User talk:Starship 24

"PRussian invasion of Ukraine" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect PRussian invasion of Ukraine has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 29 § PRussian invasion of Ukraine until a consensus is reached. Mvqr (talk) 13:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Trolling: warning

I have speedy deleted the above-mentioned redirect as pure trolling. If you create any more ridiculous redirects or otherwise deliberately waste other people's time you may be blocked. Several of your comments in the Redirects for discussion also illustrate your aim of wasting time, for example this and this. Bishonen | tålk 16:08, 29 March 2023 (UTC).[reply]

I am not trolling, stop being rude. @Bishonen Frankly, accusing me of trolling is the only trolling here. I have no intent of wasting time. Stop right now. Starship 24 (talk) 20:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry; I would have warned you more mildly if I'd been aware that you had been more or less "dared" to create the redirect in this section of the talkpage of Russian invasion of Ukraine. The experienced editors who did that have to share some of the blame. That said, I still have two points to make to you:

1. Please don't be so easily drawn another time.
2. Please don't bludgeon discussions, as you did at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 29 § PRussian invasion of Ukraine. You replied combatively to pretty much every post by somebody else, which caused that discussion to be a lot longer than a normal Redirects for discussion section and definitely wasted other people's time. I hope you will read the explanatory essay WP:BLUDGEON, and that you will aim for giving your opinion once in future discussions; it's usually enough. Bishonen | tålk 09:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC).[reply]

Okay, that is fair. I wanted to respond to everyone's complaints, but I get why that is annoying @Bishonen Starship 24 (talk) 13:30, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Malware. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. —Bruce1ee ^talk 23:48, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know, oops, didn't mean to put it here. @Bruce1ee Starship 24 (talk) 23:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :) —Bruce1ee ^talk 06:15, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice on contentious topics area Balkans or Eastern Europe

You have recently made edits related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe. This is a standard message to inform you that the Balkans or Eastern Europe is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:09, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do I need to stop editing there ? @Cinderella157 Starship 24 (talk) 13:29, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, the advice is simply to make you aware that this area is a contentions topic - which includes the invasion of Ukraine. What does it mean to be a contentious topic? There is more likely to be contentious and disruptive editing in such an area. Consequently administrators have broader powers to deal with disruptive editing. It is just letting you know that you should be on your best behaviour. You are welcome to seek further advice. Cinderella157 (talk) 13:57, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then. Thank you. @Cinderella157 Starship 24 (talk) 14:51, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Xaner civilization moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Xaner civilization. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 16:32, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Xaner civilization (1403 CE)

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing hoaxes, such as Draft:Xaner civilization (1403 CE), is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

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. —Alalch E. 22:50, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Artemis program pages

Hi, regarding Wikipedia:Artemis program and Template:Wikipedia Artemis program - are these attempts to set up a WikiProject? If so, was it both proposed and approved at WP:COUNCIL? If so, please note that both have the wrong page names - they should really be Wikipedia:WikiProject Artemis program and Template:WikiProject Artemis program. If they were not proposed, or were proposed but not approved, have you considered setting it up as a taskforce within Wikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:24, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It been existing for qyite a while @Redrose64 Starship 24 (talk) 15:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst Wikipedia:Artemis program was created four months ago (without any authority that I can find), Template:Wikipedia Artemis program was created today. Where were these discussed before creation? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:32, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They weren't. The template was for the WikiProject, why does this need discussion. As to the WikiProject, I basically thought it was fine since the Constellation program was created with no approval. This was a revival of that with a bunch of differences. While I do realize this was wrong, it seems to be doing quite well and there is no real non-beuratic reason for deletion. It has 10 success (3 B class, 3 C Class, and 4 Start Class), multiple participants, and 4 months of existence. @Redrose64 Starship 24 (talk) 22:19, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then Wikipedia:Constellation program should have been named Wikipedia:WikiProject Constellation program. A WikiProject with such narrow scope can only be doomed to failure; after all, we don't have any WikiProjects dedicated to Apollo, Gemini, Mercury or Space Shuttle - they are all covered by WikiProject Spaceflight]]. I strongly suggest that you read Wikipedia:WikiProject, Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide, Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/WikiProject, Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:56, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think you understand the scope very well of either, do you. Look at the articles. The scope is spaceflight realted articles. @Redrose64 Starship 24 (talk) 23:24, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, as a project "doomed to fail" it has 10 success and 1 failure and has been going strong for 4 months. What evidence to you have to support this claim @Redrose64 The constellation program failed bnecause it was too amvitious and the creator got bored, which is different @Redrose64 Starship 24 (talk) 23:26, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing, please dont do things to stuff you dont seem to understand. You moved the Wikipedia:WikiProject:Constellation program when the title actually had a purpose. You clearly have no grasp of the scope, purpose, or reasons. Please ask a member of those projects before doing things to it, since you dont appear to understand them yet. @Redrose64 Starship 24 (talk) 23:32, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your comment You moved the Wikipedia:WikiProject:Constellation program when the title actually had a purpose. - I did no such thing. If you are going to make such claims, you must demonstrate with evidence that I made that page move. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are write, that claim was incorrect. The rest is correct. Sorry, thats my at 11:32 P.M. @Redrose64 Starship 24 (talk) 17:28, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warnings

Hi, if someone has had a {{uw-vand4}} or even a {{uw-vand3}} and they continue vandalising, please report them to WP:AIV so an admin can block them rather than continuing to warn them. Twinkle has an option that will submit the report for you from the talk page or contributions. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:18, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They were already reported. @HJ Mitchell Starship 24 (talk) 18:19, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then no further warnings are needed, just continue to revert them until someone pushes the block button.

As an aside you can use {{reply to}} or one of it's redirects (e.g. {{ping}}, {{re}} etc.) to automatically generate @[[User:Example|Example]]: with the appropriate username as a parameter so the result appears as follows: {{re|Example}} which generates @Example:

Multiple users may be pinged by including their usernames as additional parameters hence {{re|User1|User2|User3}}. Some other templates can also be used for the same purpose such as {{ping group}} or {{pong}} see Category:Inline talk templates if your curious. {{U}} is also frequently used for pings on discussion pages, but most of the other userspace linking templates serve a more narrow purpose.

However be mindful that unregistered cannot be pinged (see WP:PINGIP) instead use {{talkback}} or {{whisperback}} instead. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 01:42, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RFPP

Hello Starship 24. I have noticed your edits to RFPP and I would like to thank you for taking an interest in that area. However, I wanted to give you some tips over you recent requests for protection/unprotection.

In this, you requested semi-protection of a page that had no edits for over 6 months. Pages only need protection in the event of persistent, recent disruption. This article did not qualify. Then there is also this request for unprotection. The page in question does not need to be edited by IP addresses (the only edits to that page come from a bot) so there is no need to unprotect that page. Doing so could actually harm the article by exposing it to IP vandals.

I appreciate the interest you are taking in this website, but you may want to read up on our protection policy before submitting further protection requests, and from now on, please only request protection to articles if necessary. Thank you, 47.227.95.73 (talk) 22:33, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thank you @47.227.95.73 Starship 24 (talk) 22:35, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just letting you know that pings do not work for IP addresses. :) Cheers, 47.227.95.73 (talk) 22:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thats odd. Why is that? Starship 24 (talk) 22:37, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not quite sure. It may have something to do with the fact that IP's can be shared, as in; operated by multiple people. 47.227.95.73 (talk) 22:39, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then, thank you Starship 24 (talk) 22:46, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Starship 24, I will ask you to stop commenting on other editors' requests for page protection. Some of your comments verge on inappropriate, such as this one. Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 14:35, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then @Isabelle Belato Starship 24 (talk) 15:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC).[reply]

You have also been making a lot of RFPP requests, many of which don't seem to have enough vandalism to meet protection requirements. 47.227.95.73 (talk) 00:18, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

Rocket Lab

added links pointing to Integration and LC1

High Earth orbit

added a link pointing to Transmission

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Testing

Good day there, Please don't mind me reverting your edit on User talk:Sandbox for user warnings, it's just a test of the Redwarn feature. Regards! DreamRimmer (talk) 04:06, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Stack exchange

Hi - the discussion at RSN has been closed, so I've come here to answer the question you asked me there. In short, it's not reliable because it is user-generated. This is discussed at WP:UGC (which I linked to in the discussion) - please read that. The arguments you are making about Stack Exchange could be made about Wikipedia itself - we have lots of experts writing articles here, we have active moderation, processes for removing dodgy content, etc etc - but we do not consider ourselves to be a reliable source. The same goes for all user-generated content, including things like IMDB, and Forbes.com (when articles are written by one of their volunteer 'contributors' rather than a staff writer). We simply do not rely on websites that allow random people on the internet to write stuff, hoping that their moderation processes are sufficient to keep their content accurate.

Stack exchange itself has been discussed many times in the past, and there is a strong consensus that it should not be used as a source - you can find links to those discussions at WP:RSP. Girth Summit _(blether) 08:31, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Artemis program

Wikipedia:Artemis program, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Artemis program and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Artemis program during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Banks Irk (talk) 14:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may not remove a MFD Notice. You have now done it twice Banks Irk (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wasnt trying to remove the notice you messed up the entire pages (displayed everything twice) just trying to fix it @Banks Irk Starship 24 (talk) 14:28, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed with everything working. Sorry about that, didn't mean to remove the notice @Banks Irk Starship 24 (talk) 14:32, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Luan Muça

Hello Starship 24, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Luan Muça, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: not a valid speedy deletion rationale. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 19:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then how do I get it deleted? @Primefac Starship 24 (talk) 19:53, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to get it deleted. It's a draft - it's not doing any harm where it is. If the author abandons it, it will end up getting deleted automatically in six months. If they continue trying to force it into article space, it will end up at WP:AfD, where it will either be deleted, or folk will identify some sources that could be used to support it and it will be kept. Girth Summit _(blether) 00:22, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some tips

Hi - so, some more tips on sourcing. Per MOS:LEADCITE, the lead section of an article does not need citations provided that (a) there are no controversial assertions in there, and (b) all the content of the lead is a summary of cited content in the body of the article (which ought to be the case). Now, looking at Los Bukis, I see that it does not cite any sources at all; I also note that there is a bunch of stuff in the lead section that is not mentioned anywhere in the body of the article. In short, this is a bad article, and it needs work to bring it up to standard. A good thing to do would be to look for reliable sources that could be used to support and expand the body of the article, and then to remove anything from the lead that cannot be supported. Suitable sources would be books about that genre of music, maybe some websites (although there is a lot of unreliable crud online). What we should not do, however, is use a YouTube profile that literally takes its content from our article - like, it even has an attribution statement saying that they are using our content (which is fine - everything we write here is released under a creative commons license that allows reuse (with attribution) for any purpose. This is discussed at WP:CIRC. Hope that makes sense. Best wishes Girth Summit _(blether) 00:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't clerk noticeboards

Hi Starship 24, I had attempted to point this out indirectly before ([1]). Looking at [2], [3] and [4] that happened afterwards, I'm afraid I need to directly ask you to stop doing this. Please don't comment on others' noticeboard reports as you currently lack the experience required for doing so, and please don't judge whether this has changed yourself. If you would like to resume commenting on others' noticeboard reports, let me know.

This is not a strict ban, as I can't issue one in the classical sense described by the banning policy, but you may end up being partially blocked from noticeboards or even all pages if this request is disruptively ignored.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How/why was I wrong @ToBeFree Could you please help gain that knowledge/experience Starship 24 (talk) 01:12, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A (to the last bit): Step back, watch and learn. More importantly, listen. I think this is a case of your enthusiasm exceeding your capabilities (experience). Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. I am not saying that you are a fool but this talk page is evidence that you have done some things that are less than wise and consequently, you have probably pissed a few people off. Perhaps you might refrain from randomly dropping your 2¢ worth in at pages that are primarily the domain of administrators. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:59, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PS: While we shouldn't bite the newbies, there is a corollary: if you don't want to get your head bitten off, don't stick your neck out. ;) Cinderella157 (talk) 03:11, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SPI April 2023

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Starship SN20 . Thank you. Banks Irk (talk) 19:11, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations \| August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024 GAN backlog drive

Good article nominations \| March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]