User talk:Owynhart/Archive

Welcome!
Thanks for the tips! Partytemple (talk) 02:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Woohoo, thank you very much! Partytemple (talk) 02:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Bias Issues on Wikipedia
Partytemple, this is a commentary on balance issues w/ certain Wikipedia articles. I've made an edit to the lead of the Tommy Robinson article: "On 1 August 2018, he was released on bail pending a new hearing of the case."

The reason why? The Court of Appeal ruled that there had been procedural errors in the original decision to jail Robinson for 13 months! That was a flawed decision, and the lead must refer to it somehow. Some readers only read the lead, and not mentioning Robinson's release gives the impression that decision was ironclad. Yes, the lead is a summary of the main parts of the article; he was sentenced to 13 months in prison, then released on appeal.

All I've done was specify he was released on bail, but it's being challenged—just because Robinson must look as BAD as possible in the lead! I'm brutally honest, and that's the only reason regardless of what those other editors say. Why is it such a problem to mention he was released on appeal? Yes, the body of the article explains it, but that was a flawed decision, and the Court of Appeal sided w/ Robinson. A vote is now required just for that. It's frustrating! That's why it's hard for me to partake in Wiki. There is a clear bias against libertarian/conservative figures.

And Michael Jackson, though he was a Democrat/liberal, is experiencing the same bias (on some Wiki articles and the mainstream media). 'Leaving Neverland' was just voted one of the best TV series of 2019, and its director Dan Reed is proud!

One of the "best" TV series in spite of all those credibility issues, all the obvious lies and inconsistencies that were found? Besides the train station discrepancy, there is the Grand Canyon discrepancy, etc. Israell (talk) 18:01, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


 * On the Tommy Robinson article, I think it looks fine with your edit. I agree it could be misleading for readers who only read the lead because the sentence before your edit doesn't accurately tell the story. But I don't think it would necessary make Robinson look bad if the lead didn't include your edit. The sections below have further explanations about his trial including explaining the procedural errors. —Partytemple (talk) 19:31, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Previous account?
Did you have a previous Wikipedia account before this one? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 04:17, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * No. —Partytemple (talk) 07:08, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Partytemple, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Trial of Michael Jackson have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Copyrights. You may also want to review Copy-paste.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Translation. See also Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Ninja Diannaa (Talk) 13:52, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay. Partytemple (talk) 18:51, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

500
Lets get you to 500.... best he doesn't interpret sources for you.


 * use this tool on some articles you like will get you edits fast well at the same time helping with references.-- Moxy 🍁 02:39, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I will use this. Partytemple (talk) 02:41, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Extended confirmed status and meatpuppetry
I see that you deliberately made numerous edits to game the system by reaching extended confirmed status in order to evade page protection. It also seems that your purpose in doing so was to edit to support another editor making controversial edits, in violation of the policy on meatpuppetry. The purpose of extended confirmed protection is to prevent editing of this kind, not to let editors do it so long as they first work at making hundreds of irrelevant edits in order to get there. I have therefore removed your extended confirmed status. JamesBWatson (talk)

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes for 90 days, after which you can request permanent extension of the right. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

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

See also: Chetsford (talk) 15:29, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

October 2019
Your recent editing history at Cultural impact of Michael Jackson shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Aoi (青い) (talk) 21:48, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

American politics discretionary sanctions alert
Johnuniq (talk) 08:54, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

GOCE
Hello, I've removed your previous account from the list of GOCE participants, as you are no longer editing under that account. Feel free to add yourself to the list with this account if you are so inclined. Thanks! Puddleglum  2.0  20:44, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the GOCE!
Hello Owynhart, and welcome to the Guild of Copy Editors! We are glad that you have decided to help us in our mission to improve grammar on the English Wikipedia! Here are some links that you might find helpful to get started on your copy-editing journey!


 * A how-to guide to Wikipeda copyediting


 * Wikipedia manual of style - helpful to refer to while copy editing


 * A simplified version of the above


 * A quick guide to writing on Wikipedia

You can help out here is you already have considerable English copy-editing skills or start out here to gain experience.

Thank you so much for joining the GOCE, we appreciate it!

For the GOCE, Puddleglum  2.0   20:23, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dangerous (Michael Jackson album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thriller ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Dangerous_%28Michael_Jackson_album%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Dangerous_%28Michael_Jackson_album%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). 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) 11:26, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Town of Salem (March 23)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jovanmilic97 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:Town of Salem 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:Town of Salem, 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, 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:Town_of_Salem Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jovanmilic97&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Town_of_Salem reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:54, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

General sanctions for Michael Jackson
NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:30, 24 March 2020 (UTC)