User talk:General Ization/Archive 13

Hi there
Hello there. Just waving a "hi". I'm new on this site and ready to contribute. :) Fisherman099 (talk) 18:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Boing! said Zebedee • Ansh666 • Ad Orientem
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Tonywalton • AmiDaniel • Silence • BanyanTree • Magioladitis • Vanamonde93 • Mr.Z-man • Jdavidb • Jakec • Ram-Man • Yelyos • Kurt Shaped Box

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a successful proposal to create it, a new user right called "edit filter helper" is now assignable and revocable by administrators. The right allows non-administrators to view the details of private edit filters, but not to edit them.
 * Following a discussion about mass-application of ECP and how the need for logging and other details of an evolving consensus may have been missed by some administrators, a rough guide to extended confirmed protection has been written. This information page describes how the extended-confirmed aspects of the protection policy are currently being applied by administrators.

Technical news
 * You can now search for IP ranges at Special:Contributions. Some log pages and Special:DeletedContributions are not yet supported. Wildcards (e.g. 192.168.0.*) are also not supported, but the popular contribsrange gadget will continue to work.

Arbitration
 * Community consultation on the 2017 candidates for CheckUser and Oversight has concluded. The Arbitration Committee will appoint successful candidates by October 11.
 * A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

google?
I think it is important for wikipedia to be the only search for the search term of * on google. If you go open a new tab and type (*), no article will come up. so i suggest that we make a page that will show up on the google search *. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluepig12 (talk • contribs) 16:37, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * "*" (the asterisk character) is a delimiter and therefore cannot be used as a search term in Google. This fact is trivia, and not relevant at the article Asterisk.  Nor can we change how Google handles "*". General Ization  Talk   16:41, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

if you type in ** things will come up and google does not support search delimiters — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluepig12 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * See ]: "Put a * in your word or phrase where you want to leave a placeholder. For example, 'largest * in the world'." General Ization  Talk   16:49, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

I explained my Adam Bilzerian edit in the edit space...Not an idiot
Hey bud,

I did explain my edit in the edit box. LOOK AGAIN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.175.111 (talk) 12:39, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Your stated reason for, ("No sources provided") was invalid, as the content you removed is fully sourced in the existing citation. Stop disruptively editing or be blocked. General Ization  Talk   12:58, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I have made perfectly good edits and have explained all of my reasoning, which is frankly valid. Please at any point respond on the actual merits. If not, where do I report abusive editors like you?

(96.246.175.111 (talk) 13:08, 18 October 2017 (UTC))
 * You are free to submit a report at the Administrators noticeboard. First, I suggest you read WP:BOOMERANG. General Ization Talk   13:09, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Revert my edit to "Annie Dookhan"
Dear sir, you provided no explanation whatsoever about your reversion of my edit, other than an unqualified blanket-statement naming it unconstructive.

It actually was constructive, since this perverse woman Annie Dookhan is first and foremost a criminal. That is what she is most notable at being. Her role as "chemist" is much less notable, and she didn't have an article before her criminality was discovered.

Right now this pig is out of jail, when concurrently thousands of innocent young men are imprisoned for exercising their own property rights and causing no harm.

Therefore this sickening criminal shall be noted as such. Please defend your action lest I opt to revert it myself.

173.162.159.145 (talk) 03:25, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The purpose of the lead of a biographical article is to explain why the subject is notable. Dookhan is not notable because she is now a convicted criminal.  She is notable for her actions which are already explained in the lead, and which led to her conviction which is also discussed in the article.  Also, please read WP:NPOV.  It is clear from your comments that you are not capable of editing this article with a neutral point of view; I strongly suggest that you stop editing it. General Ization  Talk   03:29, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Raiyan HA
Hello General Ization. I noticed you reverted a change made by this user as possibly unconstructive? As you can see from the user's contributions, they have been doing the same thing across other cricket player articles; that is changing the players' roles in their infoboxes. Since I'm not one for editing cricket articles, I'm not sure if I can handle reviewing these edits, but maybe you have a better idea of handling them than I can? jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

John Jay
Thanks. For whatever reason my edits via the WP mobile app are sometimes awkward/malformed. That is – I see a minor edit problem, try to correct, and then discover the mobile app has mislead me. In the John Jay case the mobile app did not render the section and subsections correctly, and I thought I'd removed an empty section. This has happened twice now, so I'll tell app support about this problem. Also, the app will show me as "logged in" status-wise", but my edits are logged as IP edits. App support has not fixed that problem. – S. Rich (talk) 04:06, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * In this case, the app didn't mislead you. A previous editor had apparently gotten confused about how to promote/demote section headings, and they were leading the sections they intended to include as subsections with a demoted header, which was left containing nothing. <font color="#006633">General Ization <font color="#000666">Talk   14:34, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

mediation request
I have sent a message to transporterman re this issue.

thankyou geoff — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redbacks Again (talk • contribs) 06:32, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Asterisk as correction indicator
I am my own source been using the internet for decades when you correct a typo from a previous message you put the * after your correction not before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.66.32.187 (talk)

The proper way is still by placing the asterisk BEFORE the correction, since it showcases that you are following with a correction. Looks like you’ve done it wrong for decades. The Real The Z (talk) 04:44, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Your signature
Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated  tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change
 * : <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"><font color="#006633">General Ization <font color="#000666">Talk

to
 * : <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i>

Respectfully, Anomalocaris (talk) 22:50, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

General Yagoda revisions
I've reverted your reversion of the full quote about Yagoda's trial. I've explained on the talk page for that article.PVarjak (talk) 04:27, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#000; background-color:#FFB924; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

Happy Halloween!

Hello General Ization: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!   –  Linguist un Eins uno 19:03, 31 October 2017 (UTC) Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Administrators' newsletter – November 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Longhair • Megalibrarygirl • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Allen3 • Eluchil404 • Arthur Rubin • Bencherlite

Technical news
 * The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team is creating an "Interaction Timeline" tool that intends to assist administrators in resolving user conduct disputes. Feedback on the concept may be posted on the talk page.
 * A new function is now available to edit filter managers that will make it easier to look for multiple strings containing spoofed text.

Arbitration
 * Eligible editors will be invited to submit candidate statements for the 2017 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 12 until November 21. Voting will begin on November 27 and last until December 10.
 * Following a request for comment,, and  will serve as the Electoral Commission for the 2017 ArbCom Elections.

Obituaries
 * The Wikipedia community has recently learned that (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as . Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Contesting speedy deletion of Kal Spelletich
Hi General Ization, it appears that this page meets all the requirements for review and acceptance, though you don't think so. Can you please explain your concerns so that they can be addressed? Thank you

Marylee1234 (talk) 19:59, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Until the article is actually accepted and moved to article space, it does not exist for the purposes of linking to it from other articles. This does not reflect a judgment on the quality of the article; you must simply wait for the article to be reviewed and moved to the public space of the encyclopedia before claiming that the subject is notable and qualifies for an article. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"><font color="#006633">General Ization <font color="#000666">Talk   20:05, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:


 * https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.


 * Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Muboshgu
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg None

Bureaucrat changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news
 * A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news
 * The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey results have been posted. The Community Tech team will investigate and address the top ten results.
 * The Anti-Harassment Tools team is inviting comments on new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools for development in early 2018. Feedback can be left on the discussion page or by email.

Arbitration
 * Following the results of the 2017 election, the following editors have been (re)appointed to the Arbitration Committee:, , , , , , ,.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Joe Roe
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg JzG
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Ericorbit • Perceval • Thingg • Tristanb • Violetriga

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news
 * Wikimedians are now invited to vote on the proposals in the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey on Meta Wiki until 10 December 2017. In particular, there is a section of the survey regarding new tools for administrators and for anti-harassment.
 * A new function is available to edit filter managers which can be used to store matches from regular expressions.

Arbitration
 * Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is open until Sunday 23:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC). There are 12 candidates running for 8 vacant seats.

Miscellaneous
 * Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
 * The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:58, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Unrelatable indicting.
When I fixed grammar in wikiHow article (changed one sentence from past perfect to present perfect) I was indicted for vandalism by General Ization, which is not considerable as reasonable for me. Even if I did a mistake in that sentence by misunderstanding, it shouldn't be considered as vandalism at least.

Do I not understand something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamro2000 (talk) 06:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC) ‎Hamro2000 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 10 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, apparently you do not understand English grammar. Whether or not you find it "considerable as reasonable", please stop making grammar "corrections" to articles here which in fact introduce grammatical and other errors, as well as edits that deviate from our Wikipedia Manual of Style.  Your continuing to do so after already being warned represents vandalism. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 18:44, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Weird edit
I don't know why I made this weird edit. It obviously didn't fit my edit summary. You were right. -- BullRangifer (talk) 05:35, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it's late where you are (as it is here). No worries. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 05:36, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2017 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

User:2.6.38.64
Please block this user immediately. I'll start cleaning up. Thanks <b style="font:1.3em/1em Trebuchet MS;letter-spacing:-0.07em"><b style="color:#000">nagual</b><b style="color:#ABAB9D">design</b></b> 14:49, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

...Oh, looks like you did all the tidying already. <b style="font:1.3em/1em Trebuchet MS;letter-spacing:-0.07em"><b style="color:#000">nagual</b><b style="color:#ABAB9D">design</b></b> 14:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:69.126.139.22. Thank you. Formal Dude <span style="background:red;border:solid 1px;border-radius:9px;border-color:red;box-shadow:darkgray 1px 3px 3px">  talk  22:54, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Think I have that one covered. Review the IP's edit and its timing v/v other edits and the immediately preceding block pertaining to that same article. Also note that adding a "citation needed" template (even if improperly applied) as any IP's very first edit is suspect (especially when removing a perfectly reliable citation in the same edit). <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 22:58, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, I do see those edits by the blocked user. But it looks like that citation that User:69.126.139.22 removed was actually a citation to a dead link, and therefore good faith. I just deleted it myself. So that may not have been the same user on a different IP, and therefore doesn't warrant an immediate level 5 warning. Formal  Dude <span style="background:red;border:solid 1px;border-radius:9px;border-color:red;box-shadow:darkgray 1px 3px 3px">  talk  03:28, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * FormalDude, we don't remove deadlinks. They are the evidence needed for someone to track down a source that might be live or archived. Please restore it, and please ping me here. Maybe I can find it. -- BullRangifer (talk) 04:53, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I already replaced it with a link to archive.org. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 04:57, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Good. -- BullRangifer (talk) 05:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I did not know. Thank you and sorry for the trouble. — Formal Dude <span style="background:red;border:solid 1px;border-radius:9px;border-color:red;box-shadow:darkgray 1px 3px 3px">  talk  07:19, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Regis is arberesh.
So ask it by your self, you igniorant. Tell the truth. Do you know what arberesh are ? When you dont know a thing take a step back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.73.129.245 (talk) 19:43, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know what the Arbëreshë people are. Do you know that when they immigrate to the United States, they are still Italian Americans?   Do not attack other editors here unless you would like to be blocked from editing. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 20:16, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Boves massacre
I'm not sure I can understand the Wikipedia policies, and how far can go the admin's power. However, did I delete or edited a legitimate talk page comment? I only asked why he undone all my work, bringing back the page to a poorer condition. Then the conversation is disappeared and I sent a new message? Did I do something bad? Maybe the conversation has been deleted by me? If it's so, then I must have done it by mistake. All what I wanted was to improve the article about the Boves massacre, then I wanted know why my work has been deleted. We had a conversation, then it's vanished (maybe by my fault, I don't know) so I reposted it. My meaning was to help Wikipedia, not to make a damage, but if you think what I do is bad for the project then I can also quit, for the Wikipedia's sake. Do you wanna see the vanished conversation, so you can have a better idea on what's happened? Best regards, Charlie Foxtrot66 (talk) 18:03, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * made a conscious decision to remove your comments from their Talk page . Your restoring the comments, as, and by doing so overriding the editor's decision, constitutes harassment. If you think that Hohum has acted improperly, you can take up the issue at the Administrator's Noticeboard, but don't repeatedly restore your comments at that editor's Talk page. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 18:10, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, you might actually read the replies you had already received to your questions, which appear to me to be legitimate answers to them, whether or not you like them. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 18:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Ok, it's fine. I am sorry for my bad behaviour, I only wanted to give a help. Maybe is better if I stop working on Wikipedia and I let you do it that you can do better? I am sure that you can edit the Boves massacre and many other articles much better than how I do, even if I don't understand why you didn't do it yet. You know, it's a work, and I am not getting payed, I cannot take the risk of seeing everything deleted in this way, maybe is better if you edit the articles and I spend my time in some other way. Have a nice evening Charlie Foxtrot66 (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * We agree then that it will be better for you to stop editing Wikipedia if you are not prepared to work collaboratively with other editors, for them to revert your edits when they are found to be less than constructive, and to listen when they give you good advice. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 16:08, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Mauro Milhomem
Thanks for the edits at the Mauro Milhomem entry on List of rampage killers, you may also want edit the Mauro Milhomem page on Amok Wiki. Can you give me more information about the case? Since i did not know the date where it happened, and you apparently added that the incident happaened on June 1.--Cientific124 (talk) 20:35, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Only what I read (machine-translated) at the cited source concerning his wife's suicide. Can't find anything else on it. "... her husband and seven people died while four others were injured on Sunday morning [published 6/6/80, the preceding Sunday being 6/1/80]. ... The pilot [aimed] the plane at the Presidente Hotel owned by his mother-in-law ... but failed to reach the target completely. He hit the right wing on two light poles, [struck] a two-story building and struck the central ridge of Praca da Rotula, the main Barra do Garcas." <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 20:40, 28 December 2017 (UTC):
 * Thanks, sorry for posting this, i posted because i don't know to count days propely, thanks!. And also, i will remove the "Piloted an Embraer EMB 721 Sertanejo single-engine aircraft into a hotel owned by a family member." text in the Additional notes, because it is not appropriate for the article.--Cientific124 (talk) 20:35, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Not appropriate how? <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 20:46, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know. But i think its because the Addtional notes are only used for brief texts concerning the fate of the perpetrator, probably to not make the entry long.--Cientific124 (talk) 20:35, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Since a) there is no article for Milhomem (nor enough sources found to justify one) and b) the only source is not in English, I don't think the minimal explanation of the reason he appears in this list is excessive by any means. I went to the effort to assure myself that he even belonged on this list (as the preface to the section notes, airplane crashes are hard to characterize as rampage killings, in this case without knowing that he apparently targeted his mother-in-law's hotel). There's no reason the next editor to read this should have to go to the same effort. Unless you can find that policy documented somewhere, I'd ask you to restore the information I added. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 20:54, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Since Mauro Milhomem is a rare case of suicide by pilot in Brazil, he will probably get an article, i presume that i will eventually find more information concerning him, and make an article on him, so people read. But i suspect why info on this case is so hard to find, since it is a suicide by pilot in Brazil with a large death toll, which the country probably never had a case like this.--Cientific124 (talk) 21:06, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I finally discovered more info on this case, i think i will probably make an article on it.--Cientific124 (talk) 22:37, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I created an article about the disaster. here.--Cientific124 (talk) 00:26, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I made a few improvements, mostly English grammar, phrasing and spelling. However, please check, since I was not reading the non-English sources you used, that I didn't introduce any false information in the process. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 02:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the edits!.--Cientific124 (talk) 04:29, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, General Ization!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em;height:173px;border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

Happy New Year! General Ization, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Boomer VialHappy Holidays! • Contribs 07:21, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Jordan Maron
Hello General Ization, just fyi: I have asked for semi-protection until the crowd calms down ;), but the request is still queued. GermanJoe (talk) 22:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Reverts
Take the time to look to the consensus listed in the archives of the Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt talk page. The content of the reception section of that page was debated at length and a consensus was reached. You've repeatedly reverted both the UKS and Tina Fey pages to include the edits of a single user who vandalized both pages to add all of the content you've reinstated. I'm simply attempting to counter two instances of vandalism; I'd appreciate it if you'd stop slapping needless warnings on my talk page. 2423tgiuowf 22:37, 1 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renamed user 2423tgiuowf (talk • contribs)
 * Please point out the "consensus" at Talk:Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt/Archive 1. I see none; I see a proposal you made, and no acceptance by other editors (and the advice "It is undeniably true that you are a minority of one. If you want more opinions, start an RfC or something."). If you would like to restart that discussion, please do, but do not revert to your preferred content again unless you would like to visit WP:AN3. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 22:44, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * User Quirky-artist-charlie proposed that the controversies be summed up in "one or two sentences," a proposal I agreed to; ergo, the WP:CONSENSUS. I drafted the one or two sentences, per the WP:CONSENSUS, and while one user still objected (the user you've cited, who was operating under the incorrect assumption that I wanted the information removed entirely [ergo, his comment about my being a "minority of one"], which was clearly false given that I later included the information on the page personally after charlie and I agreed to the length of the descriptions), these were the changes that were ultimately implemented without controversy, per the above WP:Consensus. Another user (who had a history of adding these sorts of things to pages and who has been AWOL from the site for months) later went and reinstated his original edits without taking it to the talk page, as well as re-writing the critical reception for a film on the page for Fey to read more negatively (indicating a pattern of WP:NPOV). The pages remained this way until one user reverted my reversions, citing my lack of reasoning, which I then gave in reinstating the original reversions of the original case of vandalism. That's really it. This seems to be a simple misunderstanding to me. Renamed user 2423tgiuowf (talk • contribs — Preceding unsigned comment added 23:00, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Do you think I can't read? "If Anonymouse5454 has their way, then we would be bleaching a significant part of this show's reception to make it appear entirely positive, when opposition to redface/yellowface would say a little otherwise. At the very least, there should be a sentence or two regarding the show's very evident controversy."  This was not an "agreement" between you and ; it was an expression of dissatisfaction with your edits up to that point. Q-A-C made no further comment in that discussion. There was and is no consensus.  And when you edited the article today, you in fact showed that Quirky-artist-charlie's concern was well-founded.  You were, as another editor stated, a minority of one in feeling that this content shoujld be removed, and you still are. Leave it alone. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 23:08, 1 January 2018 (UTC) You're absolutely wrong, but I won't be pursing this any further. I would suggest that you reassess the way you speak to other users. That was out of bounds and ridiculously combative. Renamed user 2423tgiuowf (talk
 * "That was out of bounds and ridiculously combative." Referring to what? <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 23:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Laverne Cox
The Internet Movie Database supports the change in date, unless there are two persons with the same name. I reverted the first edit because the user put different years in two different places. But the IMDB supports the older age (b. 1972). So I think that the edit should be restored and second message stricken. Unless I have missed something here, of course. Donner60 (talk) 03:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * IMDB is not a reliable source for biographical data, because it is user-edited. See WP:CITINGIMDB. And yes, you have missed something: 1) that we have reliable, cited sources in the article for the 1984 birthdate, and 2) that to change content here, you must provide a reliable, cited source that supports the change (which you repeatedly did not do). <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 03:19, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I thought you were the IP. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 03:20, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It remains that the only reliable source we have places the date of birth in 1984. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 03:22, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

User talk:184.147.29.185
Reported. I did a mass rollback of the anon's mass deletions. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 04:52, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Milwaukee Bucks
Hello! I just wanted to let you know I reported the user to Administrator intervention against vandalism. Happy editing, HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:31, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

"universally known as the auto capitol of the world"
it may be a quote (from nba.com), but it is a huge overstatement :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dedee73 (talk • contribs) 05:59, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The subjects of our articles are allowed to make overstatements; we are not allowed to "correct" them. If you think the quote should be removed from the article, discuss it with other editors on the article's Talk page. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 06:02, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Black Panther Party copyright dispute
My initial (and skeptical) assumption was that the first warning regarded my usage of quotes from the LA Times review and the link you inserted was a response to my issue with the lack of citation for the first sentence (hence the "citation needed"). First, was my usage of quotes from an issue at all as far as Wikipedia's copyright policy is concerned, and if so, was my paraphrasing in my next revision acceptable? (I understand that Malik Shabazz's beef was with the quality of my sourcing, but I'll resolve that with him and the talk page.)

After reading your second warning on my talk page and your second revision to the article however, it seems you're convinced that I copied from the link you referenced. I did not copy from that link - the only copied text I retained verbatim was that which was in the article before I started editing it. Second, I know this is probably a better question for the talk page, but would it at least be worth it to re-cite that textbook link without re-inserting (while quoting or paraphrasing instead) the copied text?

Thanks for your time. DrPepper47 (talk) 04:18, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Please continue the discussion on the article's Talk page. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 17:22, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

IP Vandal
Sorry to bother you, I know you're not an admin, but you probably know more about this stuff than me. Are we allowed to use rollback indiscriminately on the following block-evading IP:

Thanks in advance. <b style="font-family:courier;box-shadow:2px 1px 4px #888;border:1px solid #666;padding:0 6px;background:linear-gradient(#fff,#ddd);color:#071;border-radius:6px">BytEfLUSh</b> <sup style="margin:0 2px">Talk 02:35, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * My opinion is yes, we are. However, they've now been blocked, which should make life easier. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 02:52, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok. Thank you anyway, at least now I know in case more of his socks appear. Hopefully, not anytime soon. =) <b style="font-family:courier;box-shadow:2px 1px 4px #888;border:1px solid #666;padding:0 6px;background:linear-gradient(#fff,#ddd);color:#071;border-radius:6px">BytEfLUSh</b> <sup style="margin:0 2px">Talk 02:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)