User talk:Polygnotus/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hi Polygnotus! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Happy editing! JarrahTree 11:04, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Edit summaries are your friend
While I don't disagree with this edit (the material you removed was largely promotional), such a large edit (you removed over 40% of the article content!) needs an edit summary so other users can understand your reasoning. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:13, 9 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you. The article was a bit of a mess. It is certainly shorter, but also better now. Polygnotus (talk) 19:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

September 2022
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Achnabat. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 20:02, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I think you got the wrong guy. ;-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Yeetfakename34567 Polygnotus (talk) 20:22, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * While this edit by Polygnotus featured a somewhat humorous edit summary, the edit itself was valid, removing an unsourced bit of information about the town having been founded by the Illuminati, and correcting the spelling of the word crofting. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:28, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

According to Google Maps and Google Streetview Achnabat consists of a house, a farm building, and some sheep. It is beautiful, and it would be the perfect home for a secret society (if they all fit in a single house). Better still, it is very very close to Loch Ness and its monster. But considering the vandal also claimed that a tiny village in Poland was founded by the "illuminate" (sic) I think it is reasonable to remove those claims until reliable sources have been provided. ;-) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rak%C3%B3wiec&diff=prev&oldid=867137355 Polygnotus (talk) 20:56, 15 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Fair enough - the removal of unref claims and wording error was valid. The edit summary threw me off, though. Dl2000 (talk) 21:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Ajmer
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ajmer rape case, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. CodeTalker (talk) 16:36, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Please ignore, I now see the source you mentioned on the talk page. CodeTalker (talk) 16:38, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Draftification
Hello, Polygnotus,

I was wondering why you moved Accelerated experiential dynamic psychotherapy to Draft space. It was not an appropriate article to move to Draft space so I don't think you understand the rules surrounding what articles are draftified and which ones are not. Please do not move any more articles to Draft space until you are more clear on the guidelines of how this is supposed to be done. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 08:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)


 * See here. Polygnotus (talk) 16:01, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

PROD in userspace
Hi Polygnotus! Hope you are having a good day and thank you for wading through pages in userspace that are not appropriate to be on wikipedia. I came across a few such pages you had used the WP:PROD process on that are in userspace; however, WP:PROD can only be used on articles. If something is in userspace, then it can either be deleted via WP:CSD criteria such as WP:U5: Not a webhost, WP:G3: Blantant hoax/vandalism, WP:G10: Attack page, WP:G11: Purely promotional page or others (all of which are listed at WP:CSD). You might want to consider using WP:Twinkle to help with this, as it allows you to pick CSD categories from a tool dropdown. Have a great rest of your day. Cheers! TartarTorte 15:17, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Good point; I should've checked. Have a nice day, Polygnotus (talk) 15:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Editsummaries and the Preview button
Please do us a favor and "preview" your changes so you don't end up make a dozen edits in a row to a page like Wikipedia talk:Verifiability‎. Doing what you've done is asking for an edit conflict. And, as was mentioned to you above, please use edit summaries for each and every edit you make. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 14:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Edit summaries are not required. Some people love them; others not so much. Previewing changes is difficult on my phone. Polygnotus (talk) 14:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I acknowledge both of your points. Still, Wikipedia is a collaborative project. You have not violated any policies or guidelines but you could help out your fellow editors. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 15:33, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * This may be a stupid question but why are editsummaries useful to you? I've seen people use an intentionally misleading editsummary in the past so I personally don't trust editsummaries. I changed the section header to something less alarming; hope you don't mind. Polygnotus (talk) 17:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * It would probably be easy to write a script that checks what kind of edit I make and fills in the editsummary for me. E.g. if I edit an article and only change 1 character it was probably a typo. And if an edit is on a talkpage it was probably my 2 cents in a discussion. I can't really promise to use editsummaries consistently because I rarely see a reason to use them. If that means that more people check the actual edit to see what I am doing then that is a good thing imho. Polygnotus (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Edit summaries are part of my countervandalism efforts. I am not familiar with you as an editor, so I have less inclination to trust what you contribute. At the same time, if you are being useful I would prefer not to waste time checking up on you when there are others to chase down. Edit summaries are just a good practice as a demonstration of collaboration and everyone should be north of 90% usage. There is already a setting in your preferences menu to have the interface warn you if you leave off an edit summary. I appreciate what help you can give us in this regard. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 17:53, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * How do you look for vandalism? What method/tools do you use? Polygnotus (talk) 21:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * When I was actively searching for vandalism I used User:Lupin/Anti-vandal tool. Anymore I just revert what I notice in my watchlist. Twinkle is my go-to tool for that. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 02:31, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That is an 18 year old script. Modern anti-vandalism tools are far more advanced and use stuff like ORES to separate the wheat from the chaff. Me using editsummaries won't help or hinder with anti-vandalism efforts. Polygnotus (talk) 03:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Sources in Hebrew
I saw your comment in which you tagged me. It's great that you've managed to find the sources, if you need something in future I'd be happy to help. Alaexis¿question? 21:58, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I haven't found Conceiving Agency: Reproductive Authority among Haredi Women by Michal S. Raucher yet, so I may have to buy it (or ask the author for a copy). Polygnotus (talk) 22:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't have access to it either unfortunately. Alaexis¿question? 22:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Grave with the Hands
—Kusma (talk) 00:02, 13 April 2024 (UTC) GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Bloated Infoboxes
Well, that appeal and that edit certainly didn't have much effect. I'm clueless. Kind regards, Grueslayer 18:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's life sometimes. Polygnotus (talk) 01:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

April 2024
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to User talk:Ian (Wiki Ed)‎, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Chris Troutman ( talk )  01:15, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I shouldn't have bought a cheap phone. Try following this advice on an old smartphone (with an old brain). I would if I could. Polygnotus (talk) 01:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

When to warn other users about vandalism—and not to
Hi, again Polygnotus. Just wanted to leave you a comment that vandalism in the Wikipedia sense of the word has a very specific meaning: it means
 * "editing (or other behavior)."

It does not include an editor adding incorrect or false information to an article, or adding information without including a source. If the editor monumentally screws up an article, making a hundred errors because they are incompetent, or have no idea what they are doing while trying to improve it, that is not vandalism. Vandalism is only the intentional and deliberate obstruction of an article. No evil intent, no vandalism, no matter how awful the result. In the case of edits by, those were not vandalism, even though they deserved to be reverted (thanks for doing that). But please don't leave them a uw-vandalism warning unless it really was vandalism in Wikipedia's sense of the word. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Deliberately introducing misinformation while attempting to hide it by using a misleading editsummary is definitely vandalism. The project's purpose is to give accurate information. Also, we kinda use a loose definition because this is called vandalism here when it is really just an attempt to hide the stupid things someone has done. In the Jupp article case the intent wasn't vandalism, it was helping the person. Polygnotus (talk) 03:27, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * And please don't forget about . Thank you, Polygnotus (talk) 03:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I must admit I did not see a deliberate attempt to mislead on the part of the IPv6; the worst that could be said about it is that it was naive and unsourced, but that's not out of order for a newbie; I was there once upon a time. The edit summary business is more complicated than it looks; fortunately (in some circumstances) and unfortunately (in others—like this one) Wikipedia offers a drop-down containing some canned summaries, and some non-newbies regularly pick one of those that have little-to-nothing to do with their edit–unless you look at it sideways and squint–but since edit summaries aren't required anyway, it's hard to do more than just plead with them to use them because it helps their fellow editors and saves them time. And I do ask. Some say they say they will (and don't), others are quite forthright that they have no plans to change their unhelpful edit summaries any time soon if ever, and there's little one can do about that. Even if they keep it up for years, it just isn't a sanctionable behavior; unfortunate, but that's how it is. With a newbie, I'm perfectly willing to believe that they are using the edit summaries they are offered by Wikipedia—or simply copying what they see everybody else doing all around them—and so it's doubly hard to criticize them too much. For a newbie, I'd just make a gentle request about it, and hope for the best. Indeed you are right about the project's purpose, but the long and the short of it is this: a new editor (or an experienced one!) who bollixes up an article with a terrible edit with laughably wrong information they thought was right and with an unintentionally misleading edit summary cannot be accused of vandalism. Of other failings, very possibly, and they are worth pointing out on their talk page; but not vandalism. (This is one of those cases where the Wiki-meaning of a word doesn't really match the English dictionary meaning; another one is notable.) I'm swamped with other things right now, and may not get to Diamond for a while (who you pinged here, so they are probably reading this; did you want to say something to them?) but if you have a specific question or issue about a particular edit I'll try to help. Mathglot (talk) 04:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hm, I wasn't aware that User pings the user and that is unexpected, unintended and unwanted behaviour (a bug, according to some definitions) when talking about (and not to) someone. Guess I am not the first one to notice that but no one has fixed it. Statistically the user is incredibly unlikely to return, and if they do it may be good to see that people are trying to clean up the mess.
 * Wikipedia offers a drop-down containing some canned summaries It does? Where? Is this a Visual Editor exclusive thing or can us common folk use it too?
 * If someone is using an editsummary that tries to disguise the fact that they are vandalising by pretending its a boring and innocent edit (e.g. "Fixed typo"), isn't that a clear indication that they know they are doing something bad?
 * I am certain I saw someone getting blocked for not using editsummaries. I will try to find the link. Polygnotus (talk) 05:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Wow, good find on that Talk discussion; the confusion doesn't surprise me; it's non-intuitive. There are two dropdowns for summaries under the edit summary field, my (fake) edit summary on this edit is the top one on the right. There's one (non-newbie) editor who uses it constantly for all sorts of things; I've asked him a few times not to, it's irksome, but I've gotten nowhere; it's plain he plans to continue and there's nothing to be done about it. Mathglot (talk) 05:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * (post-ec comment) Please do link it; it would be the first I've ever seen. Mathglot (talk) 05:37, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Turns out that is a WP:GADGET, more specifically MediaWiki:Gadget-defaultsummaries.js, which is off by default. The gadget contains a bunch of canned editsummaries, but not the one the IP used. And without an account enabling a gadget requires a bit more work than simply checking a checkbox. So I don't think that is what happened.
 * Sadly, I am unable to find the link to the user talk page. I think I deleted it because the block was good, even though the justification for it was not. Polygnotus (talk) 06:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Good sleuthing; I probably turned it on in my early days here under the recommendation of someone more experienced, and long since forgot about it. Thanks for the reminder. Mathglot (talk) 06:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Some ninja editing
I happen to have the page on my watchlist so saw your recent edit. I was just wandering how you came across the mistake - any special tools for it? or just a coincedence? Thanks and well done on the fix anyways! Cheers, --SuperJew (talk) 12:43, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Finding and fixing them all by hand would be horrible . Computers can save a lot of time but they can't do it automatically because they don't understand text. I created a list of tools here. Polygnotus (talk) 12:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Cheers thanks :) --SuperJew (talk) 17:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2024
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

test
This is a test. Polygnotus (talk) 11:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Unsolicited advice
Please just delete your last post at ANI. All your whining about how badly you've been / are being treated accomplishes nothing except (1) distracting from the issue you want people to discuss, and (2) casting you in a poor light. Several other people have already said words to this effect to you, and you have responded by making the problem worse (by continuing to whine and argue with them). I hope to avoid that in this case by putting this here, on your talk page, and by promising that I will have no other involvement in this issue beyond offering you this advice. Good luck. --JBL (talk) 19:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I wish I could borrow your brain for a second so I could see the situation through your eyes (and vice versa). This would make life so much easier. How should I respond to the HandThatFeeds in a manner that you would not consider to be whiny? I am not very zen, or very not zen, so in situations like this I appreciate any and all outside perspective. Polygnotus (talk) 19:25, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I do not see any reason that you need to respond to them. But if you are going to respond to them, you should stop being so defensive: no one is looking for you to further justify yourself, they are giving you advice about why your initial report was poorly received.  This involves a degree of criticism of how you did things; so be it.  Not every criticism needs a rebuttal.  --JBL (talk) 19:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Especially, since it seems that people agree that there is something problematic about the behavior you reported: just let the part of the conversation that's about you die quietly, so that the part that's about the relevant issue can have more air. --JBL (talk) 19:32, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you, good points! I saw a problem and (too) quickly reported it; assuming any goodfaithed person would check some diffs and come to the same conclusion I did. In hindsight I should've compiled the mountain of evidence first. When I am more zen I don't feel the need to defend myself. Polygnotus (talk) 19:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)