User talk:Yae4

This is Yae4's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1: 14 days

DYK for GrapheneOS

On 15 January 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article GrapheneOS, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that GrapheneOS, a free and open-source operating system for selected Google Pixel smartphones, was recommended by Edward Snowden? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/GrapheneOS. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, GrapheneOS), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's on the main page! Nice work! — Newslinger talk 00:26, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Newslinger, Thanks for all your help too! The charts are interesting; looking forward to see how it goes. -- Yae4 (talk) 02:05, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Newslinger, Yesterday the chart looked like no change; today it looks like a big spike - 3,800 isn't 5k, but it's not bad. -- Yae4 (talk) 13:14, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

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 climate change. 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.

Doug Weller talk 11:55, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for NearlyFreeSpeech

On 1 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article NearlyFreeSpeech, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that NearlyFreeSpeech was considered a "safe haven" for alt-right Twitter alternative Gab? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/NearlyFreeSpeech. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, NearlyFreeSpeech), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Wug·a·po·des 06:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC) 00:02, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Precious Plastic

On 1 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Precious Plastic, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dave Hakkens founded Precious Plastic, an open hardware plastic recycling project, to enable individuals to set up "their own miniature recycling company"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Precious Plastic. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Precious Plastic), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Wug·a·po·des 06:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC) 12:02, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Dave Hakkens

On 1 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dave Hakkens, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dave Hakkens founded Precious Plastic, an open hardware plastic recycling project, to enable individuals to set up "their own miniature recycling company"? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Dave Hakkens), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Wug·a·po·des 06:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC) 12:03, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for MicroG

On 5 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article MicroG, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when the LineageOS operating system refused to integrate MicroG software, the project forked its own version, with MicroG pre-installed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/MicroG. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, MicroG), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Wug·a·po·des 22:14, 4 February 2020 (UTC) 12:01, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

I am very close to filing a complaint against you at WP:AE to ask for a topic ban for your tendentious editing on climate change articles. I think you need to take a step back.

jps (talk) 16:41, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mototaka Nakamura for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mototaka Nakamura is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mototaka Nakamura until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. jps (talk) 10:49, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with...independent review of Draft:Harold_Ambler. Someone good at BLP, please. Is he notable, and is the Reception section too critical? Thanks in advance.

Yae4 (talk) 08:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We do not do speedy reviews like this, please submit it to the queue and someone will take a look at it when they have time. Thanks, Majavah ^(t/c) 08:54, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Harold Ambler for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Harold Ambler is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harold Ambler until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jlevi (talk) 16:04, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Harold Ambler.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Harold Ambler.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Yae4. Guy (help!) 14:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Harold Ambler.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Harold Ambler.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete away, B-bot. -- Yae4 (talk) 09:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Climate change AE

So, about the AE... there's a consensus there for a full topic ban, and even though I'm not 100% on board with it, I'm closing it anyway because it needs to be closed. It's not the end of the world. It is what you make of it. I've seen people come back as better editors after appealing indef topic bans. I do hope to see you appeal it as it's clear you have some knowledge about the subject. Anyway, I have a couple pieces of unsolicited advice for you in navigating the topic ban and bouncing back after:

First, remove everything related to climate change from your watchlist. You don't want to get tripped up by accidentally reverting something you saw on your watchlist, and continuing to follow the discussions from a distance will make you more likely to mess up and get blocked. And don't continue any conflicts with users you clashed with in the topic area.
Find something less controversial to edit about for a while. You shouldn't jump sideways into some pseudoscience, alt-med, or politics battleground. Maybe make a goal, getting some obscure article up to WP:GA or something. This will help in your appeal.
Spend some time reading up on Wikipedia's core policies and mission, and try to make that your primary motivation for editing. It's easy to get caught up in righting great wrongs but the editors who have the biggest impact are the ones who have writing a quality encyclopedia as their primary goal. It's a mindset of "I'm making Wikipedia better by making sure it reflects my (correct) POV" vs. "I'm making Wikipedia better by making sure it reflects the highest quality reliable sources, and maybe sometimes my personal POV may come in handy helping me see in other editors' blind spots and helping me craft phrases in a neutral way."
Oh, and like I suggested to Hob Galding, remember Graham's Hierarchy and keep all your interactions in the top 2-3 tiers.

Thank you for listening to my Ted Talk. ~Awilley (talk) 22:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And here comes the generic template with instructions for appealing:

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are topic banned from climate change, broadly construed.

You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to this arbitration enforcement request.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. ~Awilley (talk) 23:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Yae4

Thank you for creating CrDroid.

User:Elliot321, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Please consider breaking up the "history and reception" section into multiple paragraphs.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Elliot321}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 23:55, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Elliot321:, Thanks for the review and suggestion. -- Yae4 (talk) 20:45, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CopperheadOS

Hi Yae4. I noticed you've made three reverts in the last 24 hours at CopperheadOS. I'm sure you're already aware of it, but please take a look at the three-revert rule. In particular, even if you don't break the three-revert rule, administrators may still block you for edit warring. I won't be doing any blocking myself, as I am pretty much involved with this particular issue now, but I can't speak for other administrators, so it would pay to take extra care here I think. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 13:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mr. Stradivarius, Thanks for the reminder. I was just about to go to Dispute Resolution Noticeboard to ask for more opinions on the 2v3-p name thing. I was a little too careless about the 3 changes because Anupraitsno1 is, to me, clearly closely connected with GrapheneOS and its developer, Micay/Strcat, and has not participated in the Talk about the name. Should I provide links showing the connections, and if so, where/how? -- Yae4 (talk) 14:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't post links showing the connections in public, as that would probably violate the policy on posting personal information. There is a tension between that policy and the conflict-of-interest policy, and the personal information policy takes precedence. You can see the options available to you at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to handle conflicts of interest. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr. Stradivarius: I've looked at the list of personal information, and I don't think any of the following would be forbidden. Am I wrong? Let's say hypothetically...A person using an alias is developer of X-ROM, which is a derivative of GrapheneOS. A person using that alias has advocated X-ROM in at least one forum. A person using that alias gives advice on GrapheneOS in communications channels. A person works on development of applications jointly or as forks/spinoffs of the applications in or from GrapheneOS. Therefore, the person is closely connected with GrapheneOS, and its developer, and has COI, which should prevent them from editing the articles on Graphene or Copperhead. Do you agree it would be OK to ask the editor to confirm or deny these connections? And to give them links showing the basis for these statements, if they deny these connections? -- Yae4 (talk) 03:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

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

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

-- Yae4 (talk) 14:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CryptoHarlem moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, CryptoHarlem, 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). In addition the company is not meeting Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. 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. DMySon (talk) 11:44, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:CryptoHarlem has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:CryptoHarlem. Thanks! JSFarman (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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. —84.250.14.116 (talk) 23:14, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Partial block from GrapheneOS

You have been blocked from editing certain areas of the encyclopedia for a period of one week for violating the 3 revert rule. Note that you can still edit the article talk page while the main article block is in effect. Good luck. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. El_C 01:09, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HOUNDING by 84.250.14.116

Obviously, I do not need to notify you of being added to this ANI[1]. After "apologizing" and saying you were "disengaging",[2] and after I said my "goodbye",[3] you continue to "engage" at my Talk page.[4] Please stop. In conjunction with recent tweets linking to my talk page, in my view, it has become WP:HOUNDING. Please stop. If you have anything constructive related to articles, please go to those Talk pages or elsewhere. -- Yae4 (talk) 17:20, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For any Twitter link followers

See here. Nothing new to report. -- Yae4 (talk) 17:48, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement appeal

Your appeal at the AE noticeboard has been granted.[5] Accordingly, your topic ban from the climate change topic area is lifted, effective immediately. If you return to editing in this area, please be very mindful to follow content and conduct policies, and if you do I hope your return is a successful one. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for deciding the sanction no longer applies to me, and:

I am NO LONGER topic banned from climate change, broadly construed.

Or, in other words, I am now free to move about the Wikipedia. With due care, naturally.

-- Yae4 (talk) 11:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now archived: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive313#Arbitration_enforcement_action_appeal_by_Yae4 Yae4 (talk) 15:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tommy Bolack for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tommy Bolack is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tommy Bolack until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Oaktree b (talk) 01:47, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of CalyxOS for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article CalyxOS, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CalyxOS until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Result was Withdrawn (speedy keep): Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/CalyxOS -- Yae4 (talk) 17:23, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk) 13:04, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sphilbrick: I thought I took (1) brief excerpts, and (2) did some rewording. I don't know if I quoted too much verbatim without using quote marks, and have no way to see now. Anyway, no problem, I'll try again. My Apologies. -- Yae4 (talk) 18:36, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sphilbrick, But first, please give me some advice. I'm not sure what the problem was. The citation[6] is copyrighted obviously, and they say: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 license (or later version). Obviously I cannot copy the entire page without change to Wikipedia; I need a brief excerpt or "fair use" summary of the three 2022 awards recipients, similar to previous years. Any suggestions? Thanks. -- Yae4 (talk) 18:54, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The ideal solution is not to use an excerpt at all but write it in your own words. Usage of brief quotes if the exact original words are particularly appropriate to the point are acceptable.

I'm not following your reference to the license. You said this obviously means you cannot copy the entire page you instead need to use a brief excerpt — that's not what the license says. That license is incompatible with Wikipedia use and should be treated as identical to a full copyright. S Philbrick (Talk) 01:40, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're saying the same thing different ways. My understanding of the license intent is: one may copy the whole thing and distribute that, but one may not do anything else. IMO, that is more restrictive than default or "full" copyright, and therefore not likely to be enforceable. Anyway, I found other sources, and put it in my own words. :) Thanks. -- Yae4 (talk) 13:54, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]