User talk:Porterhse

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)
 * Alligator meat ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Alligator_meat check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Alligator_meat?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Richfield, Wisconsin
 * Kangaroo meat ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Kangaroo_meat check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Kangaroo_meat?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Richfield, Wisconsin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alligator meat, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richfield, Wisconsin ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Alligator_meat check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Alligator_meat?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Michael MacCambridge has been accepted
 Michael MacCambridge, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! samee converse  06:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask 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_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Michael_MacCambridge help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Brewery Collectibles Club of America has been accepted
 Brewery Collectibles Club of America, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask 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_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Brewery_Collectibles_Club_of_America help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Sulfurboy (talk) 05:50, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Brewery Collectibles Club of America for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brewery Collectibles Club of America is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Brewery Collectibles Club of America until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  DGG ( talk ) 05:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Deletion discussion
Hi Porterhse: HighKing's comments in the deletion discussion are frustrating, but we should both stop engaging with him. He's incorrect about the policies that he's citing — his standards for satisfying the policies are way too high. We've made our points; if we interact with him any more, then it just gives him a chance to keep saying things. More people will look at the article and make their own decisions. Just a suggestion, hope you're having a nice day. :) — Toughpigs (talk) 18:02, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Want to STRONGLY express how much I appreciate your input. I tried to resist responding further, but the WSJ article hadn't been brought up and I wanted to bring attention to it.

I agree with you, again. Technocrats can pick the flyshit out of the pepper all day on this stuff. Unproductive and frankly ridiculous. Thanks again. Porterhse (talk) 18:08, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

December 2020
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Don't Look Now, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Betty Logan (talk) 22:50, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Don't Look Now 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 do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Betty Logan (talk) 23:34, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

I do not intend to waste any more time on this beyond a final explanation and defense of my edit.

It was done in good faith for those who have seen the movie, want to (as I did) learn more about the city, Venice, that played a key role, and appreciate the opportunity to arrive at the page via one click - a wonderful convention of Wikipedia that attracts users - instead of having to type it in.

The policy cited in defense of the edit is ambiguous, obscure, open to wide latitudes of interpretation, and flagrantly ignored or outright disobeyed on myriad pages. Your time could be spent much more productively on improving the policy, and/or on making useful, welcome edits on pages that really need it, including literally thousands more egregious violations than the one you are edit warring over.

I could care less about the ramifications of an edit war, including being blocked. If it's more important to you to win a picayune edit war than avoid alienating a user with 2000 edits and 0.1% reversions of them, Godspeed. I read the talk pages; it wouldn't be the first time a Mrs. Grundy turned a friend of Wikipedia into an enemy by picking petty squabbles like this. The choice is yours. Porterhse (talk) 00:11, 13 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Report filed at Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring. Betty Logan (talk) 00:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 15:24, 13 December 2020 (UTC)


 * You're mistaking me for someone who cares any longer. Fuck. Right. Off.Porterhse (talk) 15:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You were the one who left a message on my talk page. Take your own advice. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 19:00, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. -- Lydïa  (☎️ ◦ ✍) 17:29, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring at Don't Look Now
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 20:01, 13 December 2020 (UTC)