User talk:MoonlightVector/Archive 2

May 2021 - June 2021 Archive

WP:RFPP
there is really no reason to make non-admin comments or patrol WP:RFPP unless you're filing a report. Yodadicae👽 18:09, 4 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Ok then i will undo them, I want convenience because I don't have much time D X L B and Loki Blaster  18:10, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If you don't have much time, focus on improving articles instead of messing around in administrative areas. Yodadicae👽  18:12, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I undone them, ok? D X L B and Loki Blaster  18:13, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If I could have made my own template I would do that but I do not know how to do it. D X L B and Loki Blaster  18:14, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Look I do not know fully how to make articles and checking WP:[insert here] gives more enjoyment then just making the same stuff over and over again D X L B and Loki Blaster  18:16, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You didn't "undo" them, you just changed the response template. Please stay away from administrative area/noticeboards and follow 's advice by focusing on improving existing articles. --   LuK3      (Talk)   18:16, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Well time to do nothing for like 2 months... (When I go offline I go offline for a while) DXLB  and  LokiBlaster  19:38, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Also, please change your signature to something that can be easily read and understood. The bright text colors makes it very confusing to read. See WP:CUSTOMSIG for more information about correctly customizing your signature. --   LuK3      (Talk)   18:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Bruh. Its just my last Color, all the others are fine and I see others with bright colors. D X L B and Loki Blaster  19:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Changed DXLB  and  LokiBlaster  19:37, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This is your last warning, stop commentating on WP:RFPP reports like here and here. There is no need to add what protection you think is needed, the patrolling administrator can make that decision by themselves. You were already warned by a few days ago however you continue to do it. --    LuK3      (Talk)   17:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ima delete my .js now DXLB  and  LokiBlaster  13:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Done, Now i'ma be inactive for like a week. I have stuff to do on other sites. DXLB  and  LokiBlaster  13:29, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Can you explain how it was defamatory for adding the words "in an act of cultural genocide", when the next paragraph also mentions that it was cultural genocide? 62.122.119.3 (talk) 14:23, 7 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Oops. undoing that DXLB  and  LokiBlaster  15:10, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Stop.
I believe was clear when he told you to stop messing around in RFPP, so now you've taken to completely inappropriate block messages that you can't even enact, ridiculous prods and ridiculous talk page messages. Stop. Focus on improving articles and drafts or you are going to wind up blocked. YODADICAE👽 17:51, 12 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Ugh. I want to help out. DXLB  and  LokiBlaster  17:53, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You messing around in areas you don't belong in and lack the competence to edit in is disruptive, not helpful. We have enough experienced users and administrators to do this and I'm not sure how ridiculous messages and block notices from you are helping anyone. YODADICAE👽  17:54, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Editing news 2021 #2
Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter



Earlier this year, the Editing team ran a large study of the Reply Tool. The main goal was to find out whether the Reply Tool helped newer editors communicate on wiki. The second goal was to see whether the comments that newer editors made using the tool needed to be reverted more frequently than comments newer editors made with the existing wikitext page editor.

The key results were:


 * Newer editors who had automatic ("default on") access to the Reply tool were more likely to post a comment on a talk page.
 * The comments that newer editors made with the Reply Tool were also less likely to be reverted than the comments that newer editors made with page editing.

These results give the Editing team confidence that the tool is helpful.

Looking ahead

The team is planning to make the Reply tool available to everyone as an opt-out preference in the coming months. This has already happened at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.

The next step is to resolve a technical challenge. Then, they will deploy the Reply tool first to the Wikipedias that participated in the study. After that, they will deploy it, in stages, to the other Wikipedias and all WMF-hosted wikis.

You can turn on "Discussion Tools" in Beta Features now. After you get the Reply tool, you can change your preferences at any time in Special:Preferences.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

00:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:The Backrooms (Theory)


Please do not create hoaxes on Wikipedia, as you did at Draft:The Backrooms (Theory). 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. AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 03:29, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Looks like im going to recreate it somewhere else now. Im taking the data back DXLB  and  LokiBlaster  11:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC)