User talk:BobEret

Your draft article, Draft:Operación Palace


Hello, BobEret. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Operación Palace".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:51, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:20, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that hate speech
And good job warning the user responsible. Just so you know, though, the warning template only goes on the user talk page, not the page where the hate speech occurred. Rather, you should just remove the content in question with a summary like "removing hate speech". If the comment is part of a larger discussion, you can replace it with redacted. I'll also go ahead and contact an admin to see if that edit should be revision-deleted. -- Tamzin (she/they, no pref.) &#124; o toki tawa mi. 03:13, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
 * ThanksBobEret (talk) 03:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
 * An admin has deleted the edit and blocked the user responsible. -- Tamzin (she/they, no pref.) &#124; o toki tawa mi. 05:54, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Third opinion
Hey BobEret! Thank you for your part in the discussion at LGBT Outline. I saw you posted at WP:3. I've picked up and denied a few requests there, and I would suggest you withdraw. You'll see in the guidelines that they are really looking for disputes that mainly involve just two editors and ones that have "matured" in the sense of running to standstill. I think probably our discussion meets neither qualification. If needed, there are other dispute resolution options, but generally this discussion is pretty young to take to those other places. Hope this helps! Firefangledfeathers (talk) 04:27, 14 May 2021 (UTC)


 * . Thanks for that - I have withdrawn. What's the best way to take it forward - to me, it seems that the other editor is refusing to engage with my argument (about the information hierarchy), whereas I have engaged with his (about biology). I realise that this may just be how-things-are-on-the-internet, but still, it would be great to get some advice from a more experienced editor. BobEret (he/him) (talk) 04:33, 14 May 2021 (UTC) Issue resolved :) BobEret (he/him) (talk) 04:34, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I saw! You should go ahead and make the edit if you'd like. It's definitely possible someone will come along tomorrow and smash through the fragile consensus but ... hopefully not. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 04:35, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored, so Undid revision
Hello brother, I know, but the women there do not accept putting their pictures. It is forbidden to display their pictures (for them) because they wear a niqab and a cloak. It is impossible for the owner to know it must be deleted. Samlaxcs (talk) 10:06, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi there. Given that the owner uploaded the picture, and the subjects appeared in it (notably not wearing a niqab or similar clothing), I find this unlikely. While I am by no means an expert in copyright law, the image in question has a Creative Commons license, so Wikipedia is allowed to use it. If the specific people in the photo didn't want it to be used, I imagine that would be an issue for them to take up with the uploader; however, since you are neither the uploader nor in the photo (and even if you are, I'm not sure whether you have the legal right to have it taken off Wikipedia? I genuinely don't know about this), that is no reason for you to remove the photo. BobEret (he/him) (talk) 10:38, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't know, but I know the culture of the country, and the law and the state are very prohibited Wearing a dress like this and it is impossible for the owner of the picture to actually agree. I know many situations like this happen Samlaxcs (talk) 18:52, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * As per WP:NOTCENSORED, Wikipedia only has to follow the law of the US, where its servers are located, and which clearly doesn't prohibit this. It was the photographer's job to consider whether they were breaking any local laws or religious prohibitions and so on. Whether it is religiously objectionable is irrelevant, since it is Wikipedia's policy to include such content. I think this paragraph of WP:NOTCENSORED is appropriate: "Some articles may include images, text, or links which are relevant to the topic but that some people find objectionable. Discussion of potentially objectionable content should usually focus not on its potential offensiveness but on whether it is an appropriate image, text, or link. Beyond that, 'being objectionable' is generally not sufficient grounds for the removal of content. The Wikipedia:Offensive material guideline can help assess appropriate actions to take in the case of content that may be considered offensive.". BobEret (he/him) (talk) 03:31, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Just so you know, Bob, Samlaxcs has now been blocked as a sockpuppet. Good call on the revert. -- Tamzin (she/they) &#124; o toki tawa mi. 05:43, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Just thought I'd bring this to your attention...
Hello! Just wanted to bring this to your attention... The IP user hasn't edited in nine days, but I would keep an eye out since they manipulated their talk page comment by another user to fit their agenda. They clearly have a conflict of interest in this area, but I saw you commented on their talk page (which the diff will show they removed,) and wanted you to see this. I reverted it either way, so they don't have any support for any nefarious changes they decide to make. Thanks! Spf121188 (talk) 18:20, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Suggest me, O great bot!
BobEret (he/him) (talk) 13:27, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:35, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Re: Croatian kuna blocked user now vandalising Ryan Bang
This could well be a different person. Please feel free to notify WP:ANI or WP:RFPP if they persist.

Your message does help me identify that this block of a whole netblock is less than helpful, I'll amend it. --Joy (talk) 07:39, 25 February 2024 (UTC)