User talk:Ahri Boy
 | This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics:
|
 | This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Blanking Other User's Pages
[edit]Hi Ahri Boy. I saw you blanked Ltbdl's user page. I'd like to remind you that per WP:UPOWN, we shouldn't modify other's user pages unless there's a major concern such as BLP, attacks, or copyvio. However, I also haven't reverted because, frankly, I don't think it's worth it to undo a change that doesn't hurt anything just because it's not in strict accordance with policy. I just wanted to make sure you knew going forward. Thanks! EducatedRedneck (talk) 13:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Editing a blocked user's talk page
[edit]There's really no need for this. It was not disruptive, and user pages are not required to be helpful. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ohh... Didn't know that the log wasn't really a plan for a blocked user to attack in the future. Ahri Boy (talk) 13:26, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 19 October 2024
[edit]- News and notes: One election's end, another election's beginning
- Recent research: "As many as 5%" of new English Wikipedia articles "contain significant AI-generated content", says paper
- In the media: Off to the races! Wikipedia wins!
- Contest: A WikiCup for the Global South
- Traffic report: A scream breaks the still of the night
- Book review: The Editors
- Humour: The Newspaper Editors
- Crossword: Spilled Coffee Mug
Citation added to ANI but not to the article?
[edit]They said: El_C 17:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Add with citation i will not remove the edit
(diff). Why have you not done so, since obviously the citation exists, as you've added it to ANI. This is bad form and is sanctionable.
- Please disregard, it was in the body this entire time. Sorry about that. El_C 17:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
[edit]Hi Ahri Boy. Thank you for your work on Vaultwarden. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
see if you can mention this on the target page with a good reference
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
-MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
M.Bitton (talk) 04:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- I am already aware of the area before. Ahri Boy (talk) 05:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Raladic (talk) 06:30, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 6 November 2024
[edit]- From the editors: Editing Wikipedia should not be a crime
- In the media: An old scrimmage, politics and purported libel
- Special report: Wikipedia editors face litigation, censorship
- Traffic report: Twisted tricks or tempting treats?