User talk:2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1

June 2020

Hello, I'm CommanderWaterford. I noticed that you recently removed content from Rosemary De Angelis 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. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Diana Decker. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 17:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Response

BEAMALEXANDER25, talk
RE: Diana Decker -- my edit ([1]), while perhaps stylistically different from yours, does not constitute vandalism. I have noticed many edits, when a subject dies shortly before their next birthday, added or reword the text to show "[the subject] died one day [or two days or three days or a week] before [subject's] [whatever age it would have been] birthday". minor stylistic differences normally do not constitute vandalism. Am I to understand that I could not, in the more drastic cases of Alice Glenn or Galt MacDermot (both of whom died one day before their 90th birthdays), post that Glenn or MacDermott died one day before his or her 90th birthday? That this would be considered vandalism? Has an agreement been reached re MOS that such wording may not be used? 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 14:06, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please note for the sake of posterity and because all these notices are doubtless creating a misimpression of my edits to anyone who stops by this talk page that my edit re Diana Decker did not constitute vandalism (as pointed out above by myself, to which I have received no reply so I presume I am correct), although I do not remember if I bothered to restore it as it was, ultimately, of no great importance. 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 06:24, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Deborah Remington, you may be blocked from editing. RV removal of content means reverting because that someone have removed content. The creeper2007^Talk! 20:05, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please note for the sake of posterity and because all these notices are doubtless creating a misimpression of my edits to anyone who stops by this talkpage that I was not editing disruptively as determined by my conversation with @The creeper2007 at his or her talkpage (see here) and my edit was restored. 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 06:10, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Riky Rick

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Riky Rick, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Rob van vee 14:00, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Adding unsourced info and then adding a cn tag is lazy and goes against policy when editing WP:BLP articles. Please source your edits properly or don't add the controversial information, thanks. Rob van vee 14:04, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on my talk page. Rob van vee 14:14, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please note for the sake of posterity and because all these notices are doubtless creating a misimpression of my edits to anyone who stops by this talkpage that I did not add anything controversial, much less anything controversial which was unsourced under cover of a lazy fact tag. Misunderstanding between the above editor and myself resolved (see here). 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 06:32, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you got the ping but I left a message at our discussion on my talk page a few minutes ago. Rob van vee 07:07, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Chip Skowron

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy, as you did with this edit to Chip Skowron. Materialscientist (talk) 12:42, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Materialscientist -- My bad. I forgot dates of birth of living people are now sacrosanct. My apologies. Won't happen again. 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 06:29, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Your addition to Briley Brothers has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 19:46, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Richard Joseph Malone. Elizium23 (talk) 22:06, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

ARTICLE LEDE: Richard Joseph Malone (born March 19, 1946) is an American prelate of the Roman Catholic Church who was Bishop of Buffalo, New York, from 2012 to 2019 when he resigned following an investigation into his handling of sex abuse cases in the diocese.

@Elizium23's comment refers to my adding Category:American Roman Catholic clergy of Irish descent, which is factually true but not mentioned in the article. @Elizium23's edit summary comment was as follows:(Reverted good faith edits by 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk): WP:CATV not in article (TW)) yet by the time @Elizium23 reached my talkpage, it was no longer a "good faith edit" but something so serious that the threat that I could be '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]] without further warning''' the next time you add [[Wikipedia:Citing sources|unsourced]] material to Wikipedia was issued. Not entirely @Elizium23's fault because I suspect this multicolored massive wall of warnings and threats undoubtedly influenced his or her psyche. So, again, I am clarifying the exact nature of the edit in question for the sake of posterity and for anyone visiting this (my) talk page. The cognitive dissonance between the reality and the impression is resounding. I also replied on the editor in question's talk page and received no reply. 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 06:49, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your efforts to improve Wikipedia! However, you should know that it is not a good idea to remove citations or information sourced through citations simply because a link to a source is not working, as you did to Shooting of David McAtee. Dead links should not be deleted. Instead, please repair or replace the link, if possible, and ensure properly sourced information is retained. Often, a live substitute link can be found. Links not used as references, notes or citations are not as important, such as those listed in the "External links" or "Further reading" sections, but bad links in those sections should also be fixed if possible. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. In this case, I repaired the dead link with it's archive. —Bagumba (talk) 09:30, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

@Bagumba -- I do replace urls when a valid existing one can be substituted for a defective or dead one. This is not always possible, of course, but I will refrain (have, in fact, been largely -- baby steps -- been refraining) from deleting dead reflinks. 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 06:49, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Women in medecine

Please don't tag Women in medicine with a neutrality needed tag without leaving a detailed comment on the talk page regarding its improvement. Edits like these are not helpful and are highly disruptive if not done correctly. I have reverted your addition of the tag. If there is a genuine issue with POV on the article you should either fix it or leave a note on the talk page about it. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Donna Spencer^{talk-to-me⛅} 15:42, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I greatly appreciate your constructive edits on Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Help pages
How to write a great article
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style
Recent changes patrol

You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but many editors recommend that you create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits, such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page.

Again, welcome! ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 00:55, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I greatly appreciate your constructive edits on Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Help pages
How to write a great article
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style
Recent changes patrol

You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but many editors recommend that you create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits, such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page.

Again, welcome! Sturdyankit (chat) 04:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC) Please stop your disruptive editing.[reply]

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.

To whomever wrote the above UNSIGNED comment, there is no disruptive editing and no content dispute has been brought to my attention, although I note that another editor reverted my edits with no edit summary explanation. All I am trying to do is improve the Richard Allen Davis article. 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 05:29, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Porterjoh

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you blank out or remove content from Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Republic of Karelia. Porterjoh (talk) 14:09, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AGAIN FOR THE SAKE OF POSTERITY AND FOR ANYONE WHO VISITS THIS TALK PAGE
@Porterjoh: There was no disruptive editing to Republic of Karelia article. Your Level 4 warning over this edit removing a hyperlink to a non-existent page is an abuse of process and discretion, and indeed of the entire system of Wikipedia's warning protocols. 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 21:04, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I made a mistake here, I apologise, it does look however like there were other issues with this account and you were already on an L4. Regardless, I made an error. Feel free to consider this if required. Porterjoh (talk) 11:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

A reason would be nice. 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 23:18, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are socking. The CU block is valid. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 04:59, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please disclose other accounts

Are you the same user of the accounts User:Ugbedeg, User:Cryforjustice and several others? Please disclose if you are. Oakshade (talk) 05:30, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NO. I never even heard of any of them. Do we share common interests? Looking at this, I see no similarities. I do not do PRODs or AFDs nor am I obsessed with Nigeria. 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 05:36, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a remarkable coincidence that this account which showed wiki-adeptness with the first edit sprang to life within twenty-four hours of those accounts being banned. Oakshade (talk) 04:18, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You mean more since last year? I edit intermittently and used to use the library to edit before I got my own desktop, so I am NOT a newbie and never claimed to be one (although more than a year of editing should be enough time to become "wiki-adept", anyway). And it is a remarkable coincidence that your interest popped up following our disagreement over Pinelopi Tsilika‎. I am in NYC, not Nigeria. From where did those other accounts originate? 2604:2000:EFC0:12:7922:1B66:98F2:E6E1 (talk) 04:38, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see you were just blocked for two years so never mind. Oakshade (talk) 05:50, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.