Please stop continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Okey Uzoeshi, without resolving the problem that the template refers to. This may be considered disruptive editing. Try to fix the issues referred to and let editors remove the templates, when considered appropriate to do so. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. Jamie Tubers (talk) 16:39, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jamie - I have been editing the Okey Uzoeshi page, it looks as though you have paced quite a few maintenance messages without actually reviewing the content or following the reference links to establish what I have described.
1) firstly let me establish that I am an avid admirer of the subject's work and felt that the information available on wikipedia was somewhat limited. I went on to find some more information about this particular actor and the summary found on wikipedia was extremely limited. I have therefore spent the weekend finding out about him and there is actually a lot of information online - from you tube to interviews he has done.
2) I am new to wikipedia - hence why there may be multiple issues, regarding weasel words and the tone or style. I find that extremely odd as I referenced pages like the recently featured Kareena Kapoor page and Chiwetel Ejiofor to update this page, are you able to point out the specific words so we can compare and contrast. I also used material found solely online. I understand how you may view things like 'mimicking other actors' however these are specifically called out by Mr Uzoeshi
3) I have removed most external links except where Wikipedia does not have links that refer to these pages, surely there is a no way a post about an actor would be promoting his polytechnic?
Can you review the references and call out specifically where you think there are issues so that I can update them. As mentioned I am new to wikipedia, hence the numerous edits plus I am extremely pedantic in nature and tend to follow through,
Going through the article and your contributions, I believe you have conflict of interest with the article; I may be wrong, but several other Wikipedia editors are watching the page and would remove it if they think otherwise. But it's not in your position to do that. The other issues noted are also relevant. Maintenance templates are nothing you should be worried about, they are just necessary so that the article can be improved. I understand you're new to Wikipedia; you've been welcomed and given links that will help you in learning how to make useful contributions to wikipedia. Please make use of these links. However, the article will be copy-edited sooner or later by me, or another editor and the maintenance template will be removed. Regards.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 18:12, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for coming back, so that we are clear, are you able to point out specifically what has led yot to believe that I have a conflict of interest, as I also reviewed OC Ukeje's page and think that the information is also extremely limited and plan to update that as well. I compared against his IMDB and the wikipedia is extremely weak. I am not worried. I just need to know so that I do not make the same mistake twice. If you are unable to help, happy to email Wikipedia directly, as there may well be a larger issue here. Pages like Kareena Kapoors' are well managed and extremely detailed while when we try to update any of our Nollywood actors/actresses pages, without actually reviewing the content; A Jamie Tubers, who I've noticed has contributed quite a bit to Nollywood, can decide that a person editing has conflict of interest. You receive personal thanks and awards from some of the movies you review or write about, sounds to me like a huge conflict of interest. I am not being petty here. I just need to know and also I need to understand what has led you to conclude that I am conflicted. Is there a way I can get a second opinion. As mentioned I am extremely pedantic in nature and tend to follow through. I also feel partly responsible as I was trying to update the page with some articles I read online and the subject should not have to carry a badge because of my lack of experience, you mentioned a ton of users watching the page. The previous edit was scrawny and undetalied and no one thought to update it. Not even you. Which is pretty disappointing and then I come round and update it and suddenly I am conflicted. Finally your tone on 'its not for me to update' sounds very much like I am being kicked out of wikipedia. I live in the UK and was of the opinion that Wikipedia was a FREE encyclopaedia editable by ANYONE. From my understanding there are no limits to how many edits one can make.
Again I ask you to specifically call out where the issues are. As I referenced pages such as Kareena Kapoor; KikI Omeili; Chiwetel Ejiofor to update this page. I need to be clear that the fact that a thorough and detailed edit was done is not what is driving this as that just leaves an extremely sour taste in my mouth, or this is not down to the fact that this is the first article I have updated on Wikipedia at least as someone that is signed in. I have just endeavoured to be extremely detailed. Frankly I'd rather take my write up out than have it misrepresented by yourself. At the very least you could have READ the article and followed the references and READ those. I'm sorry if my tone does not read well, I am so irritated that you are not able to point to specifics, however in your view is perfectly OK to come up with a bunch of maintenance templates/messages even though they have been corrected. I am going to remove those messages and also escalate this, this is EXACTLY why wikipedia is losing contributors, because people like me who love writing and LOVE researching subjects and contributing get maligned and discouraged by people like you, and this is such a huge issue in the UK at the moment. However this time I will not be scared away or dismissed. I will actually follow this through. I need specifics, details as to what I did wrong exactly because I will update other pages.
I am even more astonished now that I have read Wikipedia's guidelines on Conflict of Interest. Have you actually read this. I see my update only as improving the information on Wikipedia as what was on the page was disgusting and almost insulting
“
Wikipedia has a few policies and guidelines addressing conflict-of-interest editing. There are no Wikipedia policies that explicitly reject paid editing, and attempts at introducing such a policy were rejected.[4] As of 2013 however, Wikipedia does have some guidelines for defining conflict of interest and permitting it in certain circumstances. Wikipedia's definition of conflict-of-interest editing is that which "involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote your own interests or those of other individuals, companies, or groups. Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest."[5] One form of paid editing that may be allowed involves the "reward board", which lets editors trade tasks with each other, sometimes for monetary compensation.[6] At one point Wikipedia's parent organization, the Wikimedia Foundation, also agreed to pay illustrators to create images for articles.[7] Mutually beneficial partnerships can exist between Wikipedia editors and certain organizations called GLAMs (galleries, libraries, archives and museums) and some of the editors at these organizations are hired to assist Wikipedia.
Companies, however, argue for greater leeway in conflict-of-interest editing, often citing the Wikipedia "Ignore All Rules" policy to justify their actions. The policy states that "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it."[8]
I'm sorry, I can't read all that you've placed up there. I'll appreciate if you can summarize, and make your point short and precise. Then again, please keep the conversation in one place, by replying on your talkpage. Thanks.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 21:34, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
♣ Adeadeyemi21, I'm just poking my nose in there to point out that IMDb is not considered to be a WP:Reliable source (WP:RS) as like Wikipedia (WP) it can be edited by anyone. WP pages are not allowed to be used as sources for other WP pages, for example. I also suggest making your comments a lot shorter. See wp:TLDR. • Also see WP:Indent, as you should indent your replies by using the : 'symbol' (As I and Jamie Tubers have) per standard WP talk-page practice.
• I suggest getting more experience in general WP editing before making major changes to any wp:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP). Biographies have been a source of great controversy on WP. We have recently come through a period where, IIRC, literally hundreds of accounts were used by editors adding un-encylopaedic promotional biography pages of non-notable people for payment, which was not disclosed. Hence we may be a bit more 'snarky' on the issue right now.
• COI can also occur if an editor is a fan of a person. " ... being an avid admirer of his work", might cause you to write about Uzoeshi in a 'fannish' way,
"... appeared in a vast array of Nollywood movies"
thought I'm not sure who wrote it, is a bit that way for example, this could be more simply (and neutrally) said:
"... has appeared in many Nollywood movies",
especially when it is in the pages' WP:Lede, "vast array" could well be considered wp:Peacock phrasing.
Comment: I have used the {{Cquote}} template above where you have quoted from WP:COI so it is clear that it is a quote, and hopefully reduce the 'wall' of text effect. Please remove the template if you object. Regards, 220ofBorg07:12, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Borg many thanks for taking the time to read what I wrote and adding in the quote template.it's has been extremely helpful. I just hope other editors understand the concept of collaborative editing and editors actually take the time to research subjects and edit appropriately. I will look out for 'weasel words' in the future and I guess 'emotive text' so as to avoid maintenance messages.
Jamie, I suggest you take the time to actually read some of these articles as well as some of my points mentioned above so that you do not discourage new editors. I also suggest doing in depth research into subjects so that you are able to adequately present, represent them appropriately. I think the focus should be on the quality rather than the quantity of wikipedia pages one 'edits' / 'creates'. Some of your pages are extremely detailed like the figurine however some are extremely inadequate. Apologies but I wish you applied the 'fugurine' approach to all your other pages/edits. But then again, what do I know seeing as I am indeed new to wikipedia.
"Jamie Tubers, Borg - so having spent some time reading up more on wikipedia, I apologise for being hasty in my conclusion. I take your points about COI on board and have now added the 'connected contributor' template to the 'Okey Uzoeshi' talk page and removed the COI template from the main page, Jamie added. I also see how as a fan or 'avid admirer' it is easy to miss these things and cause a potential conflict of interest.
"I believe, there has been further editing done, where the weasel words such as 'vast' have been removed, so I have also taken out that template. I am not sure who made those changes but they appear to have been corrected
"Where there was an 'unreliable source' template was added, I have added in an additional reference to.
"Finally - when I have a bit more time, I may look to develop the references for the career section, I feel the need to add the disclaimer that I am not taking ownership of this page, as mentioned; I am very detailed in nature and like to see things done properly
However Jamie Tubers I urge you as an experienced editor of wikipedia to be 'ever so gentle' with new editors, sometimes a few 'helpful' lines could make a world of difference and never forget that the underlying aim is to actually 'improve' wikipedia and 'improve' searchability for ALL. There is a lot of information on people like Okey and OC out there, would it not be great for this info to actually be reflected on Wikipedia too, for some of us this is our 'golden source' for info. The fact that I make multiple edits when I do edit, is down to the fact that I naturally save my work as I go along, so bear with me. My being new to editing on wikipedia, simply means that I am careful and would really hate to lose my changes as most times I actually 'edit source'
Adeadeyemi21, I've again added a few indents to make your separate messages stand out. (if you reply to me you should indent one more than me i.e. six :::::: ) • Again, you can undo my alterations if you so wish as it is not good practice to change another editors message, (especially it's meaning) unless for things like readability. (i.e. an edit totally messes up the page so it is difficult to read) or if it is a wp:personal attack, or a few other reasons. As this is your talk page you are allowed to remove most messages if you wish. • I'm glad I was of some help. I cleaned up some of the issues I mentioned earlier here, plus a few others I found while editing the page. • All edits to pages, when, and what account or IP did it, are listed in the Page history like here. You have to manually go through the 'diffs' (differences) to find who made a particular change. You can click on where it says "prev", or 'hover' your mouse pointer there if you have Navigation popups activated, to see the change. • There's nothing wrong with making multiples edits, but it it is possible to go over-board. And you should use a summary wherever possible. Using Show preview is a good idea before you save as errors can then be seen and fixed before saving. 220ofBorg11:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Hi, I'm only coming back here because of the fact that you're a new contributor. If you remove the templates once more without discussing; I'll have no choice but to take your issue to the administrative board. Whatever happens to your account after that is your own doing. Regards.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 16:18, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jamie Tubers Your tone is extremely unappreciated and I suggest you indeed take this issue to the administrative board. YOU ARE CLEARLY NOT READING ANYTHING and JUST ADDING TEMPLATES ON IRRATIONALLY and frankly I AM EXTREMELY irritated. What is you reason - you have refused to give any.
The page has been edited continuously. I am getting a tad bit irritated by all this. At least read it and leave the talk page and my comments and leave reasonable templates that actually reflect what the issue is so that they can be fixed. Are you just being irrational because you can. This is really frustrating
220 I'm learning to use indents, yayy!!! Again thanks for all your help!
What's wrong with the article has been pointed out by others. Just continue to improve the article. Simple! You seriously have no business with the templates! If you feel the templates are no longer appropriate, discuss it in the article's talkpage. DO NOT REMOVE it by your own judgement! You already have conflict of interest, the least you should be doing right now is removing maintenance templates. That is a blatant show of bias to the subject. Okey Uzoeshi is not the only article with maintenance templates on Wikipedia. It's not the first, and won't be the last! What you are doing can be considered as disruption, which is a form of vandalism. Just one of these is enough to get you a block, not to talk of doing both, coupled with your already evident COI, which is not appreciated or welcomed on Wikipedia. I'm really getting tired of your disruptions. My tone is getting harsh, because you're really frustrating me here, and the fact that you're new and I don't want to discourage you is why I didn't revert all your contributions, or just take your issue to an administrator already. And trust me, that's why most people in here are being nice, including me. I'm repeating again for effects: DO NOT REMOVE THE TEMPLATES BY YOUR OWN JUDGEMENT, just continue to improve the article, that's what is needed on Wikipedia, not disruptions or vandalism.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 17:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[User:Jamie Tubers|Jamie Tubers]] what further improvements can be done? Read the article and tell me? Like I mentioned I do not exactly know Okey Uzoeshi, I'm simply interested in writing a decent article.
Frankly at this stage I'd rather just delete ALL My edits and you can just write the article yourself.
Read it again! I have already called out the COI on the talk page, a ton of pages on wikipedia have connected contributors all they need to do is call that out and seeing as being an 'avid admirer' connotes that, even though I am not professionally or personally linked. I have ALSO called that out.
What exactly are the maintenance templates for, I am calling these out because I do not think they serve any relevance. How do they help to 'improve wikipedia as a whole'. I do not agree that this is down to vandalism and frankly I think your templates are irrelevant and unnecessary.
I agree more references may be needed and I'm happy for you to leave that template on but definitely NOT the COI template as I have already called that out on the talk page.
The weasel words have also been cleaned up so I suggest you remove that too
Feedback has been taken on board and the article amended, so what exactly is your mission here? especially given that you have not reviewed, adjusted the article. I really have an issue with your approach
As an experienced editor, surely you should be professional enough to maintain calm, you are asked about articles every day, however the complaints against you all seem to state how you do not READ revisions and you need to learn to do that. As mentioned I am extremely detailed, pedantic and want to see this fixed. So COI is extremely inflamatory as first of it is not true apart from me being a fan - that is a HUGE issue for me, so that needs to go. Tell me EXACTLY what the template is on there for as I have ALREADY called out the issue in the 'talk' page
I suggest you READ wikipedia's CLEANUP page as everything you are doing clearly contradicts that and is wrong
I have no issue with you adding templates but they must be the 'right ones', so I AM GOING TO REMOVE THE COI Template again because it has ALREADY been called out on the subject's talk page and I am going to remove the reference to weasel words because that has ALSO been fixed.
I have read through Wikipedia and nothing says only [User:Jamie Tubers|Jamie Tubers]] CAN add on and REMOVE MAINTENANCE MESSAGES, so if this is the reason why I may be banned or blocked then I'm sure there are channels outside of wikipedia to escalate and expose the 'nonsense' that goes on in here, (if this is indeed what this community is about). Also after reading the COI page and being directed to pages that carry the connected_contribute template. I have committed NO CRIME here, so I suggest you indeed take it on to the administrators.
Let me very nicely point out that your statement, this statement here is completely wrong and I see it as bullying. If there is indeed an issue with my updates, why don't we simply ask for the initial post and my corrections be placed side by side and see whether my updates have been so bad. I cannot believe anyone educated or professional will even utter these words in a pubic forum;
'My tone is getting harsh, because you're really frustrating me here, and the fact that you're new and I don't want to discourage you is why I didn't revert all your contributions, or just take your issue to an administrator already. And trust me, that's why most people in here are being nice, including me. I'm repeating again for effects: DO NOT REMOVE THE TEMPLATES BY YOUR OWN JUDGEMENT, just continue to improve the article, that's what is needed on Wikipedia, not disruptions or vandalism'
There is clearly something cray going on here and its not that you are interested in the overall good of wikipedia
The declaration you made on the talkpage doesn't override the one in the article's mainpage, there're still peacock terms in the article, and references are still lacking. Maintenance templates may look irrelevant to you, but it's relevant to the growth and improvement of Wikipedia. By the way, the fact that they look irrelevant to you is probably the more reason you should totally ignore them and just contribute on this 'passion' you have to improve Okey Uzoeshi's article. This will be my last post here; anymore disruptions, I'm handing you over to the administrators, cos I'm fed up.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 18:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jamie Tubers Maybe handing me over to the administrators' is exactly what you need to do, frankly, maybe we will find someone who is not biased particularly to 'Nollywood' and can actually see reason here. If there are *peacock*terms here i.e 'wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information. Please remove or replace such wording and instead of making proclamations about a subject's importance, use facts and attribution to demonstrate that importance. (September 2015)' - why don't you use that template and call those out.
As mentioned, I disagree with the COI template and I will take that out, as it has already been called out on the 'talk' page and in my view overrides the template on the front and also I will further review and fix issues. There's clearly no point discussing this further with you as 'it is your last message on the subject'. Lets be clear that I see very much, what you are doing as vandalism and I'll tell you why;
The article is short, the effort you are spending adding on templates, could be directed to correcting like other users have done and weeding out the 'weasel words' and 'peacock words'
After reading Wikipedia's guidance on maintenance pages, its not about being vindictive or creating 'badges of shame', maintenance templates are so that other users can correct, how the COI template helps is beyond me. Reference template I understand, peacock labels I get but how does COI help, and your steer is 'keep editing'. I am so encouraged, what do you think?. You honestly I am going to waste a single minute of precious time touching that or any article on wikipedia???
Hi, I'm only coming back here because of the fact that you're a new contributor. If you remove the templates once more without discussing; I'll have no choice but to take your issue to the administrative board. Whatever happens to your account after that is your own doing. Regards.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 16:18, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jamie Tubers Your tone is extremely unappreciated and I suggest you indeed take this issue to the administrative board. YOU ARE CLEARLY NOT READING ANYTHING and JUST ADDING TEMPLATES ON IRRATIONALLY and frankly I AM EXTREMELY irritated. What is you reason - you have refused to give any.
The page has been edited continuously. I am getting a tad bit irritated by all this. At least read it and leave the talk page and my comments and leave reasonable templates that actually reflect what the issue is so that they can be fixed. Are you just being irrational because you can. This is really frustrating
What's wrong with the article has been pointed out by others. Just continue to improve the article. Simple! You seriously have no business with the templates! If you feel the templates are no longer appropriate, discuss it in the article's talkpage. DO NOT REMOVE it by your own judgement! You already have conflict of interest, the least you should be doing right now is removing maintenance templates. That is a blatant show of bias to the subject. Okey Uzoeshi is not the only article with maintenance templates on Wikipedia. It's not the first, and won't be the last! What you are doing can be considered as disruption, which is a form of vandalism. Just one of these is enough to get you a block, not to talk of doing both, coupled with your already evident COI, which is not appreciated or welcomed on Wikipedia. I'm really getting tired of your disruptions. My tone is getting harsh, because you're really frustrating me here, and the fact that you're new and I don't want to discourage you is why I didn't revert all your contributions, or just take your issue to an administrator already. And trust me, that's why most people in here are being nice, including me. I'm repeating again for effects: DO NOT REMOVE THE TEMPLATES BY YOUR OWN JUDGEMENT, just continue to improve the article, that's what is needed on Wikipedia, not disruptions or vandalism.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 17:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jamie Tubers what further improvements can be done? Read the article and tell me? Like I mentioned I do not exactly know Okey Uzoeshi, I'm simply interested in writing a decent article.
Frankly at this stage I'd rather just delete ALL My edits and you can just write the article yourself.
Read it again! I have already called out the COI on the talk page, a ton of pages on wikipedia have connected contributors all they need to do is call that out and seeing as being an 'avid admirer' connotes that, even though I am not professionally or personally linked. I have ALSO called that out.
What exactly are the maintenance templates for, I am calling these out because I do not think they serve any relevance. How do they help to 'improve wikipedia as a whole'. I do not agree that this is down to vandalism and frankly I think your templates are irrelevant and unnecessary.
I agree more references may be needed and I'm happy for you to leave that template on but definitely NOT the COI template as I have already called that out on the talk page.
The weasel words have also been cleaned up so I suggest you remove that too
Feedback has been taken on board and the article amended, so what exactly is your mission here? especially given that you have not reviewed, adjusted the article. I really have an issue with your approach
As an experienced editor, surely you should be professional enough to maintain calm, you are asked about articles every day, however the complaints against you all seem to state how you do not READ revisions and you need to learn to do that. As mentioned I am extremely detailed, pedantic and want to see this fixed. So COI is extremely inflamatory as first of it is not true apart from me being a fan - that is a HUGE issue for me, so that needs to go. Tell me EXACTLY what the template is on there for as I have ALREADY called out the issue in the 'talk' page
I suggest you READ wikipedia's CLEANUP page as everything you are doing clearly contradicts that and is wrong
I have no issue with you adding templates but they must be the 'right ones', so I AM GOING TO REMOVE THE COI Template again because it has ALREADY been called out on the subject's talk page and I am going to remove the reference to weasel words because that has ALSO been fixed.
I have read through Wikipedia and nothing says only Jamie Tubers CAN add on and REMOVE MAINTENANCE MESSAGES, so if this is the reason why I may be banned or blocked then I'm sure there are channels outside of wikipedia to escalate and expose the 'nonsense' that goes on in here, (if this is indeed what this community is about). Also after reading the COI page and being directed to pages that carry the connected_contribute template. I have committed NO CRIME here, so I suggest you indeed take it on to the administrators.
Let me very nicely point out that your statement, this statement here is completely wrong and I see it as bullying. If there is indeed an issue with my updates, why don't we simply ask for the initial post and my corrections be placed side by side and see whether my updates have been so bad. I cannot believe anyone educated or professional will even utter these words in a pubic forum;
'My tone is getting harsh, because you're really frustrating me here, and the fact that you're new and I don't want to discourage you is why I didn't revert all your contributions, or just take your issue to an administrator already. And trust me, that's why most people in here are being nice, including me. I'm repeating again for effects: DO NOT REMOVE THE TEMPLATES BY YOUR OWN JUDGEMENT, just continue to improve the article, that's what is needed on Wikipedia, not disruptions or vandalism'
Just moved your signature/s to the end of your post/s, which is the 'usual' position for a 'sig'. Otherwise its on the left margin. Also fixed a few u/s lks to Jamie Tubers. 220ofBorg03:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please, everyone needs to calm down. More WP:AGF and less SHOUTING, please. * Note that the level 4 'last warning' message at the top of this section is a pre-written templated message, so it may be a bit more terse than 'Tubers' meant. It appears to me that you were only warned about rmv of maint templates twice, though I don't know how many times it was done. It is more usual, though not absolutely required, to go through the whole 4 advice, caution, warning, block 'threat' levels. Seems the first message you got was lvl 3.
As for deleting your edits, please don't. IIRC as soon as you have saved them, you have given up all rights to them, or they are in the public domain, to be copied, added to, altered or deleted by other editors according to WP guidelines and licencing. * A shortcut way of 'pinging' an editor is {{u|username}}, e.g. {{u|220 of Borg}}. 220ofBorg03:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
LOL at Borg, apologies at Jamie Tubers, thought 'she' was a 'he'. I am indeed a 'her', it so may be our 'ever so raging' hormones! - all in good faith eh?...no sweat off my back! It is what it is!!! Adeadeyemi21 (talk) 19:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As (I believe) the editor who suggested the COI template, it is likely more meant for editors-for-hire, employees of 'celebritys' they ask to 'fix' (or purge 'controversies', ex-'partner/s'-girl/boyfriends or other 'naughtiness' from) their WP page, and public relations/ marketing types. Being a 'fan', WP:NPOV may have been closer. • I have come across editors who swear they are not connected to a WP:BLP they edit/create, but turn out to be the person themselves! (Example). • It is not that unusual for relatively 'old' pages to be deleted. wp:Consensus can change. Sometimes really crappy pages slip 'under the radar'. A look at wp:New page patrol (a bit early to take part though), and Special:NewPagesFeed to see some of the 'crap ' that people write, especially about themselves, may be of interest. (TL;DR?) 220ofBorg05:37, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, really hilarious pages being created. makes absolute sense, however there has to be adequate quality control on wikipedia. At the end of the day FB and twitter are able to verify people, just curious as to why there's not something out there, that can resolve the many issues with wikipedia. lol. I am aware it works differently however the 'electronics engineer' in me wants to believe that theres a program that can be written to resolve these issues. How are you today? Reading up on WP principles some more tonight. Determined to ensure that I am good enough to update other wikipedia pages. :)
So just so you know, for a minute or so, I actually considered not editing wikipedia anymore, I can't thank you enough for your encouragement, because I will keep editing. Maybe you can mentor me through some articles I contribute to as this seems pretty complex and of course I will start with an 'Uzoeshi' movie. :))) Have an awesome evening. You may not know the content however you can review for WP policies. I'll ping soon. Adeadeyemi21 (talk) 19:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia, Adeadeyemi21! Thank you for your contributions. I am NottNott and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Hiiiii! Absolutely love the name, NottNott, thank you so much for the awesomely 'warm' welcome and for your message. I will DEFINITELY check out the pages you have provided and I really look forward to editing wikipedia. I have to admit I am pretty used to writing in a 'blog like' manner, so this will be really good fun'. Again! Thank you so much for the warm welcome and I will definitely reach out.Adeadeyemi21 (talk) 19:42, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, no problems! I saw you were having an editor crisis up above! I haven't read the details of this at all, but what's important to remember is that for every editor that annoys you here there's probably 10 constructive and fun-filled editors who are willing to help you out. Wikipedia continues to have high quality contribution when it continues to have a helpful and awesome community. Editing here has been a great time for me, even moreso when I started out. I'll link you a more comprehensive list of policies below, and please get in touch with me or with others through the use of a {{help me}} template.
Hello, Adeadeyemi21! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! ~ NottNotttalk|contrib09:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Okey Uzoeshi, without resolving the problem that the template refers to. This may be considered disruptive editing. Try to fix the issues referred to and let editors remove the templates, when considered appropriate to do so. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. Jamie Tubers (talk) 16:39, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Quote template added by me. 220 of Borg 07:12, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Comment: I have used the 
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
or 
) located above the edit window.
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove the maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Okey Uzoeshi. Jamie Tubers (talk) 21:37, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Cool! 220 of Borg 03:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. John Nagle (talk) 20:13, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
220 of Borg 19:01, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
220 of Borg 08:55, 7 October 2015 (UTC) 
