User talk:Watercheetah99
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
The Nigeria Barnstar of National Merit[edit]
|
The Nigeria Barnstar of National Merit | |
| Thank you so much for your amazing contributions to the Nigerian context on Wikipedia. You have enriched the knowledge of millions of people around the world with your dedication and expertise. Thank you for making Wikipedia a better place for everyone. You are awesome! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:00, 8 January 2024 (UTC) |
Stop the vandalism[edit]
I spent over an three hours writing the articles only for you to delete wholly. If you have any issue with particular section of the articles, you can ask for explanation without acting ignorantly. The edit summaries are always there to help you as well. Objectivescholar (talk) 18:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- Like most of your edit summaries, they are lies — I explained my reverts, either stop the POV violations or stop spending three hours making biased edits. Watercheetah99 (talk) 18:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is a place for factual academic facts not your opinions. Objectivescholar (talk) 21:37, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Check well before reverting![edit]
Hello Watercheetah99,
I saw you reverted this edit without checking the edit history or warning the editor (me if in case) that you reverted an edit. It will help on future or notify the editor if it is vandalism or section blanking as the case may be. However, your reversion has been undid since the input is already as a subsection in the article. Thanks! — Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 01:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello there...[edit]
Hey Watercheetah99,
On the Yahaya Bello article, the same user added new information on the article, which is nice. However, there is a 3 revert policy on Wikipedia and I'm not sure if it goes for This user because they have reverted other peoples edits. Should this user be blocked or go along with what they're doing? GoodHue291 (talk) 19:08, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think they should be blocked. They either are extremely biased or appear to have been paid to add aggrandizing text to the page and remove scandals. Watercheetah99 (talk) 19:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think bias is the case here, and the user should be challenged with it, because bias isn't tolerated on Wikipedia. I saw the user added more information with sources but I'm not sure why they didn't previously. Some of the text is out-of-place too. Are you going to pursue and get them blocked for a day or two? GoodHue291 (talk) 19:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Probably, this kind of POV editing has happened before and I think this is a sockpuppet of another account. Watercheetah99 (talk) 20:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah I think so too. It has been sent to ANI for investigation too. I asked the user why they reverted the changes but so far no response. I also asked the Teahouse about the user in a reply. GoodHue291 (talk) 20:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Probably, this kind of POV editing has happened before and I think this is a sockpuppet of another account. Watercheetah99 (talk) 20:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think bias is the case here, and the user should be challenged with it, because bias isn't tolerated on Wikipedia. I saw the user added more information with sources but I'm not sure why they didn't previously. Some of the text is out-of-place too. Are you going to pursue and get them blocked for a day or two? GoodHue291 (talk) 19:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)