User talk:DenverCoder19

May 2023

Hello, I'm TylerBurden. An edit that you recently made to Norse colonization of North America seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! TylerBurden (talk) 00:24, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Alerts

You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.
You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.
SPECIFICO talk 19:16, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Please stop

Nothing good is going to come from your discussion here, and if you're going to remove something that you believe crossed the line, it's best to do it without a snarky edit summary. I see you've already reached out to another admin for some advice, so I suggest you keep your focus there. Personalizing a dispute on another editor's talk page where there will clearly be no agreement isn't the path to take. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:02, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

That's funny: I never edited or commented on a page related to you. I was talking to SPECIFICO. When SPECIFICO got involved in a dispute with Jeremy, you were the one who banned him and forced him off the site.

Moreover, it's odd that you're putting a message on my page rather than in the discussion. And that you're discouraging me from commenting on a user's behavior on their talk page by commenting on my behavior on my talk page. If I didn't know better, I would say that you were trying to intimidate me. DenverCoder9 (talk) 18:27, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Or I'm trying to reduce overall drama. A talk page pissing match isn't likely to have any positive result. My reason for coming here was to avoid adding any more fuel to that particular fire. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

This editor keeps popping up in my watchlist for all the wrong reasons, I think it's getting to the point of being ridiculous and admin intervention is overdue. It's looking like a clear case of Wikipedia:NOTHERE to me. Tambor de Tocino (talk) 08:48, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

This discussion began when I raised concerns about WP:BRD misuse for an editor who as been banned in the past.

I encourage anyone reading this review the discussion that prompted this [1]

I encourage you to consider whether my 6-hour analysis of another user's editing history into a careful consideration of WP:BRD misuse qualifies as a "talk page pissing match", or whether this is high-effort and helpful.[2]

I will point out again that comments like these are left by editors who blank their talk page after kerfuffles about editing,[3] and seem to use accusations of "edit warring" and "this requires sanctions" as an implicit or explicit threat.

I will also point out that I have refrained from making accusations except when I have spent several hours reviewing edit history. DenverCoder9 (talk) 15:55, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Test Efn

This is a test

DenverCoder9 (talk) 16:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

"Dies piter" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Dies piter has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Dies piter until a consensus is reached. Edward-Woodrow • talk 18:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Brian Thompson (businessman) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Brian Thompson (businessman). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:38, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Sure thing. Isn't being the CEO of the largest healthcare company in the world notable enough? The CEO's revenues exceed the GDP of most countries. DenverCoder9 (talk) 00:38, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

He can be the wealthiest in the universe and have significant coverage on independed reliable sources, unfortunately notability can not be established in that manner. See WP:BLP the guide for biographies of living person, see WP:INDEPENDENT, WP:GNG, WP:NPEOPLE, WP:NBUSINESSPEOPLE. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:08, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

I'll work on the article. DenverCoder9 (talk) 23:13, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

I saw this edit, so I made an edit to Draft:Brian Thompson (businessman). That will keep the wolf from the door for a few more months.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Administrative State (October 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Johannes Maximilian was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Administrative State and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 15:01, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Reformatted citations. DenverCoder9 (talk) 15:53, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Signature

Hi, please fix your signature to include your correct username (DenverCoder19), instead of mine. Denvercoder9 (talk) 15:27, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

That's odd you're quite right. My mistake. How do you change it? DenverCoder9 (talk) 15:54, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

No worries. You should be able to change it in Special:Preferences, see the documentation. Denvercoder9 (talk) 21:08, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Done! Thanks DenverCoder19 (talk) 15:54, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Administrative State has been accepted

Administrative State, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 14:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Great! Yes, I can tell the writing is not the best, I'm working on it. DenverCoder19 (talk) DenverCoder19 (talk) 16:04, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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)

Welsh people

Hello. I invite you to revert your edit at Welsh people in which you removed a part of the definition, saying it was redundant. If you look at the talk page and its archives, you will see that it is by no means redundant to carefully define what we are talking about in the article; indeed, the wording and content has been argued over many times. Referring to another article in the edit summary is not helpful to our readers, and we can't expect them to always be able to chase down linked articles (though some of us do do that far more often than we should). Thank you. Happy days, ~ Lindsay^Hello 06:36, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Sure thing Lindsay, the definition of "ethnic group" is:

"a grouping of people who identify with each other on the basis of perceived shared attributes that distinguish them from other groups. Those attributes can include a common nation of origin, or common sets of ancestry, traditions, language, history, society, religion, or social treatment."

Since this is largely restating the old definition, and the lede did not narrow the definition at all, is it not redundant? DenverCoder19 (talk) 06:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

New message from Swadge2

Hello, DenverCoder19. You have new messages at Talk:Tata Group.
Message added 01:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just notifying you as I don't remember if replies on an article talk page automatically generate a notification. I reverted an unexplained removal of the "mass killings" sentence and the editor posted some replies to you on the talk page. Swadge2 (talk) 01:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I don't watch any articles, so this is helpful. DenverCoder19 (talk) 16:25, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Aisha

Please stop creating new sections at Talk:Aisha on exactly the same topic as other sections on the same page that you are using at the same time to say the same things. I can see why you feel that you need to repeat yourself. But overdoing it is not a good idea. -- Toddy1 (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

They're similar themed, but different sections of the article. DenverCoder19 (talk) 02:32, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

It's important to split up because people are discussing different issues. DenverCoder19 (talk) 02:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Some of this gets very unclear. It is hard to follow what comments relate to what edits in which sections of the article, or whether comments refer to the whole of the article.-- Toddy1 (talk) 06:34, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

There are a lot of concurrent edits to the article, so there will be concurrent talk page discussions. I'll continue to try to be specific about what is relevant to what. DenverCoder19 (talk) DenverCoder19 (talk) 20:15, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Amazon data centers

The article Amazon data centers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

datacenters.com is not a reliable source and the notability of a separate article outside Amazon (company) is questionable. Virtually no reader value in the article as is.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. IgelRM (talk) 15:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Your edits to Indigenous peoples

Hello there, I reverted you edits to this page because you didn't properly explain your removal of properly sourced content. If yoiu think the reliable sources don't support the content please discuss your reasons on the talk page. Thank you. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 00:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I did in fact discuss the reasons in my edit summaries. I notice you have a habit of doing this. DenverCoder19 (talk) 01:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

2 of your deletions of content had no edit summary, one stated there was no source when there was a source and one stated "failed verification" when the source clearly supported the content. But I am happy to discuss on the talk page of the article. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 02:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Amazon data centers moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Amazon data centers. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. IgelRM (talk) 19:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Amazon data centers for deletion

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

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amazon data centers 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.

IgelRM (talk) 00:16, 8 March 2024 (UTC)