User talk:CommanderLinx

Welcome!

Hello, CommanderLinx, 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:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Cirt (talk) 17:21, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 3 2013

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to María Capovilla, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --218.110.38.3 (talk) 06:29, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if placing false vandalism messages on user talk pages can get you blocked from editing. CommanderLinx (talk) 11:30, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pierre Darcourt may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"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:

{{s-aft| after =[Anne D'Evergroote<br>(October 18, 1783 – March 14, 1892)<br/>(aged 108 years 148 days) }}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:10, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of South American supercentenarians may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"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:

|}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:03, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Turinah may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"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:

{{{Proposed deletion/dated

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:44, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Moving my post

If I had wanted to post that message to the deletion discussion, I would have. I chose to post it to his userpage as a semi-private message from me to him. In the future, before taking it upon yourself to move other people's discussions/posts, you might wish to ask them first. Don't move it back.... what's done is done. – JBarta (talk) 16:34, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Longevity drafts

One reason I suspect for all of this is the old Arbcom case. A lot of the same users are involved. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:28, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blimey, this has been going on for an unusually long time. Not really sure why they can't just work together to improve existing articles instead of hiding on their user pages... CommanderLinx (talk) 18:20, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Antonio Todde, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian. 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) 09:01, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:AdmiralAlex

Hi, though this is not in exactly the same vein as the longevity-related user pages that were put up for Mfd this appears sufficiently similar to deserve examination. So far I have had no input for any other users so would appreciate your input. Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 22:00, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirecting of articles

Hello,

I've noticed that on several occasions recently you have decided to redirect (in effect, to delete) entire supercentenarian biographies WITHOUT GAINING CONSENSUS, namely:

Gertrud Henze
Frieda Szwillus
Ethel Farrell
Colombe Benoit-LeClerc

And you say that you will probably do the same to Antonia Gerena Rivera's article as well.

Now, you took Colombe Benoit-LeClerc's article to an AfD after I requested you do so, and the outcome of the discussion was "delete". Fine. I do not have an issue with an article being deleted if consensus has reached, but I do not see why you think it's acceptable to just delete an entire article because YOU and YOU ONLY want to.

Explain please. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 21:53, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See here. The common outcomes of a lot of these articles is either "delete" or "redirect to <country>". If you want Antonia Rivera to keep her article, then find reliable sources and expand it. At the moment there is nothing of value other than her name, age and country which is already present in List of oldest living people, List of supercentenarians from the United States, List of Puerto Rican supercentenarians, List of North American supercentenarians, List of the verified oldest women and List of the verified oldest people. I will wait a few months to see if this article gets improved as I just placed a notability tag this month. CommanderLinx (talk) 03:13, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It may often be the case that they are deleted after a discussion, but not always. And quite honestly, I don't see why your judgement alone is a good enough reason to destroy an entire biography. I know that AfD discussions are a pain but when talking about deletions of whole articles, I think they are necessary. I don't apologise for insisting on democracy. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 15:11, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Read the WP:WOP page, there's a section that states: " A subject whose biography is based on only one or two reliable sources establishing notability may belong on a list, rather than in a stand-alone biography, unless these sources provide significant details beyond longevity.". Look at Antonia's article as of writing, we know her name, her age and country. That's it, with no improvement since its creation a few months ago. As per the WOP Wikiproject, her article should be redirected to one of the six or so lists she's already in. CommanderLinx (talk) 02:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Why this??? [1] please explain to me. I did not do anything wrong with this account.---STM201 (talk) 13:15, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please Stop Deleting My Edits On Supercentenarians

Hello CommanderLinx, can you explain to me why you have or keep deleted my edits to Supercentenarians such as Violet Brown and Maria Capovilla. You told me to back up my info. I did. Now I'm getting messages from either DerbyCountyInNZ or you, saying i can't back up my facts with other Wikipedia articles. If you click on this link it will take you to a page that specifically states the oldest/last person by year of birth. And if your still paranoid that the info I'm giving is false, the information on that page is from the Gerontology Research Group. I hope you understand what I'm saying.

Best Wishes, Crimson&Clover71

Possible disruptive editing

Hi, I think it's only fair to inform you that you have been mentioned here as a possible source of disruptive editing. In my capacity as an administrator I generally do not make unilateral decisions in cases such as these, but I will be advising Waenceslaus to escalate the issue to a venue where a group of administrators will debate how to go forward. Editors who are found to be disrupting the Wilipedia to make a point are frequently blocked to prevent further misuse of editing privileges. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:08, 5 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) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

There was no consensus for your point of view. You and a few others simply arbitrarily decided to change things and blocked everyone who disagreed. --Sailor Haumea (talk) 23:01, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The only disruptive editing is from you. There is consensus to include reliable sources, not just the GRG. Keep going for GRG only and you will find yourself topic banned like the other 110 club members. CommanderLinx (talk) 23:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - I warned Sailor Haumea of the discretionary sanctions on longevity related articles. Should this continue, Arbitration Enforcement rather than the edit war noticeboard is probably in order given their obvious lack of desire to understand and follow Wikipedia practices. Ravensfire (talk) 23:36, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Accusation

It's NOT ACCEPTABLE to accuse me of being a user who just logged out to edit. Saying "Log back into your account" is an unacceptable accusation. --104.56.23.57 (talk) 02:06, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not topic banned. This is a public library IP address. 104.56.23.57 (talk) 04:21, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oldest in Britain

Greetings,

Please stop trying to claim Oldest in Britain is not a reliable source.

Dr. Andrew Holmes, PhD, the owner of the site, is a correspondent for the Gerontology Research Group and has been mentioned in the media. He's not a "fan"...he's an EXPERT on the subject. His information comes from correspondence with government authorities and with family members of those listed on his site. The site IS reliable.

Please stop trying to assert it's not reliable.

We see him mentioned here:

[2]

104.56.23.57 (talk) 05:28, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. No, it's not reliable for Wikipedia as it is self published. The WOP guidelines state it is unreliable and it's been discussed at the reliable sources noticeboard. CommanderLinx (talk) 07:25, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus

Stop redirecting articles without consensus. Policy is to go to AfD FIRST. If you continue redirecting without consensus, I will keep reverting you. Follow the rules. --104.56.23.57 (talk) 00:38, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Guidelines at the WP:WOP say those redirects you reversed belong on a list, not a standalone article. Also look at WP:NOPAGE. CommanderLinx (talk) 05:29, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, CommanderLinx. 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]

Ena Nelson source

Isn't the newspaper image in her find a grave page a good enough source? I don't see how that could be faked in any way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorglorg (talk • contribs) 01:05, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you get something better? Because find a grave is not a reliable source per WP:EL/P. CommanderLinx (talk) 02:13, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was asking about the newspaper image contained in the find a grave page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorglorg (talk • contribs) 02:30, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Find a grave isn't reliable. The newspaper articles you mentioned aren't sourced at the find a grave link either. So no, can't use it as a source. CommanderLinx (talk) 10:02, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well can we keep her there until her next birthday to see if we get a better source then? It's less than a month away.--Dorglorg (talk) 12:58, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Helli Stehle

I did not say the sources listed made her notable. What I said made her notable was her being the first female radio presenter which I put in the edit summary. So is that good enough?--Dorglorg (talk) 05:54, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anywhere in the notability guidelines that says "being the first female presenter makes you notable" so she would need to satisfy WP:GNG which she doesn't because you need more than a ten year old local article and IMDB. CommanderLinx (talk) 06:15, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well I just added a more recent source from a bigger website so is that good enough?--Dorglorg (talk) 06:22, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, CommanderLinx. 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]

ANI Experiences survey

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Superold people

We had some success rolling country specific lists into continent lists and I think that is a better way to go to trim. Also shortening the lists - no need for the top 100 oldest Americans because how do we verify such an indiscriminant collection of info. Ping User:EEng as well. Legacypac (talk) 20:00, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh God, not longevity again! E Eng 20:47, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking about how best to approach Canada/US/North America lists but I believe the two country articles at the very least would pass WP:LISTN as some of the references (even though many are local birthday stories) at least mention someone being the oldest in the country. I haven't seen any mention of being the oldest in that particular continent. I believe the Asia and Oceania articles should be looked at again for similar reasons. Still some redundancy with these lists anyway. CommanderLinx (talk) 02:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Chiyo Miyako

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Chiyo Miyako. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Andrew D. (talk) 17:38, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, CommanderLinx. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, CommanderLinx. 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]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]