User talk:HurricaneTracker495/Archive 1

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, WesternAtlanticCentral! Thank you for your contributions. I am Destroyeraa and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. If you wish to contact me on this page, please use  such that I get notified of your request. You can also check out Questions or type at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:20, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * The Teahouse, our help forum for new users
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Just do make sure you don't do any logged out editing!~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:22, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * sometimes it's too much to log in. As per WP: EWLO, I am allowed, and I never won't declare it's me. So, don't worry. --WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 18:47, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 20:20, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Already joined I believe. WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 21:06, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Appreciated! WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 22:30, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for finally joining this WikiProject!  SMB9 9thx   my edits  00:23, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry. It was just annoying me it was a red link but it was still a link and then I was getting confused to wether it works or not. I like   hurricanes  13:17, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

User warning messages
Hello, WesternAtlanticCentral,

If you are going to post warning messages on to user talk pages, please start with level one warning unless you see previous warning messages posted. It's inappropriate to post a final warning as the first warning that an editor receives. It's over-the-top and threatening. A warning is sufficient unless there is considerable damage being done. Liz Read! Talk! 20:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

I normally do(although generally it’s a level 2 as that’s the kind of vandalism I deal with). That appeared to be a troll or LTA of some sort, on the outside. I will keep that noted. Although I generally begin with a level 2 warning to give them more of a warning warning. WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You have had an account for two days, WesternAtlanticCentral, how on Earth do you know what an LTA is or what one looks like? Have you edited before with a previous account? Liz Read! Talk! 23:14, 2 November 2020 (UTC)


 * no. However, I have edited on the IP 67.85.37.186, previously. WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 23:33, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as at User talk:Oowqihsadui, (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment, or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button OOUI_JS_signature_icon_LTR.svg located above the edit window.

Thank you. TheAwesome Hwyh  13:44, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * When did I forget to sign ? --WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 13:53, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * At User talk:Oowqihsadui; I signed it for you. TheAwesome  Hwyh  13:54, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Normally I sign. I must have forgotten that one time, sorry. --WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 13:55, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It's all right, just remember to do it in the future. Also, you don't need to use the talkback template on my talk page, you can just use the "reply to" template. TheAwesome  Hwyh  13:57, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Or Template:Hidden ping, if you want it to be invisible. TheAwesome  Hwyh  13:59, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Generally I prefer talkbacks as it receives an automatic notification. I have no way of knowing if you disabled pings. WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 14:02, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Proper use of warnings
Hi! Please don't email me about this, for one i'm not always at my desktop, and do not always have immediate access to my private email (which is what Wikipedia is set up to email). The appropriate warning in this case would've been the "disruptive editing" warning, level 1. Do not immediately use level 2/3/4 warnings unless it's extremely egregious vandalism or malicious behavior. WikiProject_User_warnings explains how warnings work. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 19:30, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok. WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 19:35, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Editing protocol
Hello, WesternAtlanticCentral,

Now that you have a created account, please log in to do all of your editing. Editing as both an account and an IP can result in contributing to discussions from two different accounts which is frowned upon. The idea of having a created account is so that other editors can get to know you and you have a solitary identity. Editing both from this account and as an IP can be seen as sockpuppetry which can have serious consequences like blocks which I assume you wish to avoid.

You are a new editor so you are not expected to know all of the policies so I just thought I'd suggest this to you now. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok. Thanks. Will remember to log in. --WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 23:07, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Ping at 1:54 in the morning
''Please do not ping me at 1:54 in the morning. It's annpying to recieve emails at that time. --WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 15:50, 3 November 2020 (UTC) ''
 * OK. Excuse me, didn't mind about time delay. Furthermore my computer is switched of in the night, other habits of many people in Europe ... Best regards, --Wikisympathisant (talk) 19:02, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * It’s ok. Note that I am also 6 hours behind you, so if it was 7:54am for you it’s 1:54am for me. WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 19:08, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Yes, I understand. As written: I didn't mind about that. And it cannot happen, if the computer is sleeping (really switched off), too. It will not happen again from my side ... Best regards, --Wikisympathisant (talk) 19:12, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * WesternAtlanticCentral, it is worth your time to go into your Preferences (at the top of the page) and change your notification settings. You can set when and how often you are notified for different actions. You can customize other features like your signature or how your time zone appears so it is worth an hour to explore what's offered so you can have the best experience possible. Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * thanks. I'll o it when I have the time and today was a bit more of a wikiaddict day due to me having Twinkle and Huggle I won't edit as much shortly. --WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 23:13, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Sorry
Hi HurricaneTracker495, Firstly I haven't meant any offense and then I still apologize I didn't know about that, and lastly, I removed that message from his talk page, bye. P.S. I still apologize. --Informatica2019 (talk) 20:35, 6 November 2020 (UTC)


 * No problem, I didn’t think you did. That’s why I removed that last bit I initially sent just don’t do it again or you’re warning may be a Level 3. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:52, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Warning templates
Hi there WesternAtlantic Central,

Nice new username!

Also, I’ve been using Twinkle for several months now, and this is how I want users. Consider it nice for me to give a Level 2 warning to a vandal, since I usually gave Level 3 warnings but I decided to be nicer. Level 2 warnings are supposed to be used for vandals. I considering you use Level 2 warnings too for vandals, no matter what other users say. Level 3 is arguably a bit hars(, but Level 2 is just right. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:47, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Level 2 is reasonable. I generally give a Level 1 but sometimes I use a Level 2(RW forces me into Level 1 kinda). A level 3 is harsh. I'd say if it's an extremely new user use welcome-unconstructive, which contains the uw-vandalism1 code at the end. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:49, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Sometimes its better not to use the warning templates, but to offer an explination of where the person is wrong.Jason Rees (talk) 22:53, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I feel like that is the best, but then the problem is that then if ClueBot reverts vandalism then it won't be dectected so he'll give Cluebotwarning1 or whatever it is. We should at least leave code so ClueBot knows to give a Level 2. Then again, you can add info at the end of your template. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:54, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It was clear there was an effort to remove Eta from Mitch article. I’m on a mobile device rn, so my typing will Ben messy. 3 IPs removing Eta WP explanation justifies a level 3 warning. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:56, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Again, we can't be sure that it is the same person, so we must assume good faith. If it's that big of a concern, uw-multipleIPs is always there. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:57, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Dogs don’t disrupt Wikipedia unless they are supernatural and know how to type. Removing something for no reason is not GF, and especially doing it multiple times on the same page within two Dayan isn’t extremely fishy. MultipleIps look like a. level 4 warning, so I won’t change my system and how J give warnings. Luckily, the page is now locked. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 23:03, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I guess. However, I just gave an example and also maybe agf-sock? Still, I think a level 3 is extremely steep, especially because I don’t think there on the same /64. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 23:09, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The revision history shows 3 users of the same ip range disrupting the article. A clear vandal then. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 23:10, 6 November 2020 (UTC)


 * I’m gonna assume this is WP: MEAT, but I’m not sure. I think uw-agf-sock and uw-vandalism2 is the best combo. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 23:11, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Follow Up
Hi HurricaneTracker495, I wanted to apologize for any misunderstanding or misinterpretation about my intentions. While I do live in the City he represents, it was never my intention to add anything but factual, and unbiased information to the best of my ability. I noticed that there had been biased language on the page earlier this year and so I'd added a lot of information. Additionally, I noticed that user Zoof91 recreated his edit on the page in a subsection, "Political Activities" that is pretty out of order and inconsistent with the rest of the page; it doesn't make much sense. My concern is that he has a bias against this page. Let me know what you think. I was hoping you could sort it out as I don't want to be engaging in any violations of Wikipedia's Rules. Thanks so much, MalcolmKincaid (talk) 22:58, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * you must sign(and I'll do this for you shortly). I will give you a template as to have. I understand what you're saying, but you were intimidating him, and given WP: 3RR, I had no choice but to warn you. I hope you understand, --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I totally understand. I'll try and refrain from using that language in the future. Should he continue to make these changes should I continue to report? MalcolmKincaid (talk) 23:11, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * don't ping me on my own user talk. But you should report if it proves unsuccessful and he breaches WP: 3RR. And sorry, I won't be editing tonight. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 23:28, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Blanca
I only made one edit to Blanca, not sure why you pinged me but not the author of the article. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:39, 12 November 2020 (UTC)


 * I want full input. Anyone can review. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 16:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * HurricaneJanor, Jasper Deng, KN, and others didn't even do anything? I can't review, sorry, b/c I have an upcomign exam and also two reviews to deal with. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:55, 12 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Yes. But they might be slightly better due to a WP: NPOV. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:56, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Invite to join WikiProject U.S. Roads!
Hi there HurricaneTracker495,

I've seen your edits to Interstates and I think you might be interested in WikiProject U.S. Roads. Just go to WP:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Participants and put your name there. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 01:28, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Drascombe lugger and Drascombeowner
I note that you have contacted Drascombeowner about their username. Also of concern are the edits to Drascombe Lugger, where one of the manufacturers (certainly a historic manufacturer) has been deleted from the article. I am sure that there are all sorts of complex arguments about ownership of this brand, (and we presume that Drascombeowner understands them correctly, though unavoidably from a partisan point of view). However, nothing can alter the history that Honnor Marine built many of the boats still in existence.

Rather than wade in to the issue (and I have had enough, today, of Wikipedia editors who want to impose their views on others) can I leave it to you to deal with the edits to Drascombe Lugger by this user? ThanksThoughtIdRetired (talk) 19:17, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Closing edit requests
Hi there. Re this, the edit request "answer" ends the thread (or should, anyway), unless someone wishes to dispute the answer. So a separate close is redundant. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  03:25, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * you said not to turn it into discussion. I wanted to make sure no one did that. I have done that once. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 21:29, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Harvey in TX
I would help with Harvey, but there are lots of articles that I need to complete during the next several months. For starters, I am very close to getting a featured topic for the 2018 Pacific hurricane season. I will need to spend at least another few months or so on it. After that, I have articles of mine that I need to finish for the Atlantic in that year. Noah Talk 22:48, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I would also help, if I had the time. Ok. Thanks for the reply. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 23:59, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Most of the time for the 2018 Pacific hurricanes will be spent on reviews, not the actual writing itself. Featured Article Candidacies can take a month to a month and a half (sometimes more). Don't worry about not being able to help. The goal is to have the topic for global 2018 done in 2023. That's plenty of time for the people who are working on these articles to finish them. Noah Talk 00:20, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

ITN
Can you please remove "Oppose ok I never heard of him. Very few people did. Not notable. TS Gamma was more notable. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 02:18, 13 November 2020 (UTC)" since it is not a valid reason to oppose. The RD section of ITN is different from the blurb section.

Thanks! ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 00:29, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I removed it for you, because the RD section does not involve notability. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 14:43, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Please
Please don't give me warnings unless I did vandalism or my account was hacked by my brother. Thanks. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 20:15, 16 November 2020 (UTC)


 * at the top it says “please be nice

and dont give me a level 3 warning for disruptive editing”. Feel free to add a template saying not to warn you at all unless it is hacked. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:17, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * LOL. I don't remember when I forgot to sign, but I'll try to remember. Sometimes it's due to edit conflicts, and other times, like knows, it when you just simply forgot to press the button. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 20:18, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Twinkle auto signs. Those could've been two different edits. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:21, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, as a previous message said, you generally don't use warning templates for regular contributors, especially for minor issues. We all have brain farts, whether it's forgetting to sign, accidentally breaking a template, or some similar mistake. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:27, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * And, I accidentally proved my own point there, lol. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:30, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I will occasionally give templates. uw-ew and uw-3rr are examples. If you are being harsh, uw-bite or uw-agf2. So, there are times where it's appropriate to give templates. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:31, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Beatriz '93
 SMB9 9thx   my edits  14:07, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Again
Please see the context. I gave the IP a level 4 warning for a very very clear reason. Please see the IP's edits before going on my talk page again. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:19, 17 November 2020 (UTC)


 * I did. Not clear enough for a Level 4. Level 3 is ok. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:20, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * . HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:22, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Ip was litterally the same LTA vandal that vandalized Hurricane Iota and put God said to me that He will lower Iota from 5 to 0 in 30 minutes ~''' Destroyeraa 🌀 22:24, 17 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Huh. Ok. That would change my perspective. Still, I’d give them uw-multipleIPs, which is a Level 4 equivalent. But, would be a bit more specific, . HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:25, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the excessive markup. Luckily the IP got blocked, and I’m tired of this guy harassing me and other users and disrespecting religious figures. I requested Pp for my talk page. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:29, 17 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Likely to be denied. You may go to WP: ANI and request a rangeblock . I’d support it. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:30, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I’ve also requested an edit filter on all religious figures on cyclone pages and all user talk pages. I’ll also ask Hurricanehink to protect it if it gets declined. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:31, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Dammit! The smallest range with both addresses is too big. It's 90.252.0.0/14. It has to be a /16 at largest. Still, do what you're going to do....I guess. And please take that markup off my usertalkpage . --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:34, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I was a bit rude. I was very very angry at the LTA vandal IP how has caused havoc and humiliation of WPTC and Wikipedia’s cyclone articles. Search Iota Wikipedia on Twitter and you’ll see what I mean. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Merge moratorium
I created a template: ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:51, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Good idea, . I'll make another version that's more harsh if it's more persistent. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:57, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020
It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Talk:Effects of Hurricane Charley in North Carolina. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. As Cyclonebiskit cautioned you there, your message has the effect of asking others to support the merge, which is definitely not neutral and therefore is canvassing.

As an aside, it is awfully WP:POINTy to be nominating numerous articles by them for merging, particularly GA's. I would advise that you refrain from opening any more merge discussions without consulting the author on their talk page first. Jasper Deng (talk) 06:13, 18 November 2020 (UTC)


 * wait, that’s canvassing? HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 12:26, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Picking a certain group of editors so your merge/whatever your doing will win. It doesn't mean you can't get ping me or other people for a merge discussion, it just wants you to bring more people into the merge discussion. I like   hurricanes  12:41, 18 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Except, many of them actually wind up opposing, so I disagree with that. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 12:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , HurricaneTracker495 has done it in good-faith, as he did not know that it was canvassing. However, per WP:CANVASS, Editors are allowed to notify Editors who have made substantial edits to the topic or article; Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics); Editors known for expertise in the field; Editors who have asked to be kept informed. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 02:09, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Please don't ping me on my own user talk. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 02:10, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 02:18, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Talk:Typhoon Ruby (1964)/GA1
In general, it's common courtesy not to "interrupt" an ongoing GA review, at least not when the reviewer is perfectly capable of completing it on their own. If you notice minor errors you're free to go ahead and fix them boldly. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 11:28, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I wouldn’t consider it ongoing. Destroyeraa has stated they won’t start the review until Friday. I figured I’d point something out and help before Destroyeraa was avaliable. Multiple people may review. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 13:08, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm currently finishing another review with New Jersey Route 13, ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 13:49, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The review begins the moment a reviewer creates the subpage, as the code automatically designates the subpage's creator as the reviewer. "Multiple people may review" - that usually isn't the case, GA reviews are a generally one-to-one thing unless a second opinion is requested. It's intentionally designed as such to have increasing thoroughness of reviews as article quality increases based on the assessment scale. Again, if you notice an error you're free to fix it yourself. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 13:51, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * multiple people may review an article for GA if a second person wants to. I wanted to put it there to see if anyone had a problem with it. If Destroyeraa is busy, then that shouldn’t prevent me from reviewing. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 13:54, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The second reviewer should ask the original reviewer before reviewing. I'm personally fine with it, though others may not. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 13:59, 19 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Ok. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:17, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020
Thanks for reverting those edits I made on a new user. I accidentally pressed enter way too many times. I was supposed to undo it but you were faster. Thanks again. AlphonseOop (talk) 18:10, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok...--HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:14, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

About fighting LTAs
It appears that based on your contributions, you like to fight a lot of LTAs. I want you to know that in our WikiProject, we have (at least) two LTA fighters you can seek for help, and. Also consider reporting these vandals into SRG if these vandals are cross-wiki.  SMB9 9thx   my edits  13:38, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * SRG I do use, but often times they aren’t seen for a while and might become Stale. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 13:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay. I hope someday you become a rollbacker like these two. You can talk with them for advice.  SMB9 9thx   my edits  13:50, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * It’ll take some time, but I’ll apply in a few months. Quick note -why don’t you have any permissions when some of them would come in handy(most notably, page mover). HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 13:56, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I might not be able to become page mover because my terrible track record of requesting moves back in 2017, and I didn't participate much in move discussions since then.  SMB9 9thx   my edits  14:01, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Well, rollback is certainly more reasonable. Would not recommend autopatrolled as of yet. As for me, I’ll become extended confirmed in ten days, and in around a month or two will request rollback. Not sure if I even have 200 main space edits. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:03, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm going for Rollback once I become a member of WP:CVU - which in itself is going to be a long process through CVU academy. The reason why I'm not going for Rollback before this is because I might make bad decisions that could potentially make me lose my life.  SMB9 9thx   my edits  14:10, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * you have to have 200 mainspace edits to join. I’ll probably get rollback around the time I join CVU. I have 123. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:13, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * So, are you really planning to join CVU? If yes, unfortunately I'm not going to be your colleague. I'm planning to take CVU academy courses in around 2021 before actually joining CVU, and you might go for it ahead first.  SMB9 9thx   my edits  14:28, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * When I get 200 mainspace edits, . --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:30, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks!  SMB9 9thx   my edits  14:41, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Cookies!
By the way, I'm not interested in rollback. It may come as a surprise to people, but I am fine with Twinkle and I think I may misuse rollback. Thanks for asking though. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:12, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * you made a typo. What did you mean by that? HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:13, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops. Sorry. Fixed now. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:15, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * rollback proudly shows that you are into anti vandalism. One day, you may even run for admin, and it would greatly help you. Don’t worry about misuse of rollback, it’s very easy to fix. If you mean to revert a good faith edit, you can always undo and then give a reason for the revert. If you accidentally rollback, you can undo that edit. Long story short, it makes your life easier and I HIGHLY HIGHLY recommend it. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:18, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * HurricaneTracker495, it says on your user groups that you aren't autoconfirmed? It seems very strange, as you should be extd. confirmed by now. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:47, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * autoconfirmed is a psuedo group and doesn't show. Per WP:XC, I need an account for a month, so my first edit after 13:07 UTC November 30 I'll be extended confirmed(and soon I'll be rollback! Probably). Again, I highly encourage you to get rollback, as it shows you are a proud antivandal fighter. I think SMB is gonna apply in 2021. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:50, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Got it. Thanks! ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:52, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * And you can get huggle if you get rollback HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:53, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * ? Did you see the comment above? HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 01:36, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

BCRT
Hi - the BCRT logo was genuine. Can you put it back please. Many thanks Boris696969 (talk) 14:55, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Broke the whole image. Also, find a source to back it up, . --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:56, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Oops
Sorry for the duped WP:AN3 report.  NonsensicalSystem (err0r?)(.log) 15:10, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Appears we edit conflicted. All sorted out :). --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:11, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Grace Randolph
I have found a possible sockpuppeteer of the rapidly reverting editor. It's. I've requested CU. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 16:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I have to go now, thanks for reverting that guy. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 16:49, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Erasmus University Rotterdam
Hello,

I saw you undid all the corrections I did on the wiki page of Erasmus University Rotterdam. All the edits I did are actually factually correct and I updated a lot (facts, numbers (backed up with footnotes), information about famous alumni, I even updated the logo, just removed the ranking part as it's really hard to track and keep updated/correct). I got a message that I have to give a reason for the edits (I did this time, I didn't know that had to be done, I'm new on Wikipedia). But could you, or others, please not revert my edits all the time as it's really taking me a lot of time.

Thanks, WoudNathan — Preceding unsigned comment added by WoudNathan (talk • contribs) 18:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * you gotta have a reliable source to back that up. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:20, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

I do, as all of that is information from the university itself, so that's as factual as it gets. So it would really be nice to see my big edit reverted.

Grtz — Preceding unsigned comment added by WoudNathan (talk • contribs) 18:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually,, the exact opposite is true. Per WP: COI, the university may not edit about it. If you really want to add it, my talk page is not the place. Go to the talk page of the affected article and get consensus there. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

A goat for you!
For reaching 1,000 edits in less than a month (I did it in 4), and fighting vandalism left and right.

Cyclone  Toby  contribs 23:07, 22 November 2020 (UTC) 
 * Thanks! --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 21:48, 23 November 2020 (UTC)


 * that was the autoblock. Thanks! --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, HurricaneTracker495! I'm sure that I ticked the box not to autoblock you, but I guess I didn't! :-(  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:47, 25 November 2020 (UTC)


 * no concerns. You may not have clicked hard enough. already sorted it out. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 23:49, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm glad that Yamla did. It was my responsibility to handle your request correctly and I didn't. I'm sorry.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:33, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Storm Notability
One thing I wanted to stress to you is how the damage total in $$$ and deaths doesn't matter. I'm working on fixing up Hurricane Bud (2018) right now and it only has about $167,000 in confirmed damage and 2 deaths. The big issue with storms that hit non-English speaking countries is that damage totals oftentimes don't get tabulated. Noah Talk 20:40, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , kind of does. Because, it affects a storms notability. For a Pacific storm maybe not, but generally it does. $167k and 2 deaths is actually significant for a Pacific storm! --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:42, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * What I am saying is that there is a lot that doesn't get tallied. The damage total for Bud must be millions. The 167k is only a partial total of the damage at one building and nothing more was said after that. Damage was never expressed in numbers for everywhere else. Noah Talk 20:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Why are you telling me this? --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:45, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Because I'm trying to explain why some of the merges may have been premature for articles. Noah Talk 20:47, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not the only one to merge articles. Talk to as well. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:48, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Please don't drag me into things ok? Thanks. Also, damage estimates for Mexico aren't that good. Even the US's NCDC lack info sometimes. For example, it had nothing for Arthur 2020 in North Carolina. For Hurricane Chris (2018), which I'm trying to GA, I can't rely on NCDC much either. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 02:43, 28 November 2020 (UTC)


 * I dragged you into it because you seemed to hunt for articles to merge. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 02:45, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No. The articles I nominated for merging all had either minimal or no damage and no deaths, such as TD One 2009 or Josephine 20108. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 02:47, 28 November 2020 (UTC)


 * it’s getting late here so I won’t look today, but there were definitely more articles you proposed merging. Talk: Tropical Storm Rene (2020), Talk: 2005 Azores subtropical storm. The latter was very notable indeed. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 02:49, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Rene did a landslide that...spilled some mud on a road. Big deal! A subtropical storm forms near the Azores in October that...caused no damage. Not notable! Anyway, I won't re-nom the Azroes SS for merging until the moratorium ends. Have a nice weekend. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 02:53, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Rene you nominated when it was still alive and could have restrengthened into something notable(it didn't, but it could've). Azores Subtropical Storm please don't renominate, it may be seen as gaming the system if you wait until exactly it ends and it didn't have consensus. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:15, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll take your advice for the Azores SS. For Rene, most models, including the reliable HWRF, showed the storm getting ripped apart by shear and dry air. Anyway, if you want to gain mainspace edits, you should go create articles for storms. Initially start in draftspace, then submit to AFC or move it to mainspace if there's no redirect. Then, your draftspace edits will be counted as mainspace edits. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 19:14, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It's easier to revert vandalism, plus this way I will be deemed more of a candidate for rollback. Also storms have weakened dramatically and restrenghened. Hurricane Florence. I don't care if 99% of people say it is gonna die, we should wait until a storm dies in order to have a discussion. Patience. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 19:18, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are a great candidate for rollback :). The impersonating vandal came back. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:19, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

time to make more doppelgängers then,. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:29, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I finished the article for Hurricane Bud (2018) if you want to see how much impact could be found for a storm like this. It shows that recorded damage totals in regions like this aren't really good indicators of notability. Tbh, they really only work for first-world countries that have good communication networks. This storm had a similar recorded damage total to that of Arthur, but really did a lot more. Noah Talk 02:58, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Category 1 Atlantic hurricanes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Re: logged out
Re: your request for blocking, nope, just try and remember in the future. BTW, now that the active season is over, I'm curious what kind of topics you're interested in editing on Wikipedia. There are lots of articles, new and old, that could use some work. I'm curious if you ever saw the assessment table for every Atlantic tropical cyclone, color coded based on how good the article is (blue is featured, to red being a stub class). You might notice that most seasons since 1900 are a good article, and hopefully every season in the Atlantic database will be a good article. That is a feasible goal within the next year or so. Another project is getting all of the storms in 2018 around the world to a good article or better. There are also lots of lists (and topics), such as storms in a certain area, or of a certain type, or even by the letter of the alphabet. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 01:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

joshinsipres talk page
i did that as a joke, i know him — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gokufan12345 (talk • contribs) 18:03, December 2 2020 (UTC)

even my name is a joke just read it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gokufan12345 (talk • contribs) 18:04, Devember 2 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a place for jokes, even on April fools day. Otherwise, you will be not welcome to contribute here.--HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:28, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

yeah but you reported me for making "personal attacks" witch is not what i was doing, you should have reported me for joking — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gokufan12345 (talk • contribs) 03:13, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Edit filter false positive response
Good day, I am writing to you because you appear to have possibly replied to my report regarding my attempted edit of the Caren Turner article. I am not certain of this, as you left the comment under another report that was published at exactly the same time, but that particular report appears to be bogus, as I checked the log, and in that case the reported edit appears to be vandalism, which leads me to suspect an edit conflict. In any case, if you were indeed responding to me, I filed that report because there is an identical (but unminced) quote in Karen (pejorative) with exactly the same references for the quote as the article that I was trying to edit. Since you have stated that the quote should remain in its minced form due to the source, should I also mince the quote in the latter article?

203.164.163.192 (talk) 18:51, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Reverted edits on libvirt
Can I get any further explanation as to why my contributions to libvirt were considered "non-constructive"?Casiotone Nation (talk) 14:35, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I was referring to your last edit, but it cancelled out. Still, it was a semi test. If you want to test, I suggest you visit WP: SANDBOX, . --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:38, 5 December 2020 (UTC)


 * It was a test? Test of what? Did I break something? Casiotone Nation (talk) 14:39, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * No, but it was joke edits in which you added something and reverted it, which seems like you're testing, . --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:42, 5 December 2020 (UTC)


 * It was not a joke edit nor did I "add something and revert it". I moved a citation up to the infobox to substantiate libvirt supporting more than just Linux. Casiotone Nation (talk) 14:43, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi - my two cents here are that you were a little bit quick to template this user, especially with a non-constructive warning. The edit was not perfect, but I'm struggling to see how it was non-constructive or a 'joke edit'. Please remember to assume good faith when interacting with editors. Best, Darren-M   talk  15:57, 5 December 2020 (UTC)


 * How did you know how to hide information, ? Did you use an account before this? Please disclose. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:49, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you replied in this section, but uh, I'm sorry? I didn't know source comments were a feature only used by Wikipedia's most elite. I just saw some flaws with the article and wanted to address them. I don't really understand all of the scrutiny. If you don't find anything wrong with my edits, I just ask for you to restore them. Casiotone Nation (talk) 15:04, 5 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I did assume good faith, because if I wasn’t, I would jump to a more severe warning. That’s what a general note is. What is non constructive is whether or not it improves Wikipedia. This, really didn’t. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:59, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , Above, you have said that the edits were 'joke edits' - that does seem like you're skirting close to not assuming good faith, so please do be careful in future.
 * NB: I've copied your replies into the section that they were replies to, as it's a bit confusing if you reply in an entirely unrelated section. Best, Darren-M   talk  16:16, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * oops, I was on my phone and i edited and it blended both sections into 1. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 16:16, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, I think my edits improve Wikipedia. The first edit I made updated the infobox to reflect reality. That reality being that libvirt supports Linux, FreeBSD, Windows, and macOS--not just Linux. The second edit removes misinformation that is contradicted directly on Wikipedia--I left it in the markup as a comment just in case whoever wrote that would like to clarify. Now my third edit to the article is nothing special, but it does make the formatting of the article more consistent. I can understand if I could've gone about this better, I'm not an experienced editor. But I would never submit changes that I didn't think were useful. Casiotone Nation (talk) 16:46, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, I hope you get consensus for it on the talk page. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 16:47, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * What consensus? As far as I've seen, you're the only one in opposition. I've provided why I feel that my edits are productive and all you've provided are spurious allegations about my intentions. I would just like to know: what's wrong with my edits? Casiotone Nation (talk) 17:11, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * it may seem constructive, but you have to realize that this is the way Wikipedia functions. See WP:BRD. Now it's time to discuss your changes. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 17:15, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That page is about addressing the reverter's concerns--which is what I'm trying to do. I'm asking again, what are your concerns? I have clarified my edits for you and you still have not told me what the issue is. Casiotone Nation (talk) 17:17, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * First of all, is that a reliable source? I'll go look. And additionally, does it make Wikipedia look better? Those are my concerns. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 17:19, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The source is from the project maintainers, so I'd hope so. Additionally, it was already used in the page before my edits--like I said, I just moved the citation. To your second concern and as I was saying earlier, I feel like correcting misinformation does indeed make Wikipedia better. Casiotone Nation (talk) 17:21, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok. I don't fully object, but I'd like to see an independant source. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at WP: RSN. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 17:23, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , The intended purpose of WP:RSN is to assess whether specific sources are reliable; I do not understand what is being gained by pointing them to it given it's a broader question over the use of primary vs secondary sources.
 * , The intended purpose of WP:RSN is to assess whether specific sources are reliable; I do not understand what is being gained by pointing them to it given it's a broader question over the use of primary vs secondary sources.


 * To confirm - this is a perfectly legitimate use of a primary source, per WP:PRIMARY, the relevant extract of which is A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge.. We use primary sources to verify basic facts around stated compatibility, version updates, and so on across countless software articles. I see no reason why we cannot do so on this article - and as Casiotone Nation says, the source was already used in the article.


 * I'm pleased you're enthusiastic and that you're looking to help, but it might be more appropriate for you to build up your editing skills before trying to explain policy to new editors, as it can muddy the waters for them if they get multiple conflicting opinions. Best, Darren-M   talk  18:08, 5 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Seconding the comment by Darren-M and would point out, judging by the low quality of comments you were posting at points on the WP:AN discussion concerning Koavf, I'd suggest you spend quite some time building up your editing skills before discussing (not explaining) policy with other new editors. Nick (talk) 18:26, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I commented below before seeing your comment here. I strongly agree with it.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:43, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Casting Aspersions
Please refrain from casting Aspersions on talk pages or user talk pages. Aspersions are counterproductive, so please assume good faith instead. Continuation of casting aspersions (assuming editors will become LTAs, publicly asking for witch hunts, comparing a non-LTA to an LTA) will result in conflict and quarreling, which everyone wants to avoid. I know you want to help with stopping LTAs and protecting the project, but this is not the way to do it. Thank you. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:47, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortionately, that has happened far, far too often for me to have been there., for one, I assumed good faith when I(as an IP), gave an uw-unsourced2, turned out to be a VOA. I warmly welcomed to the community, and was blocked for disruptive editing. I have seen many users, like , where everyone assumed good faith, and it turned out to be a sockpuppet of a WMF globally banned user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HurricaneTracker495 (talk • contribs)
 * Every case is different however. You should always assume good faith, despite the past incidents. Though it may be hard, please bear this in mind in the future. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:57, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * See this too. HurricaneTracker495 (talk)
 * I saw that, but you must understand that every case is different, and casting aspersions will lead users to retire or get annoyed at you. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 19:36, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The fact that you aren't stopping with giving all these examples of blocked users show how much you are trying to insinuate that all LTA cases are the same, and that Destroyeraa is another one of those cases. This is absolutely unbecoming of a counter-vandalism editor (which you identify as in the above thread), as CV editors must always assume good faith, especially with fellow editors making good-faith edits. Stop trying to make connections between other editors and other LTA cases. Keeping this behavior up can be interpreted as an attempt to make a personal attack to Destroyeraa and/or an attempt to break his reputation even further, which is definitely unwelcome on Wikipedia. Chlod (say hi!) 19:49, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I try to AGF, I really do. However, I know iph95 was here in good faith, made numerous articles, and was a valuable member of WPTC at the time. Then, see Sockpuppet investigations/IPhonehurricane95/Archive, and see all the socks. I will try to assume good faith until the evidence is obviously against it.
 * However, I have more concerns. Destroyeraa requested PCR and......never used it. I have WP: HATC concerns. I quote Not having a particular user right doesn't mean you are somehow deficient. Lots of people don't have file mover, but that's because there's only a small community of people who care about maintaining the file namespace. But on the converse, having file mover doesn't mean you are an expert on file moving, it just means you've been granted the ability to do it. It's kind of those 2 things imploding.
 * My final concern is some of the inappropriate closures of discussions, they aren't an admin and the closure on Talk: Hurricane Nana (2020) is completely unwarrented. Because they simply removed there vote. (In fact, I think we should restrict our NACs here, as I must admit many users close discussions, but do not designate it at NACs.
 * I hope you can understand; I have faith; you just need to put your PCR tool to use(review those pending changes, there are many!), to designate closures at NAC, and not to sock. Hopefully, you take my advice to heart, and I hope this clears everything up. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 19:58, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * They have definitely reviewed pending changes. See — Yours,  Berrely  (🎅 Ho ho ho! 🎄) • Talk∕Contribs 20:13, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, then. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:15, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * There you go again with the insinuation. Do you happen to know with 100% certainty that Destroyeraa has more socks, will sock in the future, or owns a sock farm? If not, then you have absolutely no reason to relate them to an SPI case last updated in 2017 and has been dead in the water since. It is nearly tantamount to accusing Destroyeraa of owning more socks., and I assume you already know the process for knowing how to identify sockpuppets and socks, which is through SPI. Not through Destroyeraa's talk page, and nor through yours.
 * Next, WP:HATC is an essay. Not a policy. Just because Destroyeraa applied for PCR but allegedly didn't use it (already disproven) doesn't mean that the right will be removed from them. Even more so, HATC is for requesting, not demonstrating. HATC's "in a nutshell" even specifically states that the essay is for When requesting for adminship or any other rights, [...].
 * Finally, though the closure on Hurricane Nana is unwarranted, as far as I've found, you didn't make an attempt to inform them anywhere aside from your edit summary, which didn't even link to the WP:NAC essay . For all the cases you've provided, I can't feel the "good faith" vibe. All I can observe here is a lot of snark, a lack of proper attempts at informing a user, and a general lack of respect. In Berrely's correction above, you didn't even apologize for the false accusation. The only thing you did was strike it out and say Thanks. Even if you did carry a smidge of good faith specifically for Destroyeraa, barring your general GF assumptions on other editors, I certainly can't see, read, nor feel it through your messages or your behavior as an editor. Chlod (say hi!) 20:45, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I already struck out the WP: HATC thing, number 1. Number 2, I already stopped about socking and all that. Number 3, essays can be pretty important. WP: SO is just an essay, yet it's used like it's a guideline. And the NAC wasn't the reason why I reverted it, number 4. That was because you can't just remove a vote and close it without signing. I made an official request at WP: AN/RFC, though you may close it, since you had no involvement, if you wish. I'm also stepping away from my computer. I am saying you should sign NACs, but Destroyeraa's closure on nana is a big negative flag. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:51, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Then inform them. Is that so hard to do? And as for SO, I'm sure you'll be delighted to see the oppose votes on your proposal at Wikipedia talk:Standard offer. Quoting JD, The standard offer is not binding in any way that a guideline might. I hope you take that into heart as well. Chlod (say hi!) 20:54, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * They were notified before. Also, the first time(in 2016), for whatever reason, it had 66.7% support. That's weird. Also Chlod there's an odded discussion below, so feel free to use that so we don't keep indenting. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:57, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Remember, you're not an admin either and you've made closures too so...stop making grievances and deflecting. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 20:25, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I know, but I haven't made them frequently, but hang on. Zeta 05 was a withdraw, so that's ok, and I nominated NAC on Beatriz 93, which I had no involvement in. Please note NACs on your closed discussions, thanks. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:28, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

HurricanTracker495, can you explain what exactly is happening here, and what has happened in the three or four sections above. I'm interested in your interpretation and understanding of the seemingly endless predicaments you're ending up getting yourself involved with. Nick (talk) 22:59, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'm sorry for forgetting to assume good faith, I do feel like I dive too deep. And, I guess that edit is hard for me to tell. Again, this is a learning experience. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 23:06, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I'm a forgiving person, and I accept your apology. But please not that promoting witchhunts and casting aspersions in the future will possibly land you in WP:HAPPYPLACE. Also, I strongly suggest you refrain from partaking in discussions relating to blocks/unblocks, sockpuppeteering, and other admin actions until you complete your CVUA training. ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 02:53, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:HurricaneTracker495/sandbox


Please do not create hoaxes on Wikipedia, as you did at User:HurricaneTracker495/sandbox. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

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. - Rich T&#124;C&#124;E-Mail 20:37, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I blanked the page can you remove the tag? --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:39, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

your editing
Given all the complaints on this talk page and elsewhere about your editing, behavior and general inability to stay out of areas you do not belong, what compelled you to do this when there is a bot that does this within minutes of the template being placed? Generally non-admins shouldn't be adjusting any sort of block notices or templates. This includes well meaning edits by exceptionally inexperienced users (ie. you). Praxidicae (talk) 20:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Because AnomieBOT did it so it's correct to do. And AnomieBOT isn't an admin. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:19, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , AnomieBOT is a bot that automatically substitutes templates which are marked as "always substitute". There's no need to substitute a template for someone else since the bot will do it automatically. Perryprog (talk) 20:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I do think the sheer volume of editors who are frustrated with this editor is likely to mean they end up on a noticeboard at some point. Which is frustrating, because they are clearly keen - they just need to stay within their current limits before they push something/someone too far. Best, Darren-M   talk  20:22, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Except, I'm not sure what you mean by pushing it too far-also I edited on 67.85.37.186 for a while so my experience goes back to September. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:24, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , There are many editors who have edited for years who don't step into the areas that you have tried to - non-admin closures, block reasons, and so on. I think you're going to make a mistake at some point that is sufficiently serious or sufficiently repetitive that it causes an admin to block you. I don't want that to happen - but if you're going to avoid that, you need to identify the current limits of your expertise and stay within them. As I said above, I think for now I would stick to reverting blatant vandalism - and, ideally, doing WP:TASKCENTRE tasks to build up your editing skills. Best, Darren-M   talk  20:28, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I was about to post a polite note to slow down, but has hit pretty much everything I was going to say. You're jumping into some complicated areas of the encyclopedia, and just because you're allowed to do these things doesn't mean you should. Don't think of this as a distinction between "admins" and "non-admins," think of this as a spectrum of how experienced you are with Wikipedia, and you're still a newer editor. Heck, I'm an admin and there are plenty of things I won't do because I don't have the experience, even though I'm "allowed" to do them. I second Darren's suggestion to look at the WP:TASKCENTER, and if you want to keep doing counter-vandalism I suggest signing up for WP:CVUA so an experienced mentor can teach you. GeneralNotability (talk) 20:35, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It doesn't appear any of the prior appeals to get you to stop messing around in areas you do not belong have sunk in or been given any consideration, so let me say it more simply: you are frustrating a lot of experienced editors who have tried to help you. Consider the past advice and stop editing in areas you do not belong because the next step is going to be ANI and no one wants that. Praxidicae (talk) 20:31, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * OK but it clearly says reverting vandalism is suitable for all. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:33, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm more interested in why you were contesting the speedy deletion of an article under CSD G12, when the article was created as a copyright violation and you did nothing to remove any of the copyright infringing material. We can (with difficulty) forgive and forget playing with block notices, casting aspersions and the other couple of dozen disruptive editing behaviours we have seen from you, but what we cannot do is forgive and forget atrocious decision making surrounding copyright violating content. The seriousness of copyright is such that any further errors will, out of necessity, likely result in an indefinite block which will only be lifted when the administrators here are certain your copyright understanding is sufficient to allow you to resume editing. I would therefore suggest (and urge) you spend some time reviewing both our copyright policies and guidance provided for new editors, so you make make correct, informed decisions on copyright related deletion matters. Nick (talk) 20:58, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Nick, the copyright vio could have been REVDELed while keeping the page intact. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 21:17, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * And how would I have done that ? Nick (talk) 21:23, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The copyvio was removed, so we could RD it, or remove the copyvio. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 21:32, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The copyright violation was in the initial content of the page, as it was created, and when I deleted it, the page size was, strangely, still 3,421 bytes with all of the copyright violating content still present. How exactly would one REVDEL that ? Why was the G12 nomination invalid ? Why did you contest the speedy deletion ? Nick (talk) 21:37, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I saw a comment, but also I am not good at understand copyvios, I just saw others contest it. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 21:40, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm gobsmacked.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:44, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I was rather more than gobsmacked, but since it's almost Christmas and I'm 99.9987% certain we're in the presence of young children, I will refrain from the use of profanity. Nick (talk) 21:53, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * If you don't know how copyvios work, then you shouldn't even have been involved in the first place!  Light and Dark2000  🌀 (talk) 22:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Some unsolicited, well-meaning advice: I've seen this pattern of well-meaning, enthusiastic editors who rush into things before. There seems to be a fork on the road for most of them – similar to the situation you're finding yourself in right now: A bunch of sysops and experienced users swarming their talk page and asking them to stop doing certain things. It seems that this usually ends one of two ways: Either, people commit to mainspace editing and staying away from admin areas for a while, or they eventually get blocked. The latter option is the worst one for everyone involved; those who choose the first often become great contributors. I encourage you to work on content for a while – be it writing, gnoming or both – and maybe ease into other areas of the encyclopaedia after a couple months. To be brutally honest, I think this might end badly if you don't. Blablubbs | talk 21:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Look, I don't know if you've realized this yet or not, but you're literally one step away from an ANI report or an indefinite block. Do you not see how serious all of this is?? You have clearly upset a decent number of admins with the way you've been editing and with the way you've been conducting yourself recently. (And it's not just admins, you've also pissed off a bunch of other editors on WPTC, but upsetting the admins is not something you want.) The GF issues were already bad enough to start with, but you're also diving headfirst into a bunch of administrative areas in which you have little to no experience at all. You need to stop pretending that you understand Wikipedia policies any more than any of us who have been editing for years, least of all the admins. You clearly don't understand. That much is obvious. And for each policy for which you do have some familiarity with, you most certainly do not understand them more than I, Nick, or any of the other more experienced users on the site. You need to stop pretending that you know any more than the rest of us or that you have the standing to lecture any of us on even one of those policies. You simply do not have the standing to do so. Now, I strongly recommend that you listen to the suggestions of the other admins above: Stick to content creation and reverting clear, obvious vandalism. Avoid administrative areas in their entirety right now. And do not even try getting yourself involved in other more complicated areas, such as copyvios. You don't have the experience or the knowledge to involve yourself in any of those other places right now. And regarding your conduct, you really, really need to improve the way you've been behaving towards other editors on this site. Now, AGF does not apply equally to everyone on this site. You do not, for example, have to assume Good Faith in cases where you're dealing with clear, obvious vandals or LTAs. But whenever it comes to users with a history of being a net-positive, or anyone else for that matter (including "grey areas"), you really need to treat them with more respect and give them the benefit of the doubt. And your history with the LTAs and serial vandals you've been dealing with do not give you the right to be so caustic or so suspicious of other genuine, good-faith editors who may have screwed up, but have not yet committed even a fraction of the offenses that those LTAs have. You need to stop lording yourself over other users, or even accusing some of (quite unfounded) aspirations of becoming an LTA when they've clearly stated the exact opposite. Because this cannot go on. I don't want to see you blocked. And the truth is, none of us do. But if you continue conducting yourself on this site the same way you have been for the past couple weeks or so, I find it extremely difficult to see how you do not end up with an indef block. And that is something you do not want. So please, listen to us and cut back on your involvement in these other parts of Wikipedia.  Light and Dark2000  🌀 (talk) 22:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

An offer...
Hi HurricaneTracker. I just want to extend an offer to you, as it feels like you're digging yourself a deeper and deeper hole that is difficult to get out of, and there does seem to be a bit of an irritated swarm of administrators circling for a variety of reasons that I think is going to end badly sooner rather than later. I'm happy to informally mentor you, to give you a sounding board before you take actions and to give you constructive feedback on how to more effectively interact with the community. Of course there's no obligation to take me up on the offer, but I do think it would go some way towards showing the community that you're keen to develop your skills...

If you do accept that offer, my only ask would be that you take advice given seriously - nobody here, me least of all, is out to get you. But we do need to see that you acknowledge your mistakes and learn from them.

Let me know either way. Happy to chat on IRC if you would rather a less public venue - my nick is the same as here. Best, Darren-M   talk  21:56, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * happy to take up on it. IRC isn't perfect, but I'm ok doing it here. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , Great news. :) I use the Wikimedia Discord too if that helps? Darren-M   talk  22:25, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * IRC works better. We can try, but I only have until 22:45 UTC, --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:26, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , Hop online and drop me a message, we can have an introductory chat. :) Darren-M   talk  22:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * What channel are you in? --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:28, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , Freenode, @ #wikipedia-en (Join here) Darren-M   talk  22:29, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see you. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:32, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , If you click that link and choose a nickname, it should take you to the #wikipedia-en channel; I'm on Freenode as Darren-M. Darren-M   talk  22:34, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm having problems. I think it's better if we do it on-wiki. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:36, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , Sure. I think it's clear you're really enthusiastic about editing WP. I think it would be good to understand what made you decide to start editing, and which aspects of it interest you the most? Darren-M   talk  22:38, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * About what to revert and what not to, and learning what's vandalism, but also about what to do and when. Sorry, I'm unavaliable now. I'll do it tomorrow. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:39, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , Speak tomorrow - but would definitely be good to understand in detail what you enjoy about WP. :) Darren-M   talk  22:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion
I strongly suggest that you apologize to the people you offended. First, I think you should apologize to for lecturing him about how to do his administrative duties. Next, I suggest you apologize to the users that had dealt with your behavior recently in the above threads (, etc.). Next, I suggest you apologize to me for requesting a witch hunt against me. Thank you. ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 22:45, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I apologize Nick for that, but I already apologized for them above for the latter two. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * An apology you made specifically only after Nick (a sysop) had alerted you sounds insincere, especially when you follow it up immediately with an excuse. Owning up to your mistakes does not involve an attempt at trying to play things down. You haven't made an apology to, the three sysops who have been on your page nor to me and the other users on this page. The only thing you've done is deflect, divert attention, and challenge the genuine advice we try to give in order to prevent you from getting blocked or sent to ANI. If you really think you're in the right here, I suggest you take a look at your talk page and look at the amount of users who have been pointing out all of the problems we've experienced with your editing and your behavior.
 * Being truly honest, I already waived my expectations of an apology from you quite a while ago, but seeing this just annoyed me even more. Should an apology really be a one-time thing that you can't repeat? Because obviously, Destroyeraa (from his message) was definitely unsatisfied with his (obviously, as witch hunting is a very offensive move to an editor), and I very much suggest that you follow through with a decent and proper one, instead of deflecting again . I'm sorry for the accusation, but I can no longer see what part of this is civil or good faith. It's almost as if you're deliberately pissing editors off by persistently and repeatedly going well over the line, let alone lecture other editors with way more experience than you, and defending these actions with quotes from policies or essays that, as LD2000 said above, you clearly don't understand, to which I agree to. Enough with the games already. Learn to admit when you're wrong. Chlod <small style="font-size:calc(1em - 2pt)">(say hi!) 03:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I can understand that you're probably trying to do this in good faith. You've noticed a large backlog or similar and wanted to help out, and then suddenly you have loads of editors on your talk. It can feel like there is quite a bit of mounting pressure, and I honestly can understand why it may be hard to accept all it. Wikipedia's guidelines are complex and can be hard to understand, but I really do suggest you get at least a basic grasp of them. If you do carry on (and hopefully finish) the informal mentorship Darren-M is giving you, I do have high hopes for your future contributions. Other than that, I hope you have a good December and, when it comes, a merry Christmas. — Yours, Berrely  <span style="color:


 * 1) B3000C;">(🎅 Ho ho ho! 🎄) • Talk∕Contribs 07:49, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , I think it would be helpful if we drew a line under this for now - there's probably close to a dozen editors contributing on this page, and I think that would feel overwhelming for any editor.


 * Let's see if we get genuine buy-in and action stemming from my offer of help, and then we can take it from there. Darren-M   talk  11:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi there. I think it is a good idea for HT495 to receive mentorship, and I really hope that HT495 takes it in. I am still dissatisfied with HT495's apology to my fellow editors and me, but I won't push it further. Thanks, ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 13:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * What Destroyeraa said. Here's to hoping for a better future for everyone involved. Chlod <small style="font-size:calc(1em - 2pt)">(say hi!) 13:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Chlod, Destroyeraa, Berrely, Prixadacae, Nick, you(and to a lesser extent Ponyo, among probably many others I missed), yeah I can now see how this would get to nearly a dozen. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 17:41, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

user:HurricaneTracker495/sandbox
Hey there HT495, quick heads up/warning. Don’t create sandboxes for fake storms, especially ones that would be the costliest/deadliest on record. It’s insensitive, and an inappropriate use of a sandbox (which you do not own, and is still subject to Wikipedia’s rules). Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 20:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, you can delete it. I was just texting the infobox without vandalizing a Wiki article. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:31, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * HurricaneTracker495, there is Hypothetical Hurricane Wiki. ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 22:11, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes except User: CyclonicStormYutu/Hypothetical hurricanes is intact and it even survived MfD. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 19:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Goals/editing
Hey there HT495, I just wanted to check, what are your goals for writing on Wikipedia? What kind of edits do you want to make? I reminded a fellow user earlier that the reason we're all here is to make the best possible encyclopedia of human knowledge. We aren't here for vanity, for petty fights, or talking for the sake of talking. What topics interest you most? Are there are any articles you'd like to focus on? ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 19:16, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello; now that this monsterous hurricane season is over(which really grasped our attention), I think I'm actually going to move away from WPTC for a while, focus on another area(probably the transportation sector), and maybe occasionally checking for any vandalism. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 19:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. I just wondered if you might be interested in editing/improving any of the existing tropical cyclone articles (of which there are thousands), even as of this year or last year. I get the desire to move on, but you're clearly interested in tropical cyclones, and in this era of misinformation and climate change denialism, they're a very important topic to discuss and write about. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 19:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I mean, I'll edit there occasionally, but not as much. Anyway, the interstate sytsem is seriously lacking in editors, while WPTC has ~110. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 19:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair point, but the WPTC doesn't have 110 content writers. Most of the editors just stick around during the active season, then move onto other projects (or just do vandalism reverting, which almost anyone can do). So I'm just pestering, hoping to encourage another editor to stick around and try writing ;) ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 19:30, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll see how much I participate. Just that IMO, the road project. I tried writing Effects of Hurricane Charley in Florida, but combined with my B+ in ELA, and my poor writing/citing skills and the fact that I'm busy, I don't see the time. Speaking of which, since you failed the Garden State Parkway for GA, maybe you're interested in helping? --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 19:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey a B+ is pretty good! Don't worry about your poor citing skills. That comes with time. The important thing is citing something when you're writing an article. I think Charley's effects in Florida is a great idea, but that was also one of the costliest United States hurricanes, so that would be a rather huge article to try and tackle. Have you considered something smaller? Maybe something like a list? The List of New York hurricanes is a featured list, but quite a few entries have no sources. If you add the sources, you could help make sure the article stays featured. Otherwise, it could be demoted. And as for road articles, I have worked on a few, but I find more of a passion working on hurricane articles. People often turn to Wikipedia for information and sources, but for roads, people don't usually think about them, they just use Google Maps or whatever. For tropical cyclone articles though, we are documenting the effects of storms in a rapidly changing world. Storms are getting worse by the year, and people are still denying human-induced climate change. I think it's more important to properly document tropical cyclones. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 19:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok I could work on that alongside the interstates --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 19:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * WHOO! There's even basic articles like List of named storms (C) that take a while to compile, but all of the info is already on Wikipedia. In case you were wondering, the list of storms starting with the letters D, E, F, G, H, M, N, and O all need to be written up. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 19:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Aww, I'm sorry to see you're semi-retired! I hope it wasn't anything I said. I still think you have the potential to be a valued user and member of the project. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 22:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Don't take it too hard on yourself
Hi there HurricaneTracker495,

Have some cookies!

I know that the events the past days were hard one you, especially with a dozen editors swarming your talk page. Everyone makes mistakes, and I made a huge oopsie by socking. Don't take it too hard on yourself. I forgive your actions, and won't take anything against you in the future (unless you make another big mistake, but I think you can handle yourself).

You will do great on CVUA! Don't compare yourself to a sockmaster! Cheers, ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 01:44, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I know, these next few days/weeks will be extrodionarily tough though. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 01:47, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It's ok, I have faith that you'll do well at CVUA. ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 01:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks I also need your comment at Talk: Hurricane Floyd --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 01:53, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Late November snowstorm of 2020 (December 10)
<div style="border: solid 1px #FCC; background-color: #F8EEBC; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #000; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;"> Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Destroyeraa was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Late November snowstorm of 2020 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Late November snowstorm of 2020, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Late_November_snowstorm_of_2020 Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Destroyeraa&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Late_November_snowstorm_of_2020 reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 18:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikibreak
Considering the trouble you have gotten yourself in, I consider you take a WikiBreak before things get any worse. Not a long Wikibreak (like a year), but one that's long enough for you the get a fresh start, such as a month, maybe two. Stay safe, Cyclone   Toby  01:54, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Good point, maybe in a little while I'll consider one. I'll think about it, --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 02:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Re: Concerning views regarding discussions on talk pages
Regarding Talk:2020 Pacific typhoon season, if the process had been set such that any WPTC member can't close a WPTC discussion just because they're a WPTC member with this so-called impartiality, then WikiProjects wouldn't exist. One of a WikiProject's functions is to centralize discussion and connect users interested in a specific topic, such that the members can interact with collaborative processes (including discussions) within the scope of their project. A constant reminder that discussion should not be conducted through just a vote is not required, since we already know about it, and can simply inform a user if they don't the usual process that has been in motion for a long time. Requiring nac for non-admin closures is also unnecessary, as this discussion is for a page split, and does not require administrator intervention. I suggest you stop making up more and more unnecessary rules and conditions regarding discussion and reaching consensus, unless these conditions help prevent a possible disruption of Wikipedia, as extra restrictions can prevent other users from feeling like they should contribute to a discussion.

Additionally, part of your reasoning in Talk:Hurricane Stan had also recently concerned me. Disclosure: I was made aware of this discussion through the WPTC Discord server. You initially stated that you had 60 reasons, although provided only 8, and initially branded it as the "Strongest possible oppose in the whole entire universe", neither of which actually contribute to discussion nor make your !vote stronger than the !vote of others. Additionally,
 * (6) states to "leave it alone", however Wikipedia is not set in stone and anything can be challenged or changed hence the need for discussion,
 * (7) suggests that the move was not requested properly, but an informal discussion at the article's talk page can help reach consensus and requested move is not always required,
 * (8) cites "per consensus", however the need for a discussion clearly shows that a consensus is being looked for, and is not already established,
 * such as this may not be closed designated as an NAC if closed by a non admin is too vague to make sense (the lack of punctuation is throwing me off),
 * And finally, (4) and (5) are claims that don't have solid evidence, or at least you failed to provide it.

Consensus-building requires thought-out points. Attempting to inflate your comment by saying that you have 52 other unspecified reasons doesn't make the comment more weighty than the comments of other users. Please make sure that you're contributing properly to discussion by making comments that hold weight through reasoning. For starters, comment on why the page should not be moved, or why moving the page is beneficial than the status quo, rather than commeting on the process. Wikipedia is not a perfect system and expecting it to be one will only lead to disappointment. I hope that you take my advice in consideration, as this can help you be more helpful in contributing to talk page discussions. Thanks. Chlod <small style="font-size:calc(1em - 2pt)">(say hi!) 00:53, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice, but it's a bit too long. Mind condensing? --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 01:07, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The first and last paragraphs should be enough to get the message across. However, I sincerely hope that you don't simply brush off the entire thing and take it only at its condensed value. Chlod <small style="font-size:calc(1em - 2pt)">(say hi!) 02:24, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, I read the important parts. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 02:25, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * So, all of it? Good to know. Chlod <small style="font-size:calc(1em - 2pt)">(say hi!) 02:38, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Destroyeraa (talk • contribs) 02:20, November 26 2020 (UTC)
 * Adding this comment for sole purpose of allowing it to be archived. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:17, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Invite! (fixed)
Hi HurricaneTracker495, consider giving your opinion about sockpuppetry within WPTC. Through the years, there is a lot of LTAs used to be on the WPTC, so I would like you to give your opinion on that! This is why I reserved the third opinion piece slot for that reason.  SMB9 9thx   my edits!  12:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * my opinion is that when experienced users do it, they lose there rights. When they become LTAs, lock them up. Also, the worst LTA is IPh95, due to his personal attacks(maybe UAK). HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 12:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay then, go ahead! :)  SMB9 9thx   my edits!  12:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * what do you want me to write exactly? --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Your *full* opinion. Try to take a look at WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 43 to see what I mean by opinion piece.  SMB9 9thx   my edits!  15:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You can talk with for help.  SMB9  9thx   my edits!  15:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * my first part of statement malformed can you fix it? --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm going to sleep now, it's 11:43 PM (UTC+08:00, Bali time)  SMB9 9thx   my edits!  15:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I can help you fix the first part of the statement if SMB99thx hasn't already. What exactly is malformed that needs fixing? 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox)  16:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * below the line. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 16:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, the formatting should be fixed, does it look better now? 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox)  16:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks and I will finish my statement when I'm done with school a little after 19:00 UTC (2:00 PM UTC-5). --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 16:58, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem, just remember that there's no rush to complete the article right away, we still have over a month until this edition of the newsletter is published, so you will have plenty of time to think and revise your opinion piece to get it how you want. otherwise, enjoy editing the newsletter! Cheers~ 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox)   17:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * ok. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 12:40, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

IPhonehurricane95 (Jeffrey Gu) was the worst LTA to ever show up on WPTC. He even started the "UnderArmourKid" vandalism nonsense (complete with the 9/11 imagery). I don't know if Lightning Sabre (the person behind the newer "UAK" accounts) actually knows IPH95. But it's a possibility. They have coordinated their attacks in late 2014 and in the summer of 2016. It's best not to reveal all of the sensitive details. Some things are best left unmentioned in the public space. But it would be nice to provide an informative excerpt on the history of their activities. Personally, I probably know more about IPH95 than most other editors on WPTC, but everyone who was here back in 2014 knows him. We all got attacked by that nut.  Light and Dark2000  🌀 (talk) 00:04, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

BTW, that opinion piece of yours probably needs to be revised. It gets unnecessarily harsh in a few areas. It should probably be edited by other senior editors as well. BTW, concerning CUs, maybe all of the new editors from the past 6 months or so should be vetted by CU. But it's not required, and CUs are unlikely to grant such a request without serious allegations of abuse. Only the most circumspect/problematic users would even be eligible for CU action.  Light and Dark2000  🌀 (talk) 00:07, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Feel free to edit it if you wish. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 21:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC)


 * How did you know how to hide information, ? Did you use an account before this? Please disclose. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:49, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you replied in this section, but uh, I'm sorry? I didn't know source comments were a feature only used by Wikipedia's most elite. I just saw some flaws with the article and wanted to address them. I don't really understand all of the scrutiny. If you don't find anything wrong with my edits, I just ask for you to restore them. Casiotone Nation (talk) 15:04, 5 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I did assume good faith, because if I wasn’t, I would jump to a more severe warning. That’s what a general note is. What is non constructive is whether or not it improves Wikipedia. This, really didn’t. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:59, 5 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, I’m avaliable in a few hours to talk on IRC. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 21:59, 7 December 2020 (UTC)


 * it wasn’t; multitude of reasons. I kind of feel like I have no choice or I will become like . I may be on simple though. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)


 * please leave off my talk page and leave it on the affected article. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 00:54, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I couldn’t find any sources, and honestly creating articles is hard I tried with Charley in Florida and I had to abandon it. Hurricane Tracker 495 19:14, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi HurricaneTracker495! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:46, Thursday, December 3, 2020 (UTC)

Your conduct at WP:AN
Hello, HurricaneTracker495,

You might have edited for a few months as an IP account but this current account is a little over a month old. It is inappropriate for you to be explaining policy on the Administrator's Noticeboard to admins and editors with years and, in some cases, decades worth of experience working on the project. You are a newbie.

This is a polite message on your talk page rather than a more public reprimand because I think if you continue with this precocious conduct, some admin with a shorter fuse than mine will probably slap you down. Even though you are inexperienced, feel free to offer your opinion but do not try to instruct more experienced editors and admins on how policy works. They have seen thousands of editors come and go and will be annoyed, not impressed, by your attempts to lecture them. Thanks. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 18:03, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for the advice. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:05, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * In general, I think you assess your understanding of Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and procedures as stronger than it actually is. For example, you were wrong to suggest the use of CheckUser to "see if you really know him". That is emphatically not what CheckUser can do: CheckUser can determine whether two users were using the same or similar IP addresses and/or user agents, but cannot itself show why.
 * I strongly advise that you stick to content work and refrain from further anti-vandalism patrolling or other administrative areas, except !vote'ing in deletion discussions. I myself learned the hard way that patrolling when you do not have a firm understanding of policies, guidelines, and procedures leads to you giving inaccurate or even outright WP:BITEy advice.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:40, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It seems like my advice has fallen on deaf ears, for you have continued attempting to patrol for vandalism. There's no particularly troublesome edits among those edits, but I would appreciate it if you would at least respond here. I just had a look at Wikipedia talk:Standard offer and reiterate my request that you stay out of administrative areas of Wikipedia.--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:30, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I heard, just clarfifying. However, I wouldn’t call antivandalism as “administrative area”, something I am supposed to be doing per my CVUA. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 03:00, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Well I do, and I even specifically indicated that above. Definitions aside, I do not think you are ready for this. Like I said, I learned this the hard way; do not repeat my mistake. Communication with other users is key when they bring up concerns about your editing.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:07, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Given this editor's continued disruption I retract this message. 🎄🎄 <span style="font-family:'Roboto',sans-serif;font-weight:300;text-shadow: 2px 2px 10px black;color:black;">Ed  talk!  🎄🎄 20:42, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , I'm not sure I'm totally in alignment with you here - I think responding substantively to the comments raised by editors here would go a long way towards showing that they are keen to learn and develop. Whether that is formally required or not is clearly a different point, but not one that I think is super pertinent.
 * For what it's worth, I don't think that HurricaneTracker should totally refrain from anti-vandalism work - but I do think that they should refrain from involving themselves in all but the most clear-cut cases until they have developed their skills. Best, Darren-M   talk  18:42, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I have 3 possible definitions for that. (1) All but obvious vandalism, (2) all but obvious vandalism/disruptive editing or (3) all but obvious vandalism, disruptive editing, tests, unexplained content removal or BLP violations. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:49, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I have no problems with HurricaneTracker495 reverting vandalism or disruptive editing, though I think, with all due respect, that he should refrain from participating in the most administrative areas (blocking, BLP, Sockpuppetry, etc.). ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:55, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I have 3 possible definitions for that. (1) All but obvious vandalism, (2) all but obvious vandalism/disruptive editing or (3) all but obvious vandalism, disruptive editing, tests, unexplained content removal or BLP violations. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:49, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I have no problems with HurricaneTracker495 reverting vandalism or disruptive editing, though I think, with all due respect, that he should refrain from participating in the most administrative areas (blocking, BLP, Sockpuppetry, etc.). ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:55, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

definitely thank you Ed6767 for the nice words. I am definitely learning what to and what not to revert during CVUA. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 13:43, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I just saw the WP:SO "guideline" proposal. I have never seen the standard offer work on any users, though some are trying. And sorry for the Easter Egg links. 🐔 Chicdat <font face="Times New Roman">Bawk to me!  11:07, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Caution
Please take the time to read up on Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Your comments here and here indicate a profound misunderstanding of what notability is and how it works, along with a failure to read the page instructions in the first place and a frankly shocking lack of understanding on the second (that could also be very easily misconstrused as racist). These combined with the commentary in the "Re: Concerning views regarding discussions on talk pages" section above raise concerns that you don't understand how Wikipedia works in fundamental ways and your dismissive tone here and here to an attempted explanation of how Wikipedia works does not help that impression. Please take a step back, take a deep breath, have a nice cup of tea, and read and understand the rules, because if you continue to make comments like the "not notable" ones above it won't end well. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:47, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It's just that if Wikipedia likes to publicize only semi or even non notable events, yet a major disaster like Hurricane Delta doesn't make ITN(granted, the initial damage estimate was $2 billion), it leads to a mixed review. Basically-if you go to a TV, do you here about these random recent deaths, or Delta? Probably Delta, especially in Mexico and Louisiana. (Where Delta was a cat 2). Sure the Ghana PM was all over Ghana but, we need to balence both sides. --Hurricane Tracker 495 23:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Focus on content creation
Hi HurricaneTracker495, and I hope you are well. Your recent behavior does not reflect well on the promises that you've made in the threads above and on your userpage (the semi-retirement). I strongly suggest you focus more on content creation or content work. Creating content is a good way to regain lost trust. However, skedaddling around ITN or other talk pages isn't a good way to regain lost trust, and can garner more annoyance towards you. For example, some of the comments you made on ITN blatantly shows you didn't read the instructions. Also, since you aren't so familiar yet with policy, I suggest you stop lecturing others about policy.

We are all here to build up an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a place to chat and discuss, it's a place to create content and improve content. One way to create content is to create drafts. If you find a topic missing from Wikipedia that isn't questionable on its notability, you can create a draft, and after you worked on it, submit it to AfC. Or, you may work on existing drafts and articles, such as the Draft:Late November snowstorm of 2020. The draft clearly needs more references, which is why I declined it.

Creating or improving content is a good way to gain more experience on Wikipedia. Thus, I suggest you focus more on that instead of making long and sometimes pointless discussions. Cheers, ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 19:05, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020
Please stop your disruptive behavior. Do not use multiple IP addresses to disrupt Wikipedia or avoid scrutiny (such as this one), like you did at Talk:Hurricane Michael or Talk:Meteorological history of Hurricane Michael. Such attempts to avoid detection, circumvent policies or evade blocks or sanctions will not succeed. If you continue your deceptive behavior or continue to make disruptive edits (either intentionally or unintentionally), you may be blocked from editing. ''You really, really need to stop. HurricaneTracker495, you decided days ago to go on a week-long Wikibreak. Stick to it. You're just going to cause more problems on Wikipedia and for yourself if you continue trying to circumvent it. You are about to wear out the patience of the admins and other editors on this site. I suggest that you refrain from testing their patience any further. DO NOT do this again.''  Light and Dark2000  🌀 (talk) 14:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , What has led you to make the allegation that HT and the IP you've mentioned are linked? Best, Darren-M   talk  14:15, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The behavior, more specifically, their "reasoning", is a dead giveaway. Both the IP and HT495 are identical in behavior.  Light and Dark2000  🌀 (talk) 14:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Please excuse my interruption. HT495 and the IP are clearly the same user. For example, the IP in question has edited Talk:Tropical Storm Zeta (2005) with a similar manner as HT495 (then known as WesternAtlanticCentral). Also, the IP has reported pages to RFPP, as HT495 has done numerous times. The contibs log seems to match, and thus we can assume the IP is HT495. ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 14:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * This is evidence that HT495 has used three IPs here on Wikipedia, possible before he created an account. ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 14:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , There is no prohibition requiring IP editors to stick to one IP - indeed, many modern ISPs will make that impossible by assigning new ones periodically, and/or if you use different ways to connect (e.g. on your broadband at home, and then on mobile data while out and about). This is one of the reasons we strongly encourage IP editors to register. Best,  Darren-M   talk  14:35, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * True. However, HT495 has used multiple IPs while doing (logged out editing), and it isn't his first offense. here, and twice on his archive. ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 14:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment HT495 is currently on a Wikibreak because of all of the stuff that he has reprimanded for, and it appears that he will not be back until the 19th, judging by This, so he is unlikely to respond to the warnings. Just thought that I should point that out. 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox)  17:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Statement by HurricaneTracker495
The following statement has been emailed to me by HurricaneTracker495 requesting that I post it here.

Subject: Please carry this over to Wikipedia on my talk page because I can’t edit it myself

Here is what I want you to carry over

“It was not me who made the edit. I did convince someone else to do it, which is technically a violation of WP: MEAT, but I didn’t make the edit myself. Therefore this can’t be considered a violation of WP: SOCK, although I will admit I commited meatpuppetry. — HurricaneTracker495”

Thank you

Best, Darren-M   talk  19:08, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * On the basis of the above admission of meatpuppetry, comments made in private, and of the other allegations on this page, notably the message by The Bushranger concerning HT's comments on ITN, I do not think anything can be gained by me continuing to offer HT advice & support. This offer is therefore withdrawn. Best, Darren-M   talk  19:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * At this point, the only real thing that we could do is have a mentorship, as Hurricanehink mentioned on s talk page, as HT495 clearly is not taking advice and recommendations as he should, nor does he seem to take it seriously, based on the above sections. That is one of the only possible solutions that I can think of at the moment, that doesn't involve more consequential actions.🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox)  19:25, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * If no one wants to mentor me...I think evantually I can dig myself out of this hole. I'm increasing archiving to 30 days so, if it's truly resolved, it'll be begone in page history. --Hurricane Tracker 495 00:40, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The way you dig yourself out of the hole is not by sweeping the problem under the rug by archiving, but by actually listening to the advice that has been given to you and actually staying out of everything you are told to stay out of, as well as showing an improved attitude towards those who give you advice. The advice has become a demand because of the extent of your WP:IDHT issues. I hate to put it this harshly, but you really need to understand how close you are to exhausting the community's patience. If you are unsure even the slightest about whether an action would be proper (such as the above meatpupptery), you should ask for help rather than assuming that you somehow know it all, which you appear to have a pattern of.--Jasper Deng (talk) 10:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

User:Lima Bean Farmer
Please do not invite problematic users to WPTC. Or any other WikiProject. We certainly do not want to have any toxic or disruptive users around. If he takes your suggestion to heart and shows up, if he choses to get all political or act in a disruptive way, not only will we have to clean up after his mess, but he'll also get reported to an admin noticeboard and get re-blocked, likely indefinitely. The only people who should be invited to WPTC are those with a clear interest in the subject, have the competence to conduct themselves, and good temperament. Please do not do this again. Until you become familiar with WPTC and much more experienced with Wikipedia policies in general, I would strongly suggest that you refrain from recruiting new users as well. We have others who are already taking care of recruitment. Thank you.  Light and Dark2000  🌀 (talk) 08:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I never thought about that. Thanks,--Hurricane Tracker 495 13:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Stay out, for real
You've been asked numerous times to stay out of user conduct matters, so what led you to this? This is not an appropriate use of that warning template, which is only for use for cases where the user removes a large amount of content without explanation, such as blanking the whole page. The other editors had a good handle on it, and you appear unable to explain why the content is not libellous. In this case, the editor had potentially valid grounds to remove the content for WP:BLP reasons (they don't in this case, but you need to understand why).

By now, you should know that other editors are as a whole frustrated with your dismissive attitude towards advice. Again, as a result, that advice has become a demand. This is a relatively minor error, but at this point, unless you seriously change your attitude and behavior, your next big error is almost certain to result in your getting blocked, and a supervisory, involuntary mentorship required for unblock. I expect you to acknowledge explicitly that you will refrain from further patrolling, and stick to the content work that you have done–your trimming of sections in 2020 Atlantic hurricane season is the kind of editing you should be doing now.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:15, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The reason why it was appropriate is because, it is necessary to explain, a big theme of the article. I also trimmed down Bertha. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:19, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Your explanation is wholly inadequate and I am left scratching my head as to what you mean by your first sentence. It's as if you did not at all read the first half of my comment.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:20, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * What I meant was.....the article revolves on him being conspiracy theorist, so its necessary to include. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Again, you have wholly missed my point. Do you know what the criteria are for including such information at all? I am also not fond of your decision to redact this; redaction of personal attacks should only be done in more offensive cases and by editors much more experienced than you, as it can have the effect of WP:POKEBEAR.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That may have been a bad idea. I have to go for a little while now. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:29, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * When you get back, I expect you to thoroughly read through what I wrote and take it seriously. If I did not think you could improve, I would not be having this conversation with you. But I expect you to put in as much effort as I did in writing the above message. It's this pattern of poor judgement that has warranted the demand for you to stay out of conduct matters. I have yet to see acknowledgement of that, nor a promise to stay out, and I expect both.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:31, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It was just that in WPTC I am in hot water as well. If I completely retreat from patrolling, and I also have to retreat from WPTC, I am kinda stuck on USRD, and if I get stuck in hot water there, then I'm blocked.
 * But if you want me to help out Simple(which I am by citing sources and expanding there poor article), thats fine if you want me to completely retreat from enwiki for a while. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:37, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Your mistakes in WPTC are far more benign as they are being corrected by experienced editors. We can't have you give misleading advice or impressions to new users (WP:BITE). If your goal is to become an admin here, note that this pattern of poor judgement and dismissing others' concerns (by clearly not taking them seriously) will cause you to fail overwhelmingly. I already told you what is working, namely your trimming of the 2020 AHS, so this is not just about "this is not working". But you really do need to listen to others when they give you advice. Think about why you are in hot water and formulate specific actions to take to stay out. Staying out of user conduct issues and patrolling, and listening to others, are the two most obvious ones, but it need not be limited to those.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:44, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, that I can see you're point. Trimming it down is working, but evantually, it's trimmed too much. I think my 3rd issue is the meatpuppetry. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:54, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not about a first, second, or third issue. All of your behavior, including the meatpuppetry, is reflective of your overall attitude and your judgement. You ought to stop and think before all of your actions. No mentor can do that for you. And also, everyone makes mistakes, but you need to be receptive to the feedback. You did not even reply to The Bushranger's comment above. I have yet to see a commitment to change that attitude.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Now, I have. --Hurricane Tracker 495 23:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I won't sweat that one too much since it's somewhat old now, but I don't see that you have addressed his concerns. Are you willing to commit to taking every comment as seriously as the ones I've made here?--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:13, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * If the commitments are (1) to help out Simple, (2) to stop patrolling(of course if there's blatant vandalism on an article I'm editing, I'll revert it(though probably won't give a warning), (3) to stop my WP: MEAT violations(even though I don't consider MEAT that severe as the other person needs commitment themselves)and (4) to continue to trim down 2020 AHS, I agree. I would even agree to a complete refocus to Simple if needed. But a complicated restriction is not a very good one. --Hurricane Tracker 495 23:18, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Let me spell them out more specifically.
 * You stop patrolling for vandalism except for articles you happen to be already actively working on;
 * You commit to responding to every comment other editors put on this talk page in a way that earnestly addresses their concerns;
 * You thoroughly read up policies and guidelines before you apply them, and ask questions (at places like WP:VPP for instance) if you are confused (they are admittedly complex);
 * You continue to overall focus on content work and abstain completely from user conduct issues that do not directly involve you (i.e. are not due to concerns raised by other editors about your behavior)
 * Along the lines of point 3, you comply with all policies you are already aware of (such as MEAT) and make every effort to know which policies govern an action of yours
 * It's not a restriction. It's a change of approach and attitude that I'm looking for here.--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmm, that definitely helps. But wait, I should still be able to participate in WPTC discussions(as in, other users issues. I definitely do feel that it is a bit harsh to not allow me to take part in any discussion. By the way, I owe a response to USRD. --Hurricane Tracker 495 23:31, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, it should be articles in an area I have a clear interest. I, for example, am not working on I-25, but I should be allowed to revert any vandalism on I-25, as it is within an area I am working on. --Hurricane Tracker 495 23:46, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I, with due respect, ask that you abide by the stricter commitments first. These were deliberately worded so as to not be WP:GAME'able.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:07, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, but it also appears I misunderstood one of them saying "conduct"(as in I can participate in content discussions, which is good). --Hurricane Tracker 495 00:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

"Conduct" meaning the actions of another user, broadly construed, particularly including warnings. Even in content discussions, the other points I brought up here still apply.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait, I have a question. If I am reverting vandalism on I-90, an article I have worked on quite a bit(especially with Talk: Interstate 90), would I then have to (a) ask another user to warn or (b) not waen, or could I then warn with grave care not to choose the wrong one and with it being reviewed? --Hurricane Tracker 495 00:28, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You can revert vandalism on a page you have done significant work on -- i.e. not just other vandalism reverts, tagging, etc. So that'd count. Again, please try to abide by the spirit of this and not split hairs. WP:IAR exists for the most extreme cases but really try to restrain yourself at first.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:37, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Now I see. --Hurricane Tracker 495 00:48, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Help with my draft please:
Would you be interested in helping me with Draft:Extremely Severe Cyclonic Storm BOB 05? I'm also having issues. 🌀 ☾⊙ ☈⊙ ♫ꍏ  🌀  17:27, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * If you are willing to help me with Draft: Effects of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana. But only a little, and not now. --Hurricane Tracker 495 18:38, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I can't find many reliable sources. I have WP: GNG concerns, as I literally can't find a source saying it killed 12 people. --Hurricane Tracker 495 18:47, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#FF4646; background-color:#F6F0F7; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:0.5em 0.5em 0 0.5em; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);;" class="plainlinks">Happy Holidays text.png Hello HurricaneTracker495: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 13:26, 23 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message ~  Destroyer 🌀🌀 13:26, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Effects of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana (December 24)
<div style="border: solid 1px #FCC; background-color: #F8EEBC; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #000; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;"> Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Destroyeraa was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Effects of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Effects of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Effects_of_Hurricane_Andrew_in_Louisiana Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Destroyeraa&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Effects_of_Hurricane_Andrew_in_Louisiana reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 16:38, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Trouted
For accidentally using a source you were using on Effects of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana on Interstate 90. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

 * Thanks! --Hurricane Tracker 495 02:13, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#FF4646; background-color:#F6F0F7; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:0.5em 0.5em 0 0.5em; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);;" class="plainlinks">Happy Holidays text.png Hello HurricaneTracker495: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, — Yours, Berrely  (🎅 Ho ho ho! 🎄) • Talk∕Contribs 10:19, 25 December 2020 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Andrew in Louisiana
Hi HurricaneTracker495, and I hope you are enjoying your holiday break.

I am considering moving Effects of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana back to draftspace because nearly all of the impact section is unsourced. The impact section is the most important section in an effects article. This is why I declined the draft yesterday.

There is no rush in making Andrew Louisiana into an article, so take your time. Enjoy the rest of your holiday break, and have a merry and safe Christmas! Cheers, ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 17:02, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Please give it a WP: CHANCE. I request you wait 10 days so I can improve it. Please honor this. --Hurricane Tracker 495 17:19, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure. 10 days. ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 18:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks and please help out with sourcing as well. --Hurricane Tracker 495 18:30, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I’ll help. Storms from 1992 are going to be hard to source, so it will be a challenge. However, I have faith in you :) ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 19:42, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * No wonder Hugo 89 doesn't have a subarticle despite 82 kB of prose(see tp for discussion). It's hard to source. Also, I need help on User:Cyclone Toby/Effects of Hurricane Ivan in Alabama. I got the Charley FL page deleted, per WP: G7. --Hurricane Tracker 495 19:49, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I dunno about Ivan in Alabama. Is Toby working on it? I have Beryl that I need to GA soon, though no one has reviewed yet. ~ Destroyer 🌀🌀 20:08, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Toby has stated he has abandoned it and if we don't work on it a perfectly good article will likely be deleted so I am hoping you can help me. I pumped some good work myself in the article. --Hurricane Tracker 495 20:10, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

 * Thanks! --Hurricane Tracker 495 18:59, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

WP:BRD
You might want to take a read through WP:BRD, which stands for the "Bold, Revert, Discuss" process we use. In short, if you make a Bold edit to an article, and another disagrees with you and Reverts it, the next option is to Discuss, not re-revert and re-assert your reasoning by edit summary. That discussion should take place on the article's talk page, which is where I have opened one now.  Imzadi 1979  →   00:47, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, leaving cmt there. --Hurricane Tracker 495 00:47, 26 December 2020 (UTC)