User talk:Allanana79

Welcome!

Hello, Allanana79, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
The Wikipedia Adventure (a fun interactive editing tutorial that takes about an hour)
Wikipedia Teahouse (a user-friendly help forum)
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! We are so glad you are here! Jim1138 (talk) 08:54, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ramesses III

When starting a new thread to a talk page, please add it to the bottom. Otherwise, the person won't know where to look. Please see wp:talk page guidelines Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:54, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

Never a good idea and suggest that your argument is weak. Look at WP:NPA and WP:AGF. As I've just told another editor, sources must directly address the subject of the article, and a study that says "Objective: To investigate the true character of the harem conspiracy described in the Judicial Papyrus of Turin and determine whether Ramesses III was indeed killed." should be used only in an article on the Harem Conspiracy, and not cherry-picked to prove a point. Doug Weller talk 19:24, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

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.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:14, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the domestic dog - Talk Page

Hello Allanana79, welcome to Wikipedia as I noticed from this Talk Page that you have recently joined. (I also note from this Talk Page that you have may have "upset" one or two people, don't be disheartened, it will take you a little while to learn some of Wikipedia's rules and requirements - we all do eventually.) Regarding your recent comment on Talk:Origin of the domestic dog: "I typed in domestication of wolves and got this page so. It leads to this page no matter what you are looking for." I assume that you meant using a search engine on the internet, in which case the Origin of the domestic dog page will be the first thing you will see listed in your search engine. The dog is a domesticated wolf, although the Late Pleistocene wolf population that was their ancestor has gone extinct, and we have not yet found any fossil remains of their ancestors, but we are still looking. Is there anything that I can help you with? Regards, William Harris • talk • 04:24, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

yeah. While reading the page it says in one part that wolves are trainable and immediately afterwards in the section it says that they are not trainable. That they are very hard to keep as pets. I read a long time ago and it might have been changed. It was an observation I made a few months ago. Now that I am member of Wikipedia editors I though I could help. Thank you.Allanana79 (talk) 19:45, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that it is important when dealing with scientific research to put in both points of view, that is why it says both. Readers can then follow the citations to read further and form their own opinion. I am about to update the entire Dog Domestication section of this article and these statements may disappear as we now have a model of the domestication process for animals. If you wish to read further on the debate about wolf trainability and behavior, you will find more over at Dog behavior#Cognition. A researcher by the name of Udell has challenged many of the old beliefs about wolves and what they can do.

If you are serious about editing Wikipedia, then I would suggest thinking clearly about what your favorite area is and what you know a lot about, and just sticking to that area for a while. Create a user page for yourself (just click on the User Page button to the top left of your screen) that says a bit about who you are and what topics you like to edit, and then when you sign off on an edit you won't show a red-colored name, it will be blue - people here get concerned when they see a red-colored name. Wikipedia is only as good as the citations it provides to a user to read further - the rest is largely just someone's point of view at the time! Most of the key pages here are "owned" by someone, and you have found "mine" - the Origin of the domestic dog. Therefore, be prepared to do a lot of research and reading in you favorite area, and when making edits you need to be sure of what you are going to say and have good citations to support it, otherwise the "owner" will undo them and next thing you know you are in an edit war with the "deputy sheriff" intervening soon after, which could lead to a ban. After a few months of making useful edits in the areas of your interest, people will get to know you and trust your judgment. It took me a while to be known around the dog and wolf related pages. Then, you can expand your interest - you might even get to work in collaboration with others to updating some major pages. Good luck! Regards, William Harris • talk • 20:21, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That was really nice of you William. I don't want to edit any pages. I'm just a casual observer on Wikipedia. I'm just to hear to help point out inconsistencies and help as much as I can on the talk pages. Maybe some day though. I don't even have a computer right at the moment to do all things unfortunately. Only my phone. So. Thank again. Allanana79 (talk) 23:40, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, perhaps we will see you more active some time in the future. Please don't let a couple of early "run-ins" with others deter you - you are talking to the world out here, and it is made up of all types of personalities, attitudes and beliefs. We don't all bite! Regards, William Harris • talk • 19:52, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a question. I speak French fluently and I go on the French side of Wikipedia and I try to change some of the information and right as it gets changed it changes back saying it's not sourced. But on the English side it's there and I don't know how to show it is sourced. I'm not you could help me on this but you might be able to point me in the right direction. Thanks. Allanana79 (talk) 21:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The best I can offer is for you to read through and begin using a bunch of Wikipedia policies WP:CITE, WP:VERIFY and WP:RELIABLE. WPs are very tedious but they are the rules that "govern" this undertaking, and I think they are the most important 3 so they are worth the time reading through. If you have followed these, and have reliable, verifiable sources that have been cited but someone still undoes your work, then take your complaint onto the Talk Page of that article - other more reasonable people may be attracted who will give their point of view as well. Good luck! Regards, William Harris • talk • 19:51, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey William. Is that a new page on dog behavior? I haven't seen that one before. Very interesting. Allanana79 (talk) 00:53, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The page has been around for a while, but I have substantially reworked it last year and linked it to other articles so that it is easier to find. Regards, William Harris • talk • 19:51, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about disabling the Wikipedia collections tool

Thank you for using the collections feature in Wikipedia beta! Due to technical and moderation issues, we will be turning off this experimental feature. Your collections will be available for viewing and export until March 1st. If you would like to save your collection as links on a special Wikipedia page, please fill out the following form. If you are interested in giving your feedback about Wikipedia Collections please do so here.

Thanks,

Jon Katz
Product manager, Wikimedia Foundation
Jkatz (WMF) (talk) 00:11, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures of Trump's inauguration

Yo. I've been concerned about pics of the inauguration and looked some things up. The CNN gigapixel photo has a pretty good shot of the crowd. Here I blather about it and other photos of Trump's inauguration, and here about it and Obama's inauguration. --Kiz o r 10:09, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

September 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as WikiLeaks are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines, not for general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Your contribution on the talk page adds nothing to the discussion, is off-topic and was meant only to inflame a situation. That is disruptive editing. Don't do that. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 18:30, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Please see WP:NOTFORUM. – S. Rich (talk) 18:35, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding transgender issues and paraphilia classification (e.g. hebephilia), a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Funcrunch (talk) 18:42, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Talk:Ancient Egyptian race controversy. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Doug Weller talk 20:29, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. I wasn't trying to attack him. I was trying to sympathize with him. He is a minority in a country that wishes to exterminate his race. I'm telling him that if he allowed black people to have their history. Than maybe they wouldn't have such a grudge that they would try and murder off the whites in South Africa. Allanana79 (talk) 01:15, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am an administrator who has recently posted at Talk:Ancient Egyptian race controversy to say that there has been too much commentary lately. Accordingly, I have had to remove your most recent comment there. Please do not post opinions on the topic and particularly do not post opinions about other editors. I understand that your comment above is just a clarification of an earlier comment at article talk, but I do not see an understanding of the underlying problem—editors do not comment about other editor's personal characteristics. Regarding the topic of the Ancient Egyptian race controversy, bear in mind that Wikipedia has certain built-in limitations. The most significant of those is that articles must be based on scholarly reliable sources. Perhaps those sources are wrong about the issue, or are omitting important information. That is just unfortunate and improving the article will have to wait until such sources are available. Article talk pages are not a place to exchange opinions on the topic. Please be sure to never repeat anything like this comment—comment only on actionable proposals to improve the article based on reliable sources. Johnuniq (talk) 01:58, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted yet another forum style post of yours

at Talk:Tiye. Seriously, this needs to stop. Doug Weller talk 17:09, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		Bravery Barnstar.
		For taking and voicing a sensible stance regarding Ancient Egyptian customs, and promoting editorial decency Charles Bélanger Nzakimuena (talk) 06:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Bélanger Nzakimuena (talk) 06:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you. Allanana79 (talk) 21:14, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article) and Talk) for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 15:41, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:15, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can just change my name. Fuck off. Allanana79 (talk) 21:10, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also. I donated $200 to wikipedia. Was that a mistake?? Allanana79 (talk) 21:10, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doug Weller.

He really needs to get off his fat ass and get a life. Allanana79 (talk) 21:13, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]