User talk:P,TO 19104/Archive 5

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

Question about an edit summary

I noticed your edit summary Adding unreferenced defamatory information about living persons on Gjmontrose's talk page. Is that the only standard RedWarn summary available with uw-biog warnings? I ask because the edit itself, whilst unsourced, didn't look defamatory. If there are other edit summaries available, another one might be more appropriate next time you encounter an edit like this. If there aren't, I'll have a word with the person coding RedWarn. Thanks. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 17:00, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

@BlackcurrantTea: That is an automatic edit summary. The warning is called "Adding unreferenced defamatory information about living persons", so yes it would be a problem with RedWarn. Although, to an extent "defamation" could be considered merely unsourced claims (eg. libel). Really, its just an edit summary. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 19:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
The edit it described added information in WP:NPOV that someone's parents were Jewish and had fled the Nazis. Calling that defamatory is, to put it mildly, not a good idea. There needs to be an option to describe such an edit as simply unsourced. This is why I asked about it, and why I'm going to have a word about it with the author of RedWarn. Thanks. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 20:26, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Hmm... I suppose... well its only supposed to be a category (BLP vio). Definitely talk with Ed6767. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 22:32, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

Information icon Hello, I'm 2A01:11BF:81D:CC00:E450:7A03:73A3:2494. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. 2A01:11BF:81D:CC00:E450:7A03:73A3:2494 (talk) 15:53, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

No content apparent in references section. Do not revert without checking carefully. Thanks. 2A01:11BF:81D:CC00:E450:7A03:73A3:2494 (talk) 15:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Information icon Please do not add empty content or broken templates to pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Taliabu Island Regency, without giving a valid reason for the edit in the edit summary. Your edit does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. 2A01:11BF:81D:CC00:E450:7A03:73A3:2494 (talk) 15:58, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@2A01:11BF:81D:CC00:E450:7A03:73A3:2494: Hi IP, thank you for alerting me of my mistake. It is not necessary to "template the regulars". When reverting vandalism, I make a lot of mistakes, so thank you for reverting my mistake. Note: your point was not made until your second warning. Thank you and good day! P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 16:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Message by IP

Hey P,TO 19104, I can see you have remove something from this website Wikipedia website Beer in Denmark, you have to read this website or the link I have to this website my friend, http://www.jo-hansen.dk/beer/Historie/Nedlagte_bryggerier.html , by the way my friend, by the way P,TO 19104 ;) :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.186.116.173 (talk • contribs)

Reopening

I would ask you to self revert your reopening of the discussion, as doing so is under discussion at WT:ITN. 331dot (talk) 22:50, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@331dot: Well, I was just trying to get it back up and started. It looked like the discussion was starting to get stale, as few people had commented in the last hour. Thank you for informing me that the discussion is being started up again. My decision was obviously misguided. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 22:57, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. To be clear, I know you acted in good faith. Your views will be appreciated at the WT:ITN discussion. 331dot (talk) 23:02, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, just trying to get the discussion restarted (although, I was not trying to make a point). I was definitely misguided. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 23:16, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

Hi, I’m the guy who added the Yu Gi Oh trivia for pop culture in the article about the Antikythera Mechanism, and you removed it because I didn’t cite any sources. Now I wonder what I can add as a source (a picture, a text, the official rulebook?) and I’m sorry for causing trouble, as I’m new to wikipedia editing and adding new info! — Preceding unsigned comment added by N0meb (talk • contribs)

@N0meb: Any of those would work. However, Wikipedia prefers sources that are independent of the subject (ie. newspapers). Also, this game should have a pre-existing article before you reference it. You can read more about that at Wikipedia:Reliable Sources. Thanks, P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 13:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Signpost - proposed essay

Hello P,TO 19104,

Thanks for submitting the essay to The Signpost. It's an interesting topic that I haven't been familiar with. It would take a lot of work to put it in shape for this issue (coming out Sunday). Perhaps next month in the "Community view" section. A lot of the text appears to be taken from the Esperanza Project page. You'll need to rewrite this yourself. I'd also like to see what your POV is, or what attracted you to this project, and what you are proposing? Ok I'm pinging @Bluerasberry: who I saw on the project talk page(?) with some sympathetic views. If he can wrangle this into shape for the next issue, I'll go with him. I won't have time for it myself - I'm behind on everything this issue! But I expect with can do something for the next issue (end of September). Smallbones(smalltalk) 18:48, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Smallbones: Thanks for the information! I found WP:ESP actually by accident and I am very interested in Wikipedia's Cabal. I have no sympathetic views to the project. I'll get right on a new draft. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 18:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
@P,TO 19104: If I can assist then share a link, ping me, and ask what you would have me do. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:10, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
@Bluerasberry: Feel free to edit my draft at User:P,TO 19104/Signpost Draft. Thanks, P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 16:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
I happened to see your request on GorillaWarfare's page regarding this proposed article. My personal suggestion would be that such a look back would greatly benefit from views of those who were present during the lifespan of the project. Without this, I don't think a proper perspective on events can be provided. (@Smallbones:, I'm surprised you've never heard of it: quite often when people talk about introducing more hierarchy into English Wikipedia it gets raised.) isaacl (talk) 17:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
@Isaacl: I see what you are alluding to. Would you accept an interview from me discussing Esperanza. If so, make your remarks here. If you meant an interview of someone else, I would appreciate any referrals. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 22:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
The active period of Esperanza preceded my time on Wikipedia (or at least the time where I paid attention to such WikiProjects). Since you've been reading up about it, I imagine you are familiar with various opinionated persons involved with different viewpoints. isaacl (talk) 23:20, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Smallbones: Ready for submission: User:P,TO 19104/Signpost Draft/T. Thanks. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 21:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

It's looking pretty good. Isaacl's idea about interviewing people who were there (and what they were thinking back then and what they think now) is a very good idea. Remember, even if they aren't on wiki now, you can leave a message on their talk page (and maybe they'll still answer), or if they have an "email this user" on their talk or user page, then you can email them. Your presumption/attitude/and-or conclusion seems to be "this was an interesting idea, that had some good aspects, but turned out to be crazy". I think you could leave some room for "this was the road not taken" and maybe even speculate on what would have happened if they were successful. But that's up to you. Smallbones(smalltalk) 00:08, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
@Smallbones: Yeah, I tried to interview a person that was apart of the MFD but that didn't really work out... everyone who commented on the MFD hasn't really been active to the last 10 years. Also, credibility was an issue for this (just because someone commented on the MFD does that make them qualified to comment on it?). I did quote some people that readers might not have seen the comments if they didn't read the article, though. Although an interesting idea, I think such interviews would have to be in a separate article, maybe ("Esperanza veterans").
To be frank, without any comments from those who were involved in the events in question, credibility is an issue for a story. That being said, as Bri pointed out on the Signpost newsroom talk page, the subject was covered last year already, so it may be a bit soon to go through again. isaacl (talk) 23:44, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Untitled, by IP

Hey my friend I can see you have to remove something from beer in Denmark and that thing you have to move is actually existing in Denmark because I have to drink a beer with my friend a beer from Christiania Bryghus, and all of them is actually still existing here in Denmark and you can look it up or maybe make a searching on the Internet and Google on beer in Denmark or maybe some breweries here in Denmark and because they are actually over 200 breweries here in Denmark Sr, by the way my friend ;) :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.186.116.173 (talk) 15:02, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Please do not add entries in that list that do not have articles. That list is only for notable entries with an article. We have been through this before. Thank you. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 15:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Respond to "my edit is disruptive"

Hi P,TO 19104. I was trying to remove the hoaxes added by sock puppet Milktaco, a comfirmed sockpuppet of user Rajmaan, which has been blocked since May 2018 for vandalism. Aodai is Vietnamese custom and has nothing with china, as the sources say nothing! They "created", they lie me, they lie you and they lie everyone. I just want to stop them spreading fake news. What I did were for the truth. Trương guy (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:14, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Trương guy: Hi Trương guy, if you read source #6, and go to the bottom of the article (after translating it to English), you'll see it says: In terms of costumes, the book also shows that the Vietnamese royal costume regime is like North Korea, many times simulating China to have majesty and standards, but according to the law of cultural creation in the spirit of autonomy. I hope that resolves any issues. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 15:21, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@P,TO 19104 but you must look at Milktaco/Rajmaan edit, they are clearly made-up hoaxes and vandalism claim like "Chinese Qing dynasty clothing was forced by Nguyen dynasty." - which no book say. It's ok to remove the hoaxes, restore the sovereign of Vietnamese aodai's article. Trương guy (talk) 15:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Trương guy:It seems you are correct, what the paragraph says is largely unsupported and in fact does seem to be a hoax. Perhaps in your edit summary you should have given the exact name of the sockpuppet, because I don't think a lot of people are familar with all of the Rajamaan's socks; plus the edits made were a good while back. Good discussion. Thanks, P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 15:45, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Jeff Allen basketball

Hi there- am I able to update current basketball stats from the league site? Also am I able to update his picture on his behalf? Thanks. Stat site https://triponta.com.cy/stats-opap-basket-league/?fbclid=IwAR1POrkRB0PDnIo51WU_bye-_7fg5QketODQYfG26aApdkciDPfCDLm1p2I — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.197.142.186 (talk) 00:50, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

@174.197.142.186: Hi IP, thank you for coming here. First of all, please see your talk page. You must use in-text citations because our articles must be verifiable - only way to make sure articles are verifiable is to make sure they have citations. Regarding your Conflict of Interest, I'd recommend creating an account. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 01:17, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Debbie Harry edit

I apologise if I have made a mistake. I saw the above article and then Google searched the singer, which confirmed to me that her surname is Tremble. Sorry again if I broke any rules that were unknown to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.75.96 (talk) 23:40, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

@79.71.75.96: Hi IP, not to worry. Your edits were made in good faith. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 23:43, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

you must work for the government-sorry I posted the truth a Columbus knights guard made the call to the police and the incident happened on w 3rd ave not Grandview Ave take care --2605:A000:1307:8BDA:8D73:ACB8:32D7:174A

New, simpler RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck

HI P,TO 19104/Archive 5,
I'm writing to let you know we have simplified the RfC on trust levels for the tool WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Please join and share your thoughts about this feature! We made this change after hearing users' comments on the first RfC being too complicated. I hope that you can participate this time around, giving your feedback on this new feature for WikiLoop DoubleCheck users.
Thanks and see you around online,
María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
If you would like to update your settings to change the wiki where you receive these messages, please do so here.

Untitled

Kindly check the links provided in the wiki page

Rollback granted

Hi P,TO 19104. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Eddie891 Talk Work 02:12, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

You are now a Pending Changes Reviewer!

Hi P,TO 19104! I've been running into you while patrolling logs and recent changes, and I happened to notice that you don't have the pending changes reviewer rights. I hope you don't mind, but I went through your contributions and I noticed that you're quite active in recent changes patrolling and that you consistently view and undo vandalism and bad faith disruption. I believe that the pending changes reviewer rights would be useful for you to have and that you'd make good use of the tools. Instead of having you formally request the rights at WP:PERM, I went ahead and just gave it to you. This user right allows you to review edits that are pending approval on pages currently under pending changes protection and either accept the edits to make them viewable by the general public, or decline and revert them.

Please keep these things in mind regarding the tool or when you're reviewing any pending changes:

  • A list of articles with pending edits awaiting review can be viewed at Special:PendingChanges.
  • A list of the articles currently under pending changes protection can be viewed at Special:StablePages.
  • Being granted and having these rights does not grant you any additional "status" on Wikipedia, nor does it change how Wikipedia policies apply to you (obviously).
  • You'll generally want to accept any pending changes that appear to be legitimate edits and are not blatant vandalism or disruption, and reject edits that are problematic or that you wouldn't accept yourself.
  • Never accept any pending changes that contain obvious and clear vandalism, blatant neutral point of view issues, copyright violations, or BLP violations.

Useful guidelines and pages for you to read:

I'm sure you'll do fine with the reviewer rights - it's a pretty straight-forward tool and it doesn't drastically change the interface that you're used to already. Nonetheless, please don't hesitate to leave me a message on my user talk page if you run into any questions, get stuck anywhere, or if you're not sure if you should accept or revert pending changes to a page - I'll be more than be happy to help you. If you no longer want the pending changes reviewer rights, let me know and I'll be happy to remove it for you. Thank you for helping to patrol recent changes and keep Wikipedia free of disruption and vandalism - it's a very thankless job to perform and I want you to know that it doesn't go unnoticed and that I appreciate it very much. Happy editing! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:55, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Thanks! I hope you were able to see that I did for a brief time have this right in Early August? See also /Archive 3#Pending changes reviewer granted. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 13:02, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Indeed I did see that! I noted that in the log when I added your user right just a bit ago. ;-) Let me know if you run into any questions or need help with anything, and I'll be happy to lend a hand. ;-) Thanks for all of the hard work you've been doing, and please keep up the good work! You're doing great here, and we need more people like you! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:05, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 13:06, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Bot blocked edits

Hi! Your bot blocked a couple of edits of the Paul Bernardo page, believing that I was adding unsourced information. Check the edits: I actually removed unsourced edits and made a structural change, which was added to the Talk page. I can understand wanting a high degree of edit control over a page like the Bernardo page, but as is the page is already woefully written and under sourced. I'm hoping to improve that. I might also suggest rewriting the automatic communications from the bot, they're pretty far from the "cordial" model recommended by Wiki. Happy to discuss. -- Strunk and Right

@Strunk and Right: Ha ha, I do not run a bot - all the reverts made were directly done by me (they may have seemed a little fast because I have a tool that decreases the time it takes for me to revert. Thank you for stopping by, my warnings toward you were nothing personal. I would like to apoligize for my reverts there as it seems your edits were most certainly constructive - I just had a few concerns regarding the reason you removed some content and added some. Feel free to get rid of those warnings. Adding back your edits now. In the future, when a reverted comes around like me and reverts an edit, it is best to approach them directly after they make the revert and discuss it with them, and not edit war. This is a part of the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 00:39, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

House seniority

Hi P,TO 19104! This is just a notification/reminder that I have asked on the talk page of Seniority in the United States House of Representatives whether there are any objections to a proposed change for one of the sections. It will be much appreciated if you could give your opinion on the matter. Absent any objections a week from now, I will carry out the edit.

Sdrqaz (talk) 20:18, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

@Sdrqaz: Totally fine. Be bold! P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 20:20, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Wonderful, thank you! Sdrqaz (talk) 20:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Some falafel for you!

Thanks for fighting vandalism on Wikipedia JayPlaysStuff (talk) 18:10, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
@JayPlaysStuff: Thank you! P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 18:12, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Alec Burks and Nerlens Noel

Alec Burks and Nerlens Noel are NBA players who signed with the New York Knicks this week Averydt7 (talk) 18:54, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

@Averydt7: Please see User:P,TO 19104/Mobile before posting. Thank you. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 18:55, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Nerlens Noel and Alec Burks

Nerlens Noel and Alec Burks are both NBA players who signed with the New York Knicks this week. Announced by Adrian Wojnarowski, NBA insider Averydt7 (talk) 19:01, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

@Averydt7: You need a url that goes to this source, please also use {{cite web}} in the article. It is most important that you cite your sources by using normal reference templates because if people see content without a source (or an in line citation) they will distrust it. Please see WP:V and WP:Citing sources. One more thing: make sure to avoid sources that are coming out too soon. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 19:07, 22 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) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:P,TO_19104/Archive_5&oldid=991599135"