User talk:Asheiou/Archives/2023/06
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, I've nominated it for DYK. You're welcome to suggest more hooks. BorgQueen (talk) 18:45, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
- @BorgQueen Oh, thank you! The hook you wrote seems good. -ASHEIOU (THEY/THEM • TALK) 18:47, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Hednesford
[edit]
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Hednesford, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:04, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
It's User:Samlaptop!!!
[edit]Yo, it's User:Samlaptop85213 the guy who likes vandalism, MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM! 2A00:23C6:5413:A601:5DB1:FAFA:DDE5:B6F (talk) 15:01, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:52, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Rollback granted
[edit]
Hi Asheiou. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback:
- Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle or RedWarn.
- Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Rollback should never be used to edit war.
- If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
- Use common sense.
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:42, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Pending changes reviewer granted
[edit]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
- Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
- Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
- Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
DanCherek (talk) 23:34, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Timor
[edit]Please look before doing so, i took hard time clearing minor leagues per afc-fifa style pages. Why unrelated users so often destroy efforts?! 93.141.249.210 (talk) 16:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- Hiya 93.141.249.210,
- My apologies if I've undone any of your constructive edits. In future, to avoid this from happening, I'd recommend leaving an edit summary that explains what you've done and why you've done it. It is difficult to discern what your actions are trying to accomplish if you don't explain what it is you've been up to! If you could please make sure you do that in future, it would likely stop any false-positive rollbacking of your well-intentioned efforts. You may also wish to create an account, as it carries a lot of benefits, such as a permanent record of all of your contributions, as well as masking your IP! My apologies again. -Asheiou (they/them • talk) 21:33, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
cromch
[edit]
Links abbiegen has eaten your {{subst:cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{subst:cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!
Links abbiegen (talk) 22:22, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi Asheiou,
if I see correctly, your messages in the "Removal of content" section, might be misrepresenting (or displaying an unawareness of) the following policy sections:
- WP:BURDEN, requiring those in favor of inclusion to provide reliable sources directly supporting the material,
- WP:BLPRESTORE, requiring consensus before restoring disputed material,
- the introduction of WP:BLP (removing "immediately and without waiting for discussion" is the opposite of "it's important to not indiscriminately remove content just because the reference it is tagged with is unreliable")
- WP:ONUS, requiring consensus for inclusion,
- "Notability", which isn't about article content ("The notability guideline does not determine the content of articles").
You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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 special powers 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 practice;
- 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.
Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:24, 6 June 2023 (UTC)