User talk:Tryadon

February 2016

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page Amethyst, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 01:10, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Materialscientist: My apologies, I was not aware that such a link was not allowed within this wiki. Thanks for updating it to a more reliable source... Tryadon (talk) 01:14, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder

Mark your CSD pages as patrolled. :p JTtheOG (talk) 05:47, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tryadon, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Tryadon! 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 Rosiestep (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:21, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Colton Werner with this edit, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:30, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note about the tag db-no content

Please wait at least 10 minutes before putting that tag, thank you. Wgolf (talk) 23:34, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tryadon, if you do plan on doing much patrolling, please ensure you become more familiar with the various deletion criteria. In this edit for example, even if you had waited longer the tag would still not have been appropriate as the article does not qualify for CSD A1; it had more than sufficient context to identify the subject. It can be tricky to get a handle on the nuances of the various deletion options, so please do take a thorough read of the criteria before tagging an article. There are plenty of friendly people here who you can ask for help as well. Thank you, --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:48, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know it looks like I'm piling on here, but I thought I'd echo the above concerns; while your eagerness and assistance is greatly appreciated, may I suggest easing off the trigger a bit until you've grown accustomed to policies a bit more? Reporting edits like this one to AIV, for example, is something that generally shouldn't happen. Please don't let this discourage you from patrolling, as, like I said, we genuinely appreciate all the help we can get - it's just that, sometimes, slower is better, and Wikipedia has quite a few guidelines/policies for you to digest. Let me know if you've got any questions or need a hand! My talk page is always open. Thanks again, m.o.p 02:29, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Master of Puppets: Hi m.o.p, and thanks for your comments/concerns. I do apologize for my hasty/speedy reports to WP:AIV, as some of them should definitely not have been reported in the first place... (such as this one—[1] as well as the other two that you mentioned on WP:AIV. It may be a bit rude of me to report users in this way and now I am willing to change my ways; but here's how I've been reporting these users:

I've been patrolling the ClueBot NG (talk · contribs) contributions page in finding vandals from there—since these edits/editors automatically trigger the edit filter through disruptive edits/editing. From there I've been adding users/cases of vandalism to WP:AIV when appropriate.

Thanks for cautioning me on the matter, and I'll sort through these users more carefully in the future. Tryadon (talk) 03:08, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't sweat it, you don't need to apologize or anything, and it's not a caution. More of a friendly tip from someone who's been there himself.

The ClueBot method is creative, but keep in mind that ClueBot is a robot, and may not understand certain situations as well as a human does. May I suggest looking into tools like Twinkle if you're looking to use a tried-and-tested route? Obviously, you will need to meet WP:CONFIRM first, but once you do, you might find Twinkle handy. Best, m.o.p 03:26, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Master of Puppets: I have looked into Twinkle as well as Huggle and STiki. Though may I ask ask what the initial differences are in these three tools, as they all seem to be used and created for the same purpose. Does one of them have more/less functions than the other, or are they completely used for separate situations...? Thanks! Tryadon (talk) 03:32, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Master of Puppets: Also another thing to note: It appears as though you need to gain rollback permissions in gaining access to usage of Huggle and STiki, and i was wondering what it takes to earn rollback permissions for these tools. Tryadon (talk) 03:41, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's user preference, mostly. Nothing stopping you from trying both once you've earned Rollback. In terms of what that will take - generally, I'd look for at least a month, preferably more, of patrolling experience on different noticeboards and a good understanding of what situations rollback is applicable in. m.o.p 15:19, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also to add on-when you are reporting someone for there username, please report to the right place. Which is Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. Wgolf (talk) 04:31, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Patrolling pages like Socks 01

Please, when you add a deletion notice, like Socks 01, make sure you also patrol the page. Thanks. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (My edits) @ 04:03, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yashica Dutt Article Notability

Hello Tryadon, I notice you removed the notability tag on the Yashica Dutt article placed by KH-1. Your edit summary said that a Google search would reveal notability. I diligently looked through 5 pages of Google search results and found only primary source content except for one or two articles. BLPs needed to be heavily sourced from secondary sources to establish notability. I am replacing the notability tag for the time-being until more sources can be provided for the article. If you can provide more reliable independent sources, please add them to the article to improve it. Feel free to read WP:BIO and specifically WP:BASIC. Chrisw80 (talk) 05:25, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]