User talk:Thought 1915

This is my talk page. You can state any problems that I may have done here and I will try to resolve them with you. I am very new to editing Wikipedia and may make mistakes.

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

ltbdl☃ (talk) 15:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds great, but I have no idea how to join the dispute dicussion. Thought 1915 (talk) 15:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

go here ltbdl☃ (talk) 15:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I hope somebody will take our case. Thought 1915 (talk) 18:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to discussions about infoboxes, and edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

I just realized that nobody gave you this notification when you got involved in the 15.ai dispute. As the website status is part of the infobox, you should be made awares of this since the community has decided infoboxes ae contentious. Cheers. Brocade River Poems (She/They) 09:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Wow. I cant believe such a great new contributer already is on the DRN! Cooldudeseven7 ^{tea talk} 14:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15.ai dispute

The edit that resolved it was just reverted for violating WP:NPOV. Aw man. What do we do exactly? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 11:35, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really believe that is does not violate WP:NPOV. I'll be a bit more honest and casual since this isn't the dispute page, but I honestly believe that the user who reverted the change has bias based on the user's former edits. I'll try one revert, but with added context and citations to show that this is simply pointing out an opinion (held by so many), and not a bias. If the user still removes it, I'll try the talk page, but I honesty have heard too many people provide evidence that the user who reverted it has a possible COI for me to not be a little off.

Personally, I want a bunch of outside editors that never heard of this page before to be the judge, because the article has been undergoing quite a lot of problems, from an edit war, to the actual COI.

Sorry if this is a lot. This is my first major edit(s) to a page, so I'm both unsure of things, and seeing a user contain suspicion for the user who reverted your change will mean that any edits I do to bring back your change may be biased. I really believe we need more people. Thought 1915 (talk) 12:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Do you need a link to the edit diff? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 12:07, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=15.ai&action=history is the link to the diff. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 12:07, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think that's the diff link, but I'll try to find the actual one. Thought 1915 (talk) 12:25, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following should be the diff link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=15.ai&diff=1253276961&oldid=1253235715

Please note that this edit was already reverted because the edit you made was the agreed upon edit from the DRN.

This is a shortened version that, from what I see, means the same thing as the diff link:

DIFF:1253276961 Thought 1915 (talk) 12:29, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 13:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to say thank you for all of the work you have done on 15.ai's dispute. I am quite sad to see we are still waiting for the update! ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 13:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! On an unrelated note, I was wondering how I could get into the editing of other topics/contribute to other parts of Wikipedia. I heard that One-Topic Editors aren't very liked by the community, and I want to see how edits would go in an article without as many disputes and events occurring within the article. Thought 1915 (talk) 14:15, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if I am right you are thinking of other ways of editing wikipedia? I would say that if you want to do some general editing, see your userpages homepage, and you can configure it. Or go to the "random article" button in the left right corner. If you want to work on Anti-Vandalism, tell me and Ill tell you more?

(if i misunderstood please tell me) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 14:18, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you. Also, how do you modify your signature? I saw River Poems and yourself do that, but I have no idea how it's done.

For anti-vandalism, I heard they usually use a tool known as Twinkle for that. Am I correct? Thought 1915 (talk) 14:21, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is how:

Click here or just go to your preferences. scroll down and you should see a signature section.

Then, enter your signature in wikitext. For example, mine is

{{SUBST:Lenny}} [[User:Cooldudeseven7|<span style="color:green">Cooldudeseven7</span>]] [[User talk:Cooldudeseven7|<sub>join in on the tea talk</sub>]] ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 14:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just made a typo! Anti vandalism is used with twinkle, but I personally use ultraviolet, a revamp of RedWarn. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 14:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 17:27, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be honest: this has been dragging on for far too long. I will participate more sparsely, as I feel that I see a pattern regarding this specific article which I prefer to distance myself from. I will take your advice regarding how to contribute to other articles and try to contribute in other sections while this blows over. I hope that other articles take contributions with less chaos. Thought 1915 (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Brocade River Poems (She/They) 00:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for notifying me about the noticeboard. Similar to other issues regarding this article, I might participate, but I will do so more sparingly. I feel a sense of agrigation from multiple editors that have made me feel uncomfortable with handling this issue as much as I would like to. I personally feel that there are many editors who can easily take my place however; most of my user contributions in this dispute have been from trying to establish a consensus and do not regard prior knowledge, with the exception of evidence hunting.

From the talk pages in the article, this issue has been occuring for quite some time before you were involved. I hope that this noticeboard acts as a conclusion that the DRN was unable to serve as in this case. Thought 1915 (talk) 01:56, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]