User talk:༄U-ji

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! ༄U-ji, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us!

I, and the rest of the hosts, would be more than happy to answer any questions you have! SarahStierch (talk) 16:29, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of MADTEO for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article MADTEO 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/MADTEO 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. Ceethekreator (talk) 20:17, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Diamond Version moved to draftspace

According to a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diamond Version, an article you recently created, Diamond Version, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. RL0919 (talk) 16:16, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Diamond Version

Hello, ༄U-ji. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Diamond Version".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 07:26, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Beautiful Dreamer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Children of the Dust. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Philosophy translations by Phlsph7

Hello, just writing to clear up some confusions on recent discussion (linked to on en.wiki by Leif Czerny) that has occurred on de.wiki over translations made by Phlsph7. It appears that you voiced suspicions that I am a sockpuppet of Phlsph7 or vice versa. I wish you would have contacted me with these concerns as I would very easily been able to provide explanations. For example, you cite edits made to my user page by Edward Mordake who was later banned as a sock themself. This can easily be explained by the fact that he was removing a link to a page on my user page that was concerning a dispute we had had at Talk:Kanye West/Archive 8#Genre amongst other pages. Mordake had been repeatedly removing "hip hop" from West's list of genres, asking for sources to prove that he was a hip hop artist and then subsequently ignoring all sources provided. I found this absurd and a little amusing and so collected together some of the discussion at User:Alduin2000/A bizarre exchange. However, Mordake viewed this page as an attack page (which was not my intention at all) and it was deleted by an admin (which I now think is fair as the page probably was unconstructive). Hopefully this goes some way to explain his uncontested edit on my user page.

As to similarities between my and Phlsph7's edits, I think there may be superficial similarities (we both edit in philosophy-related areas and are sometimes the main editor on a page) but I don't think those similarities go very deep. For one thing, it looks like Phlsph7 started editing in 2020 and immediately contributed to philosophy topics, but at that time I was more focused on contributing to internet and music-related articles, topics which Phlsph7 seems to be completely uninterested in editing on wikipedia (as far as I can see). We also edit in very different areas of philosophy and I don't believe we've both made significant contributions to the same page before (although I may be wrong). I've also seen Phlsph7 being accused of making substantial revisions to pages without any outside input. Now I don't know if this is true and to be fair some philosophy topics can be quite obscure so I wouldn't blame Phlsph7 myself for this as it wouldn't really be their fault that they are interested in editing topics that others are not really as interested in editing. However, I would like to point out that if this is indeed true of Phlsph7, then that is another difference between our editing. Whilst I am the main or even sole editor for some articles, I do put them up for discussion with other editors; recently I successfully put Quine–Putnam indispensability argument through the GA process and have nominated Working from Within: The Nature and Development of Quine's Naturalism too. I also listed Quine–Putnam indispensability argument up for peer review to gain comments/concerns from other editors.

Sorry if there is still anything else to clear up, I don't speak German so have had to rely on my browser's automatic translations to follow the discussion on de.wiki so may have missed or misunderstood some things. I'm also not sure what the best way would be to provide my comments to de.wiki. Should they be linked at the appropriate place in the discussion or could you convey what I have said? Thanks. Alduin2000 (talk) 10:13, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks alot for your contribution in this matter. There was some kind of uncertainty, because we had a similar case a short time ago, where it turned out to be just like that. So please do not take offense in this case. It seems, that the suppositions happened to be some kind of post-traumatic stress disorder. ༄U-ji (talk) 16:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)