User talk:Augurar

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Augurar, 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
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Orphan Wiki 22:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Urban fantasy

Replied to the issue you raised on the talk page. It's not exactly a 'solution,' but it may be a slight improvement. On a side note, thought I'd mention that I know what the italics were for in your previous edits. I'm just more familiar with italics being used for single words than terms in cases like this. Regards. -- James26 (talk) 04:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2011

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Chocolate bloom with this edit, did not appear to be constructive, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Unionhawk ^Talk ^E-mail 00:30, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. Sorry!--Unionhawk ^Talk ^E-mail 12:04, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Centipede bite

Augurar, I salute your work on the Centipede bite page, and while I readily admit it has a much better structure to it now, I'm the least bit snubbed that you characterized my edits as "awkward" and "incoherent". Sad face. :( Buddy23Lee (talk) 18:59, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for my arrogant wording. I was hyperbolizing somewhat -- it would have been more accurate to have said: "attempted to improve clarity and flow". No insult was intended, it just came out rather harshly, it seems. Augurar (talk) 20:10, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries my friend, and thank you for the clarification. :) Buddy23Lee (talk) 18:58, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rasputin

Hello Augurar, please explain yourself. Anybody can put a template somewhere. Your solution is too easy.Taksen (talk) 04:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have put back the template with more explanation on the talk page. I'm sorry if I upset you. Augurar (talk) 05:24, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agouti (disambiguation)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Agouti (disambiguation), and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://shelf3d.com/i/Agouti.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:53, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a false positive. In fact, the linked URL was using content from Wikipedia, which I had moved from Agouti to Agouti (disambiguation). Augurar (talk) 07:23, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Eugene Goostman may have broken the syntax by modifying 3 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

'''Eugene:''' Something between 2 and 4. Maybe, three? :-))) By the way, I still don’t know your specialty – or, possibly, I’ve missed it?

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:48, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cuniculus hernandezi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Specific epithet. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Palustrine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lacustrine. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Augurar. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people

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 all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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.

Neutrality^talk 20:58, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JAR

Your re-write is well sourced, balanced, and relatively neutral, and will therefore never be accepted in that article. Since the day the article was created, any effort to achieve neutrality has been rebuffed, often with threats and intimidation. Many of us who used to edit the article have stopped. It's a shame, because a well-written article is possible, as can be seen for other language wikis addressing this topic. -Darouet (talk) 02:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment. I too have decided to give up on that article and possibly all of Wikipedia. Let the propaganda flow! Augurar (talk) 04:49, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Templating the regulars

FYI, templating editors that are more experienced than you is a faux pas. More concerning is that you are foolishly still trying to edit war that NPOV template against consensus, which is a part of your pattern of trolling that article. Anybody that thinks that the Russia investigation is "McCarthyism" really should not be editing that article anyway, and if you don't adjust your behavior, that could potentially be fixed in the near future. Geogene (talk) 14:20, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Based on your behavior, I assumed you were either a newbie or had forgotten the rules. From your comments it seems like you think you own the article in question. In fact, you have absolutely no authority to decide who should be editing that or any article, your veiled threat to "fix" my "foolish" attempts to improve the article notwithstanding. Augurar (talk) 03:41, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm noticing a pattern of disruptive editing from you. And while I don't have authority to, say, sanction people, I've seen it before and can see where it will probably go. Geogene (talk) 04:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You win this one, enjoy your fiefdom. Augurar (talk) 04:29, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Geogene (talk) 04:03, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Augurar. You seem to have broken the WP:1RR restriction on Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. There may still be time for you to avoid a block by undoing your last change. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 04:36, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The change has already been undone by a member of the article's ruling junta. I am composing a reply on the noticeboard. Augurar (talk) 04:38, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't accept the need to persuade the other users you will find it hard to edit anything controversial here. And the one you have chosen to work on is probably near the summit of all the disputed articles. EdJohnston (talk) 16:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve UWSGI

Hi, I'm Rentier. Augurar, thanks for creating UWSGI!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Hi, it's unclear to me how this passes WP:NSOFT?

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Rentier (talk) 14:35, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Augurar. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

PLease add your sources to Cylindrosporium. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 08:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:General sanctions/Syrian Civil War and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant notice

Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

--Bbb23 (talk) 14:17, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

3rr warning and MOS alert

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Galobtter: Hi, I see you have tag-teamed my edit to bypass the 3RR. Would you mind letting me know the name of the PR firm you work for? I might like to hire their services myself sometime... Augurar (talk) 07:28, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have not even reverted any of your edits here, so your bad faith aspersion of tag-teaming is patently false. I genuinely have no idea what you're even talking about in regards to PR firm and will only note that continually attacking other editors will only end up poorly for you Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:39, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No need to threaten me, just get one of your admin colleagues to ban me if you want. Remember, as a volunteer, I can't be fired for my performance on Wikipedia. ;) Best, Augurar (talk) 07:44, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For an augurar you have a remarkably clouded crystal ball. E Eng 08:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1rr violation and Self-revert

Your recent editing history at Brett Kavanaugh shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially, as the page in question is currently under restrictions from the Arbitration Committee, if you violate the one-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than one revert on a single page with active Arbitration Committee restrictions within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the one-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the one-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

You have violated the 1RR by adding back contested content and reverting more than once in a 24hr period. If you do not self revert on both you could be blocked. ContentEditman (talk) 20:30, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see thread here at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Augurar ContentEditman (talk) 02:18, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Augurar. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Augurar. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:Augurar/Conspiracy psychology

Hello, Augurar. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Conspiracy psychology".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Mgbo120 (talk) 20:36, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mgbo120:I don't intend to work on that article idea any time soon, so please go ahead and delete it. Thanks! Augurar (talk) 21:46, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I have indefinitely blocked you for continuously, persistently and abusively editing while logged out. This is not your first block for socking in this manner. See WP:GAB for your appeal rights.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:32, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]