User talk:N1CKchooseanothername

November 2020

Hello, I'm Fuzheado. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Jim Broadbent—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Fuzheado | Talk 00:41, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome

G'day N1CKchooseanothername, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; they have helped improve Wikipedia and made it more informative. I hope you enjoy using Wikipedia and decide to make additional contributions.

As a contributor to Australian articles, you may like to connect with other Australian Wikipedians through the Australian Wikipedians' notice board and take a look at the activities in WikiProject Australia and associated sub-projects. Wikimedia Australia your local chapter organises editor training workshops, meetups and other events. If you would like to know more, email help@wikimedia.org.au.

If you are living in Australia and want to subscribe to location-based notices, you can add location userboxes to your user page.

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~; this will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you have any questions, please see Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, try the Wikipedia:Help desk, or ask me on my talk page. Or you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Some other resources to help new Wikipedians include:

How to edit a page

Editing tutorial

Picture tutorial

How to write a great article

Article titles

Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Thank you for signing up! Oronsay (talk) 20:01, 9 March 2021 (UTC) Thanks Oronsay[reply]

I haven't looked into how these talk pages work yet, I'm quiet enjoying the WIKIDATA part of the projects, see if this works when I sign my name. N1CKchooseanothername (talk) 22:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added : to separate your reply from the previous paragraph. My reply here is further indented. When the replies become too narrow you can use a single : again. Starting a new "conversation" you click New Section, rather than Edit source, and add a heading and then your comments and sign them, as you have done above. Wikidata is a great place to work. I edit here and on Wikidata, with a little Commons uploading and WikiSource transcription proofreading. Happy editing! Oronsay (talk) 22:43, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Very helpful, a very different experience from last time I dipped into Wiki, I hope there are more patient people like you for newbies like me. N1CKchooseanothername (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to List of minor secular observances. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. DanielRigal (talk) 18:42, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. I am concerned that you redirected Gender critical and Gender-critical away from the correct target to one about a completely different subject. Furthermore, your edit summary made the false claim "The definition of Gender Critical is more accurately described on Sex and gender distinction" which is obviously not true as that article does not even mention the phrase "gender critical". You went on to say "the previous link used a slur" which is also obviously untrue. If it were true you would be justified in addressing the alleged "slur", not in obfuscating the redirects. This is very close to the point where it ceases to become possible to assume good faith in an editor. Please do not do anything like this again. DanielRigal (talk) 18:54, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That all seems very threatening User:DanielRigal. The redirect of Gender Critical to Feminist views on transgender topics#Trans-exclusionary radical feminists (TERFs) is very polar. Would you suggest that a new section is added to Sex and gender distinction to include the Gender Critical Movement, instead? As the redirect to Feminist Views on transgender topics is not a fair view. As any individual that agrees that Sex and Gender are differentiated might not correlate that view as being a view of Transgender views. How would you suggest a fairer and more encyclopedic view of reflecting this? I thank you for pointing out that I need to get a different source to add the recognition day of 12th March and will follow this kind advice. N1CKchooseanothername (talk) 19:31, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We don't need a WP:POVFORK. We already cover the topic and the redirect is already pointing directly to that coverage. Changing the redirect to point at something else looks like an attempt to prevent anybody searching for "gender critical" from finding out what that actually is. You have not said why you think it is "unfair". If you actually believe that there is a problem then please take it to the appropriate talk page and explain what you think the problem actually is. If there is an issue it can be discussed and addressed.

As regards the alleged "recognition day", this appears to just be an attempt to create "a Twitter thing", insofar as it is even a thing at all. If I Google +"Detrans Day of Awareness" I get literally three hits: A tweet, somebody talking about the tweet and a Facebook page. Even if I tell Google to show me the duplicate hits it only gets 7 hits. As far as I can tell, this does not meaningfully exist in the real world. This is the thing you tried to insert into Wikipedia under the guise of an "Internationally-recognized" observance? Obviously, it could become a thing at some point in the future. If that happens, to a notable degree, then it can be included in Wikipedia to an appropriate extent when that happens. Putting it in Wikipedia now, in order to pretend that it is already a thing, in the hope of turning it into a thing, is simply not a valid use of Wikipedia. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:47, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial topic area alert

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 any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated 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. — Newslinger talk 08:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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. — Newslinger talk 08:48, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gender-critical

Not that I particularly agree with your edit (nor would I think others would either), but the method to achieve your desired outcome is nominating gender-critical and gender critical for an WP:RFD where you suggestion they be retargeted to Sex and gender distinction.
Alternatively, you could always just draft an article for gender critical seeing as it is tagged with {{R with possibilities}}. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:16, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing at Holly Lawford-Smith. If you continue to engage in subtle vandalism by making unexplained changes to information, you may be blocked from editing. After it has been explained to you why a word is necessary, removing it under the false summary "typo" can only be construed as a deliberate attempt to mislead others and engage in subtle vandalism. — Bilorv (talk) 11:30, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jacqueline Brennan moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Jacqueline Brennan, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. TheChronium 08:35, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Jacqueline Brennan seems good to me so I have boldly moved it to main space, Well done to all involved. Nice addition to Women in Red Victuallers (talk) 15:34, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Lisa Littman2

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Talk:Lisa Littman2, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It appears to be a test page. (See section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
It is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer. (See section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

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. WhoAteMyButter (📨_talk│📝^contribs) 02:48, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What are you trying to do?

@N1CKchooseanothername: What are you trying to do? You seem to be making some sort of edit to [Lisa Littman] but you've moved an created so many pages in the process. Can you tell me what your end goal is? If so, I may be able to help you do it the right way; the way you're doing it right now is not ideal and can be viewed as disruptive. WhoAteMyButter (📨_talk│📝^contribs) 02:49, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WhoAteMyButter: THANKS! I have translated the page Dr Lisa Littman and was trying to get it to the page Lisa Littman but due to the redirect already on that page I messed up. I tried to rename the page and failed.

@N1CKchooseanothername: Did you translate talk pages too? Did Lisa Littman already exist on the EN. wiki? If Lisa is a new article entirely on EN., I'll nominate the mess for CSD and try to fix it for you. WhoAteMyButter (📨_talk│📝^contribs) 02:54, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WhoAteMyButter: Thank you for helping me sort this. It existed as de.wiki. and en.wiki was a redirect to a study. I would like my translated article to be at Lisa Littman I appreciate your help with this.

WhoAteMyButter, N1CKchooseanothername - I just moved the page to Lisa Littman and I hope this solves the problems for now. I have no idea what was going on before. - Fuzheado | Talk 03:10, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fuzheado: Can you also fix the talk page? Talk:Lisa Littman1 should go to Talk:Lisa Littman. (Rest will be CSD'd shortly) Thanks, WhoAteMyButter (📨_talk│📝^contribs) 03:13, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Fuzheado | Talk 03:18, 23 October 2021 (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) 00:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Lisa Littman

Hello, N1CKchooseanothername. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Lisa Littman, 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) 01:02, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Susie Green

Hello N1CKchooseanothername,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Susie Green for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

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

Arthistorian1977 (talk) 08:27, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions refresher

Since it's been over a year since you last got these, here they are again:

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.

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.

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 gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. 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.

Madeline (part of me) 10:38, 11 October 2022 (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) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Nick Hose

Hello N1CKchooseanothername, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Nick Hose, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Hose.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

North8000 (talk) 02:25, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]