User talk:Watercheetah99/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Watercheetah99. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Blocked indefinitely

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for word-for-word copying and pasting after the above discussion (I'm a bit gobsmacked that you did this in your second edit after your last post above). Specifically, you added in this redacted edit: "Rimi is home to Rimi Wind Farm, a '10MW project that can provide power for over 2,200 homes.'", copied from here. 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 ~~~~}}. Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:57, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Just as a point of clarification, the quote marks in the above excerpt were added by me to indicate I was quoting, and the apostrophes were to indicate the content that was copied (except for one word) verbatim from the source. The original had no quote marks or apostrophes.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:22, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This is the one article that I sourced, isn't everything copyright if I state what is in the article. Please, Unblock me this is absurd.

Decline reason:

This unblock request is incoherent, but I guess what you are trying to say is that you think it's not a violation of copyright if you copy exact text but provide a reference to where you are copying from. That's incorrect. That would still be a violation of copyright and isn't permitted. That's different from quoting text and providing a source for the quote, but that's not what you were doing (and wouldn't have been appropriate here). As such, I'm letting the block stand. Copyright violations are very, very important because they place the entire Wikipedia project in jeopardy. We need to be absolutely sure you understand WP:COPYRIGHT and WP:FU before we'd consider unblocking you, and at the moment, it's clear you do not. Yamla (talk) 16:15, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Sorry if my first post was slightly incoherent to you. I am saying that I used 1 article to write that blurb of course the content will be similar. Also I did use quotes on the page. As it is clear that I seem to find it difficult to abide by the copyright regluations I will review WP:COPYRIGHT which I will put into practice after hopefully being unblocked.

Decline reason:

Your statement "I used 1 article to write that blurb of course the content will be similar" rings alarm bells for me. What you will need to do is take some time to review WP:COPYRIGHT and then request an unblock by demonstrating that you understand the policy. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:43, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and I hope to put this into practice after being unblocked. I now understand that the editing work I put on Rimi could be grounds for copyright liability. I will now also use a grammar checker to make sure that I do not enter any material that breaches regulations. Edit: For clarification PhilKnight, most grammar checkers including the one that I will use have a plagiarism feature built in. That is what I will use for my future edits; and it will correct any mistakes in grammar as well.

Decline reason:

You do not need a plagiarism checker to tell you whether or not you are copying material from another source - if you genuinely can not tell when you are actually copying something, then unblocking you would be a danger to Wikipedia. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:13, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I don't believe that is a clear rational. The checker is simply a reinforcer, something that is a positive not a reason for refusal. Yes, the check isn't needed but it appears as if I sometimes fail at changing the text enough to remove any doubt about copyright. Like I have stated I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and will put that into practice.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and I hope to put this into practice after being unblocked. I now understand that the editing work I put on Rimi could be grounds for copyright liability. I will now also use a grammar checker to make sure that I do not enter any material that breaches regulations. For clarification, most grammar checkers including the one that I will use have a plagiarism feature built in. That is what I will use for my future edits; and it will correct any mistakes in grammar as well. The checker is simply a reinforcer, something that is a positive not a reason for refusal as was the case for the 3rd refusal. Yes, the check isn't needed but it appears as if I sometimes fail at changing the text enough to remove any doubt about copyright. Like I have stated I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and will put that into practice. Vanjagenije, I have explained my understanding of the block; I understand that my edits could be grounds for copyright liability.

Decline reason:

If you've really read our copyright policies, you would have known that you're not supposed to rewrite a copyrighted text to not look like copyright violation. Instead, you should write text yourself. Enough unblock requests, talk page access revoked. Max Semenik (talk) 22:04, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

How is using a grammar checker going to help you not breach copyright? PhilKnight (talk) 23:14, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

Max Semenik (talk) 22:04, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #18661 was submitted on Jul 05, 2017 23:37:15. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #18688 was submitted on Jul 09, 2017 20:37:48. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 20:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #18773 was submitted on Jul 18, 2017 14:27:38. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 14:27, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #18811 was submitted on Jul 24, 2017 02:23:24. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 02:23, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Vanjagenije for the clarification and the talk page access. I would like to know everything that I will need to put in my appeal because it has become clear that some admins love to be as vague as possible. Aelimian21 (talk) 16:36, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Unblock requests

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and I hope to put this into practice after being unblocked. I now understand that the editing work I put on Rimi could be grounds for copyright liability. I will double check my edits as it appears as if I sometimes fail to remove any doubt about copyright. Like I have stated I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and will put that into practice. Vanjagenije, I have understanding of the block; I understand that my edits could be grounds for copyright liability. Aelimian21 (talk) 00:20, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

To me this reads as if you still intend to copy first and then "remove doubts" from a copied core. That won't work. Huon (talk) 15:04, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and I hope to put this into practice after being unblocked. I now understand that the editing work I put on Rimi could be grounds for copyright liability. I will double check my edits as it appears as if I had sometimes failed to remove any doubt about copyright. Like I have stated I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and will put that into practice. Vanjagenije, I have understanding of the block; I understand that my edits could be grounds for copyright liability. Huon, like I have said numerous times before that is what I did for the Rimi edit that is not what I intend to do for future edits. Sorry if the wording was confusing. Aelimian21 (talk) 15:20, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

In order to lift the block, we need to be certain that you understand how copyright works on Wikipedia. In order for the reviewing administrator to assess this, please address the following questions in your next unblock appeal:

What is copyright?
How is Wikipedia licenced?
Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?
Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?
How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?

Your answers will enable us to establish whether or not you should be unblocked. Yunshui ^雲 _水 14:52, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and I hope to put this into practice after being unblocked. I understand that the editing work I put on Rimi could be grounds for copyright liability. I will double check my edits as it appears as if I had sometimes failed to remove any doubt about copyright. Like I have stated I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and will put that into practice. I know to not use materials that could infringe upon copyrights as it could incriminate the site. Wikipedia uses grant free access to content. Vanjagenije, I have an understanding of the block; I understand that my edits could be grounds for copyright liability. Huon, like I have said numerous times before that is what I did for the Rimi edit that is not what I intend to do for future edits, and Yunshui ^雲 _水 I have been stating those things for the last 7 months. Aelimian21 (talk) 02:40, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Copyright is the right that a creator has for their work and its use.
Wikipedia uses grant free access to content as said above many works are also licensed by Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL).
We do not use materials that could infringe upon copyrights as it could incriminate the site.
If it had a reason for why its usage would be fair use within US law and the policy of Wikipedia.
I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and I hope to put this into practice after being unblocked. I will double check my edits as it appears as if I had sometimes failed to remove any doubt about copyright. Aelimian21 (talk) 02:30, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As noted by User:Yamla below, your answer to question #4 is not correct. So I'm declining your unblock request. Please try again. Also, your comment "I have been stating those things for the last 7 months" does not inspire confidence. This hints that you believe you were correct in your understanding of copyright during all those months, and that everyone criticizing you was wrong. EdJohnston (talk) 18:05, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and I hope to put this into practice after being unblocked. I understand that the editing work I put on Rimi could be grounds for copyright liability. I will double check my edits as it appears as if I had sometimes failed to remove any doubt about copyright. Like I have stated I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and will put that into practice. I know to not use materials that could infringe upon copyrights as it could incriminate the site. Wikipedia uses grant free access to content. Vanjagenije, I have an understanding of the block; I understand that my edits could be grounds for copyright liability. Huon, like I have said numerous times before that is what I did for the Rimi edit that is not what I intend to do for future edits, and Yunshui ^雲 _水 I have been stating those things for the last 7 months. Aelimian21 (talk) 02:40, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

# Copyright is the right that a creator has for their work and its use. # Wikipedia uses grant free access to content as said above many works are also licensed by Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). # We do not use materials that could infringe upon copyrights as it could incriminate the site. # If it had a reason for why its usage would be fair use within US law and the policy of Wikipedia. Also contact can be made with the copyright holders and they can allow the use of content under the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) or a CC-BY-SA-compatible license. # I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and I hope to put this into practice after being unblocked. I will double check my edits as it appears as if I had sometimes failed to remove any doubt about copyright. Aelimian21 (talk) 22:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Unfortunately, it appears that over the last few weeks, no admin has been willing to unblock you based on this request. You can try to make a new, more convincing request - but please note that repeating this request may be considered disruptive, and may result in your access to this page being revoked. SQL ^{Query me!} 01:48, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please, give detailed answers to 5 questions posted by Yunshui above. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:43, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Aelimian21, I was about to decline your latest unblock request when I realised I had already declined a previous one, so I'll have to leave this to someone else. But I have reviewed the whole of this talk page, and I was shocked to see how uncooperative you have been all along with people who do understand Wikipedia's copyright policies. At this point, it is not acceptable for you to just say you understand copyright policy now and that you will not break it again - we need to be convinced of that, not just told it.
In your latest unblock request you add "I have been stating those things for the last 7 months", but you clearly have not. If you want any chance of being unblocked, answer Yunshui's questions, specifically, one at a time, and in enough detail to make it absolutely clear to us that you understand the questions and the answers. If you do not do that, you will not be unblocked, and you stand a very good chance of having your talk page access revoked again. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:26, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) To the reviewing admin, I'm volunteering to assist Aelimian21 after his unblock and would check his edits periodically to ensure he doesn't violate WP:COPYVIO again. And to Aelimian21, you need to provide convincing proof that you will not violate copyright again by answering Yunshui questions, as it is a really serious issue. Having once been blocked myself, I tell you ~~all it takes is just acknowledge you were wrong, and convincingly tell whoever is interested in unblocking you to unblock you that you intend to change, that's all.~~ @Boing! said Zebedee:, would you mind taking a look at this again once he does that. Regards, Mahveotm (talk) 15:27, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Actually, "all it takes is just acknowledge you were wrong, and convincingly tell whoever is interested in unblocking you to unblock you that you intend to change" is a little misleading as it conflicts with the requirement to provide specific answers to Yunshui's questions - Aelimian2 has already acknowledged mistakes and told us they won't be repeated, but that's not sufficient. I have this talk page on my watchlist and I, or another admin, will respond to any further input from Aelimian2. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:08, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

In response to the question, "*Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?", you say, "Permission must be asked of the owner to use the content." This is not correct. It doesn't discuss what form the permission would take and does not consider WP:FU. --Yamla (talk) 16:39, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

~~:As a note, this request is identical to the two posted on 12/3/17. SQL ^{Query me!} 03:26, 18 January 2018 (UTC)~~ Nevermind - that's not right. SQL ^{Query me!} 03:26, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Watercheetah99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and I hope to put this into practice after being unblocked. I understand that the editing work I put on Rimi could be grounds for copyright liability. I will double check my edits as it appears as if I had sometimes failed to remove any doubt about copyright. Like I have stated I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and will put that into practice. I know to not use materials that could infringe upon copyrights as it could incriminate the site. Wikipedia uses grant free access to content. Vanjagenije, I have an understanding of the block; I understand that my edits could be grounds for copyright liability. Huon, like I have said numerous times before that is what I did for the Rimi edit that is not what I intend to do for future edits.

# Copyright is the right that a creator has for their work and its use. # Wikipedia uses grant free access to content as said above many works are also licensed by Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). # We do not use materials that could infringe upon copyrights as it could incriminate the site. # If it had a reason for why its usage would be fair use within US law and the policy of Wikipedia. Also contact can be made with the copyright holders and they can allow the use of content under the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) or a CC-BY-SA-compatible license. # I have reviewed WP:COPYRIGHT and I hope to put this into practice after being unblocked. I will double check my edits as it appears as if I had sometimes failed to remove any doubt about copyright. Aelimian21 (talk) 01:13, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I think you understand. I'm happy to unblock you. I will unblock you with the following stipualtions. You will not copy-paste material into Wikipedia. You will not upload any image into Wikipedia that you did not take personally. You will not upload screen shots and claim them as your own. You will completely rewrite any material you add to Wikipedia so that it bears no resemblance to material elsewhere. You will not closely paraphrase and claim as your own work. You will make no edit without citing a source. If there is any doubt in your mind that the edit meets these conditions, you will not make it. You understand that not adhering to these conditions may result in an immediate block. Welcome back -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 09:04, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

April 2018

Hello, I'm Denniss. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Battle of Monte Cassino have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Denniss (talk) 10:43, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Battle of Monte Cassino. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Denniss (talk) 07:26, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Your recent editing history 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. --Yamla (talk) 11:15, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

You were warned. You continued your edit-warring as 89.204.153.66 (talk · contribs) and so I have blocked you for one week. --Yamla (talk) 11:30, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

What do you mean I was warned? Look at the timestamp I edited that before you put anything on my talk page. Aelimian21 (talk) 12:32, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

You received this warning more than 24 hours before your edit with the IP address. You received this warning just short of four hours before your edit. You received my warning to you, a little less than nine minutes before your edit. And you didn't need any warnings at all. You know perfectly well about these policies, having been blocked for violating WP:EW before. --Yamla (talk) 12:50, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

After receiving the first communication I thought I would be fine reverting if I gave solid reasoning which I than did at 00:39, 3 April 2018‎. I then didn't touch the article for hours. 89.204.153.66 (talk · contribs) is someone else who just agrees with me like many others do. Aelimian21 (talk) 15:15, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

2021

Draft: Peoples Gazette

The draft for the creation of Peoples Gazette page has not been reviewed after noted corrections were made. Even though those corrections were needless as the requirement for notability is based on reliable sources and not references by International platforms. Secondly, the rejection based on self-reference was notably not applied for many media platforms, wondering how that is different with this one.

Notwithstanding, all corrections have been made and your review will be highly appreciated. Thanks. Opelogbon (talk) 08:22, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2019 Nigerian gubernatorial elections, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Lyon. 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) 06:03, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

DS alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

--TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:54, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

August 2021

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:2023 Nigerian Senate elections, from its old location at User:Watercheetah99/2023 Nigerian Senate elections. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. -Liance^{talk/contribs} 01:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2023 Nigerian Senate elections has been accepted

2023 Nigerian Senate elections, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bkissin (talk) 14:37, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Senate elections

Hello. I think you have misunderstood WP:NC-GAL; the plural should only be used for "multiple elections to bodies or positions of the same type"; bodies of the same type being multiple councils (so we have e.g. 2011 Northern Ireland local elections), or positions of the same time being governors (so 2023 Nigerian gubernatorial elections is correct). The Nigerian Senate is a single body, so the singular should be used; the argument that there are "multiple elections" is not a justification as it could be applied to any election with multiple constituencies.

You have based your article titles on the one set of Senate elections that are incorrectly titled – the national-level American election ones (although worth noting the state ones are all correct – e.g. 2008 Pennsylvania Senate election, 2008 Illinois Senate election etc). Unfortunately resistance to change means they're pretty much stuck like that.

Also, this was a blind revert that undid several fixes to the article (making the date format consistent, removing the odd thing around the categories and removing inappropriate see alsos. This is really poor form.

Please could you restore the correct article title and the article fixes. Thanks, Number 5 7 21:35, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Number 57. Firstly, calm down it's a letter; a statement like "this is really poor form" is laughably condescending and why people mock Wiki editors as self-important, it's a letter it isn't changing the world. For the pluralization, I thank you for the correction but find it funny that this precedent applies everywhere but some of the biggest pages of the topic – the national-level American election ones. Hardly a precedent if one nation can just ignore it but that's not your fault, again I thank for the correction. For the other "fixes," I did see them, my revert wasn't blind I just thought your fixes were mostly unneeded and unexplained: I put MDY as that is commonly used in Nigeria but DMY is also seen, you removed the description for I don't know why but I'm sure there's some rule against having a description, you also didn't elaborate on the see alsos (tbh I didn't see an issue with them, let alone being "inappropriate"), and tbh I don't know what you even did with the categories but you're probably right there too. All in all, I appreciate the corrections just tone down a bit it's not that serious and please explain the "fixes." Thanks, Watercheetah99 (talk) 05:18, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
- Blind reverts are poor form – it's as simple as that – this wasn't meant to be condescending, just pointing out that hitting undo without properly looking at (or understanding) what the other editor has done is not the right way to go about things. You have left the article using two formats of dates – now some are MDY, others are DMY. Items already linked elsewhere in the article should not be in a see also section (both links are in the election template at the bottom) – see MOS:NOTSEEALSO. Short descriptions that match the article title are pointless and should instead be set to simply 'none' – see WP:SDNONE.
- Given the above explanation of the naming guideline and demonstration via examples above that 'election' is used for the vast majority of election articles, will you be moving the article back? Number 57 08:09, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
  - PS, I do apologise if this came across as condescending – I was just rather put out by the revert (another reason why they are a bad idea). Cheers, Number 57 09:33, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
    - Thank you very much for moving it back. Cheers, Number 57 21:52, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
      - Thanks for the corrections, they were very helpful and soon I will implement them on the 2019 senate page I'm making. Thanks, Watercheetah99 (talk) 03:55, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2019 Nigerian Senate election has been accepted

2019 Nigerian Senate election, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bkissin (talk) 13:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Speedy upmerging

Please see my proposal to upmerge Category:2019 Nigeria senatorial elections to Category:2019 Nigerian Senate elections. Hugo999 (talk) 03:59, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh I agree with that, what should I do? Watercheetah99 (talk) 04:13, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

State Executive Council (Nigeria) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, State Executive Council (Nigeria), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 05:47, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jigawa State, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mohammed Sabo.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

2019 House of Representatives elections

Hello. I noticed you changed the last election results here, which means the figures no longer match those in the 2019 Nigerian general election. I presume you've taken the figures from the new article 2019 Nigerian House of Representatives election. Are you planning on making the articles consistent? Is there any source confirming the seat totals in the new article?

Also, you deleted a few of the minor parties – do they no longer hold seats? This type of infobox has all the parties listed, so if they do still hold seats, could you reinstate them. Cheers, Number 5 7 18:56, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi. The seat totals currently on the 2019 Nigerian general election page are outdated as around 3 dozen results were either voided or changed by court rulings after the election. Due to the piecemeal nature of these separate court rulings (one of the results was only officially changed last month), there isn't one singular source on the number; however, there is a source on most of the rulings. Yes, I was planning on editing to make the articles consistent, thank you for reminding me as I had started was other pages like House of Representatives (Nigeria) and 2023 Nigerian House of Representatives election. For those minor parties, they no longer hold any seats as all their House members defected to the APC (see: here). Thanks, Watercheetah99 (talk) 21:31, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Regarding this edit, you cannot change sourced results without providing a new source – if someone now looks at the table and attempts to verify the results using the source, they'll find they don't match (the source used for the House results table has the previous results (APC 212, PDP 127 etc)), making your edit look like falsification. If you want to update a results table, you need to provide a new source with the figures you're adding. Plus, the seat total only adds up to 351 instead of 360 now...

However, also worth noting that we tend to show the results as they were at the time of the election – not those after court rulings, particularly when some only get changed two years after the election. I think it would be best to show the original results and add some text to say that following the elections, X number of seats changed hands due to court rulings. Cheers, Number 5 7 14:31, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Okay I think I've fixed the totals on the 2019 Nigerian general election page. On account of the 'results at the time of the election,' that wasn’t followed with the Senate elections where the totals reflected all but one court ruling plus doesn't fit with how Nigerian elections are recorded with voided results or candidates wiped from sheets (for example: here). Also there would be no generally accepted cutoff for "at the time of the election:" Is it when it was announced, then 10% of the results would be wrong or incomplete; at inauguration would still include plenty of incorrect outcomes especially party primaries; at the year mark would keep the numbers the same since only one party primary was changed since that point. I think keeping it consistent would be more important than trying to figure out an arbitrary cutoff point. Watercheetah99 (talk) 22:58, 21 November 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) 00:45, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/Green Party (Ireland)

Template:Party shading/Green Party (Ireland) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/Human Dignity Alliance

Template:Party shading/Human Dignity Alliance has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/New Vision (electoral alliance)

Template:Party shading/New Vision (electoral alliance) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/People Before Profit

Template:Party shading/People Before Profit has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/Sinn Féin

Template:Party shading/Sinn Féin has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/Aontú

Template:Party shading/Aontú has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/Fianna Fáil

Template:Party shading/Fianna Fáil has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/Fine Gael

Template:Party shading/Fine Gael has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/Green Party (Ireland)

Template:Party shading/Green Party (Ireland) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/Human Dignity Alliance

Template:Party shading/Human Dignity Alliance has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/New Vision (electoral alliance)

Template:Party shading/New Vision (electoral alliance) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/People Before Profit

Template:Party shading/People Before Profit has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/Sinn Féin

Template:Party shading/Sinn Féin has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Borno State, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sudanese.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Party shading/People's Action Party

Template:Party shading/People's Action Party has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:38, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ekiti State, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cocoa.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2021 Nigerian by-elections

The article 2021 Nigerian by-elections has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I split this page into two new pages. It is now redundant. I should’ve just renamed this one.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

January 2022

Hello, I'm 2600:6C52:6C7F:F549:E927:6C0A:A079:9015. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Portal:Current events/2022 January 12 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. 2600:6C52:6C7F:F549:E927:6C0A:A079:9015 (talk) 21:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:2023 Bayelsa State gubernatorial election

Hello, Watercheetah99. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2023 Bayelsa State gubernatorial election, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:2023 Bayelsa State gubernatorial election

Hello, Watercheetah99. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2023 Bayelsa State gubernatorial election".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:50, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Edit on Enugu State

Hello Watercheetah99, I can see u undid my edit on the page Enugu State; which I shifted part of the introduction to the history because virtually that particular section is more and has gone deep into the history of the state and I think it should be under history not introduction. Thank you Uncle Bash007 (talk) 04:30, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, while I understand your sentiment, common practice on national and subdivisional pages is to include a fairly lengthy summary touching on topics like culture and geography along with some history. The current page history section is fairly bear bones and can be expanded but it does not make sense to move the explanation of the state's origins to the history section, especially when you included the economic section. thanks Watercheetah99 (talk) 05:41, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: State Executive Council (Nigeria) (February 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Em-mustapha was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:State Executive Council (Nigeria) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:State Executive Council (Nigeria), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

User:Em-mustapha ^talk 20:22, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Watercheetah99! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! User:Em-mustapha ^talk 20:22, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Could you look at this?

Hello, this is Reading Beans, we have come across and I noticed your interest in the politics of Nigeria. Do you mind adding some prose on Minister of Information and Culture? Reading Beans ^{Talk to the Beans?} 14:54, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Sure, I'll try to work on it tomorrow. Watercheetah99 (talk) 16:03, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the long delay, I just added a bit of a summary to the draft. Watercheetah99 (talk) 21:24, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited North West (Nigeria), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kano.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Help on reversion

Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to 2023 Nigerian Senate elections in Abia State.

If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref> and one or more <ref name="foo"/> referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref> but left the <ref name="foo"/>, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/> with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.

If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page.

Edits to All Progressives Grand Alliance

I have added a reference linking to the APGA manifesto. However, it's all one source for all ideologies but it shows up as different sources. Can you help resolve that? TEK1 (talk) 16:06, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Sure! Next time just make a name for the source then use the shortcut. Watercheetah99 (talk) 16:29, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Yoruba people

Hi. I just wanted to tell you for creating this page on my people and the summary that you put down is accurate and I want to thank you personally for it. Could you please do the same thing for the Yoruba people wiki page? I would really appreciate it. Also when you do that, can you please tell people like Renato42, Talisman-white, Squared.Circle, Oramfe, and Ppdallo to stop changing around the information on my people, the Yoruba people? I have been fighting with them for a while now on this and they keep going. Basically, I wrote this down because I am grateful and also that I came to ask you for support on editing the wiki page on my people, the Yoruba people. Once again, I sincerely thank you for this and I wish you a very pleasant day. Abal126 (talk) 18:13, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I asked to change around the number of Yoruba people in total, not the religions. The way how I put the religions is accurate. I put the evidence on the bottom of the references section of the page. Abal126 (talk) 19:11, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

When there isn't data, religion order is alphabetical; C comes before I so Christianity comes first. Your "source" is literally MURIC, an organization making a claim clearly in its interest without showing evidence of its truth. Find a demographic study not a press release. I will look at population numbers in a bit but the likely reason you have been fighting with so many different people is that you keep on making changes without providing genuine sources or discussing with others, just slow down and talk about things before reverting. Watercheetah99 (talk) 19:19, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

In addition, User:Abal126, there's the problem of that link you keep adding the References section, to an article titled "MURIC replies Igboho’s aide over Shariah, Hijab in Yoruba Land", which is hardly significant in a general overview article about the Yoruba people and which hasn't clearly been used as a reference to support anything in that article. Largoplazo (talk) 22:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Fula people

Hi. Do you happen to know the Fula people population in Nigeria as of right now? Thank you and have a nice day. Abal126 (talk) 14:41, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

No. There does not seem to be solid demographic data on ethnicity or religion in Nigeria. Watercheetah99 (talk) 16:08, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Ok. Well, thank you. Abal126 (talk) 18:13, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023 Gombe State gubernatorial election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gombe.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023 Rivers State gubernatorial election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Briggs.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello

I am editing a page and you keep interrupting and removing properly sourced and cited material.

Allow me edit in peace because Wikipedia is a community and contributions from all editors are always welcome and a good thing.

If you keep up with this, you will be reported for disruptive editing.

Amaekuma (talk) 19:28, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

We have been over this some many times with Obi's page. Just because people like a politician doesn't mean he didn't commit a crime or he was cleared for that crime. You can't make up story and pretend its true. Watercheetah99 (talk) 19:36, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

"However this was proven to be wrong as Obi on an interview with Arise TV, stated that he resigned from all his companies before taking the office of Governor of Anambra State." - That's not proof, that's a denial.
"The investigation by the EFCC didn't yield any incriminating evidence and all charges were dropped." - This is just a lie, the EFCC have never released a statement clearing him nor did they file charges in the first place.
"Although no law was technically broken by Obi regarding the Pandora papers leaks" - This is false, First, Obi remained as a company director for over a year while being governor (that is against the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act); second, Obi did not declare his offshore companies when he became governor (that is against the Constitution); and lastly, he maintained foreign accounts while being governor (that is against both the Constitution and Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act).

You cannot make up stories because you want them to be true. Watercheetah99 (talk) 19:47, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

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. Thank you. Amaekuma (talk) 20:57, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Ways to improve 2023 Nigerian Senate elections in Abia State

Hello, Watercheetah99,

Thank you for creating 2023 Nigerian Senate elections in Abia State.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

There are numerous unsourced statements, which require inline citations per WP:BURDEN.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Meena}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

– Meena • 21:35, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: State Executive Council (Nigeria) has been accepted

State Executive Council (Nigeria), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

R E A D I N G ^{Talk to the Beans?} 16:02, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

July 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Ebonyi State, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 18:21, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

That's not original research. Saying "modern-day Ebonyi formerly being in Southern Nigeria" is the equivalent of saying "Sandy Springs was in the Confederacy." It's basic level fact. Watercheetah99 (talk) 19:18, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello Watercheetah99, you referred to WP:BLUE (Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue) when adding/restoring the following unsourced content: [1]

Modern-day Ebonyi State is primarily inhabited by Igbo people. In the pre-colonial period, what is now Ebonyi State comprised part of medieval Kingdom of Nri and later, the Aro Confederacy before the latter was defeated in the early 1900s by British troops in the Anglo-Aro War. After the war, the British incorporated the area into the Southern Nigeria Protectorate which later merged into British Nigeria in 1914.

I respectfully disagree that WP:BLUE applies here at all. These are specific data points, not generic, globally understood basic level facts. If you wish to include this content, please do provide accurate citations from reliable sources, as required by WP:V policy. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

I entirely disagree, what about these points is "specific?" Ebonyi State was not in existence yet, the area was a part of two pre-colonial entities then was incorporated into the colony after the British came. That is extremely broad. These are basic facts, no source is going to outright say "Ebonyi was British Nigeria," that is the definition of a basic fact. Watercheetah99 (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Gubernatorial elections

Directly from Wikipedia: "Stories added to the main portal page should be of international interest. Stories of only regional or topical interest belong in their appropriate sub-pages, if any." So, I argue that state and regional-level elections that aren't covered by international news agencies to any significant degree, shouldn't be added to Current Events. I will try to gain consensus for this for future editing purposes and remove your edit. If you wish to remove it yourself, then please go ahead. Regards, MattSucci (talk) 02:10, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

The election has had local and international coverage plus it is entirely consistent with other inclusions on the portal. And to IJBall (talk · contribs), that's a blatant falsehood, a glance at local electoral calendar pages and the dates of those elections on this portal proves that wrong (examples: 1 and 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 plus I could find dozens more if I had the time). If you want to now apply some strict criteria for inclusion, you can't have the same portal happily include practically uncontested special elections a few months ago. Watercheetah99 (talk) 03:03, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

WP:OSE – the fact that some editors are adding state-level elections to Current Events doesn't make it right. Sometimes by-elections and special elections make it into Current Events, but state-level elections rarely should. There will be rare exceptions – like when a party has held a state-level office for several decades, but then loses. But, in general, state-level elections don't merit inclusion. For example, the recent state election in Australia did not make it into Current Events I noticed. What MattSucci quotes is the correct guideline here – regional-level elections that aren't covered by international news agencies to any significant degree, shouldn't be added to Current Events, and most state-level elections will not merit significant international coverage (a mention on BBC doesn't count). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:09, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

"the fact that some editors are adding state-level elections to Current Events doesn't make it right." - so why weren't they removed? you two seem to be claiming that this portal has very high standards of notability yet those standards don't apply?
"Sometimes by-elections and special elections make it into Current Events" - why? they are often far least important than state-level elections and rarely have international coverage.
"There will be rare exceptions" - from ten minutes of looking I found over a dozen, that's not rare by any means.
"For example, the recent state election in Australia did not make it into Current Events" - not only is that an odd thing to point out when claiming that all subdivision elections aren't included, it is another complete fallacy.
Lastly, it was covered by the BBC, AFP, and VOA plus more articles on it will probably come out in the next few days. What is even the point in fighting this so hard, who is being hurt by its inclusion lol Watercheetah99 (talk) 03:31, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Wow – almost immediate revision on a discussion that has just started. I'm not going to bother discussing this anymore with you. There needs to be a wider discussion on this, because it's clear that some editors simply want to ignore the guideline that MattSucci quotes above. But, yeah – a state election does not belong in Current Events in most cases. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:39, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

"I'm not going to bother discussing this anymore with you." - You stopped talking, you literally just ended the discussion and went to go edit other stuff instead of defending your point.
"the guideline that MattSucci quotes above" doesn't exist in any form if it is never applied and when it's applied, it's proponents cannot defend it.
"yeah – a state election does not belong in Current Events in most cases" - I mean you could just ignore every point I've made and end good faith discussion until the moment that the results of your decision to ghost happen.
What is going on with this site, this is the fourth time in a couple months that longtime editors have ghosted discussion so the status quo is kept and then get furious when that status quo is changed. Watercheetah99 (talk) 04:57, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

2023 Zamfara State House of Assembly election moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, 2023 Zamfara State House of Assembly election, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

2023 Nigerian Presidential Election

What is it about Kwankwaso, why do you distrupt the editing Taofeeq Abdulkareem (talk) 04:35, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Since the NNPP is not a major party, evidence needs to be bought that Kwankwaso is a major candidate. Please go to the article's talk page and put articles referring to Kwankwaso as a major candidate. Watercheetah99 (talk) 05:14, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Most likely you hold grudges against Kwankwaso presidency. Let me tell you, don't even play this game because I have enough time to go into all your submissions and delete them. Remember, you have to many contributions to lose. I don't, I am only interested in making everything fair. I dont care about your political view but don't make this difficult on yourself. Mujaheed21 (talk) 16:29, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Since the NNPP is not a major party, evidence needs to be bought that Kwankwaso is a major candidate. Please go to the article's talk page and put articles referring to Kwankwaso as a major candidate. Watercheetah99 (talk) 16:30, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Edit warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2023 Nigerian presidential election. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. You have been disagreeing and undoing everyone else, please wait for the opinion of other contributors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rotidiap (talk • contribs) 22:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

2023 Nigerian general election

Edit Warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2023 Nigerian general election. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. You have been disagreeing and undoing everyone else, please wait for the opinion of other contributors. Rotidiap (talk) 22:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

That's not how that works, I've reverted twice and you are the one avoiding discussion and changing the status quo. This is on you. Watercheetah99 (talk) 22:25, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Check the article history and see how many other contributions supporting the inclusion of Kwankwaso as a major candidate that you have undone; please wait for new contributors on this. Rotidiap (talk) 22:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Still not how that works, you don't have to be a wiki expert to know that the statement 'you reverted an unexplained edit two months ago' does not justify edit warring now. You are not a new contributor either, how would your claim even work? Not to mention you do not have support either. Even if you did have backup, multiple people giving undue weight to a viewpoint does not make that viewpoint now mainstream. Watercheetah99 (talk) 22:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

There are multiple reputable secondary sources supporting the view point that you have decided to disagree with everyone else. Rotidiap (talk) 22:43, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Please stop creating "everyone else," right now it's you and me while there were editors on both sides beforehand. For the statement, "There are multiple reputable secondary sources supporting the view point" - there are even more reputable secondary sources opposing that viewpoint. The burden of proof is on you, you need to show that Kwankwaso has the same level of coverage as Atiku, Obi, and Tinubu. Since most coverage does not include him on the level of the major candidates, it would be giving him undue weight to include him alongside them until it can be proven that he is a major candidate. Hopefully polling will be publicly released soon to definitively say his position (along with the main three). Watercheetah99 (talk) 22:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I will add more links to the talk pages. Please, do a Google search yourself. Rotidiap (talk) 23:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Yeah you clearly just did a Google search and added everything because most of your sources aren't even about him being on the level of the main candidates. Watercheetah99 (talk) 04:57, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Research before taking action

I recently observed that you reverted my edits on the page Gombe State,Nigeria. Some of the information you added back does not belong to the page. They belong to a different place with the same name in The Democratic Republic of Congo.

Note also that Gombe as an LGA is different from Gombe as a state. They are used interchangeably but they are totally different. So, some former editors added information about the capital (Gombe LGA) on the page (Gombe State) which are wrong.

With this, can you please revert my edit that I spend hours on? Objectivescholar (talk) 13:13, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Here's the issue. I can actually read what you edited and know that you did not simply change tourist attractions or remove references to the DRC; instead you went through the page and removed nearly everything about non-Fulani ethnic groups in an obvious ethnically-charged POV violation. Read Wikipedia rules and guidelines and your edits will not be reverted. Watercheetah99 (talk) 13:17, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023 Nigerian Senate elections in Gombe State, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yusuf Ibrahim.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2024 Nigeria gubernatorial elections

A tag has been placed on Category:2024 Nigeria gubernatorial elections indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2024 elections in Nigeria

A tag has been placed on Category:2024 elections in Nigeria indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:25, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Watercheetah99. Thank you for creating 2023 Nigerian Senate elections in Jigawa State. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 13:00, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Nice to see this concerted effort! Maintaining a category like this is not easy. Are you in touch with the wikiproject or regional user group members? – SJ + 17:27, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

No not really, I just started this last year and am trying to finish before the elections. Watercheetah99 (talk) 16:52, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Concerns with sourcing

Hi User:Watercheetah99, I looked at your recent article on the 2023 Nigerian presidential election in Ogun State, and I have a concern with your sourcing. In the background section, you didn't cite any sources to support the contents, but you did provide sources to support a projection that Tinubu's chances are higher than those of other candidates. Can you explain why this is the case? I look forward to reading your response. Thank you. Shoerack (talk) 22:32, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, most of the background section (and all of the political part of it) is based on basic facts about past elections. A source isn't needed for such basic results, especially considering those results are linked in the section. The projections had to be sourced as they are the results of outside analysis, like most articles. Watercheetah99 (talk) 05:08, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

You do need to provide citations for contents relating to previous elections if used in a new article, per WP:WHYCITE. Shoerack (talk) 09:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

WP:WHYCITE just doesn't say that, it mandates sourcing on challengeable content not for something so basic. And if you'd like to, just add sources yourself. Watercheetah99 (talk) 03:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Watercheetah99. Thank you for your work on 2023 Nigerian presidential election in Kano State. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:56, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

January 2023

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to 2023 Plateau State gubernatorial election. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in red at the top of the page. Thanks! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:24, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

2023 Nigerian presidential election in Anambra State moved to draftspace

Unfortunately, an article you recently created 2023 Nigerian presidential election in Anambra State, is not ready as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage with citations from reliable and independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. I've moved your article to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's WP:GNG guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. M.Ashraf333 (talk) 18:12, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Ways to improve 2023 Nigerian Senate elections in Taraba State

Hello, Watercheetah99,

Thank you for creating 2023 Nigerian Senate elections in Taraba State.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Hi @Watercheetah99! Thanks for creating the article. It appears there is an issue with citation display, even though you have provided references. You might be working on it already, but I wanted to make sure you are aware so that the page can undergo review. Feel free to remove the tags as soon as that's fixed!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Ppt91}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Ppt91 (talk) 21:33, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Thank you for all your contributions to Nigeria political space. Really amazing; welldone! Kaizenify (talk) 23:27, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Watercheetah99 (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2023 Nigerian presidential election

On 5 March 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2023 Nigerian presidential election, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Amakuru (talk) 00:27, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

STOP REVERTING MY EDITS WITHOUT CITING ALTERNATIVE SOURCE(s)

What is the lie in my edit? the discovery of crude oil? the languages spoken? or what exactly ? Objectivescholar (talk) 19:28, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:2023 Zamfara State House of Assembly election

Hello, Watercheetah99. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2023 Zamfara State House of Assembly election, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:03, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Making changes

I saw you made changes to Olubuse II. Would be good to work with you to add more recent information. 102.89.44.177 (talk) 07:57, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:2023 Zamfara State House of Assembly election

Hello, Watercheetah99. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2023 Zamfara State House of Assembly election".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yahaya Bello, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Government Secondary School.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Reverting

Hi @Watercheetah99, It is imperative understand that while editing biography of living persons you should take care to use reliable sources when adding information and understand the difference between conflicting sources, especially when it could be considered derogatory.

From my analysis they're conflicting as the same sources states "arrested" and also states "detained", these have two different meanings. In light of this, the WP:PUBLICFIGURE policy needs to be strictly followed. There needs to be MULTIPLE reliable sources confirming the information, as stated in that policy, not just two. Moreover, the neutral point of view policy probably also requires that the conflicting stories also be added. I've removed the section until policy can be followed. Further changes to the page should be discussed and agreed on the talk page before being implemented. Happy Editing. Jamiebuba (talk) 06:55, 1 August 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) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

The Nigeria Barnstar of National Merit

		The Nigeria Barnstar of National Merit
		Thank you so much for your amazing contributions to the Nigerian context on Wikipedia. You have enriched the knowledge of millions of people around the world with your dedication and expertise. Thank you for making Wikipedia a better place for everyone. You are awesome! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:00, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Stop the vandalism

I spent over an three hours writing the articles only for you to delete wholly. If you have any issue with particular section of the articles, you can ask for explanation without acting ignorantly. The edit summaries are always there to help you as well. Objectivescholar (talk) 18:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Like most of your edit summaries, they are lies — I explained my reverts, either stop the POV violations or stop spending three hours making biased edits. Watercheetah99 (talk) 18:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a place for factual academic facts not your opinions. Objectivescholar (talk) 21:37, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Check well before reverting!

Hello Watercheetah99,
I saw you reverted this edit without checking the edit history or warning the editor (me if in case) that you reverted an edit. It will help on future or notify the editor if it is vandalism or section blanking as the case may be. However, your reversion has been undid since the input is already as a subsection in the article. Thanks! — Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)