User talk:Asukite/Archives/2021/January

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Vandalism on Kalaripayattu

Hi,

For the past month some unknown user is continuously trying to vandalize kalaripayattu. Please go through the edit history, you can see how that unknown anonymous user is in edit war and vandalising the article.

The anonymous user 2409:4073:380:22F7:B8BC:C04E:4492:B679 has some pending edits on the same page now.

Please either block him or make the page protected only for extended confirmed users.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.39.76.60 (talk) 14:39, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello,
I am not an admin and unfortunately do not possess the ability to block users or protect pages. I will say that the edits on that page in particular do not appear to be vandalism, but a dispute over the content or an edit war. The page in question is already protected, which should be sufficient in keeping unapproved edits off the page, as only users with the proper user rights can accept those edits. My only edit to this page was to revert a change to the infobox that appeared to make no sense in context, and because I noticed the edit conflict going on. I chose not to get involved further because I am not enough of an expert on the subject to make any unilateral changes.
If you feel strongly about the topic, feel free to revert any edits that appear to be wrong. Be sure to include an explanation of why, and avoid reverting somebody multiple times in a row as it can get you blocked. The Talk Page for the article is a great place to talk about content disputes, and hopefully help get some other editors involved in maintaining a quality article.
Thanks for the tip! I will keep the page on my watchlist in case there is anything I can do to help.  A S U K I T E   15:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter

Hello Asukite/Archives/2021,

A chart of the 2020 New Page Patrol Queue

Year in review

It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.

Rank Username Num reviews Log
1 DannyS712 bot III (talk) 67,552 Patrol Page Curation
2 Rosguill (talk) 63,821 Patrol Page Curation
3 John B123 (talk) 21,697 Patrol Page Curation
4 Onel5969 (talk) 19,879 Patrol Page Curation
5 JTtheOG (talk) 12,901 Patrol Page Curation
6 Mcampany (talk) 9,103 Patrol Page Curation
7 DragonflySixtyseven (talk) 6,401 Patrol Page Curation
8 Mccapra (talk) 4,918 Patrol Page Curation
9 Hughesdarren (talk) 4,520 Patrol Page Curation
10 Utopes (talk) 3,958 Patrol Page Curation
Reviewer of the Year

John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.

NPP Technical Achievement Award

As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Donner60 (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

New page reviewer granted

Hi Asukite. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

  • Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
  • If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed, Rosguill talk 09:03, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Wendigoism

I just noticed this. It was a reference to Wendigo#Wendigo psychosis. Of course it was also original research and a long way north of where a Wendigo would be found. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 15:27, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I guess that makes sense. Without the context I felt like it just added confusion.  A S U K I T E   15:55, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

It really wasn't any help. And unsourced. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 15:02, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm John B123. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Sofronovo, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

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

John B123 (talk) 18:03, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I think I must have done this by mistake, apologies. Regards. --John B123 (talk) 16:21, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
I figured as much, I barely even read into it haha. I only got confused when the other editor copied and pasted the notice.  A S U K I T E   16:26, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

You removed 4 KB of text as "unexplained reverting removal"

Wow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.173.120.57 (talk)

Hello, that was a mistake, which I have apologized for on your talk page. Thanks for understanding and please keep up the good work.  A S U K I T E   15:43, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

John Babiiha

Hi,Rghhh . I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, John Babiiha, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.) Rghhh (talk) 15:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Rghhh, I'm a little confused about how this is here, much less why it links to user:John_B123's talk page. If you see this, please feel free to message back with any concerns. Thank you!  A S U K I T E   15:39, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
I think this was copied from the post above, just changing the signature. Probably relates to the editor removing the speedy delete tag rather than page review. Regards --John B123 (talk) 16:31, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

John Babiiha

Hi,Rghhh . I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, John Babiiha, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Rghhh (talk) 15:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Neutral

Hi! Thanks very much for your message about my edit. I absolutely disagree with you. Suggesting that naming racist police violence is not "neutral" is supporting the notion that naming racism is biased. I ask you to please reconsider. The police caused the death of this Black woman on a "wellness check". It is factually racist and ableist police violence. AlisaGD (talk) 00:12, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I agree in full with you, and as an avid supporter of BLM, I am very for calling out violence and racism for what it is. That said, Wikipedia as a platform has strict rules about maintaining a neutral point of view, in particular to this situation is the policy wp:impartial, which outlines that articles should attempt to remain unbiased. While I believe that the events described in the article can indeed be described as racism, we have to be careful about how we word the article as Wikipedia must not appear to be opinionated. Even if the majority of readers would agree that the description of racism here is appropriate, it's the tone of the article that matters. "Racist and Ableist" may be factual tags, but they're very emotionally-charged and do not reflect Wikipedia's standard of neutrality.

It would be possible, for example, to include a quote somewhere from a recognized news organization or other source, with a citation, which might help to add perspective to the article.

I do apologize if it seems like I am censoring you; I am only trying to maintain wikipedia's standards for neutrality and fact-based content. I am by no means an authority here, so if you were to make the change again, I won't stop you, but unless it meets WP's standards, somebody else likely will. I hope that this doesn't discourage you from further editing. We can use all the help we can get!  A S U K I T E   15:24, 30 October 2020 (UTC)



{MSG} What? How dare you remove a true fact on "Fascism in North America"! I should have you know that it's 200% true, and that Trump is a fascist. reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

lol jk. I was bored, and didn't think anyone would check something regularly. lol sry

trump is bad tho — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.37.241 (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

@24.190.37.241: yes, I agree with you that trump was a bad president, but on Wikipedia we need to maintain a neutral point of view. if you want to know how asukite found your edit, see recent changes patrol. also, maybe consider getting an account, it's free and hides your IP address, which computer hackers can use to steal personal information. Firestar9990 (talk) 05:20, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I saw you reverting vandalism, thank you for making Wikipedia a better place! Firestar9990 (talk) 05:21, 2 November 2020 (UTC)


Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Asukite! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 00:20, Friday, August 7, 2020 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Asukite. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Asukite. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Asukite. 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)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Asukite. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)


Speedy deletion nomination of Inal Sherip

Hi! Thank you for noticing my text! Please advise how to make this page and what my mistakes.

best wishes (Chessof (talk) 08:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC))

Please be more careful

When reviewing content blanking, please be more careful in reverting. This content was at best poorly sourced and contained numerous heavily biased statements. Thank you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

I received a notification that you reviewed my article, I've added to it now. Jaosnimpson (talk) 19:46, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Your rollback request

Hi Asukite, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert any other type of edit - such as by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with - can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning depending on the admin who becomes aware of any misuse. If you think an edit should require a reason for reverting, use a manual edit summary instead of using the rollback tool. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 20:38, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the reversion of edits to Monster Hunter Freedom Unite

Hey it IS the best game ever though! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.49.133 (talk) 02:02, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

That would be a personal opinion, which is non-encyclopedic. Statements like that are likely to be interpreted as spam or vandalism. {C  A S U K I T E  T} 02:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


Daniel Sherman (Judge)

You, Sir, have some cheek. I don't write A3 articles and that, certainly, was not my first. If you check the history, I created a redirect when I created the disambiguation page Daniel Sherman and then 50.136.0.8 blanked it. You then - based on what you saw, rightly - tagged it for speedy deletion and then he added a bit of content. I will format it and then we can decide if AfD is the correct procedure.--Launchballer 19:20, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I admit that it was a bit hasty of me to mark it for deletion. Apologies. I simply saw the redirect, then the IP removing the content, and assumed that the IP had nothing to add (had I looked at the time frame, I would have left it.) {C  A S U K I T E  T} 20:03, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


Your application for WP:AWB

Hello Envelopesalad. Your editing seems OK but usage of AWB presumes that you are willing to engage in discussions. Occasionally a certain kind of automated edit may be controversial and you may need to negotiate. The fact that you constantly remove others' posts from your talk page makes me nervous. If AWB is approved, do you think you would be willing to retain others' posts and do normal archiving if needed? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:41, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely. I wasn't making any attempt to hide the discussions, I simply wanted to keep the page clean. I'll keep everything in the open until I figure out a good way to archive old messages while still retaining their accessibility. Thanks! {C  Ξ N VS A L  T} 18:44, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Maybe you would consider using User:MiszaBot for archiving? EdJohnston (talk) 19:06, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Asukite, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Here are some pages which are a little more fun:

  • The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
  • Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!

We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and -- tnumbermaniac c 08:25, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Article feedback

We really don't have guidelines on when to enable feedback. Turn it on if you want, but don't be offended if someone else turns it back off. (In my opinion, it's kind of a poorly thought-out system).Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:22, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm beginning to notice that. It seems to disconnect comments and make discussion difficult participate in. Thanks for the answer. {C  A S U K I T E  T} 02:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm MrScorch6200. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Sunir, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. MrScorch6200 (talk) 18:59, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Tagging conflict

Sorry about bumping into you on the new pages feed. That said, thanks a lot for helping out! I, JethroBTdrop me a line 02:40, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

That's fine, it happens to me also. I also saw that you took the "Bot" out of your name! I was wondering when you might have done that! MrScorch6200 (talk) 02:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
*stands in corner, looking bewildered* "Ahem." No problem. I thought I'd switch over from vandalism patrol to new pages review, but I don't have it in me tonight! {C  A S U K I T E  T} 02:48, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Yeah uh...it's a little strange that you responded as though this was directed at you, oh well. I did decide to take it out because I got tired of wondering whether it confused newer editors, even ifthe community did not think so. Anyway, Asukite, I'm moving onto other matters, so hopefully you'll have fewer curation conflicts tonight. :) I, JethroBT drop me a line 02:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess I'm a little too tired to be doing this right now... %') (That's actually what a tired smiley looks like). MrScorch6200 (talk) 02:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
P.S. It confused me when I was new. :) Anyway, I'm sure I'll see you around. MrScorch6200 (talk) 03:05, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thanks for your vandalism suppression with 207.233.109.100 edits! ///EuroCarGT 03:03, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:Theonesean#The League of Peace Foundation

You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Theonesean#The League of Peace Foundation. theonesean 21:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Opting in to VisualEditor

As you may know, VisualEditor ("Edit beta") is currently available on the English Wikipedia only for registered editors who choose to enable it. Since you have made 100 or more edits with VisualEditor this year, I want to make sure that you know that you can enable VisualEditor (if you haven't already done so) by going to your preferences and choosing the item, "MediaWiki:Visualeditor-preference-enable". This will give you the option of using VisualEditor on articles and userpages when you want to, and give you the opportunity to spot changes in the interface and suggest improvements. We value your feedback, whether positive or negative, about using VisualEditor, atWikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Re: your edit war at Dan Doyle (basketball coach)

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Dan Doyle (basketball coach) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. SeeBRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Please, rather than you reverting User:98.14.207.162's edits, and he or she reverting yours (which could in fact be valid), try to discuss this and resolve your dispute in a civil, productive manner. Come to a compromise. Understand each other's viewpoints. Explain your rationale for your actions. Thanks. --Qwerty Binary (talk) 18:46, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Per your comment (and the don't-template-regulars policy; clearly, you understand site policies and put that understanding to good use), I have stricken out the warning.
However, would you be so kind as to explain why you have engaged as you have with User:98.14.207.162 or your actions in your edit war? Cheers.
Also, I am aware that you were not the only editor reverting User:98.14.207.162's edits. However, can you deny that were the only one to have reverted at least thrice, and can you deny that there could be valid grounds for the edit that both you and EuroCarGT have been reverting? --Qwerty Binary (talk) 19:08, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I wouldn't call it an edit war. I was simply a bit overzealous in my usage of Huggle. I was moving a bit quickly at the time and probably failed to notice the number of times I had reverted the page. I noticed shortly afterward that I wasn't handling my reviewing with the same dispatch which I normally am capable of, and decided to stop. While I recognize in entirety that I remain fully responsible for each edit which I perform using automation, I concede that I do occasionally make oversights and mistakes, which I have corrected summarily.
Futhermore, the removed content did appear to be sourced upon my secondary investigation and I have been unable to locate a source regarding a libel investigation into the included claims. I might be able to further improve this issue but the disappointing truth is that I don't altogether care that much. I will issue an apology to the IP editor when I see proof that it is not a single purpose IP, as its only edits have thus far been to the page in question. Good day :) {C  A S U K I T E  T} 01:14, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Fair do's. My apologies for any similar overzealousness or misunderstanding.
Although the IP editor appears to be an SPA, it could be a little presumptive to assume that it is in fact one. Further, do keep in mind that determining whether something is under investigation or before the court can be a little difficult, as not all of these things are publicly accessible and may compromise the integrity of the rule of law and due process.
Glad that this has been sorted, though. --Qwerty Binary (talk) 08:28, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

You deleted Pigdebatten

You deleted my article on Pigdebatten but I'm not sure why. How do I undelete it and how do I revise it to ensure it doesn't get deleted again. Thanks -- Mangooseman —Preceding undated comment added 20:37, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: ST Applications

Hello Asukite. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on ST Applications to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 17:55, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello I'm aindriu80. I don't think you should have deleted LÉ Samuel Beckett (P61) because it is a new ship for the Irish Navy which is being built at the moment. I tried to upload a few pictures but it said I did not have the privileges. _____________ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aindriu80 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

  • Hello aindriu80, I apologize that your page was deleted, but it was deleted as an empty article. When you create an article, you have to submit some meaningful content along with the article, rather than creating blank pages. You can work on an article in your userspace, (ie, create the page "User:aindriu80/samplepage" and work on it there, then move it or ask somebody else to move it when it's ready for action.) just remember that the subject of the article has to be notable. Hope I helped! (you might also find WP:AFC useful.) {C  A S U K I T E  T} 22:08, 11 November 2013 (UTC)


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Julijo Pisk may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • }}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:55, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Why would you delete an article that you have no reason to have any problems with. The article is by no means vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Regular-bypasser (talk • contribs) 18:37, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

  • The article in question, Jonathan K. Stonefire was reviewed and classified as a blatant hoax, as an unsourced article which makes nonsensical claims about an individual. Contributions to Wikipedia must meet the following guideline: WP:GNG in order to qualify for encyclopedic coverage. In addition, subjects must be written about in a neutral manner that exposes the reasoning for the subject's significance in clear language without need to exemplify any certain characteristics, such as accomplishments; whether factual or not. {C  A S U K I T E  T} 18:42, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Alderson Smith

Thanks for the invitation to Wikipedia not so long ago. It took me a while to work out how to do the 'Talk Pages' and I still don't think I'm doing it quite right. Anyway, thanks for the advice/help on the 'Paul-Louis Landsberg' article. I still need to make improvements to out but will watch out for what other Wikipedians might do to it first. Have been busy editing twenty or so other articles and have just added extra references (London Review of Books, British National Bibliography, Worldcat, Independent Biographies) to the article Edouard d'Araille. I have watched as this author has gone from obscurity to over 10,000 entries on Google on the last decade and was aware of his large body of poetic work having been discussed by the Nobel Prize Foundation earlier this year. I hope that the article is coming nearer to being satisfactory from a Wikipedia point-of-view. Someone else already seems to have added an edit (which seemed accurate to me) but I am still browsing through internet entries and physical bibliographies for the best additional references to add. Will get to work on some other articles in the meantime that I have been wanting to add as well, and I have some further cleaning up edits I would like to do. Thanx again for your support. Aldersonsmith (talk) 00:43, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

James Cerrero Tallano

Hi, just a heads up that I replaced your CSD on this article with one for copyvio. Hope you don't mind. best wishes Flat Out let's discuss it 03:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC)


Some baklava for you!

Thank you for deleting the page Srimathi Sundaravalli Memorial School.. Now i have changed its heading.. 123gogeta (talk) 13:23, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your Huggle revert

Hi, Asukite. I edited RubberBand earlier to update a detail, adding a supporting reference for the change and with an appropriate edit summary. Shortly afterwards you reverted it using Huggle [1], in an edit marked as minor and with no further information in the edit summary. Please could you tell me what the specific problem you had with my change was that caused you to revert? Thank you. Replying here is fine; elsewhere if you prefer. Thank you. –91.125.29.135 (talk) 02:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, that was a mistake. I've corrected it. {C  A S U K I T E  T} 17:30, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Cool, ta. 91.125.29.135 (talk) 23:19, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

I didnt edit that page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.126.127.177 (talk)

To which page do you refer? {C  A S U K I T E  T} 01:12, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Asukite/Archives/2021/January&oldid=1142867951"