User talk:Isi96/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

y

Isi96, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Isi96! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Missvain (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Isi96. 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)

Famousbirthdays.com as a source

Hi Isi96. I noticed that you recently used famousbirthdays.com as a source for information in a biography article, Jason Paige. Please note that there is general consensus that famousbirthdays.com does not meet the reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. (See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_153#Is_famousbirthdays.com_a_reliable_source_for_personal_information). If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks. --Ronz (talk) 00:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

• Ah, okay. Thanks for the info. Isi96 (talk) 00:39, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Editorializing

Hi. Please don't editorialize about whether a film was a "box office bomb", as you did at Unforgettable (2017 film) in this edit. Wikipedia doesn't label stuff like this. If a reliable source does, we can report their conclusions, but we can't come to our own conclusions per our policy on original research. Whether a Hollywood film made a profit is a complex and contentious matter, and there are people who are paid lots of money to analyze this stuff – or to obfuscate it, as in the case of Hollywood accounting. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:14, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

• My apologies. Isi96 (talk) 10:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Isi96. 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)

Orphaned non-free image File:Office 2000 on Windows 10.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Office 2000 on Windows 10.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:50, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Office XP on Windows NT 4.0.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Office XP on Windows NT 4.0.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

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) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

My mistake

My mistake. My apologies; past time for me to take a break, I guess. X1\ (talk) 06:47, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Currently

Please note the WP:RELTIME guidelines and try to avoid words like "currently" and "recently".

If necessary, instead use Template:As of and specify the date. -- 109.76.216.10 (talk) 02:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

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) 02:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Imitation Game

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Imitation Game you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Imitation Game

The article The Imitation Game you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:The Imitation Game for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 23:41, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Raw Story

Good job on the Raw Story article! See if you can try to incorporate this Harvard study or this CNN article. :) Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 09:02, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Sure, I'll take a look at those sources. Isi96 (talk) 09:03, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

I took a look at the Harvard study, and it doesn't seem like there's much useful info there about Raw Story besides its popularity on social media. Isi96 (talk) 09:20, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh, my bad! Those were only the first few pages. Here's the full study. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 09:24, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

I went through the full study, and there isn't any information on the actual content published by Raw Story that I could find. It does have information on its popularity on social media, though, as well as its relationship with other left-leaning sources of info. Isi96 (talk) 10:24, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Yea, I think it may be worth incorporating some of that in the article. If you're looking for specifics of some of their article content, you should probably check out Snopes (like in this article) Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 11:26, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. Isi96 (talk) 11:28, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alerts

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 shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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 the 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.

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 shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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 the 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.

Firefangledfeathers (talk) 08:47, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Jamie Dornan

Thanks for your efforts copy-editing the Jamie Dornan article. I tackled the smaller sections a few days earlier but didn't have the time at that point to tackle the section about his career as an actor. I think between us we've covered the whole article, so the 'needs copy-editing' tag can now be removed. Do you agree? Neiltonks (talk) 08:45, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I skimmed through it, and there don't seem to be any major issues. Isi96 (talk) 08:49, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Leigh Janiak has been accepted

Leigh Janiak, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 05:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dinesh D'Souza, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hill. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Sarah Natochenny.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Sarah Natochenny.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:48, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Ann Coulter

added a link pointing to Vanity Fair

Laura Ingraham

added a link pointing to Vanity Fair

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Small comment

When citing sources, search for and replace WP:CURLY apostrophes. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:02, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, my bad. Isi96 (talk) 01:02, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

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) 00:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Epoch Times reference at 2016: Obama's America

Hi. Please do not use the Epoch Times as you did at 2016: Obama's America. It is not a reliable source. See WP:EPOCHTIMES. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 14:51, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Robby.is.on Hi, I'm aware that The Epoch Times isn't a reliable source (I've contributed to its article as well). The reference used in the article you mentioned was being used as a primary source for D'Souza's claim of how he was inspired to make the film per WP:DEPRECATED.

Thank you. Isi96 (talk) 15:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. As I see it, this is a WP:UNDUE problem: "Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources". The Epoch Times is not a reliable source. Robby.is.on (talk) 15:23, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Robby.is.on Yeah, I understand, but that particular claim doesn't seem particularly controversial to me, so I thought it would be fine to include it with attribution (The Epoch Times can still be used, just not for statements of fact). Isi96 (talk) 16:03, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't think claims need to be controversial for WP:DUE to apply? My point is: if the claims aren't covered by reliable sources, they are probably not worth mentioning. Robby.is.on (talk) 16:07, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Derek Black, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don Black.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Dom Phillips

On 23 June 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Dom Phillips, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 16:07, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Adding content to the BTS article

The BTS article is going under a WP:FA review and more things need to be added as of now. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 02:19, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Btspurplegalaxy Sorry about that, I had no idea that it was under review. Feel free to remove what I added if needed. Isi96 (talk) 02:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 02:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

If it's needed, I will add the impact content back. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 02:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Mary Mara

On 2 July 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Mary Mara, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 18:29, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Watchdog (research collective)

Hello! Your submission of Watchdog (research collective) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BuySomeApples (talk) 02:27, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Watchdog (research collective)

On 26 July 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Watchdog (research collective), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Watchdog created a fact-checking app within 36 hours of its founding? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Watchdog (research collective). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Watchdog (research collective)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 5,580 views (465.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of July 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 04:18, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Exposé

Hello! Your submission of The Exposé at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Spodle^Talk 01:43, 16 August 2022 (UTC) Spodle^Talk 01:43, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Important Notice

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 shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. 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 the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Doug Weller talk 15:31, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

DYK for The Exposé

On 30 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Exposé, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Exposé's false claims that COVID-19 was created by Moderna were republished by Chinese state media outlets? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Exposé. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Exposé), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Disclose.tv

On 6 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Disclose.tv, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the fake news website Disclose.tv plagiarized many of its articles when it relaunched in September 2021? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Disclose.tv. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Disclose.tv), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

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) 01:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

FYI EWN posting

New posting on EWN: wp:EWN#User:Smefs reported by User:Adakiko (Result: ) Cheers Adakiko (talk) 13:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

"A report found..."

Hi, I put some nonsense on the talk page of your bot sentinel article, not really making sense, but trying to get un-confused about what the sources are saying. Though...I guess that is not our job, and the article seems pretty good to me. A few days later I sort-of started realizing what was bothering me, it is where someplace in the article you say a report "shows" or "found" something. This always bothers me in journalism, an example is if an article says excess sleep correlates with early death, and this is reported as "research *shows* that sleeping late can hasten your death," I think Wikipedia can't do a literature review and then have the statement, "research *shows* that excess sleep causes an early death."

Even if a reliable source says a report "found" or "shows" such-and-such, I think unless it is a matter of objective fact ("bot sentinel found that 12 percent of twitter accounts are bots") using the words like "found" or "shows" constitutes original research on the part of the Wikipedia editor.

There is the issue that Wikipedia readers are usually intelligent and can read between the lines. But I think we have to draw the line at the point where a Wikipedia article uses a word like "research shows" or "research found," because that word is what is used in a literature review to do original research, and conclude "on balance, research shows that Trump was the better president."

Even if a source says that, Wikipedia can only say that the source says that. Wikipedia cannot say "research found" or "research shows.." except if it really is a matter of objective fact like a mathematical theorem or a chemical formula.

Do you agree with this, that the article would step over the line into orig research if it says a report "found" ...unless in this context it found bots? Let me know.Createangelos (talk) 02:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I think you're right, thanks for pointing it out. I'll update that particular sentence. Isi96 (talk) 02:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Cheers. I'm pleased you were able to follow my argument even though I am not writing very clearly (need coffee!).Createangelos (talk) 15:32, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Isi96. Thank you for your work on OpenVAERS. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating 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) 15:16, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Isi96. Thank you for your work on Hannah Emily Anderson. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating 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) 04:41, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

DRN notice re Breitbart News / Quotes and cites

I have filed at Dispute resolution noticeboard#Breitbart News. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:24, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, from a DR/N volunteer

This is a friendly reminder to involved parties that there is a current Dispute Resolution Noticeboard case still awaiting comments and replies. If this dispute has been resolved to the satisfaction of the filing editor and all involved parties, please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Resolved". If the dispute is still ongoing, please add your input. Chefs-kiss (talk) 18:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Bot Sentinel

On 8 February 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bot Sentinel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a Bot Sentinel report described conspiracy theories about Prince Harry and Meghan as being reminiscent of QAnon? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bot Sentinel. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Bot Sentinel), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Contentious topics

You have recently made edits related to Complementary and Alternative Medicine. This is a standard message to inform you that Complementary and Alternative Medicine is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:55, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

You have recently made edits related to pseudoscience and fringe science. This is a standard message to inform you that pseudoscience and fringe science is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:55, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I just want to say that I have conflated you with Rwatson1955. Sorry for the warnings. tgeorgescu (talk) 21:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Disclose.tv for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Disclose.tv, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disclose.tv until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Administrative Intervention

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.DiamondPuma (talk) 00:26, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Isi.

I do not understand your statement that YouTube is not a reliable source to elicit information regarding the content covered by the YouTube channel in question. Where else would you find more accurate information than directly from this source? Mbdougl (talk) 17:54, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

See WP:RSPYT; YouTube is not a reliable source unless the video in question comes from an official account, like a news organisation. Also, secondary sources are preferred; see WP:SECONDARY. Isi96 (talk) 23:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Died Suddenly

What’s up with this page? It completely false. Why would you make it and then not make it editable? Sugartwinz (talk) 02:45, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Weather Barnstar
		For your work on 2023 Asia heat wave! And perhaps a {{Bubble tea}} too, considering how hot it's been. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 13:34, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Balaknama, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tabloid.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:37, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

RT data

hey, when you convert RT prose to use RT data, please use the prose parameter of the RT data template. Please see edit after yours on Avengers: Endgame. Thanks, Indagate (talk) 19:09, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for your efforts

		The Current Events Barnstar
		In recognition of your contributions to the article Nahel Merzouk protests. --Cdjp1 talk 15:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Daniel Quinlan (talk) 00:56, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Spoutible

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Spoutible, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Fredabila (talk) 10:35, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ian Miles Cheong

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ian Miles Cheong requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Miles Cheong. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ~ India^cup 17:16, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ian Miles Cheong

The article Ian Miles Cheong has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Ineligible for WP:G4 as it is not an identical copy, but see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Miles Cheong. Per overwhelming consensus, a non-notable Internet troll.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:07, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ian Miles Cheong

The article Ian Miles Cheong has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Also fails GNG because the sources that describe him are in passing. There's no SIGCOV of the subject.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:19, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Ian Miles Cheong for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ian Miles Cheong is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Miles Cheong (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:30, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Gameranx

Unreliable source per WP:VG/S. Could you please stop inserting it? -- ferret (talk) 00:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

My bad, I was expanding some citations that included that site. I'll remove those. Isi96 (talk) 00:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Rfc - Richard D. Gill and Kate Shemirani

There's an ongoing RfC at Talk:Richard D. Gill#Rfc - Kate Shemirani radio show appearance of relevance to a page you have edited on (Kate Shemirani). Structuralists (talk) 22:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Ian Miles Cheong

If the article ends up deleted, given the time you spent on it, may I suggest you consider putting it up on Rationalwiki? Best - DFlhb (talk) 19:56, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

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) 00:48, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Grace Jabbari for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Grace Jabbari is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grace Jabbari until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Isi96. Thank you for your work on Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

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) 09:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 14

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited 2020 Taiwanese presidential election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Al Jazeera.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:47, 14 January 2024 (UTC)