User talk:Onorem/Archive 20

Archive 15

←

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Moved from userpage (Reelkandi)

Onorem, please specify which bits are nor suitable and do you have suggestions yourself in helping in getting the point of interest across — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andisuper (talk • contribs)

It sounded like a promotional piece written for the organization and you clearly have a conflict of interest on the topic. --Onorem (talk) 15:36, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

not sure how to use all of this, but can you advise, help on this, as the instructions are complex..and have tried several edits without success— Preceding unsigned comment added by Andisuper (talk • contribs)

In general, you just shouldn't write the article. If people without a conflict of interest think it's notable, they'll write it. I have absolutely no interest in the topic. --Onorem (talk) 15:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Moved from userpage (Greico)

Are you serious. This is a valid source as it comes directly from richard grieco himself. Check out his art website maybe you would actually learn something about art. I welcome talking to you further about this if you would like.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuy33 (talk • contribs)

How hard is it to find my talk page? Seriously. Three times today I had to request my userpage be deleted...

Anyway. You clearly aren't reading anything that people are telling you. Your edits are simply not acceptable. They are not neutral in their point of view, and they are copy and paste copyright violations. Enjoy your block. --Onorem (talk) 23:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

what

who are you i never said anything to you and i was kidding i know the dude.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathgenious989 (talk • contribs)

I'm Onorem. I don't care. I don't care. I don't care. Please sign your posts. --Onorem (talk) 01:07, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

FYI

Mathgenious989 (talk · contribs) has been reported to wp:aiv, and probably will be blocked shortly. Dan653 (talk) 01:07, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Not surprised. Unless there is a BLP violation or personal attack on someone other than myself, please do not remove comments left here by other users. --Onorem (talk) 01:08, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello,Mathgenious989 here. I was looking at some of my old contributions to see how far i have come. I would like to ask a question though since i found your page while looking at my wall. While I do not appreacite the talking behind my back and subseqent calling out of me i will ignore these ignorent actions . i would like to ask how to become an administrator of the site. (Mathgenious989 (talk) 23:09, 11 November 2013 (UTC))

ANI-notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Plasmic Physics (talk) 02:50, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I still want an explanation. What you've given is shit. --Onorem (talk) 03:15, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Don't curse at people who are polite to you, you common little rude boy. CC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.252.51.235 (talk)

Go away troll. --Onorem (talk) 09:17, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm like Walmart. everything is on rollback. Fuck you all. Rollback, rollback, rollback. My opinion doesn't matter. I'm a troll. Fuck it.

__Subject__

URGENT QUESTION!

Hello,Mathgenious989 here. I was looking at some of my old contributions to see how far i have come. I would like to ask a question though since i found your page while looking at my wall. While I do not appreacite the talking behind my back and subseqent calling out of me i will ignore these ignorent actions . i would like to ask how to become an administrator of the site (Mathgenious989 (talk) 23:11, 11 November 2013 (UTC))

Don't worry about becoming an admin. Try to be a good editor. Listen to feedback. The admin thing will work itself out (or not) after at least a year of just editing. Side note: I wasn't talking behind your back. It was all out in the open if you were looking, and there was nothing ignorant about 'those' actions. --Onorem (talk) 05:37, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Your comment to me

"Stop evading your block?" Other than allow myself to be kicked around by some bully with a block button and give up my years-long hobby, I feel I don't really have another option. Colton Cosmic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.13.108.100 (talk)

Go away. You weren't bullied away. You tried to force YOUR opinion over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and finally someone decided to tell you to shut up and go away. You weren't trying to work with the community. You were trying to tell everyone else why they were wrong and you were right. Go away. Get the fuck off my page. You are not welcome here. --Onorem (talk) 08:47, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Don't curse at me, you common little rude boy. You commented to me first. Follow your own advice about "go away." You have no idea what you are talking about, Onorem. I always tried to work with the community. You are sheer ignorance. CC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.252.51.235 (talk)

Go away troll. If you didn't do things like this, you might have people here who would be willing to listen. --Onorem (talk) 09:18, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Again, follow your own advice. You don't want me to talk back, then don't talk to me. Your "troll" attack shows how low meaningless noise your conversation is. Bye. CC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.252.51.235 (talk)

You aren't teaching me shit, other than that you are too fucking stupid to realize that you ruin your chances even more of being taken seriously every time you respond. Wait, I already knew that so I guess we're back to you aren't teaching me shit. I'll have the last word on my own talk page. You might come back with another IP, but I'll respond to that one if I have to. You don't get the last word. You lost the right to speak on this entire project already. I won't give you the right to have the final word on my page. --Onorem (talk) 09:27, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Random other moron

You go away you loser. Way to standup for you boyfriend Blueboy96. Make me go away. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueboysucks (talk • contribs)

I can't make you...but I hope you enjoy and accept your block. Thanks for stopping by. --Onorem (talk) 16:56, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Your swearing and personal attacks towards me doesn't put you in a very good position either, especially since I didn't initially start arguing with you. Why are you in this anyways. What does me and hangingcurve/blueboy96 have anything to do with you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueboysucks (talk • contribs)

I don't need to be in a good position when dealing with an obvious troll. What the fuck do you think I'm risking by being rude to someone like you? I have no idea why his talkpage was on my watchlist. For all I know, it's because I've had an argument with him in the past...but when I see worthless pieces of shit like you trolling, I bite. You succeeded with your trolling. Good job. Enjoy the block that is clearly coming soon. --Onorem (talk) 17:02, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

you suck

You suck Onorem. You keep standing up for your boyfriends on Wikipedia, and get so rattled when other people get insulted, and swear at people with works like "fuck" even when they didn't initially attack you. I bet you cry to your mom whenever someone gets insulted in Wikipedia, but not nearly as much as you are now since this time you are directly the one being insulted. Onoremsucks (talk) 17:09, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm not rattled, and I seriously couldn't ever be offended by anything that you have to say. --Onorem (talk) 17:22, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

You seriously suck giant cock Onorem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.172.167.184 (talk)

I'm not that flexible...but thanks for stopping by. --Onorem (talk) 02:26, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

I just stumbled on this, this altercation is hilarious. It has made my day. Sorry if this is innapropriate. Mbcap (talk) 02:12, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm fine with it. Made me laugh to read it again. I'd forgotten about it. --Onorem (talk) 02:21, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

It does make me a little sad to see how little action my page has these days. I haven't had to archive in how long... --Onorem (talk) 02:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

This is probably also innapropriate, but I think both this and "Random other moron" brightened my day up. It's really blatant personal attacks, but not violent ones, but so stupid they make me laugh. 96.237.27.238 (talk) 22:08, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Onorem. You have new messages at ColinFine's talk page.
Message added 16:58, 6 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ColinFine (talk) 16:58, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Why?

Why did you remove the information on Jeffrey Dahmer's grandmother Catherine?. And your "And?", sounds arrogant. There's no worse in a human being than being arrogant. --Japanesehelper (talk) 19:41, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

The And? means...why should that information be in his article. What does it have to do with the Aftermath? --Onorem (talk) 20:23, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Sad Report

Thank you for your comment. Not sure why I was reported. If having a dynamic IP is a crime, then I'm guilty as charged. 54.224.206.154 (talk) 02:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't entirely AGF about you myself, but it's silly to report to AIV given the current edits. I would not be shocked if you were a blocked user evading...but your comments weren't unacceptable to the conversation. Bugs just doesn't like new users and anons so in his mind they are all here for nefarious purposes. Challenge him, and it only makes it more clear that you are bad. --Onorem (talk) 02:33, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

It's ironic you have a "don't feed the trolls" logo, because that's exactly what you've done in this situation. This is at least the third recent IP for this DC-area troll, whose only purpose is harassment:
54.224.35.46 (talk · contribs)
54.224.206.154 (talk · contribs)
54.242.221.254 (talk · contribs)
←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

You should have said something about that to start with. Since you didn't, it just looked like you were mad because his comment was directed at you. In any case, I see no problem with their post in response to your comment about someone else's RFA chances. Are we done? --Onorem (talk) 11:55, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Medeis investigated it. I knew it was the DC-based troll, but I thought quietly zapping it would fit the standard established in previous discussions. You caused this problem, by being an inattentive busybody. Act more wisely in the future. P.S. I never get mad here. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:38, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Please stop trolling. --Onorem (talk) 21:52, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Yawning

Ya also yawn, when there's a tiny lil boy being killed and Wikipedia fanatics have seized power and tell the world that the boy is a villain..

BIG UP.--[[Special:Contri--37.230.15.218 (talk) 00:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)butions/37.230.15.218|37.230.15.218]] (talk) 00:50, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

What the fuck are you talking about? Please make sense or shut the fuck up. Actually, just go away. --Onorem (talk) 00:51, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm talking about the innocent boy called Trayvon Martin being killed by an over-zealous and crazy doorman called George Zimmerman and how friend's and fanatic supporters of the latter are ruling the depiction on Wikipedia. But that's probably matters you don't know much or care about.--37.230.15.218 (talk) 00:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Just go to any pages regarding this shooting and see how these one-sided fanatics are hindering anybody to tell the truth and you're one step ahead.--37.230.15.218 (talk) 00:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh. You're that troll. Get off my page. I don't have any interest in what you have to say. --Onorem (talk) 00:59, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

As you don't have interest in changing the world and do not care about the blatant misdepictions and -undoings. Big up, once again.--37.230.15.218 (talk) 01:36, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

ok, I've conceded any depiction on Wikipedia is the utter truth and anyone questioning this is a troll. Thanks for your insight on this, I greatly appreciate this kind of behaviour!--37.230.15.218 (talk) 01:39, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Yawn. Once again. You are a boring troll. Please go away. --Onorem (talk) 01:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Do I have to remind you it was you who had the infernal of contravening when it was all about the life of a young boy being taken away... and yet. YOU YAWN?--37.230.15.218 (talk) 02:08, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Justin Bieber RfC

If you have time and the desire to re-engage in the debate over legal issues and polls at the Justin Bieber article ....pls comment at Talk:Justin Bieber#RfC: Behaviour and legal issues Thank you for your time. -- Moxy (talk) 04:01, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

metrodome

I replied on my page in case you are interested Smith03 (talk) 01:52, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Your comment about me at WP:AN/ANI, a deal?

"Support if he agrees absolutely to abide by the decision that is handed down. I'd be happy to give him a voice on the RFCU if he'll go away when it's over (if that's the decision of course...)" Well, I am interested in making a deal with any administrator conditionally willing to unblock, to include for purposes of the RFC/U only. You misunderstand, I think, the nature of an RFC/U though. It is not supposed to provide a conclusion like a WP:AN/ANI section. It is rather supposed to enlighten Wikipedians, including its subject, on difficult questions that have resisted resolution. There is no "you lose/you win" outcome to an RFC/U. (I read up on it.) My intent when I asked GB_fan to work with me to open up the RFC/U was to get broader community input beyond the WP:AN/ANI blockaholic regulars that latched on to me many months ago, watchlisted my talkpage, and have been eagerly overwhelming any unblock effort ever since. You can see them at the RFC/U. The "block him" contingent are not editors that typically participate in RFCs or RFC/Us. Rather they watchlisted my talkpage and tracked me there against my will to criticize me once again. It is a strange way to enjoy one's participation in Wikipedia. I do not know what I will do when the RFC/U is done. I hope that it gives enough enlightenment of the facts to embolden a brave administrator to unblock me permanently. However if you are inclined to a deal, I promise to adhere to double-civility behavior, desist all IP-based block evasion, and only comment at the RFC/U talkpage (and at my own talkpage) if you unblock me for the duration of the RFC/U. This is Colton Cosmic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.17.230.41 (talk • contribs)

I guess I did think that RFC/Us sometimes ended with decisions or sanctions. In any case, I'm fine with you being unblocked to participate in the discussion if you agree to leave if the discussion doesn't end with you being unblocked for other purposes. --Onorem (talk) 22:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Trinity

Why did you remove accurate sourced information from the trinity article?

Lede should be a concise summary

More details is in the Larry Sanger#Citizendium section. QuackGuru (talk) 01:51, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I understand what the lede is for. I just think it is misleading with the current wording...and flows like shit. --Onorem (talk) 02:06, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't know what you want me to do. I did revert my edit and split the sentence back into two sentences. Here is the source. I'm not sure what I could do without a specific proposal to make the text more accurate. QuackGuru (talk) 02:11, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I've made what I think is an improvement to the lede. The one source giving only 2 reasons for why it failed is still not satisfactory to me, but I don't care enough to look for more sources. --Onorem (talk) 02:14, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Comment from Biohazardblack

My apologies. I wasn't aware that Wikipedia had a policy of allowing only flattering commentary about someone who openly advocates for the murder of children. - biohazardblack

Not what happened, and even if it was, your addition to the article would not have been appropriate. --Onorem (talk) 01:19, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

hi

Please follow: If you place a banner for an outside WikiProject, and a member of that project removes it, do not replace the banner. from Wikipedia:PROJGUIDE#OWN . Thank you. NotYetAnotherEconomist (talk) 13:00, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Go away. Thank you. --Onorem (talk) 14:00, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

There is a consensus on this issue. Votes are at the momen 1:0 (me being the 1). warm regards NotYetAnotherEconomist (talk) 16:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

You don't understand how wikiprojects work and you can't count. Congrats. --Onorem (talk) 16:45, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

A brief note

Hi Onorem. I just wanted to say that, while I disagreed with you some in that particular context, I do appreciate the good-faith intent behind your comment and your decision to remove both our postings so as to avoid adding extra volume to the discussion. Just for the record. ;) Snow talk 01:50, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry if I came off too aggressive. I do hope the conversation ends up productive. I have no desire to participate myself, mostly because I'm trying to avoid the same people who TRM can't discuss...by my own choice. It's just not worth it. They can enjoy their playground. --Onorem (talk) 03:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Evidence

Go off to Auschwitz, Seig Heil. Corrupt assholes like you not welcome here. http://postimg.org/image/kig2mpmt7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.7.135.136 (talk)

That's not evidence of anything. --Onorem (talk) 16:42, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello

I felt it was clear that something was amiss in that image situation, and also that sometimes in a case like that, the person coming to ANI knows more than they can publicly say. SarekOfVulcan is a long-time editor, and I don't think he would have jumped to ANI if he didn't know something was "off", as it clearly was. Admin action was needed, but three posters right away downplayed the situation, including Samwalton9 saying it could have been "accidentally linking to the wrong image", when all the evidence was clear in only three posts that it was no accident, and it was perfectly clear which image it was.

I'm sorry to have offended you, but that's what I saw, and it troubles me when people brush off ANI reports. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:22, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Not interested. I wasn't trying to brush it off. I was suggesting discussion. Sorry I missed the 'off' portion without it being presented directly, but I don't appreciate your comments. --Onorem (talk) 02:26, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Samwalton commented after you, and why the hell should I care what he has to say? Including Samwalton9....OMG. Guess who else is a long time editor? Me. --Onorem (talk) 02:29, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Again, I'm sorry to have offended you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:32, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Have a good night. --Onorem (talk) 02:48, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

More again. I hate when I keep thinking. They were making a silly claim that very likely was wrong. There was no copyright concern for Wikipedia since the general quick consensus was that SoV was the original image rights holder. Why do I need a deeper understanding to know that there's plenty of time to discuss before drama? --Onorem (talk) 03:02, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Feel free to add it back into the article. I won't. Too many threats.

I know that you are supposed to be bold and all of that, but the amount of threats I've been given in the past few hours, and the severity of them has made me not want to come here. If you want to add it, then you do it, as you at least aren't being threatened. As for me, I am not interested in it any longer. A guy was blocked over it, and I got threatened with being blocked because I dared to suggest that the blocking may have been wrong. A lot more than a threat to be blocked too. It seems that I have stumbled on to a part of Wikipedia that is extraordinarily hostile. KrampusC (talk) 09:30, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Onorem, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} to all registered users whom have commented on his talk page. To prevent receiving future messages, please follow the opt-out instructions on User:Technical 13/Holiday list

Global account

Hi Onorem! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:46, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

WP:AN#The User:DangerousPanda page

I have started the discussion. Feel free to join in. --George Ho (talk) 03:43, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Well this is getting familiar

I thought you might want to know that User:Herecomesiggy is almost certainly a sock of User:Kevinschaffer, whom Ponyo has blocked (along with numerous of his other socks, at least two of which have been devoted to vandalizing and trolling on that page). Not sure how much difference it makes which rationale is on the user talk page, since they clearly won't try to appeal but will instead just make another throw-away account, but that's your call! Snow talk 13:21, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment

I'd just back away and get out of the fire if I were you. No need to get all stressed out from that user. :) - Amaury (talk) 08:22, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the catch!

Just happened to be going through the revision history on my user page and saw this matter for the first time. Thanks for attending to that! Seems the vandal hasn't let up on poor Johnny Cash though in the last few months, have they? Snow ^{let's rap} 08:56, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Henderson Secondary Pic.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Henderson Secondary Pic.JPG. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Onorem. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Henderson Secondary Pic.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Henderson Secondary Pic.JPG. 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) 17:14, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Henderson Secondary Pic.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Henderson Secondary Pic.JPG. 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) 17:37, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Stop obstructing Genuine Edits

This controversy involves a specific tweet by a fan that the Writer & Director of Wonder Woman 1984 Retweeted

Excessive details have been deleted

The whole controversy involves a specific tweet. The tweet MUST be included Dwilliamphilip83 (talk) 22:02, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit rejection from Moorpark California Wikipedia page

Hi,

I wanted to ask about the issue you have with notability. I would argue having over 100,00 subscribers on YouTube, film roles booked and started in as well as an upcoming music single and album is more noteworthy than the average citizen. Therefore I ask why would you reject the edit of a person only to become more famous from their hometown.

Regards,

Danny DANNY8995 (talk) 22:18, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

That is not notable enough. Youtubers with 1+ million plus subscribers can get denied a article. You need considerable media coverage to be considered notable. For example, whenever MrBeast has a new video, it is reported in the media. I might have not explained it well but the only thing you need to take from this is that youtuber is not notable and notable people need considerable media coverage. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 19:10, 14 May 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) 00:05, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Random nonsense warning from Hatsune Volvo

Hello, I'm Hatsune Volvo. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Vocaloid (software) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Hatsune Miku. But it is made by Sweden. (talk) 20:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by. It'd be even cooler if you just stopped. --Onorem (talk) 20:45, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Regarding disturbing Taiwan’s wikipage

Recently you warned me to not be engaged in “edit warring”, but in the same time i got @Horse Eye's Back and @LilianaUwU both disturbing the page with no argument at all and ignore the consensus reached in the talks page, they didn’t even type anything in the talks page !, what should i do regarding them ? Stephan rostie (talk) 23:18, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@Stephan rostie The consensus, in bold on top of the closing statement, is "Use "country" when referring to Taiwan". On a technicality, you're right (Taiwan is, in fact, not recognized by every country), but the wording that was present is generally fine. I've only reverted because you've brought a further change that hadn't been discussed, but you're free to do a RfC over whether "partially recognized" belongs. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 23:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@LilianaUwU

"Use "country" when referring to Taiwan".. That’s exactly what i did !, so on what base did you remove my contribution ?

I've only reverted because you've brought a further change that hadn't been discussed. Not true, we have discussed it in the talks page and reached a consensus to mention the fact of taiwan’s lack of international recognition.

but you're free to do a RfC over whether "partially recognized" belongs.. No I don’t have to, Wikipedia:Consensus say that we should reach consensus on talks page first, and if a consensus couldn’t be reached there then we head to RFC. Stephan rostie (talk) 23:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Guess they told me

Very effective. Valereee (talk) 15:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Your warning message

I see that you warned User_talk:SussyTheRealOne about adding "incorrect information", but their edits were clearly vandalism. Was that the right wording to use? David10244 (talk) 21:14, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

That's the template Twinkle uses for "Introducing deliberate factual errors." I don't think there would be anything wrong with using the regular 'vandalism' warning, but I don't think it matters much for at least the first couple warnings. --Onorem (talk) 21:18, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

would any of u good folks know how to get some keesh deliveried

to my house? Booalialmalik (talk) 13:37, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

God bless America Booalialmalik (talk) 13:37, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry. Can't help you with that. --Onorem (talk) 13:46, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Swamp Thing origins

Onorem, you keep deleting my edit on the Swamp Thing under the allegation that it is "original research". Sorry to disagree but that's preposterous because I am just simply adding some background an elaborating on the origins of the character by adding information already available on the very same Wikipedia which in turn references external reliable sources.

Can you elaborate further on which parts of my editing are "original research"? Did you write this entry in the first place and you want nobody to touch it? Darkalo (talk) 13:18, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Calmsurble

Hello, Onorem,

As you can tell by looking at the page history of Marcus Bell, we are not only dealing with an editor with a COI and legal threats but a sockpuppet farm. Since you are doing some excellent anti-vandalism work, if you see more edits about Marcus Bell or Calmsurble, please report the editor to a noticeboard or to an admin. Despite the variety of sockpuppets that have been created recently, I don't think an SPI case has been filed yet. Thank you for all of your contributions to the project. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Canceling my edits

Please note that my English is poor. You have reverted my edits (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Three_Saints_Church_(Shaki)&diff=1169005467&oldid=1168992819). Why? I am not Aydinsalis. I just shared his letter. Even if I am Aydinsalis, you cannot undo my edit. This is vandalism. You must first prove that my edits are incorrect. Sincerely, Aydino1967 (talk) 14:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Aydino1967: - You posted on Talk:Jimmy Wales that you are User:Aydinsalis. It is not vandalism to revert edits made by banned users. "Anyone is free to revert any edits made in violation of a ban or block, without giving any further reason and without regard to the three-revert rule." --Onorem (talk) 14:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Onorem: - Excuse me. I mentioned at the beginning that my English is weak. Now I note that I am not Aydinsalis. I just shared his letter. I will add this now. Thanks. Aydino1967 (talk) 14:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Aydino1967: - That's not very believable, and your appeal to Jimmy is on the wrong page. You posted to the talk page for the article about him, not on 'his' talk page. --Onorem (talk) 14:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Onorem:Thanks for the information. Aydino1967 (talk) 14:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Terence Crawford

Onorem, I search that Getty images public domain, so I don't have to understand copyright. Terence Crawford picture, and i look did not mean to break rules, I just don't understand so I take responsibility for mistake just don't ban me. JNOJ1423 (talk) 19:52, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Health Concerns

Touch Grass 172.58.174.235 (talk) 00:38, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your concern. I will try. --Onorem (talk) 00:39, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

A small word of advice

Thank you for helping me find the movie clip in the Bright side video!

The Industrial Me 1563 (talk) 16:51, 26 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) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Minor thing

The non-afd version of WP:OTHERSTUFF is WP:OTHERCONTENT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:52, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought there was a better link, but couldn't think of it. --Onorem (talk) 10:01, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Ottis toole

Thank you for editing ottis toole. I had already done it once but material scientist who likes to be a bully reverted my edits and he's always threatening to delete accounts. I asked him to cite where crucifixion was mentioned and of course he wouldn't cite his own edits. Thank you for fixing that. Joshjustwontgo (talk) 23:51, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

deleted comtents

I respect your views and deleted the contents. Thanks for guiding me Bandan Resources (talk) 11:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Archive 15

←

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20