Jump to content

User talk:Fytcha

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome

[edit]

Hello, Fytcha, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! Shirt58 (talk) 09:31, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please un-permablock me from Wiktionary

[edit]

(Notice: This isn't just for you Fytcha, it's also for @RcAlex36:, @Suzukaze-c:, @Eirikr:, @Justinrleung:, and @Chuck Entz:)
Hello, I, Mr. Shāntián Tàiláng, want you to know I'm very deeply sorry about evading my Wiktionary block these past two months. The first time (October 26) I thought I'd be able to get away with it, because way back in January 2019 when I was first blocked from Wiktionary, I evaded that block and nobody ever noticed (I believe it might have been because none of the anonymous edits I made at that time seemed to be disruptive). The second time (November 1), I thought that I wouldn't get blocked because I was trying my best to refrain from making disruptive edits.

If I had a time machine, I would go back to before the admins blocked me (say, October 20th) and create, say, 肝腦塗地, 德薄, and 不留 as they exist today, so that your younger selves would no longer have any reason to block me, let alone permablock me.

And I'm sorry about pinging them as well―I was worried that you might be ignoring my pleading because of you, or at least RcAlex36, apparently thinking of me as incorrigible. I never thought I'd get blocked from editing my Wiktionary talk page. (See, none of you ever actually said, "Please stop pinging us, or else we will make you unable to edit your own talk page.")

And I'm sorry for Eirikr―please tell him and Justin that I was feeling upset over getting permablocked (Wiktionary editing was actually one of my hobbies, believe it or not), and I just wanted a few more chances to...prove I wasn't entirely disruptive, and I now realize I must have blown those chances as well. If any of you ever unblock me on Wiktionary, I tell you, I will not do any hasty Japanese entry creation edits again (as I did on October 28), and I won't do any disruptive Chinese entry creation edits either (as I foolishly did on October 26).

Again, if I could mentally time-travel to October 26, I would wait out the block and avoid doing all those disruptive edits and block evasions so that you wouldn't end up wasting your time cleaning up my bad edits with a mop and a shovel. I'm telling you the truth, the whole truth, and absolutely nothing but the truth.

So please don't assume that I'm beyond help and/or don't have any self-restraint because of the horrible mistakes I've made.

Isn't that assumption of yours, and your subsequent permablock-with-no-apparent-hope-of-any-sort-of-appeal just as bad as my sloppy creation of 德薄 where I assumed it was a noun (not an adjective) and gave it the wrong meaning?? Or my edits that I did using IP addresses 158.106.52.10 & 71.246.146.76 because I thought that not being disruptive would let me off the hook this time? (I realize I was mistaken about the definition of the first etymology of 不留 as well; I did not know Yellowbridge wasn't reliable.)

(And regarding self-restraint, I would never ever even try to create actual sockpuppet accounts like Angela Criss or Kingshowman did.)

And by the way, I really need to link 握り締める to and from its component words 握り and 締める. I also need to link 一時的 & 一時 to each other, as the former is derived from the latter (in Japanese); there's お手伝いさん that needs an etymology as well—it's from 手伝い, which is in turn derived from 手伝う. (I found them all mentioned in this file's description that was pulled from Flickr.)

In addition, I need to add Category:ja:Mythology to 伝説, and Category:zh:Hair to 髯, and the zh-forms of 一絲一毫 and 一絲不掛 needs "|type=211" added. The latter entry also should link to "stark naked" instead of to "stark" and "naked", and worse, meseems that English stark naked has "likely" misspelled as "likelily". German fasernackt also needs its etymology added (yes, I know it's from Faser + nackt, the same applies to splitternackt from Splitter, so splitterfasernackt is also equivalent to Splitter + Faser + nackt). And 論語読みの論語知らず really needs to be put in Category:ja:People, don't you agree?

Speaking of which, you do NOT have to completely remove the block for me to be happy. Just remove the permablock (I think that in this case of Block evasion, a permablock is absolutely overkill; one year or (hopefully) less would be MUCH more appropriate for someone as productive as I was, or at least tried to be, on Wiktionary) and allow me to edit my own talk page again. I promise I will wait out my block THIS time if you remove the permablock. Cheers!!! Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 21:00, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Shāntián Tàiláng: I'm not an administrator on Wiktionary but even if I were, I wouldn't overturn your ban. This verdict was reached by another sysop and I don't think it's unjustified. I am also inherently the wrong person to turn to because I don't edit Chinese nor Japanese, so I'm not the one who has to clean up after you (well, besides your {{etyl}} vandalism that I had to painstakingly mass-revert one by one). I'm personally a believer in second chances, however it seems like you've had much more than that already; besides, this is also easier said than done when I'm, again, not the one that has to bear the burden of your edits. Only if the affected CJK editors unanimously spoke out that you are a net benefit for the project, then I would hope that the ban would be commuted to a temporary one. --Fytcha (talk) 23:30, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That {{etyl}} stuff? I only did that because {{etyl}} is deprecated, and in fact, right on that template's documentation page, it says "This template should no longer be used directly in entries; it should be replaced by {{der}}, {{bor}}, {{inh}}, {{cog}} or {{noncog}}." Nothing similar appears on {{der}}'s documentation page. Besides, I know (now) that {{bor}} or {{inh}} should be used instead "wherever possible", but I wasn't sure whether each Italian or Portuguese entry was inherited or a learned borrowing.
Also, you might want to tell the CJK editors to look over all my CJK edits in general, not just the page creations. Also, I want them to know that prior to getting permablocked, I didn't understand their cleaning up after my sloppy edits to be wasting time cleaning up after me, but rather I thought of it as akin to follow-up or peer review. (Yes, I know they are admins and not exactly peers, but it does or did seem like a good analogy. Besides, they never actually stated that a week-long block would be among the things they would do if I continued to do those poor Chinese entry creations.)
Oh, and BTW, can you do something about νάνοιν? It has 2 redlinked templates; I think that entry was created before those 2 templates were deleted. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:15, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Shāntián Tàiláng: There is a precedent to not mass-replace {{etyl}} with {{der}} (see this thread) because there is no way to find all unspecific uses of {{der}}. What's more, I've told you exactly this right from the getgo when you embarked on your {{etyl}} vandalism spree (see this and this edit before the bulk of your {{der}} edits, the latter of which you've reverted so there's no doubt that you saw my hint but deliberately chose to ignore it). Re "but I wasn't sure whether each Italian or Portuguese entry was inherited or a learned borrowing": 1. That's why you shouldn't be the one doing these cleanups in the first place 2. You didn't even bother using the correct template in obvious cases (like this where it literally says "Borrowed from" or cases like this where it can't possibly be a non-borrowing).
Re "you might want to tell the CJK editors to look over all my CJK edits in general": No, I'm not your mouthpiece and they probably don't want to go over thousands of edits again. My stance is clear: If they deem you a net positive for the project, then I'll favor commuting your permaban to a temporary one; otherwise (if they deem you a net negative or if they don't reply at all) I'm not going to do anything. Again: I'm the wrong person to turn to. --Fytcha (talk) 16:43, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I didn't see a "you have a new talk page message" thingy, like what sometimes appears (or at least, used to appear) on Wikipedia for non-registered users whenever they get one. Also, Wiktionary has never alerted me to one of my edits being reverted (even if I'm logged in), unlike Wikipedia. Besides, nobody ever, uh, fretted when I did this, this, this, this, or this, so I thought you meant specifically Alfedena, not {{etyl}} in general, when I reverted your revert. So sorry.
As for "I'm the wrong person to turn to": Well, who in the world should I turn to? I already made requests on Chuck Entz's & RcAlex36's pages, and they have not said or done anything at all in response. And as I've said, I cannot edit my own talk page on Wiktionary, because of "continuing to ping other users to ask them [to] make edits for them after request to stop pinging other editors". See, I really wish they'd spelled out in full why they were permablocking me and why I should not have changed RcAlex36's words (yes, changing other users' words is frowned upon, but RcAlex36 never made it clear why I shouldn't have changed that one; I assumed it was a misspelling because it linked to a variant form, and I'm sure that's also frowned upon). As for why I did these and these edits? There's no actual Wiktionary equivalent of Wikipedia:Standard offer or anything similar, and I simply wanted to prove I wasn't gonna be disruptive anymore so that I might have a chance at getting un-permablocked. I had no idea that I was never under any circumstances supposed to make any logged-out edits even if they weren't disruptive ones. And I really don't like my questions being completely ignored; in any case, when the latter two IPs were found and blocked, I felt like I'd thrown one of my most passionate hobbies away forever. Just letting you know.
So, as I said, who do you think I should turn to? Any help would be greatly appreciated. So sorry if I'm annoying you too much. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 17:48, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Shāntián Tàiláng: Re "wish they'd spelled out in full why they were permablocking me": It says it right there on your user page. How much clearer than "Abusing multiple accounts/block evasion" should they be? --Fytcha (talk) 21:23, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Fytcha, I understand that now (and I did understand that yesterday as well), but back in October I was not aware that this was the standard protocol for all manner of block evasion, since I hadn't yet looked at Wiktionary:Requests for checkuser. I thought an infinite block for block evasion only occurred for actual creation of multiple Wikimedia accounts, like Til Eulenspiegel did (and even then, it seems that User:Bishonen only blocked him for 6 months the first time he evaded blocks). In any case, I still think an infinite block for me would be overkill, especially since this block makes...sweeping assumptions about my intentions and/or feelings (and as I said before, I never want to make sloppy page-creations ever again). You might be interested to know that before I had my account here, I would sometimes end up within Til Eulenspiegel's IP range, even though I had (and still have) no idea who he even is or what his...biases are (I do know he tends to engage in personal attacks, which I'd never do). That's how I knew of his misdeeds early on. So, as I asked before, who do you suppose would be the right dude to turn to for help? Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Shāntián Tàiláng: Re "who do you suppose would be the right dude to turn to for help?": For the time being, nobody. Your chances of getting unblocked right now are absolutely 0. I would encourage you to own up to your mistakes, learn from them, be remorseful and better yourself (this means in particular not doing them again; your last block-evading IP was blocked just recently). After you've done all of this and after some time has passed, the involved sysops might reconsider their decision and give you a tentative second chance, though I won't promise anything for certain. However, this certainly won't happen for as long as you keep block-evading. Show some self-restraint. If I were you, I'd take my advice, stay away from Wiktionary for at least half a year and then respectfully and remorsefully ask an involved sysop without making any excuses as you did here on my page. As I'm only very tangentially involved in all of this, I don't think I have anything further to comment. --Fytcha (talk) 15:23, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to ask all those months ago, exactly which were the "excuses" I made on your page? I'm not very good at recognizing when I make excuses.
But other people's excuses, well...I do know that Samuel A. Cartwright invented drapetomania as a filthy excuse for racist slavery!
Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:20, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! One last thing―can you put visitator (and its female equivalent, visitatrix―which Wiktionary sadly doesn't indicate) in Category:en:Religion, and then add oryges to Category:English irregular plurals ending in -ges for me? Thank you so very much for your advice. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 18:53, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ultrapolynomial

[edit]

There is a discussion of an article you recently created at WT:WPM#Ultrapolynomial. --JBL (talk) 13:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Fytcha

Thank you for creating 1982 seizure of the Polish embassy in Bern.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:12, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Allen Coliban moved to draftspace

[edit]

Please refer to log comments. MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:02, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MrsSnoozyTurtle: Which part of the article has supposed "promo issues"? Can you really just move (read: delete) an article out of mainspace unilaterally as a non-sysop? Fytcha (talk) 02:09, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Fytcha. Thanks for your message.
Throughout the article, events are described with subjective wording to present this politician in a positive light.
What's a "sysop" please? I am not familiar with this term. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:33, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MrsSnoozyTurtle: Which events exactly are described with subjective wording? As far as I can tell, the article relays the information from the Romanian sources pretty neutrally. If you could refer me to a specific passage of text, that would be helpful.
A sysop is an administrator. Fytcha (talk) 12:14, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Allen Coliban

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Fytcha. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Allen Coliban, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Allen Coliban

[edit]

Hello, Fytcha. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Allen Coliban".

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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 16:36, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fytcha&oldid=1127597569"