User talk:WelpThatWorked
Your acceptance on July 2022[edit]
Hi. This IP user would like to thank you for accepting my edits committed on this page. 41.62.165.223 (talk) 13:10, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- No Problem, keep up the good work. WelpThatWorked (talk) 13:15, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi. It is the same user but different IP Address. This is just to let U know that my edit has been reverted by this user (talk) (contribs). According to the edit summary, I have ACTUALLY made SIGNIFICANT changes by inserting information about Internet Explorer 11's retirement and Microsoft's recent plans to deliver updates, and most importantly, I HAVE ATTACHED CITATIONS. It sounds ludicrous when the page has been ranked high in importance-level according to its talk page when my CREATIVE edits have been reverted. Any suggestions, WTW? 41.62.214.176 (talk) 15:11, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- You should discuss this with the user who reverted the edit, either on the talk page for the article, or on their talk page. I accepted your edits because they seemed to be good faith additions, but the user who reverted your edit is the best person to discuss issues with the content of the article with. WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi. Apologies, this is a dynamic IP, but still the same user. It is shocking how this user behaves in WP, especially that nowadays the user would simply ignore discussions by deleting them. As an IP user, I prefer not to share ideas because there is little to zero possibility that administrators will value thoughts from an IP (I do not even want to create an account for myself).
This is a horrible impression that the user is such a lazybones nowadays to communicate to other users in person.No offence intended. 197.244.51.233 (talk) 16:43, 16 July 2022 (UTC) - Hi. This user still appreciates your tolerance towards accepting my pending edit. However, apologies to ask, if this case has occurred, then Y in the world would Pending Changes Reviewers avoid requesting changes in a protected page's talk page or, otherwise, commit the same changes which they reviewed and accepted but later got undone/reverted? Surely, all Reviewers, like you, possess those authorities (if this IP user is correct). Thus, what on earth are the consequences if they make use of those capabilities? They won't get involved in disputes, would they? 197.244.51.233 (talk) 16:43, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi. Apologies, this is a dynamic IP, but still the same user. It is shocking how this user behaves in WP, especially that nowadays the user would simply ignore discussions by deleting them. As an IP user, I prefer not to share ideas because there is little to zero possibility that administrators will value thoughts from an IP (I do not even want to create an account for myself).
- You should discuss this with the user who reverted the edit, either on the talk page for the article, or on their talk page. I accepted your edits because they seemed to be good faith additions, but the user who reverted your edit is the best person to discuss issues with the content of the article with. WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi. It is the same user but different IP Address. This is just to let U know that my edit has been reverted by this user (talk) (contribs). According to the edit summary, I have ACTUALLY made SIGNIFICANT changes by inserting information about Internet Explorer 11's retirement and Microsoft's recent plans to deliver updates, and most importantly, I HAVE ATTACHED CITATIONS. It sounds ludicrous when the page has been ranked high in importance-level according to its talk page when my CREATIVE edits have been reverted. Any suggestions, WTW? 41.62.214.176 (talk) 15:11, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]
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) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]
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) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
An invitation[edit]
You're invited to attend a meetup at the San Diego Central Library on Monday 26 February 2024. Hopefully see you there. RightCowLeftCoast (Moo) 11:45, 19 February 2024 (UTC)