User talk:Equine-man/Archive 1

May 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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 ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Re
✅ tag removed. Also, you will probably want to expand the article a little if you can find some more info (like when it was approved, any notes about its development. etc.) Also, you will want to sign your talk page comments with four tildes ( ~ ) to let people know who wrote the comment without having to look at the page's editing history. Regards. Thingg &#8853; &#8855; 15:04, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, no problem. Also, another way you can make your comments easier to read is to add a colon before your "re:" comment. This will indent the text like this comment is. You can also do more levels of indentation by adding more colons. (eg. "::::" is four levels of indentation) Looking forward to seeing you around!  Thingg &#8853; &#8855;  15:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV
Hello there Equine-man. I wanted to drop you a note about reporting to WP:AIV. When a user makes a bad faith edit on WP, you are to warn them according to a scale. For example, when they first make a BFE, you warn them with a template similar to pagenamehere ~. You increase the number each time they are warned. Only after they have had their last warning can you report them to AIV, otherwise your request will be denied. Thanks and happy editing,  D u s t i complain/compliment 15:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC) P.S. if you need as a question, feel free to do so here.

Sourcing
Hi, I don't have access to the source of the content you removed at Kevin_Quinn (I'm at work). Can you please check for me whether or not the article is indeed stating that he is a homosexual and sounds reliable. In that case, this would not be a BLP violation. I blocked the IP for 3RR, but if it was a BLP vio I was wrong and I'll need to unblock it :) -- lucasbfr  talk 16:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah I agree with your removal (after a second look which came, unfortunately, after the block). I'll leave everything as it is then (the IP is prolly a SPA anyway). -- lucasbfr  talk 16:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Asperger syndrome
Hi; I have reverted your edit, not because I think it is wrong, but because it is unsourced. Asperger syndrome is a featured article, and we need to be rigorous in protecting it. If you can find a good published source for the statement you added (I bet you can if you look; maybe Temple Grandin?), feel free to put it back in. Looie496 (talk) 16:54, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Life Power International
Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles you created. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:
 * Place  on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag(s).
 * Make your case on the article's .

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 17:57, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "Rohit Verma (Spiritual Teacher)"
A page you created, Rohit Verma (Spiritual Teacher), has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, organisation, or web content, but does not indicate why its subject is important or significant.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Uncle Dick (talk) 18:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page List of types of spiritual teachers. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Uncle Dick (talk) 18:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Life Power International and others
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated articles are Life Power International, Rohit Verma. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to the relevant discussion pages: Articles for deletion/Life Power International for Life Power International, Articles for deletion/Rohit Verma (2nd nomination) for Rohit Verma. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo norbrook.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Logo norbrook.png. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:43, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey
Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * 1) Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
 * 2) Editor-focused central editing dashboard
 * 3) "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
 * 4) Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
 * 5) Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded User wikipedia/RC Patrol (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, — Delivered: 01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Benedetta Dubini


A tag has been placed on Benedetta Dubini requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Daiyusha (talk) 04:32, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Benedetta Dubini for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Benedetta Dubini 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 Articles for deletion/Benedetta Dubini 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. Huon (talk) 01:07, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Nandu Jayakumar for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nandu Jayakumar 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 Articles for deletion/Nandu Jayakumar 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. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 02:00, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Liberland
Hello. Being verifiable is never by itself reason enough to include anything, what matters is that being a local representative for a fictional nation isn't notable. I have also tagged the article you created about Daniel Dabek for lack of notability. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not LinkedIn, and your article does not present evidence for Dabek being botable enough for an own article here. I could have nominated it for deletion straight away, but I'll give you a chance to find such evidence. And please note that press releases, passing mentions and short blurbs about him isn't enough, we need in-depth coverage in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. And please only add what the sources actually say, the sentence you added about him having worked for a Wall Street trading company wasn't mentioned at all in the source you first gave, and the second source you added reads like a press release, and was published on a site for a cryptocurrency conference, not a reliable source that checks facts before publishing things. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 17:56, 24 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I take your removal of my notice about paid-editing disclosure (a notice that is still visible in the page history, just like everything else that gets posted here) as you denying that you have received payment for creating articles here. A denial that could come to back to haunt you, because if it turns out that you have been editing for pay, in spite of denying it when asked, you as a person can expect being blocked indefinitely from editing here, regardless of which account or IP you use. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 18:56, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, as I had already answered you. I will be taking your advice and expanding on the article more in the draftspace. Equine-man (talk) 19:59, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Copying without attribution on Gonda Betrix
Hello. I took a look at the article named above, comparing it to the original article on the Afrikaans Wikipedia (af:Gonda Betrix), and found that 90% of your article is identical to a Google Translate machine translation of the Afrikaans article, without proper attribution. Which is a big no-no since it violates the copyright terms here. So please read Translation and Copying within Wikipedia, and make sure you always follow the instructions given there. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 15:06, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of TROIKA Germany GmbH


A tag has been placed on TROIKA Germany GmbH requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:09, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Daniel Dabek moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Daniel Dabek, does not have enough sources and citations 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). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " 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. —— SerialNumber  54129  17:57, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Karan Exclusive


A tag has been placed on Karan Exclusive requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. StaticVapor message me!   20:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. 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:. Bbb23 (talk) 00:40, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I note on the Standard Offer page it states: "Banned users seeking a return are well-advised to make significant and useful contributions to other WMF projects prior to requesting a return" As an Administrator would you be able to point me in the direction where I could be most useful until I can request unblocking? Thanks. Equine-man (talk) 13:07, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * There are many projects. Wikidata is a centralized database.  It's a little complex to figure out at first, but there's usually vandalism to clean up.  Wikimedia Commons is an image repository, kind of like Flickr.  There's usually something to do over there, such as tagging copyright violations or uploading new images.  Simple English Wikipedia is an interesting project designed to make English-language articles easier to understand.  It's not as easy as it sounds to "translate" a complex topic into easy-to-understand prose.  Regardless, it's still English, and there's always other work to be done, like anti-vandalism.  If you speak other languages, you could try looking at Wikipedia in other languages.  French Wikipedia and German Wikipedia are the most active ones, I think.  Wikiquote is a quotation database, which could be fun to edit.  Wiktionary is a dictionary, which sounds a little less fun, but it's probably not that much different than editing an encyclopedia.  There are lots of other sites, too, but I've never used them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

unblock discussion
Well, owning up to it is a good idea. However, I'm puzzled by the enormous editing gap. Is this regarded as your original account? Please list all of your accounts so a non checkuser admin can better assess matters. As this is a checkuser block, non checkusers are prohibited from unblocking. You may or may not be someone to whom we would tender the standard offer. This would depend on whether unblocking you would be a net positive. We would need to assess the amount of damage done and whether or not this was an aberration.  Dloh Cier  ekim  12:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


 * thank you for taking the time to respond. This is my main account. Huge gap in editing as I had lost my password, then managed to recover it, hence editing attributed to my username. Two other accounts as mentioned: Purple-PirateGB and Verdrehter Bär (I only used Verdrehter Bär to edit in the German wiki as I wanted to keep accounts separate according to language, I should have got permission to do this one I think?) Equine-man (talk) 12:52, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * If you use alternate accounts, you should declare them on your user page. You can explain their the purposes of each. I do not know if these are the reasons for the block.  Dloh Cier  ekim  14:32, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Oh no, I was caught dead to rights using Purple-PirateGB as a sockpuppet, which I vow never to do again. I do note however that I have been incorrectly tagged in a previous sockpuppet investigation here after I had made a comment on this article for deletion discussion three years ago, which resulted in this investigation. I have nothing to do with that apart from making a comment in the discussion for deletion. I don't know if this confused matters and prompted the block.
 * No, as you can see, I found you unrelated. Please remember to sign your posts here.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:19, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, yes I forgot to sign Equine-man (talk) 15:41, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Nanda Kumar Jayakumar for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nanda Kumar Jayakumar 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 Articles for deletion/Nanda Kumar Jayakumar 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. signed,Rosguill talk 21:10, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of TROIKA Germany


A tag has been placed on TROIKA Germany requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

"G5 for multiple blocked users: User:Equine-man, User:Flapjacktastic, User:Purple-PirateGB"

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. signed,Rosguill talk 22:28, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

The reason you used sock puppets seems to be to create spammy articles and keep them from being deleted. Is there anything you'd like to declare after having read Paid-contribution disclosure? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:31, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Sorry it was such a long time ago that I thought I had declared it. You are correct, I had attempted to get three articles posted for payment. This is why I waited so long before requesting unblocking because I was not happy with my own actions. Equine-man (talk) 14:54, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Two questions: 1. Will you be writing articles for hire going forward? 2. Would you accept a ban on creating articles of at least 3 months (of active editing) as a condition of unblock?  The idea behind that would be to show you are here to actively work on articles and not create potentially spamming articles as you had in the past.  only (talk) 02:19, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply In answer to your questions: 1. No I will never write articles for hire again. 2. I would happily accept a 3 month ban on creating articles while I continue to constructively edit. Regards, Equine-man (talk) 07:22, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Disruptive editing
Why did you interpret the addition of wikilinks as disruptive editing/vandalism here, here, and here?  bibliomaniac 1  5  21:18, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * When did they remove links only to re-add them again? I don't see that in their editing history.  bibliomaniac 1  5  21:26, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I see they've been blocked for abusing multiple accounts. Thanks.  bibliomaniac 1  5  21:35, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Simply adding links to game autoconfirmed is not itself a blockable offense, though it does make the user suspicious. However, I'm confident this one happens to be a sock given the username similarity and editing pattern and have blocked. Sro23 (talk) 21:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

User 202.166.70.149 on East Coast Group Representation Constituency Page
Hello, I note you have issued warnings of vandalism to the user which I am currently in an edit dispute with, mainly due to their unconventional style of editing which may hint at a lower proficiency of English. Would you kindly look at my comments on his page as a neutral observer regarding the East Coast Group Representation Constituency page and meditate between us? I do not entirely feel their edits are outright vandalism, and wish to resolve the matter amiably. Seloloving (talk) 02:01, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

"Unconstructive editing"
Hi, I respectfully take issue with the description of my editing as "unconstructive". Happy of course to discuss this further and thanks for your time on this. Mark83 (talk) 16:21, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * In terms of WP:V, the policy states "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." The content removed does not have inline citations and the article has been tagged as such for over a year.
 * To compound the issue above some of the content is blatantly unencyclopedic e.g.
 * "A particularly scary group of women from the valleys in South Wales who would descend upon RAF St. Athan on NAAFI Bop night. They would abduct any young airman they chose for use in dignity-robbing acts."
 * "Station Bike (the) – Derogatory term for a particular WAAF, WRAF, or civvy female with station access who develops a reputation for frequent sexual activity with many different Airmen. As in – "The whole station has ridden it"."
 * "SPAM (abbreviation) – Spastic Plastic American Mouth – a derogatory term for gobby Yank."
 * These issues are extremely serious. However to compound the issue the whole page is a candidate for deletion under WP:NOT.
 * Finally, even in terms of accuracy it includes many terms that were neither invented by the RAF nor slang.
 * I've reflected on this and just wish to voice that I'm offended by how you've approached this. Stating that my edits "did not appear constructive" and using a generic vandalism /unexperienced editor template when I have valid concerns (which I stand by and which I explained in my edit summary) makes me feel like you haven't fully considered this issue. It's also important to stress that I know you will have been acting in good faith, but I hope you understand my desire to defend my integrity here. As noted above, happy to discuss further. Mark83 (talk) 16:43, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I actually was thinking of posting a concern as well. Equine-man, your reverts at Nicolas Sehnaoui were reverting someone removing WP:BLP violating material as I've explained on the article talk page.  Just because someone is removing a significant amount of information from an article, like at Nicolas Sehnaoui or like Mark83 did at RAF slang, doesn't mean it is vandalism.  You need to look into the edits further, not just blindly hit revert.  Please be more careful.  only (talk) 16:31, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

No response?
Hi. I took the time to explain a concern I hold at your actions and you haven't responded, but archived it instead. You also seem to have ignored the other concern raised by a different editor. No rules broken, it just doesn't sit well with me. Best regards Mark83 (talk) 18:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:UAA
Thanks for the report but you should note that some wiki projects (Commons, German & maybe more) allow corporate account names. They're not in violation of enwiki's policies until they edit this wiki. Cabayi (talk) 09:14, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Cabayi Correct, however they had created a userpage purely for promotional purposes, including their website url, which is why I reported it. PixelproductionSg Equine-man (talk) 09:28, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Umm, it turned out that way eventually, but your UAA report was filed at 9:02, declined at 9:05, and their promotional userpage was created at 9:08. Cabayi (talk) 09:40, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Cabayi I was just following username policy at WP:NAMEGUIDE.

The following types of usernames are not permitted because they are considered promotional: Usernames that unambiguously represent the name of a company, group, institution or product.

Usernames implying shared use: Because Wikipedia's policy is that usernames should not be shared between more than one individual, the following types of usernames are not permitted because they imply shared use:

Usernames that are simply names of companies or groups are not permitted (these also fall under § Promotional names above). Best regards, Equine-man (talk) 09:49, 26 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Up to a point. User accounts are shared across all the WMF's projects - see Special:CentralAuth/Equine-man. Until they edit this project they're not subject to this project's rules. They might want to edit exclusively on a project which allows such names. Until they edit here we don't know. Cabayi (talk) 10:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Fixed your talk page archiving
Hi! I took the liberty of fixing the auto-archiving settings at the top of this page. --rchard2scout (talk) 09:16, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion
Hello Equine-man. Just as an FYI, the block I imposed on is a so-called soft block. It means that, basically, the user is invited to create a new account (or to go through a specific procedure to be unblocked). So, it's not really block evasion if they keep editing using a different account. Now, in this case, was also in violation of the username policy and, so, I have soft-blocked it as well. Cheers. Salvio 15:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Paravar
My edit about Paravar is a correct content because Paravar community people don't follow Hinduism and don't speak Malayalam Alfwin Fernando (talk) 13:30, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Because I belongs to Paravar community Alfwin Fernando (talk) 16:23, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Military Veterinary Institute
Hello, Equine-man. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Military Veterinary Institute, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:40, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Military Veterinary Institute


Hello, Equine-man. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Military Veterinary Institute".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:49, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Chosun Ilbo
As I explained in edit summaries and on the talk page, part of the "controversy" section did not refer to any controversy. The existence of sources making different claims is not a controversy (WP:SYNTH). Please do not revert changes without explanation. 73.71.251.64 (talk) 23:00, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

As expected
As experted, a cursory glance at what the IP hopper was up to turned up these edits. They clearly are on a mission. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 20:51, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Again
This and this, again. Cabayi (talk) 10:14, 28 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Point taken. I was however right about the 2nd example, and I will probably be right about the 1st example. My view is they signed up on English Wikipedia, not another WMF project, so I was following WP:NAMEGUIDE for the English Wikipedia. However I will take your advice and not report any further usernames. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Equine-man (talk • contribs) 10:36, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * We don't block users based on what they might do. Minority Report (film) is a dystopian nightmare, not an aspirational vision.
 * 50-50 is not a success rate to boast of. I'm not asking you to stop reporting, just to be more careful to ensure that a reason to report exists.
 * The English Wikipedia is (though it isn't too polite to say this in front of the other Wikis) Wikimedia's front door. Many users sign up on enwiki and then exclusively edit other WMF projects. Until they edit here you cannot safely assume enwiki is where they will edit.
 * Ping only works if you sign your post in the same edit. Cabayi (talk) 11:17, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Dorothy Ruíz Martínez
Hi Equine-man, the community's initial response to Rafaela Mars's concerns was reverting the good-faith contributions as if they had been vandalism. As vandalism is intentional damage to the encyclopedia and such intention was clearly not present, Special:Diff/1041047929 was unspecific and led to unnecessary confusion; the user had to ask for help at the Teahouse before finally receiving a proper explanation of what has happened and how to continue.

In general, the removal of material from a BLP can often be interpreted as a neutrality (undue weight) or verifiability concern, and such concerns are usually worth discussion. When the inclusion of article content is worth discussion, re-instatement of the disputed content without consensus is usually inapproppriate (WP:ONUS for verifiable material, and WP:BURDEN for verifiability concerns, both recommend not to do this).

Best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 12:21, 29 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up. I saw on the article’s talk page a connection had been declared a day after my last edit on that page. Equine-man (talk) 15:45, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

User page
Hi, can you please remove all the misleading userboxes and service awards from your user page. Eevee01(talk) 08:30, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also: Mz7 (talk) 17:00, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.


 * Thank you very much. I'll refresh my memory on everything first before diving in. Equine-man (talk) 09:29, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I am attempting to update the content on the Crescent School Toronto page. I am new to this process and do not understand why I have been prevented from posting these changes. Please assist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrescentSchoolToronto (talk • contribs) 21:12, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Page Edit
Hi Equine-Man, these changes have been incorporated as the “information” is defamatory libel with zero link to the actual subject, “Islamic Society of Baltimore” - further, the “source” incorporated was an opinion piece from a news article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimSale123 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * @TimSale123, I fail to see where you brought your concerns to the article’s talk page. You can’t just go around claiming something and deleting large parts of articles without reaching a consensus. I saw multiple references from different sources that you deleted. Equine-man (talk) 16:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I am not vandalizing anything, The People Under The Stairs is not a comedy film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:805:4200:9300:C843:B65A:2606:8CE8 (talk) 15:48, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I AM NOT PARTAKING IN DISRUPTIVE EDITING! YOU NEED TO BACK OFF!! OR YOU WILL BE BLOCKED! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:805:4200:9300:C843:B65A:2606:8CE8 (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

False contribution
Hi Equine-man, I didnt understand what did I wrong in my previous contributions Akram O. A. (talk) 19:33, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Akram O. A. answered at Teahouse that people should not be added to lists unless there is an existing article. David notMD (talk) 20:57, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Tree of Life Synagogue Shooting edits
Hello, please remove the part on this page that mentions "Hamas offered their condolences."

They did not and they are anti-Semitic terrorist organization. If you read the link, this is clear that this was NOT a condolence.

Hamas, a terrorist organization and sworn enemies of the Jewish People, claimed to condemn the attack, likening it to their own experience as "victims of the terror of the Israeli occupation." While many mainstream progressive news sources originally cited Hamas among groups around the world offering condolences, it was later understood to be an instance of "hijacking victimhood" and "co-opting and exploiting a tragedy as an opportunity to further their own anti-Semitic agenda of Jewish extermination." By extending disingenuous sympathies towards a specifically Jewish tragedy to further their own public narrative and anti-Semitic agenda, said remarks were condemned as "despicable" and "dangerous" to a Westerners unfamiliar with their crimes against Jews, and thus an instance of how propoganda functions by preying on indifference and widespread ignorance as a tool to normalize hatred. Many mainstream news outlets later invoked the trope of "a wolf in sheep's clothing" to describe this blatantly predatory act. 2600:387:B:902:0:0:0:49 (talk) 14:58, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

HPV vaccine
Hi Equine-man, on HPV vaccine we appeared to have an edit conflict as I accepted this revision, at the same time as you reverted it. I accepted it as a google search turned up this university article which appeared to support the edit. Don’t know whether to accept or not, DigitalChutney (talk) 20:53, 5 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments. I was going according to the official HPV licensing https://ec.europa.eu/health/vaccination/hpv_en] Equine-man (talk) 20:59, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I see, will leave as is for now, though I see that the UK row in the table also makes reference to male vaccination. DigitalChutney (talk) 21:07, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Danny Tarkanian
Hey, the changes that I made were to more accurately reflect history and the changes you reverted to either didn't happen or were irrelevant to the topic.

Cigány
Grci 91.137.243.64 (talk) 14:17, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

RE COI Disclosure on Campaign Legal Center's Page
I am new to editing Wikipedia pages, but I fixed my user page to say, "This user, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that they have been paid by CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER for their contributions to Wikipedia." Could you please let me know if that addresses the concerns that you laid out? If I were suggest more potential changes in the future, I would do them through Talk:Campaign Legal Center first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frida Fresca (talk • contribs) 21:48, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Why do you delete my page sir
Please i want to know the reason why you delete my page Ekurume8 (talk) 08:16, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry
I think that the admin who edited the talk in Joachim Fest doesn't respect the NPOV wikipedia policy, because i have seen him/her in other pages in the past, edit without an explanation. I ask you please control that IP to verify if his/her intentions are good. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.56.26.240 (talk) 07:43, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Please take it to the talk page, you can’t just go around deleting stuff because you don’t believe in it. Equine-man (talk) 07:46, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

All I am trying to do is update the Crescent School wikipedia page
Hello Equine-man, I left updated content on the Crescent School talk page weeks ago as instructed, but now you are telling me that the content is not worthy of Wikipedia. In fact, other than the acquisition of the Bob Rumball Centre (which is big news, covered in Canada's National newspaper the Globe and Mail, citation included) all the changes are simply updates to the information ALREADY ON THE PAGE. This is extremely frustrating and I don't know how to simply make the listing current. Please also understand that I am not a Wikipedia expert, so a lot of the instructions don't make sense to me. LyndaTinTO (talk) 13:42, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

That is the danger of editing when you have a COI. The stuff you were adding does not belong on Wikipedia. Equine-man (talk) 15:01, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi again. I appreciate your help in updating our wiki page. I have no additional changes other than the one I added earlier this week regarding our FIRST Robotics World Championship. I'm hoping you can implement these updates soon. Please let me know if you need any further documentation from me. LyndaTinTO (talk) 14:29, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi again. I am following up on the updates the Crescent School wiki page as requested on November 16. Please let me know if there is anything else you need from me to make these updates. thanks LyndaTinTO (talk) 15:32, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Editing Stanton University (and Sockpuppet investigation)
Hello Equine-man,

I am working with my friend, sungchul.ham, on adding an entry for Stanton University. I see you have posted a Sockpuppet investigation charge against me and sungchul.ham. He had asked me for my help to create a wikipedia entry for Stanton University.

If it makes it easier, I will tell him not to edit on Wikipedia, and I, Roasted Brussel Sprouts, will be the one making changes to the articles from now on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roasted brussel sprouts (talk • contribs) 21:37, 15 November 2021 (UTC)


 * why does your friend want to edit the article? Equine-man (talk) 22:24, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

RE: Draft:اليوم الرياضي في قطر
A page not being in english is not a valid rationale for speedy deletion, neither in draftspace or mainspace (with some exception in the latter). It should instead be tagged with the appropriate tags. Curbon7 (talk) 11:10, 16 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Correct, this guy is problematic for every newcomer (because he thinks they are vandals.) Scratchinghead (talk) 14:18, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft refused
Hi, the message for refusing my article was a bit standard about reliable sources and I'd like to understand a bit more to know how can I improve. The article is about the formation of a band that I'm part of. I understand the concern about conflict of interest, but we are not famous yet so that journalists would write about us, so it has to be one of us writing about it. There are references all over the article, not to newspapers or magazines, but to the actual asset produced by musicians: songs. I'd like to know if the format of the references has to be different, or if other sources rather than ourselves should publish the article (I wonder who would know about our history better than us) or what exactly I need to do to be able to publish the article. Fwynyk (talk) 00:14, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Talk page blanking
People are free to blank their talk pages if they need to, per WP:BLANKING Wesoree (Talk) 17:59, 27 October 2022 (UTC)


 * True, but IP’s love hiding their warnings. Equine-man (talk) 18:00, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Also forgot to add as per WP:BLANKING “A number of important matters may not be removed by the user—they are part of the wider community's processes”……”For IP editors, templates and notes left to indicate other users share the same IP address.” Equine-man (talk) 18:06, 27 October 2022 (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) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of @Properties
It really makes no sense why you put a speedy deletion of @Properties, it was not advertising at all when you put the speedy deletion on there. I have removed the speedy deletion from the draft, and ask that you don't put random speedy deletions on drafts without good reason. Thank you, Matthew, MasterMatt12 (talk) 00:50, 16 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I beg to differ. The entire draft is promotional. Equine-man (talk) 07:27, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * How? MasterMatt12 (talk) 12:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Giannis-Harden rivalry notablility
Would you re-consider your delete support in the discussion? You said they fail notable people, but the people are EXTREMELY notable, they are famous, considered some of the greatest basketball players in history, play in the NBA, and get very active news coverage and one of them is an MVP candidate this season. This alone makes them notable enough, so I am asking you to re-consider supporting delete in the discussion. Thank you, Matthew. MasterMatt12 (talk) 12:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Just a simple google search will give you thousands of results on them. MasterMatt12 (talk) 12:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Edits on Paul Vallas Page
Hello,

I do not understand why the editing changes were not approved for the last edit? I provided the source and correctly ordered the titles. There are also several things not sourced throughout the article. At least 10 years of content that is missing that I am adding. Zbrahm2 (talk) 19:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello??? Zbrahm2 (talk) 20:50, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * How is it a COI if I disclosed and sourced material? And that material is subjectively being removed from the page now that it is sourced? Is a biography a conflict of interest? Zbrahm2 (talk) 20:51, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Read the section on YOUR talk page. Equine-man (talk) 20:54, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I read the section. I am not illiterate. If you would like to write the content yourself then go-ahead. But don't pull down sourced material. There is 10 years of missing content on the website. I gave you a link with a sourced bio. I encourage you to edit the page then if you are the mediator of the Paul Vallas wikipedia. I do not know what else to do if there is missing material and it is sourced. I appropriately disclosed my COI. Zbrahm2 (talk) 21:03, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You obviously missed the bit where it says:
 * ”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”
 * I do urge you to click through each link on your talk page, read what it says, and follow the rules. Equine-man (talk) 21:08, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Again, that is fine. I will not make the edits. Can you please then make them instead of just pulling them down? If you are a harbinger of validity, then the page should reflect the facts. Zbrahm2 (talk) 21:13, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

GeForce 40 series
Hello Equine-man,

This is just a quick notice regarding the recent situation that escalated on the GeForce 40 series article.

The majority of the disruptive edits appear to be coming from IP range 42.190.0.0/16 (see their contribs).

Blocking the individual IPs isn't helping it as the person can just restart their modem and continue disruptive editing again.

So the next time the same person comes to disrupt the article or related articles again, request the admins to block that entire 42.190.0.0/16 range instead.

Thanks, and Happy New Year. AP 499D25 (talk) 00:34, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

COI
Thank you for so kindly jumping on me within 30 seconds of my first interaction with Wiki. It’s heartwarming there are people ready and waiting to correct your every move here as everywhere. Please be advised I have read the COI page and am drafting a placeholder ready within the rules for an independent person to edit it. Johnocleese (talk) 09:26, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Bad form
I thing it is bad form to archive your talk page comments in a very rapid manner. 103.21.175.112 (talk) 07:36, 22 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Also, it is a little annoying that you have a huge picture of a horse on your talk page. We get it. You are into horses.  We can see youe username.  You should move it to User:Equine-man.  It means that other editors don't have to scroll too far.  103.21.175.112 (talk) 07:43, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Why
It is poor form to not discuss comment on your talk page. Removing them is silly. 103.21.175.112 (talk) 103.21.175.112 (talk) 07:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Because I choose not to interact with you as you have shown you really should not be on WP. Equine-man (talk) 07:50, 22 April 2023 (UTC)


 * That is not true. I checked the edit history.  You do it all the time. Also, it was a civil and valid comment.   103.21.175.112 (talk) 07:53, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Don't delete correct revisions
Please don't take it upon yourself to delete edits. SB127 (talk) 13:47, 27 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I will if it breaks the rules. Read WP:ALMA. Equine-man (talk) 13:51, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * What rule? SB127 (talk) 13:53, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Read the link I kindly provided for you. That will explain. Equine-man (talk) 13:54, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It says it does not absolutely require a wiki page. Also, there are others with no wiki page. SB127 (talk) 13:57, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * You will see every name in that section has a clickable blue link. Every one, except the one you added. Equine-man (talk) 14:01, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Not McMorrow or Merryman. SB127 (talk) 14:07, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Macament and Merryman. SB127 (talk) 14:09, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Stop reverting Temple Beth-El article
The old version of the article to which you are reverting is outdated. The types of programs and the religious affiliation have changed since the last time text was substantially updated.

Temple Beth-El has an official mission statement posted on its website, it occasionally brings visiting rabbis and cantors, has not been affiliated with the Union for Reform Judaism in years, and is thus non-denominational.

In Judaism, a synagogue/Temple that belongs to an official organization such as the Union for Reform Judaism, the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism and the Orthodox Union (there are a handful of other, smaller organizations) should use the appropriate religious affiliation descriptor. Temple Beth-El does not belong to a wider organization of synagogues.

The Temple does not "routinely" bring visiting rabbis or cantors. This happens about 3 to 5 times per year. The term ecumenical should be replaced with interfaith. These programs are not services as in worship services, and therefore the use of the term services is ambiguous at best. The term programs should be used instead of services. The picture of the exterior comes from the organization's website.

Have you ever been to Temple Beth-El or know anything about it? ENMWX (talk) 01:09, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Robert Patrick
I don't understand what you mean by "more reliable source." This one comes straight from a video interview with him admitting right in front of the camera. How much more reliable source do you need? Krisfrosz133 (talk) 07:59, 17 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Apologies, I did not watch the video, I just looked at the YouTube channel. The only time you can use a YouTube reference is if it is an official channel is my understanding. Equine-man (talk) 09:29, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Recreate
Hi, Please recreate article from last point in time draft for safekeeping. Please respect gathering of information about Michael Bjärhov and time going into project making wikipedia page. Consider making so immediatly, without delay, so Author can save importaint sources and be considered for peer review.

Best Regards, Author 83.254.1.68 (talk) 22:34, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Draft:Jonathan Marc Stein
Hello Equine-man. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Draft:Jonathan Marc Stein, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: For G5 to apply, the user in question has to be a sockpuppet of a banned or blocked user. And I don't see any evidence that that's the case. Thank you. BangJan1999 18:38, 5 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, please see User:Hawanonh, creator of article. Banned. G5 applies. Equine-man (talk) 18:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I wasn’t thinking straight, you’re correct. Both users reported sockpuppets anyway. Equine-man (talk) 18:45, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you again, and I need a little more guidance, please.
As you suggested, I updated my user page with the COI for the half-dozen or so pages I'm looking to update or correct.

I've created a Word doc with nearly 20 pages of suggested edits across Wikipedia--again, all factually based (not opinion), all written in an encyclopedic manner, and all with hotlinks to independent news sources to document each edit I am suggesting. (I'm happy to follow the rules to ensure everything is done in an upfront, open and honest method.)

So as not to overwhelm any editor, I'd like to share these suggestions in chunks--basically one topic at a time. That way, he or she can have the time to assess my suggested edits and, if they meet with his or her standards, to then make those updates before moving on to another section.

What I've done with each suggested edit is to point out what's lacking, and then suggest alternative language, which the editor can take or leave as they see fit, with suggested links to document everything.

This is my first time working with Wikipedia, so I set up everything in that way so the editor can make a quick assessment of every update or correction I'll suggest and let me know if something else is needed.

May I share the first chunk with you (either here or through some other means that you might suggest) so you can see what I'm trying to do and perhaps make the edits, presuming they do, indeed, meet Wikipedia's standards?

All the best, and thank you again for taking the time to guide me through this.

Kramer Lyrical42 (talk) 11:46, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Specific edits to Institute for Justice page
Good morning!

Just wanted to follow up and see if I can work with you to resolve the necessary edits to this page.

I've added the various COI information to my user page to ensure I'm being perfectly transparent about that.

I'd like to now start offering specific (FACTUAL) edits to update the Institute for Justice's page to fix what is either inaccurate, very out of date or incomplete. I have a Word doc with many pages of such edits that need to be made, all with independent sources to verify what I'm suggesting, and everything is written in a neutral/encyclopedic manner, as required by Wikipedia. Where needed, I've also spelled out why this change makes sense.

May I start sharing these specific suggested edits with you? If you're aren't able or don't have the time to assist with this, I'll certainly understand. If that's the case, please let me know and I'll continue looking for an editor who can help move this forward.

Thank you for your consideration. It is very much appreciated. Lyrical42 (talk) 08:39, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Peter dekker
Equine man, I gave the reason in my edit summary. All the information I removed was sourced to Peter Dekker's Manchu archery website which is not a reliable source. Point out Dekker's qualification in this field.Hukris (talk) 08:17, 27 August 2023 (UTC)


 * If you have concerns about a source, take it to the article’s talk page with your own source. Don’t just remove because you disagree with it. Equine-man (talk) 08:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)


 * it's not me that disagrees with it. Wikipedia has a policy on reliable sources, does it not?

LehryDoo who is likely Dekker himself, added his own website and himself as a citation to those articles and replaced earlier information. You cannot add random websites with no academic qualifications as citations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/LehryDoo

If I bring this up on the talk page and no one challenges the rationale (unless they prove Dekker earned a PhD in archery history) then will you stop reverting?

Hukris (talk) 08:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Reverts and warnings
Hi. I was prompted by a post at WP:RSN to review some of your recent reverts and user talk page warnings. At a glance, it seems like you are reverting without explanation and posting warnings that are inappropriate. Is there some mitigating factor or angle that I'm missing? Upon reflection, would you have done anything differently? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:36, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I've explained why I reverted the editor who just removed references without explaining why they were removing. Equine-man (talk) 20:32, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Edit: Sorry hit enter before I was finished. I never looked at the sources that had been there for years. Perhaps I should have checked RS suitability first as well. Equine-man (talk) 20:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Finishing my thought
Separate from the RS question, if an editor provides a reason in their edit summary for removing content, it's almost never appropriate to revert with no edit summary and the edit marked minor. We reserve such reverts for vandalistic edits. Similarly, a template like Template:Uw-delete4 is not appropriate for users that provide some explanation for the removal of content. You can disagree and revert or discuss, but it's not unexplained removal of content. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 21:05, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Understood. Thanks for clarifying. I have added an apology to the RS thread, because we were both coming from a different direction, and I should have taken more care in looking at the source itself. Equine-man (talk) 21:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
 * This is a best case scenario. Thanks for hearing me out. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 21:14, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time to help me improve my wiki knowledge. Equine-man (talk) 21:17, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Deletions from high school articles
I have reverted your deletions from Bishop Dunne Catholic School for the following reasons:
 * 1) It is reasonable and encyclopedic to mention the accreditation status of the school. This is routinely done for British (or at least English) high schools.
 * 2) The description of the campus is reasonable to include: rather than delete, it would be reasonable to tag the section as needing sources.
 * 3) A list of state championships in athletics is reasonable, especially when the list is sourced.

If this were an isolated incident, I'd say no harm, no foul. However, you've removed the athletics section from multiple high school articles. This pattern of behaviour is concerning, and this administrator strongly suggests you do not remove any further sections—especially when locating the sources for the championships was a trivial search. —C.Fred (talk) 13:39, 3 September 2023 (UTC)


 * @C.Fred Thank you for your note, which is noted. I messed up on the accreditation section, I wasn't reading the markup source properly.
 * However, you reverted things such as:
 * "In 2004, it was awarded the National Blue Ribbon School Lighthouse Award in regards for its continued academic excellence and dedication to the students of southern Dallas" - which is unsourced.
 * "Classrooms have been renovated with technology teaching walls, LEEDS environmental and acoustical standards, and new ceilings and flooring. The front office areas have also been completed. The auditorium and chapel have been re-modeled."
 * The entire Campus section - nothing of that is encyclopedic and is intended as pure puffery.
 * The state championship sports section I will leave alone in future. Equine-man (talk) 15:47, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

September 2023
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Ross High School (Hamilton, Ohio), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Despite your edit summary of "unsourced", Simon Stepaniak's attendance was clearly sourced. Meters (talk) 19:36, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Ross High School (Hamilton, Ohio), you may be blocked from editing. ''State athletic championships are not puffery. They are normally included in high school articles. Do not remove them'' Meters (talk) 19:39, 13 September 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) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Deprodding of The Draining Lake
I have removed the tag from The Draining Lake, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Snævar (talk) 15:21, 16 April 2024 (UTC)


 * @Snævar Thank you. I had put a prod there, later changed my mind, and forgot to remove it. Thank you for doing this. Equine-man (talk) 17:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Elliodor
Hello, Equine-man. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Elliodor, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:01, 14 September 2023 (UTC)