User talk:NotSeenHere

Welcome

File:Verifiability and Neutral point of view (Common Craft)-en.ogv

A video showing the basics of verifiability and neutral point of view policies.

Welcome!

Hello, NotSeenHere, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like Wikipedia and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. 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! - Ahunt (talk) 02:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NotSeenHere, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi NotSeenHere! 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 Naypta (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016

Hello. An edit that you recently made to Friedrich Hayek seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! – S. Rich (talk) 06:53, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 19 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Maxime Bernier page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:46, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 9 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Conservative Party of Canada leadership election, 2017 page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful

NSH, I am glad that you are keen to edit in Wikipedia, but I urge you to be more careful - take your time and make sure that you edits are correct before you press "save changes". Use the "Show preview" button to check your spelling and capitalization. Also, be sure to provide references to reliable sources per the Wikipedia policy on Verifiability . I have reverted several of your edits that were not ready for Wikipedia. Regards, Ground Zero | t 13:21, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the last few days you've done over 30 edits to the Maxime Bernier article and many many more if we look back further. There are still grammar errors, but checking and fixing every trivial edit would be tedious. So I'll only add my support to what Ground Zero said: please be careful. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 19:16, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop ignoring requests to discuss your edits

@NotSeenHere: Please tell me that at least you are receiving "ping" messages and posts on your talk page -- I have yet to see you respond to anything. In the latest series of changes, on Maxime_Bernier, you added statements about Bernier's father which I believed were poorly sourced, so I removed them. You reverted me. I went to the talk page, I explained the problem, I asked you to discuss. You ignored me, and continued to edit Maxime Bernier. I went to the talk page, said that I was removing again, and asked for anyone's input, and removed again. You reverted me, and continued to edit Maxime Bernier as if nothing is going on. I remind you that both I and Ground Zero have seen problems with your edits, and that this is a page which is subject to WP:BLP. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2017 (UTC) It is referenced in the french article that I recited.[reply]

March 2017

Hello, I'm Simplexity22. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Kevin O'Leary seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Simplexity22 (talk) 03:44, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Kevin O'Leary. Thank you. Simplexity22 (talk) 03:44, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maxime Bernier

You are trying to remove sourced information from the Maxime Bernier page without explanation. Please discuss your proposed changes on the talk page. Bell1985 (talk) 19:30, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

Your recent editing history at Maxime Bernier shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Simplexity22 (talk) 05:17, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't misrepresent sources.

On the Maxime Bernier article, the source says that in the National Observer interview, Bernier stated that "many" of his values differ from Libertarianism, but you changed it to read his values "slightly" differ (the exact opposite). Is this just your opinion? You also removed all of the examples. Why?11pm (talk) 05:35, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:NotSeenHere reported by User:Simplexity22 (Result: ). Thank you. Simplexity22 (talk) 05:40, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:43, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of reverts, one talk page post. Please change this behavior. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:44, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you looking to get blocked again? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:00, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:53, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have unblocked you as you were dealing with a sock puppet. I really wish you would use talk pages more. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:31, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Canada Health Act (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to MLA

Dairy farming in Canada (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Supply management

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to By-elections to the 42nd Canadian Parliament does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:25, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, NotSeenHere. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Autonomisme au Québec

I'm moving your article to draft space, Draft:Autonomisme au Québec, because it's not yet ready for publication. It's still mainly in French, and where it is in English, too many words are just made up. Autismism ? Autism is a disorder. Autonomy perhaps? Cabayi (talk) 17:19, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Autonomism in Quebec, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 11:34, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

Hello, I am guessing that perhaps English is not your first language, and so your intentions may well be good, but too many of your edits on My Story (Julie Couillard book) contain grammar and spelling errors, or sentences that do not make sense. I have again reverted because this means that your edits are overall not improvements to the article and unfortunately trying to go through them and make sense of them one by one would (a) take up other editors time and (b) not always be possible. Melcous (talk) 23:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have now gone through the article and edited out the many grammar and spelling errors, as well as noting in my edit summaries why other content has been changed or removed. Please take the time to understand these, and perhaps in future you could consider making suggestions on the talk page rather than editing the article when your English is not competent. Thank you, Melcous (talk) 00:25, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making the same changes - the grammar is contradictory and nonsensical. If there are specific problems you have with the meaning of what is written in the article, please make suggestions on the talk page, but again I would suggest that your English is not competent enough to be editing the article because whatever you are trying to say you are not, because it makes no grammatical sense. Melcous (talk) 03:57, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Have same concerns ....cant understand many edits.--Moxy (talk) 06:40, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You can see by looking upward on this talk page that you're not alone (though two of the complainers were sock puppets). And you can see that NotSeenHere often ignores reversions or objections (though I've counted 8 comments on talk pages since 7 April 2016). Peter Gulutzan (talk) 14:56, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Supply management (Canada), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page European (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:33, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Marshall-levant-lilley-electionnight.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Marshall-levant-lilley-electionnight.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 18:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just delete it. Seems like I have issues making the changes to the copyright status of the image.

Disambiguation link notification for February 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maxime Bernier, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Geddes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Please do not assume ownership of articles as you did at Maxime Bernier. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 22:08, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Watch WP:3RR please. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Warning: Edit warring

This is your final warning. Do not remove maintenance tags from articles without adequately dealing with the issues: these edits are unacceptible, and I will report you to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring if you do it again. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 04:56, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NotSeenhere is blocked, but what can be done about cleaning up?

Ground Zero, Simplexity22, NeilN, Melcous, Curly Turkey: I ping you because (above) you expressed concern about NotSeenHere's edits, as I did. Well, now NotSeenHere has been blocked as a sock puppet -- but first it did 1248 edits. I want to try reverting edits done without consensus for at least some of the easy-to-fix BLPs, but first wanted to ask: did any of you intend to do the same? If so, please reply here and we'll see if we can coordinate. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:39, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I went through Caroline Mulroney, and aside from some odd mistakes (possibly non-native English speaker?), I haven't found anything more suspicious. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 00:47, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I went through all the other BLPs, fixing what turned out to be mostly trivia and odd English mistakes, except Maxime Bernier and Andrew Scheer. For the Scheer article, I'll try to correct a few edits at a time. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:23, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]