User talk:OliveYouBean/Archive 1

OliveYouBean, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi OliveYouBean! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Bop34 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:South Australia cricket team in 2021–22

Hello, OliveYouBean. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:South Australia cricket team in 2021–22, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:2021 Adelaide Football Club season

Hello, OliveYouBean. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2021 Adelaide Football Club season, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:01, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:South Australia cricket team in 2021–22

Hello, OliveYouBean. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "South Australia cricket team in 2021–22".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:2021 Adelaide Football Club season

Hello, OliveYouBean. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2021 Adelaide Football Club season".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:40, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, OliveYouBean. Thank you for creating Nick Murray (footballer). User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 19:42, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Adelaide

OliveYouBean - Please stop edit warring and let this be resolved on the talk page. Your actions are destructive. They also break Wikipedia's standards on dispute resolution, incl. Wikipedia:CYCLE (if there is new edit, later is revert by other user = first must to be discuss and consensus to new changes). Your actions are a typical example that you trying to push a POV. You have made three offenses: [1].

• 1) You restore in the intro a text with an aboriginal name. According to the discuss and per many sources, name apply only for the centre area, this name is added to Adelaide city centre [2]). There is no consensus on the use of a center name as the name for the entire Greater Sydney area.
• 2) you put content into the first paragraph of the article about a selected group of people who had a minimal impact on the construction of a modern city and constitute a small percentage of the population - which is extreme breaks Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. I moved this data to third paragraph, but you moved to the first paragraph as the most important information about Greater Adelaide, without any consensus.
• 3) you are removed templates inserted by another user - templates have been inserted correctly. The content of Traditional Owners in the introduction to the article is still debatable (still under discussion), and the sources have also been questioned. Verification of the sources showed that they are inconsistent with the content of the article and a breaks rule of Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

These are serious offenses. It's not that you have your own opinion. You are not allowed to break Wikipedia's rules. You restore wrong the sentence about the Aboriginal name of the city center and inserted it into the first paragraph of the article although not applicable Greater Adelaide + you have deleted templates inserted by another user - you have no right to delete them. You break Wikipedia:CYCLE. You put in the wrong sources and use OR. This behavior will not be tolerated. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 09:08, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 10:30, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Preferred pronouns

You can edit Special:Preferences under user profile to set your preferred pronoun. Look for the gender section. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 11:28, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! OliveYouBean (talk) 11:30, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Temba Bavuma

I don't really know my way around wikipedia yet and I'd like to ask if there is any way to stop that user from continually making editorialised edits without any consensus. Cheers Smashedbandit (talk) 10:59, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

imo the best solution is to try to get them to engage on the talk page. It's probably best if you don't revert their edits yourself for a while because you're already well past three reverts so could get blocked. If they keep reverting without properly engaging I will report them at WP:ANEW. OliveYouBean (talk) 11:04, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't think this user is engaging in good faith at all. Ive tried to engage them in discussion numerous times and they have either ignored me and gone along with their own edits or name called. And with the three reverts rules can I make any more edits on that page? Since its been left in a mess with poor grammar, too many sources and a role that is not consistent with all other cricket pages which follow cricinfo. Smashedbandit (talk) 11:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

With 3RR you can edit the page, you just can't make reverts to other people's changes (there are some exceptions but they don't really apply here). I'll look through and see if there's anything that needs urgent changes though. OliveYouBean (talk) 11:13, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the help and time mate, its incredibly frustrating to deal with this as I don't know all the ins and outs around wikipedia yet but this user is clearly just injecting his own personal opinions over that page Smashedbandit (talk) 11:23, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

That user is clearly not acting in good faith, look at the edit he made to this page, Najmul Hossain Shanto Smashedbandit (talk) 12:13, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Adelaide

Hello. You didn't write back to me against all these charges against you, but let's move on. Let's talk calmly, without emotions. I assuming your goodwill, I figured you just rolled back roughly all the changes without looking exactly what you were doing (you did not notice that you entered the wrong text with an Aboriginal name and removed the source templates). Let's analyze the changes in more detail. If look closely at the editing changes between your revision and mine (editi-war changes [3]), can be concluded that:

• your version added sencence about Kaurna people to first paragraph of intro of article about city. My version added sencence about Kaurna people to fourth paragraph of intro of article, near other historical text like "Early colonial Adelaide was shaped by the diversity and wealth of its free settlers (...)" - Don't you think that the fourth paragraph of intro, along with other data of this type, is more sensible for Kaurna people than the first! paragraph of intro of the article?
• your version added Aboriginal name to intro but the matter had already been clarified earlier in the discussion. The Aboriginal name refers to the center, not the entire metropolis (Greater Adelaide). The name was added to the article of Adelaide city centre by another user involved in the discussion[4]. I think you did it by mistake and the matter is solved. Yes?
• your version removed two templates added by other user, one template relates to an incorrect source. Generally, you are not allowed to delete these templates, this is a serious violation of the rules. However, here I can assume your mistake for a moment and let's leave this topic alone (as part of my goodwill and willingness to solve the problem). Do you agree?

If you agree with these three points, that solves the problem of edit-war. However, there is still a separate question - whether information about Traditional Owners / Kaurna people should be included in the intro of the article at all. This is a broad topic, so I propose to conclude the discussion on this in Talk:Adelaide.

But before we continue discussion about "Kaurna people should be included in the intro or not" in Talk:Adelaide, I want to make sure that you understand the current version of the article and you will not continue the edit-war. Is everything understandable in current version of article and can we continue the discussion about Kaurna people in Talk:Adelaide? Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 14:23, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Why are you relitigating the discussion from ANI? I think that needs to run its course. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 15:39, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

rsjaffe, this thread of discussion concerns a purely substantive matter, not related to ANi, but to the content of the article of Adelaide. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 16:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

I already explained on the talk page why I rolled back your edits: you didn't have consensus, and the talk page discussion was ongoing. The talk page discussion was showing a developing consensus against your edits, because the content was not problematic like you assert. I agree that this discussion should take place on Talk:Adelaide, where people have given more detailed arguments, but I also don't want to go back to that right now while the discussion at ANI is also still ongoing because I think that should be resolved first. That way we can go back to the content dispute once any behavioural issues are dealt with. OliveYouBean (talk) 06:09, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

		The Anti-Flame Barnstar
		Thanks for keeping cool and hanging in there during this protracted and messy ANI dispute! Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 06:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Good article nominations

Hi OliveYouBean, thank you for your assistance in reviewing at WP:Good article nominations. When you pass a nomination, please remember to add it to the appropriate list of Wikipedia:Good articles. All steps that should be taken are listed at WP:GAN/I#PASS. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best regards, CMD (talk) 06:56, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the reminder! I have no idea why that completely slipped my mind, I was even reading the instructions as I was finishing the review. OliveYouBean (talk) 09:41, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Everyone forgets to do it at some point! Best, CMD (talk) 10:09, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

The 1 pixel Moon

Hi, thanks for the edit which made me check again and come up with the full name (good collab). I came across this on another site a couple days ago and actually finger-scrolled through the whole thing, took close to half an hour maybe (I didn't time it, 20 minutes maybe?) but worth the trip in order to get a perspective of the size of the Solar System (checked our Solar System page and it was already linked). Putting my attention back on it (thanks) I'll probably add it to my top of talk page list. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:46, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I've been scrolling through it on my laptop for like half an hour now, finally made it up to Uranus! :D It's definitely worth the read. OliveYouBean (talk) 01:47, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

lol. Takes a long time. I've added it to my talk page thanks to your inspiration. A good mental exercise. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:54, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, OliveYouBean!

Happy New Year!

OliveYouBean,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 12:15, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 12:15, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently been editing discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes which has been designated a contentious topic. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

follow editorial and behavioural best practice;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Barkeep49 (talk) 16:17, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 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) 00:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

March 2024 GAN backlog drive

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)