|
|
The Minor barnstar | |
Thank you very much for your prompt response and excellent editing on a semi-protected article. J850NK ( talk) 19:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm Hockeycatcat. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Telugu Americans have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. I know this may not have been intentional, but this racist text has been on this page for quite a while. Hockeycatcat ( talk) 10:23, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you for reverting the to IPhone 12! You beat me to it! You not only removed the edit, but more importantly - you correctly identified the issue and warned the user for not adhering to a neutral point of view, which is why I'm leaving you this barnstar. Most people on Huggle in this situation would just quickly and carelessly press the shortcut key to revert the edit as vandalism and warn them for such, which is not the correct thing to do. You didn't do this. Thank you very much for your hard work, and for your time and energy patrolling recent changes. It's a thankless job to perform, and I wanted you to know that it's appreciated greatly. :-) ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 10:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC) |
CVU Academy Graduate | |
Congratulations from both myself and all of the instructors at the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy on your successful completion of the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy. You completed your final exam with a score of 93%. Well done!
Skingo12 - seriously, well done. Your record of reverting vandalism over the course greatly outpasses the final exam mark - the most out of all the trainees I have observed so far. You have an unrelenting commitment to fighting vandalism on Wikipedia, which I commend you for - congrats once again :-) Pahunkat ( talk) 21:05, 12 February 2021 (UTC) |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
For your tireless efforts to fight vandalism. Kammil ⟨ talk⟩ 14:11, 22 February 2021 (UTC) |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
thanks for keeping wiki factual and vandal-free! Alibino ( talk) 14:50, 22 February 2021 (UTC) |
Hello. You left a message on my current IP's talk page telling me that I have removed content on this article without explaining why. I believe this to be a misunderstanding. I have made my reasons for the removal of that content clear several times on the article's talk pade, namely that the text I have removed consists of improperly sourced opinions mostly attributed to primary sources, and express fringe theories that were included purely for the sake of WP:FALSEBALANCE.
I initially removed all sections separately, giving lengthy explanations for my reasoning, but the removal was reverted by User:Washuotaku who insisted that there should be some consensus on the removal first (even though there was never any consensus to include those entries in the first place). He tagged three users who previously contributed to the page.
Two of these users responded, namely User:GoingBatty and User:Deisenbe, and they have agreed that my removals were justified, or at least that my reasons valid. I waited several days for further input, and after Diesenbe explicitly stated that he agrees with me, I removed the sections again, this time in a single go, and once again explaining my rationale.
Within one day, the removal was reverted again, this time by User:Anachronist, who insisted that all viewpoints on the subject need to be proportionally represented, while ignoring my reasoning that the sections I removed were in fact WP:FRINGE.
I gave Anachronist a lengthy response explaining my rationale as to why those sections should be removed in great detail. Over a day passed since then and the only response I got was Washuotaku repeating the same talking point about a need for "consensus", while all of my arguments were ignored. I went ahead and removed the offending sections a third time, leaving a message on the talk page, explaining that zero counterarguments have been provided against my deletions, even after a whole work week, and therefore I will remove the sections one more time.
Now as you can see, my edits were made in good faith, were in line with site policy, have been agreed on by other editors, and in five day's time, nobody could provide a single argument as to why I'm wrong for removing four and a half paragraphs that very clearly don't meet wikipedia's standards. This is an issue that has been going on all week, and I simply don't know what else I can do. I didn't think it would be this complicated to simply help uphold wikipedia's policies. 46.97.170.19 ( talk) 15:24, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Skingo12 - I moved your training page to User talk:Atsme/NPP trainingS12. I suddenly found myself with 3 students at one time, and needed to reorganize the archives. Atsme 💬 📧 12:35, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Are you happy? ButterCashier ( talk) 14:04, 28 March 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) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
|
|
The Minor barnstar | |
Thank you very much for your prompt response and excellent editing on a semi-protected article. J850NK ( talk) 19:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm Hockeycatcat. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Telugu Americans have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. I know this may not have been intentional, but this racist text has been on this page for quite a while. Hockeycatcat ( talk) 10:23, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you for reverting the to IPhone 12! You beat me to it! You not only removed the edit, but more importantly - you correctly identified the issue and warned the user for not adhering to a neutral point of view, which is why I'm leaving you this barnstar. Most people on Huggle in this situation would just quickly and carelessly press the shortcut key to revert the edit as vandalism and warn them for such, which is not the correct thing to do. You didn't do this. Thank you very much for your hard work, and for your time and energy patrolling recent changes. It's a thankless job to perform, and I wanted you to know that it's appreciated greatly. :-) ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 10:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC) |
CVU Academy Graduate | |
Congratulations from both myself and all of the instructors at the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy on your successful completion of the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy. You completed your final exam with a score of 93%. Well done!
Skingo12 - seriously, well done. Your record of reverting vandalism over the course greatly outpasses the final exam mark - the most out of all the trainees I have observed so far. You have an unrelenting commitment to fighting vandalism on Wikipedia, which I commend you for - congrats once again :-) Pahunkat ( talk) 21:05, 12 February 2021 (UTC) |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
For your tireless efforts to fight vandalism. Kammil ⟨ talk⟩ 14:11, 22 February 2021 (UTC) |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
thanks for keeping wiki factual and vandal-free! Alibino ( talk) 14:50, 22 February 2021 (UTC) |
Hello. You left a message on my current IP's talk page telling me that I have removed content on this article without explaining why. I believe this to be a misunderstanding. I have made my reasons for the removal of that content clear several times on the article's talk pade, namely that the text I have removed consists of improperly sourced opinions mostly attributed to primary sources, and express fringe theories that were included purely for the sake of WP:FALSEBALANCE.
I initially removed all sections separately, giving lengthy explanations for my reasoning, but the removal was reverted by User:Washuotaku who insisted that there should be some consensus on the removal first (even though there was never any consensus to include those entries in the first place). He tagged three users who previously contributed to the page.
Two of these users responded, namely User:GoingBatty and User:Deisenbe, and they have agreed that my removals were justified, or at least that my reasons valid. I waited several days for further input, and after Diesenbe explicitly stated that he agrees with me, I removed the sections again, this time in a single go, and once again explaining my rationale.
Within one day, the removal was reverted again, this time by User:Anachronist, who insisted that all viewpoints on the subject need to be proportionally represented, while ignoring my reasoning that the sections I removed were in fact WP:FRINGE.
I gave Anachronist a lengthy response explaining my rationale as to why those sections should be removed in great detail. Over a day passed since then and the only response I got was Washuotaku repeating the same talking point about a need for "consensus", while all of my arguments were ignored. I went ahead and removed the offending sections a third time, leaving a message on the talk page, explaining that zero counterarguments have been provided against my deletions, even after a whole work week, and therefore I will remove the sections one more time.
Now as you can see, my edits were made in good faith, were in line with site policy, have been agreed on by other editors, and in five day's time, nobody could provide a single argument as to why I'm wrong for removing four and a half paragraphs that very clearly don't meet wikipedia's standards. This is an issue that has been going on all week, and I simply don't know what else I can do. I didn't think it would be this complicated to simply help uphold wikipedia's policies. 46.97.170.19 ( talk) 15:24, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Skingo12 - I moved your training page to User talk:Atsme/NPP trainingS12. I suddenly found myself with 3 students at one time, and needed to reorganize the archives. Atsme 💬 📧 12:35, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Are you happy? ButterCashier ( talk) 14:04, 28 March 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) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)