User talk:35.139.154.158

Welcome!
Hello! I noticed your contributions to Ticket resale&#32;and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! ASUKITE 20:47, 12 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Ah, I wondered who the highly competent but somewhat ill-tempered IP might be, and I guess now I know. So a belated welcome back :).  --JBL (talk) 22:47, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

June 2022
Hello, I'm Victor Trevor. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Square root of 6—because it 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. Victor Trevor ( talk ) 14:44, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

AfD you requested
See Articles for deletion/List of largest buildings in the United States. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:48, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Speedy tagging
You've tagged two articles as WP:A7 without notifying the author of the articles. Stop doing that. If you do that again, you risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:38, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Noted, will begin notifying. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

, Further to that, can you explain why you've been declining these? These are blatant A7s. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:46, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * First, they are not "blatant A7s". Second, I declined them because of your failure to notify the author. Why are you on such a tear to delete these articles, anyway? Indeed, your behavior as an IP is very suspicious. You are not a new user.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * There is nothing whatsoever in Wikipedia policy that states that IP contributors have to be 'new'. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:11, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I am not a new user. And you're right, I should have notified the article creator.  Now that that's done, will you reconsider the tags?  Thanks, 35.139.154.158 (talk) 01:19, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Ahem
Please tone it down in the edit summaries. Drmies (talk) 00:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

October 2022
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Long pause. 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: 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. Since you continue to edit war after the initial warning. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Milky Way
Sorry, that was my bad, I misinterpreted the current standing of this issue, -  FlightTime  ( open channel ) 17:26, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * K, sorry if I snapped 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:27, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem, we're good. Cheers, -  FlightTime  ( open channel ) 17:29, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

ℤ-actions
Regarding your reversal of my edit: it is true. ℤ is the free group on one generator, so the data of a group homomorphism $$\mathbb Z \to \text{Aut}(X)$$ is equivalent to the data of a function $$\{*\} \to \text{Aut}(X)$$, i.e. an automorphism of $$X$$. The equivalence is given, in one direction, by evaluating the action at 1, and in the other direction by sending $$f : \text{Aut}(X)$$ to $$n : \mathbb Z \mapsto f^n : \text{Aut}(X)$$, using the inverse when $$n$$ is negative.

It is also true that any G-action and $$g : G$$ determines an automorphism, but in general this automorphism does not suffice to reconstruct the entire action.

Please unrevert, and in the future refrain from hastily reverting edits you don't fully understand. — ncfavier  15:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)


 * I very much do understand that, but that's not what was in the content of the edit. You simply said a Z action was an automorphism, which is nonsensical taken at face value.  In any case, it doesn't belong in the examples section, because it's not an example of an action (or even a whole class of actions). 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, I can see how the phrasing might be confusing and I concede that "is" needs to be expanded a bit.
 * Where does it belong, if not in the examples section? It's a spelling-out of what it means to be a group action for a specific instantiation of the group. I also plan to add that $$\mathbb Z/2 \mathbb Z$$-actions are involutions. — ncfavier  19:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I've made a new edit. If you still object, please improve it instead of reverting. — ncfavier  13:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Naw, makes much more sense now. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:11, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Bijection
Thanks for the clarification. My apologies. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 20:19, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:19, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Your tags on Magical alphabets
... included "Original research", "Essay", and "Tone". I've trimmed down the two paragraphs following the list, and cited where I thought that necessary. (The first sentence of that second paragraph merely rephrases the concept of encryption or enciphering in plainer words for any unfamiliar with those terms – and "encoding secret messages" is blue-linked in the lede.) I'd appreciate learning specifically what else you think should be documented, de-essayed, or re/un-toned. As this is a topic which may be new to a reader, I've tried to err on the side of explaining, where for a more commonplace subject a plain list might suffice. Shall we take it to Talk:Magical alphabets? – . Raven .talk 23:06, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

There is now a section on this topic in Talk:Magickal alphabet [note singular title]. I pinged you from there. Please respond. – . Raven .talk 03:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

May 2023
Please stop. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of rainbow crossings, you may be blocked from editing. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 20:31, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello
Hi, hope you are well. I'd like to direct you to Wikipedia's policies around civility. The statements you made in reply to my contributions in Articles for deletion/List of people who have been pied (5th nomination) could have been made in a way that didn't insult my contributions or my understanding of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. All the best. &mdash;siro&chi;o 02:39, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Trust me, calling it "horse manure" was the toned-downed, civil version. Strong language is often effective for getting someone's true, visceral reaction to something across in a way that nothing else can.  Don't mistake strong language for incivility.  My disagreement with your interpretation of of PAG is just that, not a personal insult.  35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:05, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I felt that it was disrespectful statement. Your stated intent to not personally insult me (via my contributions) did not come across in the phrasing. It was hurtful. I ask that you consider rephrasing or retracting parts as others will be reading it. &mdash;siro&chi;o 20:36, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

August 2023
Hi! I've reverted your recent edit to Jonathan Brandis, where you changed "die by suicide" to "commit suicide". Current best practices are to use the phrasing "die by suicide". — Moriwen (talk) 14:48, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Talk:Derivative, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ☀DefenderTienMinh⛤☯☽ ( talk ) 19:08, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

 Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for habitual edit warring. 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. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:08, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

September 2023
Hello, I'm FenrisAureus. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Chaitin's constant 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. — FenrisAureus ▲ (she/they)   ( talk ) 18:13, 18 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Well that was silly. --JBL (talk) 22:43, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Oct 23
Please do not mass remove cited content without explanation, it might be seen as wp:disruptive. Slatersteven (talk) 17:00, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

also read wp:editwar, as doing it over something like mass content removal will not go well. Slatersteven (talk) 17:01, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Standard deviation, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. — W.andrea (talk) 19:03, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, and thank you for lending your time to help improve Wikipedia:Lies Miss Snodgrass told you! If you are interested in continuing to edit, I suggest you make an account to gain a bunch of privileges. Happy editing! Clyde &#91;trout needed&#93; 16:31, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you...
... for your contribution at Articles for deletion/2024 deaths in the United States. What you said was obviously the best outcome, much better than deletion. JBW (talk) 20:29, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

January 2024
Hello, I'm ThaddeusSholto. I noticed that you recently removed content from Cult without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 21:19, 21 January 2024 (UTC)


 * The IP's edit summary is undoubtedly an accurate explanation. You should self-revert.  --JBL (talk) 21:29, 21 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Done. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 21:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Water memory, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Ixocactus (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

March 2024
Hello, I'm Heyallkatehere. I noticed that you recently removed content from Methylamine without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Heyallkatehere (talk) 19:50, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

April 2024
It seems you're involved in a situation that resembles an edit conflict with me, as evidenced by the repeated reversals you've made on the String_art page. This indicates you are persistently modifying the content back to your preferred version, despite differing opinions from other contributors. Collaborative effort, avoiding disruptive edits, and striving for agreement are key expectations for users, especially when disagreements arise. Instead of continuously reverting others' contributions, please engage in discussions on the article's talk page to reach a mutually agreed-upon version. Additionally, you have the option to seek assistance at an appropriate noticeboard or pursue dispute resolution mechanisms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.205.244.137 (talk) 06:42, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Talk:List of cult films
As a participant in Articles for deletion/List of cult films (2 nomination), consider this a formal invitation to figure out some kind of proper list criteria for List of cult films. The discussion can be found at Talk:List of cult films. TompaDompa (talk) 23:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Vedic Mathematics
Please note that it is normal to provide the nationality of an author for context, and that honorifics may be included for the first mention of a person who holds the honorific, but should not be repeated. Therefore I have reverted your edits which are the opposite of improvements to the article. Skyerise (talk) 18:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Race hoax
I was very confused by whomever wrote on the AfD about the pronouns and who did what. The use of proper nouns, especially last names, eliminates misgendering and confusion. Bearian (talk) 12:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Sam's Chicken, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Wiiformii (talk) 15:22, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sam's Chicken. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Wiiformii (talk) 15:25, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Sam's Chicken
Hello, I have removed the portion you referenced on my talk page as I also agree that it did not bring anything to the article, although I reverted it due to the removal of properly cited controversy and the addition of confusing maintenance tags. I will not revert anything for now due to the WP:3RR rule but I hope you understand, with best regards :) Wiiformii (talk) 16:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

June 2024
Hello, I'm Doclys. I noticed that you recently removed content from Volcanism on Venus without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — doclys  (❀) 05:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


 * If you think that "refspam" is not adequate explanation for the removal then you may like to reconsider your own edit summaries, most of which give even less explanation than that. For example, a very large proportion of your edit summaries are of the form "Restoring revision [revision number] by [username]", with no explanation whatsoever  of why you are restoring it, let alone merely "without adequately explaining why" (my emphasis). JBW (talk) 10:05, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for your feedback. I understand that my edit summaries should be more detailed. I'll remember this for my future edits. Thank you. — doclys  (❀) 10:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on AREA (fashion label). 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: 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.  Yoshi24517  ( Chat ) ( Very Busy ) 19:02, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Thank you again...
... this time for your edit at Talk:Prime number. JBW (talk) 09:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

ANI you've been mentioned in
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 07:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Conversions to metric in NASCAR tables
Please see the discussion thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject NASCAR regarding your recent reverts. -- Beland (talk) 05:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)