User talk:Delfield

Disambiguation link notification for February 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sciences Po, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paris Law School. 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) 06:21, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

I apologize
I apologize for assuming bad faith in ANI. I struck through all my comments in the offending section, and I hope you won't be angry at me for assuming bad faith. I'll try to assume good faith in the future. Sorry. 4D4850 (talk) 15:33, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Of course, I am not angry at all haha. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=1008435494&oldid=1008432359. --Delfield (talk) 08:15, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * 4D4850: Just to be clear: my haha was meant to be friendly. Thanks for taking the time to reach out and tell me this in any case. --Delfield (talk) 08:24, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, even though I'm bad at knowing if something is humor, I could still tell it was a friendly laugh. 4D4850 (talk) 13:14, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your edit!
Thanks for keeping the natural point of view at the article you edited. Your edits have been approved. 🌀Ae geo  u2🌀 ← talk 11:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Explanation of edits
Hello, I'm Paper9oll. I noticed that you recently removed content from Sciences Po 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 your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page.  You added content which is welcome, however at the same time, you removed quite an amount of content without explaining why in through the edit summary.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  11:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Paper9oll : The reason of the removed content was that it was written 2 or 3 times that there is this partnership or that partnership, so it was not neutral.See the message of  🌀Ae  above.  These were minimal: the article is still largely written with much details, like in a brochure.  I left a message talk page and a general "NPOV" for the changes. --Delfield (talk) 13:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi thanks for the reply. I have accepted the pending changes you've made. Just a tip and unrelated to the revert, is that you can easier reply to another editor using the Template:Replyto which would ping the editor hence notify the editor. Anyway ... happy editing!  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  13:53, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Just did it, never noticed the button, thank you! Delfield (talk) 15:15, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 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 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
—  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:03, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

POV pushing
I have to admit your accusating of POV is baffling. If you have an issue with an edit discuss it. That article is a mess thanks to really poor editing by multiple editors. I don't know why you turned your ire towards mw after agreeing with you. Nemov (talk) 20:27, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Delfield. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Juan Branco, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the edit COI template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see );
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see );
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Bbb23 (talk) 15:40, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message. I have absolutely no relation with this person. I came on the article by chance, and was led to edit because of the activity on it. You should, however, perhaps ask the same disclosure by Nemov. Thanks. Delfield (talk) 15:42, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2023
Your recent editing history at Juan Branco shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about 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 you being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Bbb23 (talk) 15:41, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for you message. I simply have been editing the page and Nemov has been all reverting without discussion in the middle. Please notice that Nemov has been siding with a blocked sockpuppet, even though it was obviously promotional: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Juan_Branco#RFC_:_Which_status_quo_to_build_on? He should be cautioned by an admin to edit this page Thanks. Delfield (talk) 15:46, 7 August 2023 (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 Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Bbb23 (talk) 23:47, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Nemov (talk) 13:15, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:. Daniel Case (talk) 18:29, 8 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Everyone can verify that Nemov has been editing without one single bit of discussion on content, but for unexplained reasons to me I am the one who is considered edit-warring. Never mind. Delfield (talk) 16:58, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

RE: Juan Branco
If you wish to argue about your block you can discuss with the blocking admin. I would recommend taking note of the admin's comment.. Thanks! Nemov (talk) 19:27, 10 August 2023 (UTC)


 * You once again mischaracterize the truth. This is not at all an admin comment. I don’t wish to discuss anything, stop following me everywhere to leave comments about my supposed behavior. Thanks. Delfield (talk) 14:24, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 * My comment was in response to your comment that you were not the one edit-warring and again you were pointing fingers at me. There's no mischaracterization. I'll gladly ignore you if you simply quit accusing me of bad faith. Thanks Nemov (talk) 21:06, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Everybody can see that you write refer to "the admin's comment" and give a link to a comment that is not at all by an admin. Delfield (talk) 14:35, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Oops, I linked to the wrong edit. You can find the admin's comments about your specific behavior here. Apparently you haven't learned your lesson because you continue to accuse others of bad faith.. This will only lead to further sanctions if you don't stop doing it. Nemov (talk) 18:01, 30 August 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) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)