User talk:IKhitron

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, IKhitron! I am Ravenmewtwo and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

~@Ravenmewtwo 11:19, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this letter. Unfortunately I do edit Wikipedia a lot, but not in English. So I saw you letter right now. Best regards, (IKhitron (talk) 11:40, 21 August 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Flow

I marked the discussion at WT:WikiProject Breakfast as "resolved". I don't think that there's any need to delete it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, WhatamIdoing. By the way, it's resolved indeed - the bug is fixed after my work. IKhitron (talk) 11:50, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Zootopia

I know you said that you're willing to let things be, but I did add something to the discussion that I hope makes matters a bit clearer. You can respond if you wish, or just read it and move on, but I do hope it helps. --McDoob AU93 18:41, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, McDoobAU93, I did not understand. What did you say that I did not answer on it? IKhitron (talk) 18:46, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think we were posting at the same time, so this does not take into consideration your most recent post in the thread. --McDoob AU93 18:49, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Test

Test test test.

December 2019: Urls in edit summaries are not sources

Hello, I'm Alex 21. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Black Lightning (season 3), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page.

When you add new content into an article, such as here, you need to add the cite in the article; posting it in the edit summary is lazy, and an editor would completely be within their rights to revert you, as you added unsourced content within the article. -- /Alex/₂₁ 21:36, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You just left a message on my talk page that I added something to an article without sources. You wrote to answer you here if it's wrong. Well, it's completely wrong, and I definitely wrote a source for my addition. Could you please delete your message? Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 21:52, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where, in the article, did you add the source? You added the date, nothing else. -- /Alex/₂₁ 21:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex 21: The source appears in the summary of course, because I did not add the new data to the article as is, but only to the hidden part. There will be actual source, with a different url, when the title will be published, and there will be a date there either, so the person that will add it then will not need my source. You could say I put the source in the wrong place - it's possible, I'm working by rules I know from my wiki, and do not know the enwiki rules, but you can't say I did not source the data. IKhitron (talk) 22:02, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So, what you're saying is, is that you didn't cite it in the article at all. You added content; hidden or not is irrelevant. You need to cite everything you add to an article, with a cite in the article. -- /Alex/₂₁ 22:03, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex 21: Actually, what I'm saying, I sourced the data, looks like in the wrong place, and you say I did not do it at all, which is not true, because there is a source for my edit that I found and only then made the edit and mentioned it. If I would do such thing in our wiki I could lose my sysop flag because of violation of WP:DNB. All you could do when I explained you that I did not know that this particular source should be in different place, was removing your message and putting another one, explaining that I sourced it wrong. You still can delete all this conversation and put the right message. IKhitron (talk) 22:14, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me to the exact edit where you added a source for the content in the article? -- /Alex/₂₁ 07:49, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point an exact edit where I added a data that need a source to a content in the article? IKhitron (talk) 11:32, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here, here and here. The fact that they were hidden is irrelevant; you edited the article, added content, and did not include a source with that content in the article. -- /Alex/₂₁ 11:34, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. I added sources to all of them. The fact they were hidden in summaries is irrelevant. Again, I do not insist I was right - I was not, I did not know the rules yet, people do not born with this knowledge. I just expect you to fix the message to the right one. Something as "next time you add sources in summaries you will be indefinitely blocked". This is fair. To say I did not provided them at all is not. IKhitron (talk) 11:39, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where in the article was the source? The message is correct - you added unsourced content; that is, content without any source in the article itself. -- /Alex/₂₁ 11:40, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let's stop this. I can see that you say these irrelevant things again and again just not to say you are wrong. IKhitron (talk) 21:56, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Alex 21, the discussion does not help, but the problem should be solved somehow. So I asked for a piece of advice in IRL from enwiki admin that I know many years. I did not wanted him to do something, of cource, because of conflict of interests, but he explained my what I can do. According to his words, there are three options.

I can archive this topic. I do not want to do this. I did something wrong, I do not want to hide the message, just make it right.
I can ask for help from Administrators Noticeboard or AK. I prefer not to do this yet and try to find a peaceful solution.
I like this one. As he explained, I can change the topic title, which you named "December 2019". I do not need your approval to the fact of renaming, but it's better if you agree to the new text.

So, here is the deal. I'd like to rename the topic from "December 2019" to "December 2019: Urls in edit summaries are not sources". Are you agree with this text? Or do you want to suggest another one, that still includes the word "summary", and I'll probably be ok with it? If we'll find the solution, I can delete all this topic, except your first message, if you are interested in it, replacing it with my apologies. What do you say? IKhitron (talk) 14:33, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I wanted to wait a week, but it was eleven days eventually, even more than needed. I must try by the rules to get your approval, not to get it. And I actually tried. Unfortunately, you've ignored my ping the third time in the last month on different pages. And so, again by the rules, after I tried, I can change the topic title. IKhitron (talk) 12:49, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, there are 2,845,300 edits in enwiki zero namespace excluding redirects, with URLs in summaries, updated to December 25, 2019. IKhitron (talk) 12:55, 1 January 2020 (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) 02:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dates in episode lists

RE your revert on Secrets of Sulphur Springs [1]: I understand "why" it was done that way. What I'm telling you is that it's not a proper format and can't be done that way. If you want to put in a formatted pre-release date with a footnote, then change it when it actually releases, that's fine. Otherwise, leave it blank. Also, it's possible that <nowiki>TBA (TBA)</wiki> may work, but don't quote me on that. Technically, if it was "pre-released", then that's the original air date anyway, per the template documentation (Template:Episode list). When it's not formatted correctly (and it wasn't), it ends up in Category:Episode lists with unformatted air dates and someone is going to come along and fix it. That's the reason for the original edit and the revert of your revert. ButlerBlog (talk) 12:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Butlerblog. Well, I'm not a part of enwiki, and do not know the rules. So, I'm not going to fight or edit this cell any more. For now the article includes very wrong information, as is the episode was not broadcasted yet, and it wil be fixed by somebody else or remain wrong. IKhitron (talk) 12:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]