talk / contribs) 15:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
The information provided in the page https://dasfinance.info/frontrunning-laws-and-penalty/ has been properly sourced and contains no factual errors. Dhirendra Chandra Das ( talk) 06:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Here is how Limits to growth got into article - first it was added without source (just because no good English source), but the flow of events is easy to comprehend - first there was a Limits to growth report, which caused discussions in Russia too, then someone (Tsikunov aka A.Kuzmich) decided to turn discussions into conspiracy theory. In his writings he does not mention specifically Limits to growth, rather some vague UN documents which were produced after Limits to growth caused widespread discussions. Then someone correctly added rather limited mention of theory in English language book, that theory become very popular. So you wrote - it's unclear why it was there. Hope now, after deleting something about which you have very vague idea, you understand, why the mention was in the article. SergeyKurdakov ( talk) 15:38, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Regarding blockchain.com... I get why blockchair.com has gotta go.. but why is blockchain.com not a reliable source? Who in the industry would be reliable, if not blockchain.com. Thanks!
Haxwell ( talk) 16:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Also, good call removing a quote I added regarding "no intention" to ban bitcoin. (for posterity, it was: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/09/30/fed-chair-powell-says-he-has-no-intention-of-banning-crypto/) As I looked into the transcript for the meeting, he seems to be talking more about CBDCs and stablecoins than anything else, and certainly didn't mention Bitcoin. Some irrational exuberance there, for sure. https://www.congress.gov/event/117th-congress/house-event/LC67940/text
Haxwell ( talk) 16:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
reputation for fact-checking and accuracythat Wikipedia expects of reliable sources.
I go to the school so I know how many people are in the student body. TheRuinsOfAlpha ( talk) 01:53, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello,
I saw on the article talk page you were wondering where the SPA's were coming from, and asking "who tweeted about this".
The solana developers tweeted about it, [1] and got 40k views, they are also offering a bounty to whoever "fixes" the article [2].
This has got picked up in the crypto "news" websites, and is not spreading around social media, e.g. reddit [3] [4].
Hope this sheds some light on the situation, 192.76.8.84 ( talk) 23:01, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi, this is Sean King. I just wanted to apologize about engaging in that edit war and my poor conduct five years ago with you and others regarding Gab. I've realized since then, Gab isn't actually pro-freedom of speech and has gone in an absolute editorial direction that inadvertenly proves you are right. It is an alt-right site. Moreover, I'd personally argue a publisher and not a platform.
Going forward, I will do my best to have better ettiquite in any discussions. Moreover, I hope to bring better contributions to the Wikipedia community. SeanKing.TheReboot ( talk) 02:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Your edit to Philosophy, politics and economics is inconsistent (unless it's lazy). The article is very much a list of institutions that offer the program. If you don't want those few names listed and your reasoning is that it's "name dropping" you might consider removing the other universities named in the article or editing it to list them differently. I could be wrong, though, I don't really know your intent or perspective. ProofCreature ( talk) 22:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
I'm still learning this whole Wiki thing, your notes have been helpful, if but a little aggressive. Hope to get better, let me know if I can do anything more to get better at this. ThePetroglyph ( talk) 20:54, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Please consider reading WP:ROWN before major reverts and give a clear and proper reason for each removal of an addition. WP:ALTREV, WP:BABY & WP:RV would generally be helpful reads in this context.-- JasonKryptonite ( talk) 10:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
I would like to thank you and DDMS123 for helping to combat the vandalism that was done to my edit of the May 13 page. Rorr404 ( talk) 23:51, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Over at Neo-Confederates, OgamD218 has once again reverted to removing the See Also links they don't like, hasn't achieved consensus for any of those changes, and has basically just stopped discussing, preferring to revert instead. I'm honestly out of ideas. I don't know where to go from here. I'm asking for some intervention because you weighed in at the discussion earlier. Thank you. Wes sideman ( talk) 12:47, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I suspected as much for a while now, but hadn't quite gotten around to putting together the evidence and filing a report. Thanks for doing all that. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 17:23, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Sir, you revert change made by me by giving reason that it don't have reference. Can you please tell me which type of reference should I add? Vishwa6421 ( talk) 06:54, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
I was thinking of putting Enshittification into mainspace. It’s an important topic, particularly with what is going on at Reddit. I am happy to keep it in draft if you want to work on it more. Best, Thriley ( talk) 23:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for restoring the page back to normal. I kept trying to restore it to normal, but that link filter blocked my attempts. $chnauzer 04:42, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
An edit-summary by the IP 2001:2D8:6264:4BC:2C63:28F5:DF72:3525 on the article Vox (political party) reminds me a bit too much of those of User:Storm598 and his sockpuppets. Coincidentally, the IP originates in South Korea. Would love if you would look into this. Vif12vf/Tiberius ( talk) 05:33, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Hoshimachi Suisei.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject). If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 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, 25 July 2023 (UTC) |
Hi there,
You recently advised that ,rather than make direct changes to this article, I should leave proposed changes in the Talk tab -- which I did. There has been no response. The information in the article continues to be misleadingly out-of-date and inaccurate. If I can't make changes directly due to my affiliation with the company, could you kindly advise how to correct the issues with this entry?
Thanks. Fmcevoy ( talk) 18:42, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
I saw you put a copyvio-revdel template on Data science. Based on this [5] there appears to be very little, if any, copying from that site. There are a few similar phrases but most are common terms, are used differently, or are part of cited text. May I know if you have some specific areas you think are copied? I'm tempted to just remove the template but no doubt there was something that concerned you so perhaps you could explain. Oblivy ( talk) 07:39, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
On 23 October 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Enshittification, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to Cory Doctorow, enshittification is how platforms die? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Enshittification. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Enshittification), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Kusma ( talk) 00:04, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Hook update | ||
Your hook reached 23,458 views (977.4 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of October 2023 – nice work! |
GalliumBot ( talk • contribs) (he/ it) 06:35, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
It's best I just ignore that IP editor right? Whether or not they are sealioning, trolling or WP:RUNAWAY, they seem to be mispresenting what I said (and their own edits) on purpose ( WP:TALKNO). I could warn on their talk page, and if they persisted take it to a noticeboard, but that's kinda pointless given the SPI right? Zenomonoz ( talk) 10:36, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
The neutrality of the Godot Wikipedia page has been disputed in the past. Having a "criticisms" section is reasonable. The sources used in the criticism section are the same as the sources used elsewhere on the page ABetterTomorrow101 ( talk) 20:22, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for your note about the source on that section about the Brave Dissenter Fork. I'm frustrated with myself for getting too distracted with improving a bad section to actually think about what the source was that was being cited—that I added a second obviously poor source is just the icing on top. A lesson in not editing while tired! I've done a search for any reporting on anywhere with even a whisper of reliability, and there's nothing I can find. Taking a step back I think that probably that section should just be entirely removed, and I wanted a second opinion if you have the chance. Handpigdad ( talk) 09:10, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello "Grayfell"
I have reverted the changes you've made to Jonathan Bowden's article due to the fact i think it was a poor edit and you are obviously biased.
Sincerely, Dork. DorkNorkem ( talk) 22:12, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
I understand you removed my edit, but I would think it's because the formatting was messed up. However, you said it was because there was no such article, and then linked to a page that talks about redlinking. But there was no redlinked article in my edit. AKFkrewfamKF1 ( talk) 07:35, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
I don't mind most marine mammals |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I reverted an edit twice The Myth of Male Power, then you accused me of "edit warring". I made a completely separate edit to the article in which none of the same material was affected, and you again accuse of edit warring? Please stop with the frivolous allegations. 47.219.237.179 ( talk) 08:23, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
|
Can't you understand the analogy? Theophilus of Antioch has the same relationship with Turkey as Kant had with Russia, the relationship is from the current regime occupies the territory of former countries. Theophilus of Antioch was a Greek-speaking Christian, not a Turkish-speaking Turk. Ho Pak-chuen ( talk) 12:53, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello @ Grayfell I wanted to ask if a Wikipedia article has a line appended with a source that is an opinion piece, doesn't it has to be removed. For instance, in the Douglas Murray article, in the Criticism section first line's last sentence. "His fans have described him as a defender of free speech" It probably is in contravention to WP:NOTOPINION and WP:RS. 182.183.58.243 ( talk) 21:10, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Grayfell,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk) 14:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe ( talk) 14:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. regarding Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Grayfell's_edits_at_Erik_Voorhees Thanks! Jtbobwaysf ( talk) 09:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Hey, Grayfell! Why did you think this was likely spam? Valereee ( talk) 12:19, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
I don't quite agree the ideas expressed by the spokespeople were of little value, but your edits are a reasonable compromise. Wpearce1983.k ( talk) 22:08, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi Grayfell, I notice you have some experience with a topic I'm interested in. Currently, there's an editor trying to whitewash the lead of Blake Masters. Was hoping for a third opinion on this, as you appear to be unbiased in this arena. Thanks, Fred Zepelin ( talk) 04:01, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
|
The
Oregon Jewish Museum and Center for Holocaust Education (OJMCHE), in partnership with social practice artist Shoshana Gugenheim and as part of the
Art+Feminism Project, will host an International Women's Day Wikipedia Edit-a-thon to edit and/or create Wikipedia articles for Jewish women artists. The event will be held at the museum on Sunday, March 10 from 11am-3pm PDT. Pre-registration is preferred but not required. Members of the public are invited to come to the museum to learn about the editing process, its history, its impact, and how to do it. We aim to collaboratively edit/enter Jewish women artists into the canon. An experienced regional Wikipedian will provided will be on site to teach, support, and guide the process. Participants can select artists ahead of time or on site. |
|
Hi Grayfell - I noticed you reverted my date edit on Off-White company page and labelled it as "poorly sourced" BUT I would like to re-iterate that Off-White is the Brand name and not the Company name (Company name is Off-White Operating or OWO). And it was incorporated in 2013 and not 2012. PYREXE VISION was incorporated in 2012, and OWO in 2013 (you can verify on their official Corporate Journal available in their website (HERE https://www.off---white.com/en-us/customer-service-feed/corporate-information for their corporate/company name AND THEN HERE https://www.off---white.com/static/offwhite/public/pdf/EN_ModelloOrganizzativo_ParteGenerale.pdf for the complete history/breakdown/specifics). I just wanted to justify/backup my update here to make sure there is not confusion. Thank you! Streetwearwizard ( talk) 01:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Unlike other Streetwear brands, Off-White plays a slightly different role than just defining what’s hip on the streets and elsewhere. The brand is cultivating a sort of avant-garde and cult apparel that merges streetwear culture with premium fashion, like reaching a common ground between the two extremes.This is far too promotional and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. To repeat what I said, Wikipedia isn't a platform for promotion or advocacy. Neutrally summarize reliable independent sources without editorializing. Thanks. Grayfell ( talk) 02:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey Grayfell, thank you for editing the hoodie article and editing the edit my friend put trying to prove me wrong about zip-up hoodies just being long for a jacket, if you could let me write about hoodies with zippers commonly being referred to as zip-up hoodies that would be nice to keep that in there, thank you. :) 01:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC) HoodiesWithZippersAreCalledZipUpHoodies ( talk) 01:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of employment websites, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of employment websites (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
I disagree with your deletion of the extensive History I've written and sourced for.
1. You removed the mention of "Pace news media" which is indeed the copyright holder of The Political Compass tool. The website itself indicates it is the copyright holder. Multiple sources state so. I think it's important to include a mention of Pace news media.... I believe you are mistaken there. https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/political-science/political-compass
Using "opencorporations" is indeed a valid tool for citation, please refer to the countless Wikipedia articles that use it as a citation, including the pages of Instagram, Apple, Meta, and BBC. https://en.wikipedia.org/?fulltext=1&search=opencorporates&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1
2. You removed when the domain was actually registered, which is I believe an important aspect of describing the history of the website. You ask for a reliable source and I believe "whois.domaintools.com" is indeed a valid source.
Refer to the multiple pages on Wikipedia, such as Dictionary.com, duckduckgo, and RedTube. https://en.wikipedia.org/?search=whois.domaintools.com&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1
I believe the page is a good starting point and it could use more development. However, I believe deletion and not discussing about it is detrimental to the collaborative spirit of Wikipedia.
3. That "obscure journal mention" as you mention is the Journal of Social Philosophy, a Peer-reviewed journal since 1970, published by Wiley. It appears you don't like how much detail is include, and I believe its important to be accurate to say what he thinks.
One of the many corrections I made on the page is that the website is "British" and should use British English, which I disagree. The source from opencorporations says it's registered in New Zealand. Without the proper context we are consequently creating inaccuracies.
I ask you to reconsider the revision what was created and deleted without consensus.
Gameking69 ( talk) 00:32, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
The Decision Lab is an applied research and innovation firm. We use behavioral science & design to help ambitious organizations create a better future." [6] Nothing about that website demonstrates a positive reputation for accuracy and fact-checking.
The only reason it was written the way it was before was people kept changing it in the past, and it seemed like the only acceptable text which won't get users (mainly IP addresses) to vandalize the page. I'm fine with the changes you made in that regard, its just that it may lead to some IP addresses trying to change it to be "correct." That's my prediction of what will happen... or maybe not, as those days may have passed behind us. I sure hope so. Historyday01 ( talk) 00:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, before the making the edit I checked out Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin these pages don't have citation for the sign. Then now just read Solana (blockchain platform) Symbol conversation in your talk page and your edit comment which you asked for citation.
Now I'm confused about what determines for requirement of citation and how can I cite a sign?
And not sure if we should talk this on your userpage on Monero talk page. Throat0390 ( talk) 04:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
I have finished enough of Consciousness of guilt (legal) to go public with it. Further development and improvement will be appreciated. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 19:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Hiya! I see that you included this in the summary in an edit after my edit: "Like it or not, DnD is consistently defined by reliable sources as the most influential example." I just wanted to let you know I wasn't criticizing Dungeons and Dragons being part of the examples, just that I didn't understand why it was abbreviated (shortened to DnD instead of Dungeons & Dragons). That's it! Happy editing! EdoAug ( talk) 22:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello,
you've changed an article I had worked on, "Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Breakpoint". In the article you consequently changed "the reviewer" to "a reviewer". Also, in one case you wrote "According to a review in GamesRadar". In my opinion this is incorrect.
"A" means "one of many", "the" means "this one". Therefore, we usually write "the sun", even though there are many of them, in order to indicate we mean "this" sun near the earth. In the same way when we write about the reviews of a game we write "The Edge reviewer wrote (...)", "For the Hardcore Gamer reviewer the biggest problem with the game is" because there are many Edge or Hardcore Gamer reviewers, but there is usually one Edge reviewer and one Hardcore Gamer reviewer of the game in question.
I don't have time to fix it carefully yourself. My father is seriously ill. Please tidy up after yourself.
No, I don't agree with the "Be bold in editing" policy. I understand sometimes people do need a bit of encouragement to edit, or to make editions which will be polished later, but sometimes bold editing is a waste of the previous editors' time. So you made a bad edit, fix it yourself.
Thanks in advance.
MichalZim ( talk) 21:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
In my last edit that I just made, I removed the section about abortion that you seem to have such an issue with, but I restored the additional sources that I had added to other sections of the article - sources that you had no business removing, as they had absolutely nothing to do with your "flattering language" complaint. In that regard, what, exactly, is "flattering" about the language that I used? I didn't say "Brendan O'Neill is a stalwart defender of a woman's right to choose". I stated that he was adamantly pro-choice. There's nothing "flattering" about it, and you refuse to go into any real detail about how my language violates WP:NPOV.-- LadybugStardust ( talk) 19:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a discussion involving a topic which you have previously been involved in at Talk:True North Centre for Public Policy. Fred Zepelin ( talk) 00:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello! Please leave new messages at the bottom of this page.
Don't forget to sign your posts by typing four tildes (~), like this: ~~~~.
Welcome!
Hello, Grayfell, 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:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome! --
Elkman
(Elkspeak) 04:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
You appear to have dealt with the Saint Thomas Christian sockpuppeter before. I ask for comment on another suspected set of accounts for cross-reference: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Qaumrambista ~ Pbritti ( talk) 07:18, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
What do you think we should do about this editor? I’ve reported their five copyright-violating photos and they’ve been removed, but they continue to add copyrighted materiel to a draft page, as well as edit war—all while adding no comments. ~ Pbritti ( talk) 14:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi Grayfell, I noticed you had put a note on the Peter Brimelow talk page so I thought you might be able to help with a different article. I ran across True North Centre for Public Policy today, and in the edit history, saw that there's a user named Bigbluenet whose edits are almost exclusively to that article, and they appear to be designed to remove any unflattering information about the group, even if it's sourced. I reverted their edits to what I saw as the "last good version", and was almost immediately reverted back by the same user. As I'm not familiar with the group or the article (yet), I was hoping you could offer some input? Thank you. Fred Zepelin ( talk) 23:17, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I reviewed the articles I cited. These articles have been republished on 30+ websites. Would it make you more comfortable if I choose a Yahoo version of the article in the future, even though they're also a republisher yet they serve ads (and video ads!) throughout the page? I fail to see "spam" in the links I cited. Those pages don't even have AdSense. I fail to see what they have to gain by my minor citations.
I don't mind you changing the links. But labelling a website as spam just because they're not popular/commercialized by ads, even if the republished content is the same as commercial websites and written by leaders in their respective fields, seems disingenuous. Articles are republished all the time. The author is what makes them credible.
I appreciate your contributions to Wiki. I am also trying to help improve the page with more updated content. You don't seem to have an issue with the substance of my updates. But I also don't want the sources I find labelled as spam just because you haven't heard of them, when they're republishing quality content without annoying ads. This should be encouraged not discouraged. 104.158.121.12 ( talk) 05:36, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I am a random wikipedia fan who does not contribute. I just wanted to say thank you for fighting the good fight w/r/t racialists and pseudoscientific enablers of White Supremacy. I saw many of your talk page posts and admire your candor and persistence.
71.175.33.102 ( talk) 18:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC) mitch
It's only tangentially related to True North Centre for Public Policy, but I made a few additions (sourced) to the Lindsay Shepherd article. I was quickly reverted by someone named Springee. I took a quick look at Springee's contributions page and I saw they are very experienced and often weigh in on right-wing figures' articles, usually to remove things that might be considered negative, whether sourced or unsourced. I though I might ask you to take a look at my additions and offer an opinion. Thank you! Fred Zepelin ( talk) 21:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Good call there. But should the {{ cn}} tag also be removed too? DMacks ( talk) 14:08, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Heads up, I removed the multi-level section of Affiliate marketing after I noticed that 2 of the original paragraphs were borderline copyvio from a self-published source, and that of the two sources you added, one doesn't back up that they're truly related (merely that they have similar scopes), and one (Ze Zook) was later updated to remove the claim that MLM and AM are equivalent. Since I no longer see any source tying the two subjects together, and given the context that MLMers have been trying to claim the (better) reputation of affiliate marketing for themselves for years, I've removed it. I'm absolutely inclined to discuss this (I promise I'll be concise!) on that talk page. Cheers DFlhb ( talk) 17:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of CryEngine games 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.
Respiciens ( talk) 12:44, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Regarding: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Solana_(blockchain_platform)&oldid=1114696668
Cryptocurrency do not have a formal ISO 4217 alpha-3 code (See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/BTC#Translingual for more context.)
“SOL” like other cryptocurrency tickers BTC, ETH etc. are informal only, though used widely across all platforms that track cryptocurrency, like https://coinmarketcap.com/ as well as products like https://coinbase.com/.
It seems important to include this basic detail on Wikipedia, so people know which ticker is the correct one (so they don’t buy the wrong cryptocurrency).
Thanks,
Aarongillett ( talk) 00:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification 🙂 Aarongillett ( talk) 06:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi Greyfell, (I'm pretty new to making edits to Wikipedia)
I have a question regarding the following revert: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=StepMania&oldid=prev&diff=1127284429
Stapmania hasn't seen any recent updates, but the fork known as Project OutFox is in active development. (And therefor this may be relevant information for new players)
Since the Project OutFox page does not exit yet, I figured changing that internal link to an external link, may have been better.
If that's not desirable, then it's probably better to make sure the Project Outfox page *does* exist. What are your thoughts about this? Thanks in advance! Frankkie12345 ( talk) 15:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your clarification! I'll go have a look at all the articles you've linked. Frankkie12345 ( talk) 20:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
I like it. Bishonen | tålk 22:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC).
Grayfell,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. See
this for background context.
—
Moops ⋠
T⋡ 16:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠ T⋡ 16:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thanks for removing primary references. However it seems very odd to remove, say, information on the Shaq and Brave partnerships but keep references to Melania Trump using Solana, or a reference to an security on a specific Solana wallet application to be the much more vague 'the Solana ecosystem had been targeted by hackers', as you did in https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Solana_(blockchain_platform)&diff=1131876867&oldid=1131876267. Before 2023 the Solana Wikipedia page is mainly edits by people that wish to discredit the chain - hence 'Melania Trump' being the most notable item on the page. I have recently added items that more more positive, but kept the referenced negative information. Removing only the positive information is against NPOV.
Mikemaccana ( talk) 10:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Please don't get me wrong here, I didn't want to amplify anything. My intention was to simply notify you about that comment, which I recognized as a personal attack as well, and give you the opportunity to respond to it. Nothing more, nothing less than that. — Sundostund mppria ( talk / contribs) 15:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
The information provided in the page https://dasfinance.info/frontrunning-laws-and-penalty/ has been properly sourced and contains no factual errors. Dhirendra Chandra Das ( talk) 06:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Here is how Limits to growth got into article - first it was added without source (just because no good English source), but the flow of events is easy to comprehend - first there was a Limits to growth report, which caused discussions in Russia too, then someone (Tsikunov aka A.Kuzmich) decided to turn discussions into conspiracy theory. In his writings he does not mention specifically Limits to growth, rather some vague UN documents which were produced after Limits to growth caused widespread discussions. Then someone correctly added rather limited mention of theory in English language book, that theory become very popular. So you wrote - it's unclear why it was there. Hope now, after deleting something about which you have very vague idea, you understand, why the mention was in the article. SergeyKurdakov ( talk) 15:38, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Regarding blockchain.com... I get why blockchair.com has gotta go.. but why is blockchain.com not a reliable source? Who in the industry would be reliable, if not blockchain.com. Thanks!
Haxwell ( talk) 16:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Also, good call removing a quote I added regarding "no intention" to ban bitcoin. (for posterity, it was: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/09/30/fed-chair-powell-says-he-has-no-intention-of-banning-crypto/) As I looked into the transcript for the meeting, he seems to be talking more about CBDCs and stablecoins than anything else, and certainly didn't mention Bitcoin. Some irrational exuberance there, for sure. https://www.congress.gov/event/117th-congress/house-event/LC67940/text
Haxwell ( talk) 16:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
reputation for fact-checking and accuracythat Wikipedia expects of reliable sources.
I go to the school so I know how many people are in the student body. TheRuinsOfAlpha ( talk) 01:53, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello,
I saw on the article talk page you were wondering where the SPA's were coming from, and asking "who tweeted about this".
The solana developers tweeted about it, [1] and got 40k views, they are also offering a bounty to whoever "fixes" the article [2].
This has got picked up in the crypto "news" websites, and is not spreading around social media, e.g. reddit [3] [4].
Hope this sheds some light on the situation, 192.76.8.84 ( talk) 23:01, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi, this is Sean King. I just wanted to apologize about engaging in that edit war and my poor conduct five years ago with you and others regarding Gab. I've realized since then, Gab isn't actually pro-freedom of speech and has gone in an absolute editorial direction that inadvertenly proves you are right. It is an alt-right site. Moreover, I'd personally argue a publisher and not a platform.
Going forward, I will do my best to have better ettiquite in any discussions. Moreover, I hope to bring better contributions to the Wikipedia community. SeanKing.TheReboot ( talk) 02:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Your edit to Philosophy, politics and economics is inconsistent (unless it's lazy). The article is very much a list of institutions that offer the program. If you don't want those few names listed and your reasoning is that it's "name dropping" you might consider removing the other universities named in the article or editing it to list them differently. I could be wrong, though, I don't really know your intent or perspective. ProofCreature ( talk) 22:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
I'm still learning this whole Wiki thing, your notes have been helpful, if but a little aggressive. Hope to get better, let me know if I can do anything more to get better at this. ThePetroglyph ( talk) 20:54, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Please consider reading WP:ROWN before major reverts and give a clear and proper reason for each removal of an addition. WP:ALTREV, WP:BABY & WP:RV would generally be helpful reads in this context.-- JasonKryptonite ( talk) 10:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
I would like to thank you and DDMS123 for helping to combat the vandalism that was done to my edit of the May 13 page. Rorr404 ( talk) 23:51, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Over at Neo-Confederates, OgamD218 has once again reverted to removing the See Also links they don't like, hasn't achieved consensus for any of those changes, and has basically just stopped discussing, preferring to revert instead. I'm honestly out of ideas. I don't know where to go from here. I'm asking for some intervention because you weighed in at the discussion earlier. Thank you. Wes sideman ( talk) 12:47, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I suspected as much for a while now, but hadn't quite gotten around to putting together the evidence and filing a report. Thanks for doing all that. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 17:23, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Sir, you revert change made by me by giving reason that it don't have reference. Can you please tell me which type of reference should I add? Vishwa6421 ( talk) 06:54, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
I was thinking of putting Enshittification into mainspace. It’s an important topic, particularly with what is going on at Reddit. I am happy to keep it in draft if you want to work on it more. Best, Thriley ( talk) 23:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for restoring the page back to normal. I kept trying to restore it to normal, but that link filter blocked my attempts. $chnauzer 04:42, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
An edit-summary by the IP 2001:2D8:6264:4BC:2C63:28F5:DF72:3525 on the article Vox (political party) reminds me a bit too much of those of User:Storm598 and his sockpuppets. Coincidentally, the IP originates in South Korea. Would love if you would look into this. Vif12vf/Tiberius ( talk) 05:33, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Hoshimachi Suisei.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject). If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 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, 25 July 2023 (UTC) |
Hi there,
You recently advised that ,rather than make direct changes to this article, I should leave proposed changes in the Talk tab -- which I did. There has been no response. The information in the article continues to be misleadingly out-of-date and inaccurate. If I can't make changes directly due to my affiliation with the company, could you kindly advise how to correct the issues with this entry?
Thanks. Fmcevoy ( talk) 18:42, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
I saw you put a copyvio-revdel template on Data science. Based on this [5] there appears to be very little, if any, copying from that site. There are a few similar phrases but most are common terms, are used differently, or are part of cited text. May I know if you have some specific areas you think are copied? I'm tempted to just remove the template but no doubt there was something that concerned you so perhaps you could explain. Oblivy ( talk) 07:39, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
On 23 October 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Enshittification, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to Cory Doctorow, enshittification is how platforms die? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Enshittification. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Enshittification), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Kusma ( talk) 00:04, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Hook update | ||
Your hook reached 23,458 views (977.4 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of October 2023 – nice work! |
GalliumBot ( talk • contribs) (he/ it) 06:35, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
It's best I just ignore that IP editor right? Whether or not they are sealioning, trolling or WP:RUNAWAY, they seem to be mispresenting what I said (and their own edits) on purpose ( WP:TALKNO). I could warn on their talk page, and if they persisted take it to a noticeboard, but that's kinda pointless given the SPI right? Zenomonoz ( talk) 10:36, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
The neutrality of the Godot Wikipedia page has been disputed in the past. Having a "criticisms" section is reasonable. The sources used in the criticism section are the same as the sources used elsewhere on the page ABetterTomorrow101 ( talk) 20:22, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for your note about the source on that section about the Brave Dissenter Fork. I'm frustrated with myself for getting too distracted with improving a bad section to actually think about what the source was that was being cited—that I added a second obviously poor source is just the icing on top. A lesson in not editing while tired! I've done a search for any reporting on anywhere with even a whisper of reliability, and there's nothing I can find. Taking a step back I think that probably that section should just be entirely removed, and I wanted a second opinion if you have the chance. Handpigdad ( talk) 09:10, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello "Grayfell"
I have reverted the changes you've made to Jonathan Bowden's article due to the fact i think it was a poor edit and you are obviously biased.
Sincerely, Dork. DorkNorkem ( talk) 22:12, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
I understand you removed my edit, but I would think it's because the formatting was messed up. However, you said it was because there was no such article, and then linked to a page that talks about redlinking. But there was no redlinked article in my edit. AKFkrewfamKF1 ( talk) 07:35, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
I don't mind most marine mammals |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I reverted an edit twice The Myth of Male Power, then you accused me of "edit warring". I made a completely separate edit to the article in which none of the same material was affected, and you again accuse of edit warring? Please stop with the frivolous allegations. 47.219.237.179 ( talk) 08:23, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
|
Can't you understand the analogy? Theophilus of Antioch has the same relationship with Turkey as Kant had with Russia, the relationship is from the current regime occupies the territory of former countries. Theophilus of Antioch was a Greek-speaking Christian, not a Turkish-speaking Turk. Ho Pak-chuen ( talk) 12:53, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello @ Grayfell I wanted to ask if a Wikipedia article has a line appended with a source that is an opinion piece, doesn't it has to be removed. For instance, in the Douglas Murray article, in the Criticism section first line's last sentence. "His fans have described him as a defender of free speech" It probably is in contravention to WP:NOTOPINION and WP:RS. 182.183.58.243 ( talk) 21:10, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Grayfell,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk) 14:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe ( talk) 14:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. regarding Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Grayfell's_edits_at_Erik_Voorhees Thanks! Jtbobwaysf ( talk) 09:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Hey, Grayfell! Why did you think this was likely spam? Valereee ( talk) 12:19, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
I don't quite agree the ideas expressed by the spokespeople were of little value, but your edits are a reasonable compromise. Wpearce1983.k ( talk) 22:08, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi Grayfell, I notice you have some experience with a topic I'm interested in. Currently, there's an editor trying to whitewash the lead of Blake Masters. Was hoping for a third opinion on this, as you appear to be unbiased in this arena. Thanks, Fred Zepelin ( talk) 04:01, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
|
The
Oregon Jewish Museum and Center for Holocaust Education (OJMCHE), in partnership with social practice artist Shoshana Gugenheim and as part of the
Art+Feminism Project, will host an International Women's Day Wikipedia Edit-a-thon to edit and/or create Wikipedia articles for Jewish women artists. The event will be held at the museum on Sunday, March 10 from 11am-3pm PDT. Pre-registration is preferred but not required. Members of the public are invited to come to the museum to learn about the editing process, its history, its impact, and how to do it. We aim to collaboratively edit/enter Jewish women artists into the canon. An experienced regional Wikipedian will provided will be on site to teach, support, and guide the process. Participants can select artists ahead of time or on site. |
|
Hi Grayfell - I noticed you reverted my date edit on Off-White company page and labelled it as "poorly sourced" BUT I would like to re-iterate that Off-White is the Brand name and not the Company name (Company name is Off-White Operating or OWO). And it was incorporated in 2013 and not 2012. PYREXE VISION was incorporated in 2012, and OWO in 2013 (you can verify on their official Corporate Journal available in their website (HERE https://www.off---white.com/en-us/customer-service-feed/corporate-information for their corporate/company name AND THEN HERE https://www.off---white.com/static/offwhite/public/pdf/EN_ModelloOrganizzativo_ParteGenerale.pdf for the complete history/breakdown/specifics). I just wanted to justify/backup my update here to make sure there is not confusion. Thank you! Streetwearwizard ( talk) 01:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Unlike other Streetwear brands, Off-White plays a slightly different role than just defining what’s hip on the streets and elsewhere. The brand is cultivating a sort of avant-garde and cult apparel that merges streetwear culture with premium fashion, like reaching a common ground between the two extremes.This is far too promotional and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. To repeat what I said, Wikipedia isn't a platform for promotion or advocacy. Neutrally summarize reliable independent sources without editorializing. Thanks. Grayfell ( talk) 02:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey Grayfell, thank you for editing the hoodie article and editing the edit my friend put trying to prove me wrong about zip-up hoodies just being long for a jacket, if you could let me write about hoodies with zippers commonly being referred to as zip-up hoodies that would be nice to keep that in there, thank you. :) 01:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC) HoodiesWithZippersAreCalledZipUpHoodies ( talk) 01:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of employment websites, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of employment websites (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
I disagree with your deletion of the extensive History I've written and sourced for.
1. You removed the mention of "Pace news media" which is indeed the copyright holder of The Political Compass tool. The website itself indicates it is the copyright holder. Multiple sources state so. I think it's important to include a mention of Pace news media.... I believe you are mistaken there. https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/political-science/political-compass
Using "opencorporations" is indeed a valid tool for citation, please refer to the countless Wikipedia articles that use it as a citation, including the pages of Instagram, Apple, Meta, and BBC. https://en.wikipedia.org/?fulltext=1&search=opencorporates&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1
2. You removed when the domain was actually registered, which is I believe an important aspect of describing the history of the website. You ask for a reliable source and I believe "whois.domaintools.com" is indeed a valid source.
Refer to the multiple pages on Wikipedia, such as Dictionary.com, duckduckgo, and RedTube. https://en.wikipedia.org/?search=whois.domaintools.com&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1
I believe the page is a good starting point and it could use more development. However, I believe deletion and not discussing about it is detrimental to the collaborative spirit of Wikipedia.
3. That "obscure journal mention" as you mention is the Journal of Social Philosophy, a Peer-reviewed journal since 1970, published by Wiley. It appears you don't like how much detail is include, and I believe its important to be accurate to say what he thinks.
One of the many corrections I made on the page is that the website is "British" and should use British English, which I disagree. The source from opencorporations says it's registered in New Zealand. Without the proper context we are consequently creating inaccuracies.
I ask you to reconsider the revision what was created and deleted without consensus.
Gameking69 ( talk) 00:32, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
The Decision Lab is an applied research and innovation firm. We use behavioral science & design to help ambitious organizations create a better future." [6] Nothing about that website demonstrates a positive reputation for accuracy and fact-checking.
The only reason it was written the way it was before was people kept changing it in the past, and it seemed like the only acceptable text which won't get users (mainly IP addresses) to vandalize the page. I'm fine with the changes you made in that regard, its just that it may lead to some IP addresses trying to change it to be "correct." That's my prediction of what will happen... or maybe not, as those days may have passed behind us. I sure hope so. Historyday01 ( talk) 00:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, before the making the edit I checked out Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin these pages don't have citation for the sign. Then now just read Solana (blockchain platform) Symbol conversation in your talk page and your edit comment which you asked for citation.
Now I'm confused about what determines for requirement of citation and how can I cite a sign?
And not sure if we should talk this on your userpage on Monero talk page. Throat0390 ( talk) 04:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
I have finished enough of Consciousness of guilt (legal) to go public with it. Further development and improvement will be appreciated. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 19:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Hiya! I see that you included this in the summary in an edit after my edit: "Like it or not, DnD is consistently defined by reliable sources as the most influential example." I just wanted to let you know I wasn't criticizing Dungeons and Dragons being part of the examples, just that I didn't understand why it was abbreviated (shortened to DnD instead of Dungeons & Dragons). That's it! Happy editing! EdoAug ( talk) 22:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello,
you've changed an article I had worked on, "Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Breakpoint". In the article you consequently changed "the reviewer" to "a reviewer". Also, in one case you wrote "According to a review in GamesRadar". In my opinion this is incorrect.
"A" means "one of many", "the" means "this one". Therefore, we usually write "the sun", even though there are many of them, in order to indicate we mean "this" sun near the earth. In the same way when we write about the reviews of a game we write "The Edge reviewer wrote (...)", "For the Hardcore Gamer reviewer the biggest problem with the game is" because there are many Edge or Hardcore Gamer reviewers, but there is usually one Edge reviewer and one Hardcore Gamer reviewer of the game in question.
I don't have time to fix it carefully yourself. My father is seriously ill. Please tidy up after yourself.
No, I don't agree with the "Be bold in editing" policy. I understand sometimes people do need a bit of encouragement to edit, or to make editions which will be polished later, but sometimes bold editing is a waste of the previous editors' time. So you made a bad edit, fix it yourself.
Thanks in advance.
MichalZim ( talk) 21:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
In my last edit that I just made, I removed the section about abortion that you seem to have such an issue with, but I restored the additional sources that I had added to other sections of the article - sources that you had no business removing, as they had absolutely nothing to do with your "flattering language" complaint. In that regard, what, exactly, is "flattering" about the language that I used? I didn't say "Brendan O'Neill is a stalwart defender of a woman's right to choose". I stated that he was adamantly pro-choice. There's nothing "flattering" about it, and you refuse to go into any real detail about how my language violates WP:NPOV.-- LadybugStardust ( talk) 19:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a discussion involving a topic which you have previously been involved in at Talk:True North Centre for Public Policy. Fred Zepelin ( talk) 00:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)