User talk:WikiEditorial101

إليك وساما!

	وسام العمل الجماعي
	:) Egy writer (talk) 23:08, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

@Egy writer: Thank you WikiEditorial101 (talk) 20:09, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, WikiEditorial101. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by /wiae /tlk 03:02, 5 June 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Category:Lydia Canaan has been nominated for discussion

Category:Lydia Canaan, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor ^(talk) 21:16, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Canaan may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• | blank_info_sec2 = {{hlist|list_style=line-height:1.3em; ([[Biblical Hebrew|Hebrew]]|[[Phoenician language|Phoenician]]|[[Ammonite language|Ammonite]]|[[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:30, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Please claim your upload(s): File:Lydia Canaan at MY World Partners Awards Ceremony.jpeg

Hi, Thank you, for uploading this file.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm some details,

If it's your own work, please include {{own}}, amend the {{information}} added by a third party, and change the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add |claimed=yes to the {{media by uploader}} tag if it is present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

If it's not your own work please provide as much sourcing/authorship information as you are able to.

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transfered to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:15, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for your message. I apologize for the very delayed response. Actually, I didn't take this photo and didn't have permission to upload it. Can you please help me determine how to delete it? WikiEditorial101 (talk) 06:35, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, WikiEditorial101. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Gestrid (talk) 17:15, 9 August 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Query

Do you have any connection to the editors User:Manifest Density or User:Thomasvitins? Their editing patterns and edit summaries are so similar to yours. Thomas Vitins is Canaan's manager, he made so many edits to her page. Gareth E. Kegg (talk) 08:56, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

No, I absolutely have no connection to the subject, nor her manager. I'm a lifelong fan who has attended many of the subject's concerts and political events. This is my only account. I have not reviewed the edits of User:Manifest Density, but I think that it's absurd to say that my edits in any way resemble those of User:Thomasvitins, who created this article; when I began editing this article—years after it was created—it wasn't much more than a subjective, error-ridden stub—a careful comparison between our edits (and also the dramatic rewrite made to this article compared to it's previous state) would clearly dispell such implied accusations. If you're not satisfied with my response, I welcome you to contact a CheckUser. WikiEditorial101 (talk) 17:23, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lydia Canaan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Convention. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:07, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

November 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Donald Trump. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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 ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  WaggersTALK 09:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, WikiEditorial101. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

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

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

References

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from VeriChip into PositiveID. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:58, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

I see you are still not adding the required attribution, as required under the terms of the CC-by-SA license. Please have a look at this edit summary as an example of how it is done. Please leave a message on my talk page if you still don't understand what to do or why we have to do it. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Assessment of PositiveID

In this edit, you assessed a not even 10 year old company as "High" importance for WP:WikiProject Human Rights and WP:WikiProject Politics, placing this article at the same importance as Anarchism and United States Bill of Rights. This raises at least two questions:

1. Why would members of these projects be interested in editing this article?
2. PositiveID doesn't really sound as important as Anarchism and United States Bill of Rights. Is your assessment a case of WP:RECENTISM?

Also, you also removed WP:WikiProject Miami citing "removing for irrelevancy". Place WikiProjects typically want to track and manage articles about organizations located in their place, so how is the WP:WikiProject Miami tag irrelevant? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 09:22, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! I'll (manually) revert these things back to the way they were. WikiEditorial101 (talk) 15:17, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Enki

I do not mean any disrespect towards you, but I would like to inform you that the information I wrote on Enki that you reverted is, in fact, the view of mainstream scholarship. It was not unsourced. It came straight from Samuel Noah Kramer's Sumerian Mythology. Samuel Noah Kramer is one of the most widely-respected scholars in the field of Near Eastern studies. He says nothing about Enlil being opposed to slavery, but he does go into great depth discussing the contents of the tablets and provides full translations of all the parts of the tablet that are legible. Furthermore, the information I added was not from memory. I had the book itself open as I was writing it and double-checked everything to make certain what I was writing was indeed correct.

As for your comments that I should read Zecharia Sitchin's Book of Enki, I would like to inform you that Zecharia Sitchin is, in fact, a pseudohistorian with absolutely no credibility whatsoever in the field of mainstream scholarship. He misrepresents and, at times, misunderstands, the stories he is retelling. There are a number of sites debunking what he has written. The most accessible of these sites is probably http://www.sitchiniswrong.com/, but there are plenty of others you can visit. For that matter, even the Wikipedia article on Zecharia Sitchin directly describes him as a pseudohistorian. Most scholarly books and articles do not address Sitchin because he is so far off from mainstream scholarship that there is not even an overlap between them. Instead, most real scholars simply ignore him. (By the way, I actually have read Sitchin's book And There Were Giants Upon the Earth, which I knew from the start was complete pseudohistory.) If you do not believe me, you can ask anyone who has studied Near Eastern literature and that person will tell you that Sitchin has no credibility. --Katolophyromai (talk) 11:18, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

You didn't cite your sources at all. And, again, you are incorrect concerning the narrative and the general consensus of mainstream scholarship. Furthermore, I never used any of Zecharia Sitchin's work as a source. I had simply referred you to a book for a good read, which was not in the context of my correction of your edits. Thank you for your enthusiasm, but I'm not interested in debating these issues with you, and even if I was, Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. I realize that you're a very new editor, but I'm sure you'll start to get the hang of things soon. Take care.WikiEditorial101 (talk) 16:59, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Celebrity, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:49, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Divine madness (religion)

You're probably not aware of it, but your edit-behavior is WP:DISRUPTIVE. See also WP:OWN and WP:RS. Your post at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Disruptive edits is shortcutting WP:DISPUTE RESOLUTION. And it is incomplete: "When you start a discussion about an editor, you must leave a notice on the editor's talk page." Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:04, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Edit war on Divine madness (religion)

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. JimRenge (talk) 09:33, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lydia Canaan

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lydia Canaan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hmlarson -- Hmlarson (talk) 01:01, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Divine madness

Hi. I've made a suggestion for renaming Divine madness (religion) on its talk page. PopSci (talk) 17:56, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, WikiEditorial101. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Middle-Eastern philosophy

Please forgive me for misreading your blanking of this page as disruptive. I have restored the page based on other edits and warned another user about cut and paste page moves, which is what happened to this page a month ago. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 19:12, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

@Jd22292: Thank you for your assistance. And I’m afraid that it was my inability that was to blame; I wasn’t sure how reverse what the other user did a month ago. Cheers! WikiEditorial101 (talk) 22:44, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Barnstars

Hi there! I don't know if you're sarcastic with all your barnstars, but I hope you're not. I tried to edit Lydia Canaan constructively (and yes, it still is full of unreliable sources and partially not cited, but anyways...) Cartoon network freak (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cartoon network freak: Please note that I awarded everyone who significantly contributed to the article; please have good faith that I am absolutely sincere in awarding you Barnstars, as I implmented every single one of your recommendations on the GA review you did for Lydia Canaan, and I was and am appreciative of your help on not just this article, but in helping me become a better editor in general. Thank you! WikiEditorial101 (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying this! I'm also appreciating your work on Lydia Canaan. Best of luck with your other projects and have a nice day... Cartoon network freak (talk) 17:59, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much May you be blessed with all of your ♥’s wishes! WikiEditorial101 (talk) 23:05, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Middle-Eastern cuisine

Please do not make changes that go against Wikipedia MOS guideline per MOS:HYPHEN. Hzh (talk) 18:17, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Please stop stalking me. So over your little hyphen thing. Far too busy. WikiEditorial101 (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Removing tags asking for page number improves nothing

You don't like how a tag looks? Fix the problem, don't remove the tag. Bright☀ 07:43, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Touché. WikiEditorial101 (talk) 02:33, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

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

WikiEditorial101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

UTRS appeal #21718 was submitted on Jun 04, 2018 19:50:29. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 19:50, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Genographic Project, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native Americans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:16, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi WikiEditorial101! You created a thread called Discography template at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lydia Canaan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robin Scott (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, WikiEditorial101. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Mesopotamian pantheon

There are plenty of reliable sources by our criteria discussing this, eg[1]. I haven't reverted you as I don't have sources for the rest of the sentence. Doug Weller talk 12:47, 22 October 2019 (UTC) And [2]wshich mentions both pantheons. Doug Weller talk 12:54, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Rachel Dolezal article

Stop WP:Edit warring there. You have been reverted by three different editors there now. Make your case at Talk:Rachel Dolezal or move on. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 05:35, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

And please don't try to move the identical issues to Transracial (identity) . Meters (talk) 05:37, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Um, you do realize that it's completely obvious that the two accounts that just left messages here are run by the same person, right? I didn't realize that the subject of this article was part of a psy-op and thus the article "protected" by deep Wikipedian sock puppetry. My apologies, I won't stick my nose where it doesn't belong again ;) WikiEditorial101 (talk) 05:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Just noticed this bizarre accusation of sock puppetry. Meters (talk) 00:22, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:46, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Garden of the Gods

You are of course right, but we ask for edit summaries for a reason, and if you had left one I wouldn't have reverted. And you wouldn't have had to chide me. Doug Weller talk 20:29, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

You're right. I'll remember to give a summary from now on. Thank you for for explaining your action, and sorry for the sass. WikiEditorial101 (talk) 02:03, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Seriously. You can check this on my analysis of edit summary usage. "Edits with summaries: 209,682 · (99.9%)." In a few cases, rollback or Huggle might not leave a summary, I suppose, but that is because the users who made those tools set it up that way. Perhaps I have had a few edits without summary by mistake over the years but I certainly did not need your message to be careful about 0.1% of edits, some of which may have been to my own talk page or years ago. Donner60 (talk) 23:34, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

I see. Perhaps you'd enjoy editing The lady doth protest too much, methinks. Don't forget to leave a summary! WikiEditorial101 (talk) 00:47, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Behindthename.com ...

... is not a reliable source. Please don't use it. For example, as you did here, where you inexplicably removed a cite to Black & Green 1992, an authoritative work on Mesopotamian culture, and replaced it with a cite to this website. Paul August ☎ 01:59, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough concerning the source being deemed unreliable. But if you'd been paying attention to the page edits, you'd have seen that the citation to Black & Green 1992 was a source cited by a previous editor to support the idea that the meaning of the name NIN.URTA is unknown, and that I had mistakenly failed to replace it with the so-called unreliable source that was meant to support my assertion that it is known. All of the above was thoroughly documented by my edit summaries. Now isn't that just amazing how inexplicable things become explicable when you read? WikiEditorial101 (talk) 02:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I had read. But reading still did not (and does not) make it clear to me why you would use such a source in the first place? Nor why you would remove Black & Green 1992 for any reason. In any case you seem now to agree that that website is not reliable, and that Black & Green 1992 is. That's my only concern here. Regards, Paul August ☎ 14:04, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Apology

Hi WikiEditorial101. I just wanted to apologize if we have got off on the wrong foot on the Yahshua article. I saw your changing of the source on that article, both the text and the source itself, as a deliberate attempt to change the facts. If that was not the case, I apologize. Many people have attempted to change what Elder Jacob O. Meyer has said over the years. It hurt that despite my efforts to be as truthful as I could in the article, someone had changed even the quote I introduced to something that Meyer never said. It was wrong of me to use the word doofus and it was totally out of character for me. I was angry and annoyed. I'll try to be more considerate in the future. In Citer (talk) 14:46, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I forgive you, Mr. Meyer. But it's not me you need forgiveness from. May YHVH forgive you. WikiEditorial101 (talk) 16:09, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

WP:ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:21, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

April 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Fences&Windows 00:13, 3 April 2021 (UTC)