User talk:S0091/Archive 2

Happy New Year, S0091!


Happy New Year! S0091, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:32, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.


 * Thanks and you too! :) S0091 (talk) 13:42, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thanks

Cergo123 (talk) 09:48, 9 January 2020 (UTC) 

CHC Theory
Good morning,

I regret that you view my prior contribution to the CHC theory page as an effort to promote one's self-interest. I do think you threw the baby out with the bathwater. The authors I cited (Dombrowski and colleagues), though spearheaded by a single author, are some of the few individuals who have extensively researched the empirical basis of Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory. Some have contended that CHC theory is commercially inspired (McGill, Dombrowski, & Canivez, 2018), others have called for an "annulment" from Carroll's Three Stratum Theory (Canivez & Youngstrom, 2019) and even John Carroll himself in 2000 questioned the need for the "so-called CHC theory." And, still others (numerous citations by Dombrowski & Colleagues on both the III and IV edition of the Woodcock-Johnson Tests) have found that the instruments used to create the theory do not actual measure the abilities they are attempting to measure.

Why is this important? CHC theory is likely, in part, a commercial inventation and wikipedia is being used as just another arm of the test author and test publishing company. Carroll (2000) did not see the need for this theory even though his eponymous is upon it. The test author could have simple used Carroll's Three Stratum Theory. The citations used to support CHC theory in the wiki article are one-sided and the citations mentioned have authors with a conflict of interest (e.g., Flannagan makes $$ off of her cross-battery assessment algorithm, books, etc using the WJ IV and the theory underlying it; Kaufman who is a test author whose test is aligned with CHC theory; and certainly McGrew who developed the WJ III and IV and created the theory). They all have a COI and this wiki page does not cite any countering perspective. Instead, the wiki CHC theory page uses a one sided approach to promote the merrits of CHC theory even going so far as to call it the most empirically validated theory of cognitive ability. (That certainly is not the case).

The articles I cited may be largely from a single author, and you are within your rights to remove the contributions, but I will tell you that you did a disservice to the scientific community. The intent was not to promote a particular author; rather, the intent of the edits was to confront a one-sided, non-scientific discussion of the theory that has been promoted and adopted by the commmercial test publishing industry. The author of the Woodcock-Johnson, Fourth Edition (WJ IV Cognitive) and the test publisher of the WJ IV stand to benefit from this page. The world does not.

TheGoodDoctor77 (talk) 13:00, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Prenatal Development
Sir,

I noticed that you deleted my contributions to prenatal development as well. I understand your concern about self-promotion. However, I have written and researched extensively on this topic (and others). It did improve upon the quality of the discussion. The sources are not magazine articles, but rather sources that have been vetted in the peer review process. The sources I have cited, though some are self-citations, have been vetted by some fairly rigorous journals and publishing houses. I suppose I simply don't understand what wikipedia is all about? Wouldn't it be nice to have individual experts add contribute to where they have expertise? Wouldn't it be nice if each expert added their own work? This would increase the credibilty and richness of the discussion I would contend. Rather than considering these contributions excessive self-citation (in the case of prenatal development I added solely 4 works and a book on the topic) perhaps consider them a conduit for increasing knowledge of a topic.

TheGoodDoctor77 (talk) 14:37, 10 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi I am not the editor that removed your contributions.  That appears to have been Mr. Ollie so I suggest you reach out to them.  In the interim, you may find WP:EXPERT helpful.  S0091 (talk) 08:59, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Good Day, unfortunately i don't have any external relationship with the people, places or things I written in the David Dobrik page. I am just a fan from asia who edits a youtuber's wiki page using references which i found from googling articles on the internet or via social media accounts dedicated to david dobrik. Can you point out what i added in the david dobrik page that might make you think i am in any way related to David dobrik or any of the sources? Thank you for your time and have a nice day. Princeton294 (talk) 00:51, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you for your message here. The reason for the suspected COI is because pretty much (outside of a handful of exceptions) the only article you have edited in the year you have been a registered user is to David Dobrik.  Often, that signifies either a COI or a NPOV issue.  If you do not have a COI, just state so on your talk page as response to the message I left you that way it is all in one place.  No harm, no foul, etc.  Wish you the best as well and thanks again for the note.  S0091 (talk) 01:12, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh that makes sense and thanks again for your response and have a nice day. Princeton294 (talk) 01:30, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 January 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your welcome. :-) I used to edit Wikipedia years ago. I don't even remember that username haha. Tokiere (talk) 01:29, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Copyright
Hi there - just wondering what exactly was flagged for copyright infringement on the NYU School of Law page, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyulawiee (talk • contribs) 16:07, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The text you added was word-for-word from the Program Overview and the NYU site is copyright protected so that is not allowed. Copyrights are taken very seriously by Wikipedia as there are legal implications so violations must be reverted. If you paraphrase it, you can add the content.  S0091 (talk) 22:58, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Tu es très gentil . :) S0091 (talk) 21:08, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Appreciation
Many thanks to you...I really appreciate your piece of advice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by James Moore200 (talk • contribs) 08:32, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Oops!
Thanks so much for the impressively prompt revert of my embarrassing but purely inadvertent premature Clemente keypunch. Would've done so myself, but alas, it was not until returning from a brief investigation into just what exactly had caused the tremendous and startling noise that led to said keypunch that I saw your notification and first realized my mistake. In any event, thanks again, and rest assured I will take extra care not to require this invaluable assistance any time in the foreseeable future. DavidESpeed (talk) 01:47, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi S00991, thank you for your welcome message. I left one for you on my talk page but I don’t know if you saw it. - Felchueef — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felchueef (talk • contribs) 01:42, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the tip about Twinkle! I had no idea how some people were able to undo vandalism so fast. I think I get it! - Felchueef — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felchueef (talk • contribs) 02:46, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Cease all edit warring, settle in talk.
Unless you can cite some published fact to refute the information added in my edits, I suggest that you refrain from your admittedly agenda-driven edit warring and cease henceforth all edit warring pursuant to WP:NPOV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.132.126.95 (talk) 04:10, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I think you have the wrong editor. S0091 (talk) 04:29, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, also, GWU
Hey S0091, thanks for the welcome. Regarding the article for GWU, I understand the policy about external links. Thanks for the heads up and I'll be better about it. I would like some explanation about other revisions. May I presume that they take some time before they show up in the article? Or are they rejected out of hand if they aren't visible shortly after I publish them? I don't see ANY of the edits I made and was wondering what process, if any, they must go through before showing in the article text. Thanks! WrylyCoyote (talk) 20:30, 2 February 2020 (UTC)WC
 * Hi, it reverts the entire edit or a series of edits by the same editor but it still there in the history (here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gardner%E2%80%93Webb_University&action=history). What you can do is go back that version (here ) and copy what you want.  It may be a bit tricky but worth a shot so you don't loose everything.  If you mess up, you can just "undo" yourself. S0091 (talk) 20:39, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, forgot the beep beep. :) S0091 (talk) 20:42, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

So what you're saying is that ALL my edits were undone? So I have to go back and redo them all minus the external links? Please clarify because I'm not sure I'm following exactly. WrylyCoyote (talk) 20:51, 2 February 2020 (UTC)WC (lol at the beepx2)
 * You made one edit with several updates within that edit and the entire edit was reverted but what you did is still available in the history so you do not have to start over from scratch. You can go back to the edit, fix the citations then hit publish.  If you mess up, you can hit the "undo" button and try again.   S0091 (talk) 21:04, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I see. So just fix the citations so that the links stay within WP instead of linking to an external site, that about right? WrylyCoyote (talk) 21:13, 2 February 2020 (UTC)WC
 * Well, citations will still link to externally the sites but will display with the citation number and automatically be added to the reference list. But yes, you need to fix the external links so they are proper citations.  Does that make sense? S0091 (talk) 21:22, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Also I recommend making your changes in a series of edits instead of one big one so you make sure what your doing is correct beforehand. "Preview" is you friend here. :) S0091 (talk) 21:24, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Block
Who are you to state what is defamatory? Wiki is there to showcase truth, not a version you believe should be represented. Everyone has a right to edit and publish the content. Beth Hart2020 (talk) 17:25, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Responded on their talk page. S0091 (talk) 17:33, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Edits
Hi, i recently edited a page and you asked me to find a better source, the people themselves have clarified this on Instagram and in a video interview, how can I provide that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluerandom22 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I was actually about leave you a message.  I did a Google search but all I could find are tabloids and other gossip type columns.  I am not sure about the video as you would need to ensure it will not violate copyrights.  Per WP:SOCIALMEDIA, Instagram may be the route to go as long as the accounts are verified.  If they both have posted about their relationship, I would include both.  Just be sure not include anything that is not substantiated in the sources.  Thanks for the question! :) S0091 (talk) 19:16, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Noob: how do I find Wikipedia tasks?
Hi again! You gave me advice a long time ago when I started editing! How do I find things to do on Wikipedia? Is there a list of tasks somewhere? Or do I just wander around and edit pages when I see things that need changes? Gungb5n6nqkg (talk) 20:11, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Good to see you around!  You may find the Community portal is a good starting place.  S0091 (talk) 06:46, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

question re template
Hi. I wanted to ask about a welcome template that you seem to have used in the past. It is at the top of this user's talk page; User talk:Shrinkydinks. Would you happen to be able to please tell me which template that message is from? I appreciate your help. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 22:47, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi It's the WelcomeVisual template that I found on the WP:WT page.  So glad you asked!  It's my favorite because it works for both registered users and IPs along with it being clean and simple, yet covering important Wikipedia guidance and polices.  In addition, most often you do not know the age or English competency level of a an editor so the graphics are helpful (I think anyway).  S0091 (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree! that's really good to know. I am going to try to add this to the option on my pull-down menu for Welcome messages,. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 00:58, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 March 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the info!
Hi,

I just made my first contribution. Could you please help with getting it published? Maybe you could tell me the next steps?

Thanks!!--Ilovu3000 (talk) 17:50, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi There are a couple issues with the article, which are common for new editors.  As it stands now, there are no citations to reliable sources and the subject may not meet notability guidelines.  You may find Your First Article and User:Ian.thomson/Guide helpful. S0091 (talk) 17:59, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Adding the section about reserve components of Russian Armed Forces and its subsequent removing
I have added the section "Military reserve and military reserve force" into the article "Russian Armed Forces". This section is based on the text of Russian Federation Federal Law of 28 March, 1998, №53-FZ "About military duty and military service". The section does not include any original research - just law quotes. The text of section had the link to the full text of aforenamed law, placed on the website pravo.gov.ru The website pravo.gov.ru is the official state system of russian legislation, administered by Russian Government. This website is the source for official publication of russian laws (russian laws enters into force after publication on this website). Thus, this website is reliable source with regard to the article about Russian Armed Forces. Unfortunately, this site has russian version only (this is not surprising taking into account the purpose of this site), but I think the information about reserve components of Russian Armed Forces is very important for english-speaking Wikipedia's visitors, and bearing in mind the absence of actual english version of russian laws in english-speaking sources I think it should be guided by official russian sources. As for my part I just can offer to check out the link, I've done in the text of section, and to read the text of aforenamed russian law (articles 51.2, 52, 53, 54, 57.1, 57.2, 57.3) if your knowledge in russian language is well. Anyway, the rules of verifiability provides for using non-english reliable sources.5.129.59.116 (talk) 19:26, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Responded on their talk page. S0091 (talk) 20:03, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

The Book of Mormon
You said I was vandalizing Wikipedia, but I was merely fixing small errors in the text. Please clarify what I was doing wroung. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.167.174.17 (talk) 21:37, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You have the wrong editor. S0091 (talk) 21:41, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Last change
Hello, Thank you very much for your message. I actually feel awkward because of this page. I am no more a researcher in the Laboratory in Paris Diderot University. I would just like to remove this information from the page. Many warm thanks and a good day! Saverio Tomasella — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.203.139.8 (talk) 09:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:43, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Lebanese Ice hockey Edits
Hi

Thanks for the message, im sorry i did not leave a note. The page is quite incorrect. I am on the board of the lebanese ice hockey federation and we are trying to clean up the page, the list of players is quite incorrect. I am not sure who originally posted it.

I deleted it and was going to post a new one this week. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sforzley (talk • contribs) 20:54, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

last edit
I only removed tha content on tha 'list of mass shootings in the united states' article, b/c i felt like some listed such as tha murders in 1's house & tha 2019 Jersey City shootings, are NOT mass shootings, so they don't belong there, tha 2019 Jersey City shooting was NOT a mass shooting, that was more of a SHOOT-OUT, SIEGE, OR SHOOTING, SO IT DOES NOT BELONG THERE!!!! AS 4 tha murders in houses, those should be under 'familicide', or murders, NOT mass shootings, b/c in my opinion, mass shootings are more in public places.

thanx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chimpanzeelover (talk • contribs) 21:12, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Your opinion on the matter isn't relevant, read the criteria for a mass shooting in the lead of the article and stop edit warring, Praxidicae (talk) 21:22, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

last edit
excuse me, but tha shoot-out in Jersey City, if u ask ANYBODY, MOST PPL HAVE TOLD ME THAT THAT WAS NOT A MASS SHOOTING, SO IT DOES NOT BELONG IN THA 'LIST OF MASS SHOOTINGS' ARTICLE!!!! IT'S NOT JUST MY OPINION, MOST PPL HAVE TOLD ME THAT THA 2019 JERSEY CITY SHOOTING, WAS NOT A MASS SHOOTING, IT WAS JUST A SHOOTING, SHOOT-OUT, HATE CRIME, OR SIEGE, NOT A MASS SHOOTING, SO IT DOES NOT BELONG IN THA 'LIST OF MASS SHOOTINGS' ARTICLE!!!! ASK ANYBODY!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chimpanzeelover (talk • contribs) 18:35, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Inland Rail
Hi S0091

1. I have been surprised to see you have removed all my information in my edit of the Wikipedia article Inland Rail, without contacting me and discussing any concerns. This was brought to my attention today. '''Could you please explain why? Could you explain who complained of my content and what was the basis of their complaint?''' 2. I note your comments "Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia". I had added referenced detail to what was a skeleton article compiled around information obtained almost totally from the Inland Rail Project and its associates. My articles were all referenced details, points of view and analyses from experts which you have replaced with details almost wholly supplied by Inland Rail Project and its associates. I am puzzled why you would remove even the Inland Rail graph 15 showing that the Thermal Coal industry is the main beneficiary of the Inland Rail, while the benefits to Agriculture and Primary Industry will be negligible. This important analysis was done by Inland Rail itself and provided to the Senate Inquiry. Why would you delete that important piece of information? I never tried to remove any information supplied by anyone, including the information from Inland Rail and its associates on your supposedly "neutral" Wikipedia site which included even their web page. 3. By restricting your Wikipedia information on the Page to those sources from almost wholly Inland Rail and associates, you will be breaching your company's own policy about not accepting information from sources with conflicts of interest, when in fact the whole article becomes based on the Inland Rail and its associates information. 4. I would appreciate the concept of the Wikipedia article on Inland Rail being an impartial source of information, which it is definitely not now. I would really appreciate your feedback on the questions above explaining why the information of experts I had provided was deleted, and who had complained of that information and what was the basis of the complaint. If no one had complained, then why delete the expert advice to provide an article now based almost wholly on old out-of-date information and non-neutral conflicted information from Inland Rail and its associates? It appears probable that the current site as of now (with the invitations "edit source") will be updated by Inland Rail associates using "neutral unconflicted" information only allowed from Inland Rail. How will you ensure that such updates will be neutral and unbiased but must come from Inland Rail and associates? 5. '''Would you be also able to advise me how it is possible to provide the information I had provided to Wikipedia, without it being withdrawn by someone acting solely on his/her opinion? Is there a method where I can submit the Submissions made to the Senate Inquiry into Inland Rail for publishing on Wikipedia (these would be all been cleared by the Senate as public material for public use), without someone trying to change them?''' 6. If you are not able to answer all my questions, could you please reinstate my information in the Inland Rail Page as I had provided or ask your supervisor to contact me to discuss my serious concerns with what you have done to weaken the value and independence of the Wikipedia article

Looking forward to your answers,

Regards Concerned InlandRail (talk) 13:49, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Concerned InlandRail (talk) 13:49, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Gah, They spammed me the same boilerplate. Apparently they have not noticed the hatchetting I gave the thing. -- Deep fried okra  ( schalte ein ) 16:23, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Soo91
I have edited some incorrect information of New Generation Movement background history, after the changes you refused it and you put back the wrong information. The background history of any political party in Wikipedia must contain the historical event of the party with background detail of how it formed, not only opinions for the people that are against the party. The All information that I corrected and I added were have sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AAAM2020 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, actually 3 different editor's reverted your changes. I only reverted you once and an administrator has now protected the article.  I do not disagree with your statement in that articles should be neutral (please follow the blue link and read the policy) but you removed sourced content and added some unsourced content.  Per WP:BRD (again follow the blue link and read the guidance), you can start a discussion on the article's talk page to see if you can gain consensus from the community for your proposed changes.  I do recommend rather than making blanket statement, such as "this is fake news", you back up your assertions with reliable sources and be concise.  Also, if you believe the current sources are not reliable, you can address that at the reliable sources noticeboard where the community will evaluate your claim.  Wish you the best of health. S0091 (talk) 22:26, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Why are you saying I removed content?!?!?!??!
You left a message on my talk page saying I removed content. I did not remove content. In https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jack_Swigert&diff=prev&oldid=950366742 I took the sentence on him being a boy scout, and moved it into the paragraph covering his early life, right next to early schooling. It was out of place coming after his undergraduate and graduate studies, which he did years after ending his scout activities! — Preceding unsigned comment added by StellarNerd (talk • contribs) 18:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, you are right and my mistake. I just left a message on your talk page.  Again, I apologize.  Thank you for the messages! S0091 (talk) 18:39, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

SPI for the V user
Hi. We submitted pretty much the same stuff at the same time at Sockpuppet investigations/Vallabhas. The IP you added and the second user are both already blocked as SP - you may want to edit things a bit to simplify it. I'll leave that to you to do if that's OK - feel free to merge the two SPI. Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Oh, I see what I did wrong.  It's only the second report I have submitted so still inexperienced.  How do I merge mine with yours?  I don't want to mess things up more than I already have.  S0091 (talk) 14:13, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what the done thing to do is, but I think you could maybe just delete most of yours, perhaps leaving the second comment about requesting PP? Is there anything you'd want to add otherwise? Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:38, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I fixed mine (I think) and just added a note that it is a duplicate of yours so mine can be closed or merged with yours. I do not have anything additional to add. Thanks for the note letting me know! S0091 (talk) 14:46, 12 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Yeah, sounds good to me. I sort of expected Spike 'em to add an SPI at the same time as well! Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:58, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess we got this one covered then! :) S0091 (talk) 15:00, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi S0091. I had a question about a comment you left on my new account...
Thanks for the welcome message! Lots to learn, no doubt. I was curious about your comment on my info page about referring to my project blog. I understand the nature of the concern you pointed out and so I have modified my wording to make it clear this is a research site. This site is entirely non-commercial (no ads or linking). It is an important tool I use to validate my research with the larger historical community, and also to help connect me with potential sources/ subject matter experts. In that sense, I'm hoping it will be seen as not out of alignment with the objectives of Wikipedia... Best, 5280Explorer (talk) 19:50, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I was already writing a note on your talk page so responded there. Thanks for the message. S0091 (talk) 20:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Edward Bromberg
Why did you remove my information on Edward Bromberg ? I’m new to this am trying to add and publish information ? Could you suggest what should be done to publish ? You can google on your own and see many articles and notable history. Ragstyle (talk) 05:50, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi The subject first needs an article or to be a topic in an existing article in order to be included on a disambiguation page.  If you notice, all the entries listed at Bromberg (surname) have their own articles.  Since Edward Bromberg does not have an article on Wikipedia, it is not appropriate to include them.  If you believe they do meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines and there are sufficient independent reliable sources to support that, you can create an article.  Thanks for the question! S0091 (talk) 15:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the information! Ragstyle (talk) 07:03, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect vandalism claim
Hi, This regards User:52.144.111.20 as they made a useful, constructive edit was valid (the song as wrong in the first place, its is lion and the liar, search on Google...) Everyone makes mistakes, please remove the 2nd vandalism warning on the user's page. Thanks, --Landihan (talk) 16:32, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Done! Thanks so much for letting me know! S0091 (talk) 16:41, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks you for the Welcome
Dear S0091 Thank you for the welcome and tips. This is my first article for wiki and I am unsure of the process. Will I get notification if it is approved? How long does the process usually take? Thanks in advance for your help--UKberrydesign (talk) 11:26, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I see your article was declined. It may be beneficial to visit WikiProject Opera for some guidance and feel free to post questions on the talk page there.  It may well be that Halliday is not notable enough for their own article but could perhaps be appropriate for inclusion in an existing article.  Good luck! S0091 (talk) 13:35, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Help
Hi S0091, I received your message just now stating that I am violating a term of use. I just want to say that I am not getting compensated to do the changes, please redirect me to that particular edit and I will revert it back.03:22, 4 July 2020 (UTC)Ashley Vanryan (talk)
 * Responded on their talk page. S0091 (talk) 03:27, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help - may I ask you some questions?
Hello S0091,

I am sorry if this is the incorrect way to do this. Forgive me! I represent the person whose page I was editing and want to make sure that the information is up to date and accurate. I noticed that you declined my edits to the page. How should I go about amending the information correctly?

Thank you in advance for any help that you can provide - I am not great at this.

Tomtom2390 (talk) 18:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC) Tomtom
 * Hi, actually, since you represent Ashley Comeau you should not edit the page directly, but rather make edit requests on the article's talk page. Also, you will need to declare your conflict of interest.  Please read the COI message I left you on your talk page to ensure you are following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  It also has instructions on how to make an edit request.  Just be sure to include reliable sources in your requests (note, blogs or forums are not considered reliable and there are strict guidelines for using socialmedia).  If you have questions, you can ask them at the Teahouse where experienced editors can answer them.  I don't mind you asking me, but I am not always around.  Thank you for the message! S0091 (talk) 19:19, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your help!

Tomtom2390 (talk) 19:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC) Tomtom

Question about reverted edits
Hello S0091,

I am martin.gpu. Before all it is my first time in wikipedia like editor, I am sorry for the incovencenes. I see that you tag my edit like Spam but I am doing the same like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manfred_von_Richthofen#Published_works The book is about the company 3dfx. It is the first book and I put the link to kickstarter to show that it is real. I didn't write the link to amazon/web. How should I go about amending the information correctly? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin.gpu (talk • contribs) 19:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, Sorry, but you cannot add it unless the book becomes notable (referenced by experts as an authority on the subject, a best seller, etc.). The fact it is self pulblished also it not helpful to your case.  Currently, it comes across as a means of advertising the book which is against the purpose of Wikipedia.  S0091 (talk) 19:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your message. Sorry for the mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin.gpu (talk • contribs) 20:03, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * It's common. No need to apologize but, of course, please stay mindful of Wikipedia's purpose.  Wish you the best.  S0091 (talk) 20:07, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi S0091, Michael Thaddeus (despite the name I have no relation to him) satisfies criterion 1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. His articles are highly cited and some of his work is described as spectacular by various people. Michael Thaddeus Fan 93 (talk) 01:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Gag name
The penny didn't drop for me either, S0091; I simply clicked on Mike Rotch to see if it was an actual porn star, or perhaps merely the user's own name. I guess we're both innocents. (And yet we've probably both seen Bart phone up Moe's and ask for I.P. Freely.) Bishonen &#124; tålk 21:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC).
 * Lol! Well, at least you thought to click.  I didn't even get that far. S0091 (talk) 21:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Help
Hi there,

Soon I'm going to start editing pages, and I might need your help, if I may.

--Benedito blu (talk) 08:45, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, sure! I am not always around so I also suggest the Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 15:16, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello!
Thanks for the welcome, looks like I have some reading to do. -Loner Fox (talk) 19:26, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism
Please explain why my addition to the ‘money in the banK’ page was vandalism please??? Darius m81 (talk) 02:27, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry about that. It was a mis-click on my part as it certainly was not vandalism, but unsourced.  I will strike it out.  Thanks for asking! S0091 (talk) 02:32, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello!
Ok, thanks! Sabatocilantro &#91;&#91;https&#58;//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title&#61;User_talk:Sabatocilantro&#38;action&#61;edit&#38;redlink&#61;1&#124;(talk)&#93;&#93; (talk) 15:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Index Copernicus - how to discourage blatant advertising on Wikipedia?
Hello. Thank you for taking the time to explain the reversion. I still think that this paragraph should be kept - Wikipedia should be able to protect itself from blatant advertising. If advertisers saw that it will be called out, they would hopefully stop. It should be used only in evident cases: for instance when the new edit is one sentence praising the company. Exactly as in: "This is the only so complex evaluation of scientific journals in the world." ("Jest to jedyna tak kompleksowa ewaluacja czasopism naukowych na świecie " on 8th May 2019).

What else could be done? I could make a blog post myself with word by word what I wrote in the edit you reversed and then link it as a source for a new edit (I am a university professor so I imagine it would have some credibility). But you see that clearly this is ethically dubious conduct - and at the heart of it - cheating.

The Index Copernicus page was the first time I went to a edit a company website - and I saw how naive I was about Wikipedia advertising, so maybe the shock of it will wear down. The whole polish page of IC is pure advertising but apparently this is a norm on polish wikipedia (I stalked one of the editors of Index Copernicus to see his other edits, this is how I found out). You can try using a simple translator, it will give you the picture of the article: paragraphs with no sources, language not neutral ("innovative solutions" etc) and | so on.

Responding to you I checked that in english Wikipedia page of Index Copernicus there are some funny editing instances. In particular a "scientific article" cited as a source: Jan Barczyński, Mirosław Rek. Evaluation in science – Index Copernicus case study of multi-parametric evaluation system, 2011, Archives of Budo. (If you want to have a laugh I encourage you to go to the website http://archbudo.com/view/abstract/id/10606 where the article is published.) Of course Archives of Budo is one of top 20 journals in 2014 IndexCopernicus Master List of scientific journals... I don't want to rant, but this is just the tip of the iceberg here.

Reassuming: in my opinion Wikipedia will be sturdy as long as it can protect itself. English Wikipedia is doing well, but lesser cousins not so. I think that using Wikipedia as source material for showing manipulation of content on Wikipedia should be allowed.

18:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Paczki sa najlepsze z dzemem — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paczki sa nalepsze z dzemem (talk • contribs)
 * Hi First, it actually is not blatant advertising.  I do not see any puffery type language in the article, etc. Your opinion/commentary certainly does not belong there.  Your blog would not be a reliable source (see also WP:BLOG).  With all that said, you can start a discussion on the article's talk page with your proposed changes to see if you can gain consensus.  If you do not believe the subject is notable per Wikipedia's notability guidelines, along with the guidelines for organizations, you can nominate it for deletion.  Be sure to read the materials I have linked so you can take the most appropriate action based on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  I honestly do not have an opinion either way.  If you have questions, you can reach out to the Teahouse.  I don't mind you contacting me, but I am not always around.  I hope you find this helpful. S0091 (talk) 18:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello again I will repeat: I am not contesting your decision about removing that paragraph, I think it is consistent with Wikipedia guidelines. I just don't agree with it, but I will not fight. I do agree that my opinion does certainly not belong on a Wikipedia page. This is the only point that I agree with you on.

First, I am surprised with your opinion that there is no blatant advertising. I don't see how you think sentences
 * "This is the only so complex evaluation of scientific journals in the world."
 * "(...) ICI Publishing Stars. It is currently underway in several hundred journals around the world, helps achieving the strategy of securing wider audience, and thus - augmenting citability" ("(...) ICI Publishing Stars. Jest ona obecnie wdrażana w kilkuset czasopismach z całego świata, pomaga w realizacji strategii zapewniającej dotarcie do szerszego grona odbiorców, a co za tym idzie – zwiększenie cytowalności")

are neutral ("citability" is a metric that can make or break a scientific career). There are no sources to these statements, it would be like me stating that I am the world's greatest scientist - there is no source for or against such statement. (Please don't judge my translation here, I have problems understanding the original although I am a native speaker.)

From Wikipedia article on blatant advertising it checks at least 3 points:
 * Its reception section is a bullet list of taglines and quotes praising the product followed by bylines to supposedly give it credit.
 * It positively describes the product or service and why it's important for people to know about or to purchase, enroll, join, or obtain it.
 * It speaks of the product's reputation in regards to originality, age, dependability, and customer satisfaction ("The original", "Number-one selling", "Highest rated")

I am also sorry to say that you are wrong about the blog as a source. Please read your sources first [| "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications."]. Otherwise the blogs of Terence_Tao or Beall's list could not be cited as a source.

Unfortunately, the page on Index Copernicus should not be deleted - it is a publicly funded entity that is known by every scientist whose spam filter failed. Moreover, there is ongoing debate in the scientific community about "citability" and citation indexes. Most scientist agree we need change, the actions of this company undermine these efforts.

Thank you for your help in understanding Wikipedia guidelines and attitudes of the community. I learned something, I hope you will too. In my outrage I am indeed preparing material about Index Copernicus. So this discussion was productive for me. Paczki sa nalepsze z dzemem (talk) 22:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Your complaint is about the article on the Polish Wikipedia, not here on the English Wikipedia. Apologies, I missed that.  The issues you have cannot be addressed here.  You have to address them at the Polish Wikipedia.  Each Wikipedia is its own project with its own policies and guidelines.   This means what I linked above may not be applicable.  However, I wonder if you can leverage the English article as a guide to clean up the Polish one.  Note, the English version has a Controversy section that aligns with your statements about usability of such indexes.  I guess, rather than rant, why not just try to fix the issues yourself?  Again, not familiar with the Polish Wikipedia, but here editors often clean up/rewrite articles to remove unsourced or poorly sourced claims and rephrase content to ensure neutral language, etc. In my mind, the worst that can happen is someone disagrees with you, then you just work with them and/or others to come a consensus.  You may not get all the changes you want but at least some progress can be made.  S0091 (talk) 14:59, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you.Sefoye (talk) 17:54, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

WalkAway
Hello. Can you explain to me why pointing out the fact that the WalkAway campaign is an example of astroturfing, doesn't belong in the lede? It's supported by all reliable sources and it's a key information that defines the very essence of the phenomenon. 46.97.170.78 (talk) 06:48, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia rocks.
I hope i can contribute to this amazing website!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lelandken (talk • contribs) 18:00, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by StaticString (talk • contribs) 15:26, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to RedWarn
Hello, S0091! I noticed you have been using Twinkle and was wondering if you'd like to beta test my new tool, RedWarn, specifically designed to improve your editing experience.


 * Easy to use - Unlike other tools, RedWarn uses easy to interpret icons and simple summaries for common actions, reducing both learning and reading times.
 * Supports rollback and rollback-like functionality - Unlike Twinkle, RedWarn supports both rollback and rollback-like functionality for users will rollback permissions. This decreases waiting times during rollbacks.


 * Making life easier on the battlefield - Ever been in the middle of a vandalism war or campaign, frantically reloading the history page to see a new edit? No more! Enabling RedWarn's "Alert on Change" feature will automatically send you to the latest edit when a new edit occurs - and if you're working on something else, RedWarn will send you a notification while the tab is still open in the background. No time wasted.
 * Rollback previews - If you're ever worried about the changes a rollback will make, especially in the case of reverting good faith edits, you can click the rollback preview button to preview the difference a rollback will make, with the version that will be restored on the right, and the latest revision on the left.


 * Always the latest revision - RedWarn will automatically redirect you to the latest revision if the rollback is no longer for the latest revision - no more frustrating errors.


 * Fast - RedWarn can automatically select a warning level, and, on vandalism and content removal rollbacks, automatically select a warning template.


 * Built on your feedback - RedWarn is receiving frequent feature additions and changes based on your feedback. If there's something you don't like, or would like to see, just say!


 * and many more features ...but I don't want to fill your userpage.

RedWarn is currently in use by over 35 other Wikipedians, and feedback so far has been extremely positive. If you're interested, please see see the RedWarn tool page for more information on RedWarn's features which I haven't listed here. Otherwise, feel free to remove this message from your page. If you have any further questions, please ping me or leave a message on my talk page. Your feedback is much appreciated! Ed6767  talk!  19:35, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft Van Bohemen Family
Thanks for your statement. I like to be transparant and reliable.

The draft is a translation of the Dutch Wikipedia article with the title Familie Van Bohemen. This article is not about myself, but about my ancestors which lived in the 15th-17th century. In 2018, I have published an article about them in the renowned genealogical journal Ons Voorgeslacht (Dutch journal). The editors has let review the text (with 388 notes) by genealogic experts. After publication I received reactions. This had lead to some additions and corrections in 2019. Both articles form the backbone of my draft. They are listed in the draft as references 1 and 2.

There are mentioned some other facts in the draft. They are taken from references 3, 4 and 5.I have no personal connections with this references.

The external link refers to a website I made about the Van Bohemen family (with both a Dutch as a English version). The link is intended for people who would like to know more about the Van Bohemen family, but is not used as a source. If this is not allowed, the link may be omitted.

I hope to have informed you sufficiently.

Duyfrak (talk) 07:35, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Page creation Ugo Giletta
Dear S0091, I wrote Ugo Giletta's page and I didn't have time to finish it. Could I kindly have an explanation why it was canceled? Can I know where I went wrong? Best regards and thanks for your attention.Arte frida (talk) 10:24, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi it has not been canceled.  As far as I can see it is at Draft:Ugo Giletta waiting for review.  Please note due to the number of article submissions, it may take a couple months or so for the review.  S0091 (talk) 18:46, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I understand, very kind !!! Thanks so much!--Arte frida (talk) 09:49, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Dear S0091,I worked on Ugo Giletta's page to insert quotes where required. I also tried to clarify the sentences in which they were considered vague. Can you kindly check if it's ok? Thank you very much for the attention!!!--Arte frida (talk) 15:29, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Van Bohemen Family
Hi S0091, I informed you two days ago in response to your comment. I wonder if the information was sufficient? If so, is it appropiate that I submit now my draft for review? Duyfrak (talk) 18:36, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I am not a reviewer but I do have concerns about it meeting notability criteria.  Can you make it more clear in the prose why the family is important/significant that is supported by your sources?  I do not speak Dutch so I cannot assess your sources to determine if maybe there is more there that could be helpful.  Either way, you are welcome to submit it for review or you can try posting at the Teahouse to see if someone that speaks Dutch can take a look at it and provide some guidance. S0091 (talk) 19:09, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Translations Latin American Literature
Hi S0091,

Thank you for your message. I am in fact willing to translate content for Wikipedia, in particular topics regarding Latin American literature, which is my academic background. Although I have already activated the translation feature in the "Contributions" section, I am not allowed to translate anything as I always find an "issue" that says: "Your translation cannot be published because publishing is only allowed to more experienced editors on this wiki." Could you please give me a hand with this? Regards. WhisperingValley (talk) 21:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi That may be because you had not reached autoconfirm status (account has 10 edits and 4 days old).  You have reached that now so hopefully that resolves your issue.  If not, you can post a query at the Teahouse for assistance. S0091 (talk) 19:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you S0091 for your message
I found it helpful. I would give a barn star for helping newbies if there was one. Thanks a lot FlyingNinja1 (talk) 06:06, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Reversion to Irish_slaves_myth
My apologies, I missed the Edit Summary box when I added a link earlier today to Line 5 of Irish_slaves_myth. Line 5 is: "In 2016, academics and Irish historians wrote to condemn the myth.[5]" You reverted the edit as "Poor source, self-published"

The problem is that Line 5 is not properly referenced at present: Reference [5] refers to a Seattle Times article which fails to provide either a link or bibliographic information on the open letter which is the central subject of Line 5, and therefore is inadequate.

I don't know whether you are correct that the link I provided pointing to Medium.com is "poor source" or "self-published". My understanding which may be faulty is that Medium.com has two arms: both an open blogging platform, and articles that are under tight editorial standards, the latter now being widely recognized as being a legitimate high quality publisher, and I don't know which of these categories the article in question would belong to.

More fundamentally, in this context the issue is not whether the content of the open letter is factually correct (unsubstantiated accuracy being an ordinary purpose of rejecting self-published material). It is merely "what is the content of this notable open letter" or "where can I find the content of the notable open letter". For that purpose it is my opinion that the Medium.com article is equivalent to a historical facsimile of the open letter, and as such is a suitable reference if the open letter is to be mentioned in the Wikipedia article unless you feel the authenticity of the Medium.com version of the letter is in doubt. If you agree, please revert the reversion.

If you still feel a direct reference to a copy of the open letter itself is inappropriate for some reason, then I would propose that Reference [5] be changed from the Seattle Times, to a similar NY Times article which DOES include a link to the open letter itself. The NY Times article is behind a paywall now, so I would suggest using the Archive.org version of it, if that is permitted: https://web.archive.org/web/20200622164752/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/us/irish-slaves-myth.html

If you agree with that work-around, can you please make the change? I'm not comfortable that I would do it correctly. Maxwell Gerald Anderson (talk) 23:36, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I wish we had more editors like you. I see your point about context, thus I have reverted myself back you version of the page.  If you have any other concerns, you can post them on the article's talk page that way other editors can participate in the discussion.  Thank you for the message. S0091 (talk) 23:49, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for welcome
Hello

I am looking forward to learning how to create translations and edit articles with more precision and detail.

Regards

Mike Duffy --Mikejohnduffy (talk) 09:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia welcome
Thanks! Bam Zilla Wiki (talk) 15:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 June 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

How did you just message me?
I just edited an article about the Latin Church in Turkey and you edited my talk page the second I pressed publish changes. How did you do that? Here's the talk page for reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:99thGuardianOfLlamaTown I haven't edited any more than 2 pages, so I doubt you just found me by a link that says "last edited # days ago by 99thGuardianOfLlamaTown".
 * I likely came across one your edits either doing recent changes patrol or a page you edited was on my Watchlist. S0091 (talk) 03:00, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, it seems to be the former, as most of my edits are pages that are edited by non-native English speakers.

Why you deleted my entries
Why you reverted my edits on list of football clubs in India article What I edited was correct Shivsa008 (talk) 03:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Per the note I left you on your talk page, entries to lists generally should already have their own article. If you want to add a club to List of football clubs in India, create the article first.  Please see WP:FOOTYN for the notability criteria for football clubs. S0091 (talk) 03:06, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I tried making article but not happening I am new to Wikipedia and want to provide true information only Shivsa008 (talk) 11:14, 30 June 2020 (UTC)shivsa008

Claim for my edit
Hello, I want to know why my edits was removed? Some ppl just come and edit anything. I am not against them but any edit must be done in a proper way. Many will argue on her being taiwanese and will say she is Chinese bcoz taiwan is part of China and all that. this way vandalism will continue. Arorapriyansh333 (talk) 04:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I do not see that I removed any of your edits. S0091 (talk) 03:07, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok.. Arorapriyansh333 (talk) 03:50, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Help me
Hello, Soo91!

I'm so honored to be part of Wikipedia, and thanks for the welcome.

I have a question: I created a draft yesterday and I moved it into an article, but why can't I find the page on google? I honestly thought moving a draft to an article would require a verification or a review from an administrator but it just moved to an article right away, and now I'm confused. How do you make your page available for google.

--Amartushig (talk) 14:16, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * New articles do have to be reviewed or be over 90 days old before they can be indexed by Google or any other search engine. The exception is for experienced editors who have the autopatrolled right.  New articles have to be reviewed even if they go through the Articles for Creation (AFC) process.  So while an AFC reviewer may approve an article, it still has to be reviewed by a New page reviewer before it can  be indexed.  Currently, it could take a couple months or so for an article to be reviewed due to the large volume of submissions.  S0091 (talk) 03:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I am Yuvraaj. Public Relation Officer & Celebrities Manager of Tamil Film Industry. This Page represents only my profile. This Page is for my encyclopaedia. This article domes not contains any promotional or advertisement. I have PRO Association Identification Card. if You need I ready to submit copy of identification card. P R O Yuvraaj (talk) 17:20, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

anthony pellicano page
your section on Linda Fiorentino and Mark rossini is incorrect. fiorentino page was forced to remove section claiming she knew pellicano before he went to jail. this is competely false. there is no reference to this at all. you site none at all. please take down all except what you can actually prove to be true. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.248.143 (talk) 00:09, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Like I stated, please start a discussion on the article's talk page so you can gain consensus for your changes. S0091 (talk) 00:15, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

linda fiorentino
please remove section on Pellicano. It is unsourced. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.248.143 (talk) 00:40, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Magister001
thanks for telling me that I vandalized! I will correct that! By the way, I'm also Arceus24

pellcano rossini fiorentino
the only correct page with direct law enforcement sourcing is the mark rossini page and that should be used for all fiorentino page was already corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VeritasNY (talk • contribs) 01:10, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi {{re|VeritasNY]], Wikipedia requires independent reliable sources which both Newsweek and the Washington Post qualify. If you take issue with their reporting, which are cited and supports the content in the articles, I suggest you reach to them and have them issue a retraction.  Once the retraction is published, then the retractions can be used to support removal of the content.  Until then (or other reliable sources contradict their reporting), there is no case for removal of the content.  The only other advise I can offer is to start a discussion on the articles' talk pages to gain WP:consensus perhaps for rewording (i.e. blanket removal is not going to happen).  Otherwise, it is time to accept it and move on. S0091 (talk) 02:31, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

{{Clear}}

Блокировка
Мой аккаунт EditUZB бессрочно забанили, за то, что я поставил шаблон на аккаунту NBS о бессрочке. Все мои правки были откачены. Меня обвиняют в обходе. Как это понять и кто такая lessless который про меня пишет всякие гады, якобы что я угрожал? Что? Когда? Доказывайте пожалуйста. EditUZB (talk) 15:15, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Ruwiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by EditUZB (talk • contribs) 15:15, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, this is the English Wikipedia which is a separate project from the Russian Wikipedia so I cannot comment on any activities there. Also, I do not speak Russian.  Communication here should be in English. S0091 (talk) 15:39, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

There is real bullying going on in the Ru-Wiki. Banned me indefinitely and all my edits dial-up connection in Russian, template for a member of NBS authoritative links to the article Ganiev and my other contributions all pumped out. I was also accused of fraud. Tell me, is this normal? EditUZB (talk) 16:35, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Like I said before, I cannot comment on Ru-Wiki. I have no idea what is normal there.  I can tell you here editors are banned or blocked if they are deemed disruptive, which is not uncommon. S0091 (talk) 16:43, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your welcome. I'm hoping this will come up on my talk page, but I've got an awful lot of learning to do yet. My aim is to provide quality without hassle! Duckspindle (talk) 17:17, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello S0091,

I must say I am humbled to receive your message. I will ensure that I make a noteworthy contribution to this astounding platform which has a plethora of information!

Regards, Mr.Mosak --Mr.MOSAK (talk) 19:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Hey, thanks for the note and guidance S0091. --Gregmmuller (talk) 00:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Remove the duplicated references
Hello! I don't know how to remove duplicated references. Could you please do it for this draft: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sanjib_Kumar_Karmee# Thanks!Kdis98 (talk) 12:15, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * If you cited in more than place, then is it fine to duplicate it. S0091 (talk) 20:44, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Removal of edit
Thank you for the advice. I have now added the citation source. As I'm sure you can tell, I'm new to this! TheFireHorse (talk) 20:20, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I hear ya! For the "encyclopedia that anyone can edit", it does have a steep learning curve.  Thanks for the note! S0091 (talk) 20:23, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you for the Welcome! --LemonsofLife (talk) 17:20, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Mistaken Edit - Mark Adler?
Hi,

I saw that I had a message when I was looking at another wiki and saw you addressed me sometime in 2019 (I'm assuming directly over IP as I don't have a wikipedia account or don't recall making one!) for editing the Mark Adler wiki page?

I think I had been looking at his page having fallen in a wiki hole for Toronto area politicians but I don't recall making any changes.

Anyway I saw that you noted it's been restored, just wanted to address the note!

Perhaps it was originally edited by someone else and I've been reassigned the IP it had been done with? (not 100% familiar with IP addressing/leasing beyond basic familiarity but between sleepily mashing keys or that that's all I can think of)

Cheers!

174.88.11.138 (talk) 00:30, 21 July 2020 (UTC)C

Hello back! and a quick question
Hello S0091, Thank you for welcoming me! I have a question to ask, if my edit gets reverted but I genuinely believe it should be kept, what shall I do?Zeech00 (talk) 07:54, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello and a quick question
Dear S0091,

Would you please help me with the Human Brain Cloud Interface page creation? How can we chat? I wish you an excellent weekend. NunoRBMartinsPhD

Hello
Thank you for the kind welcome message, S0091. Keep up the good work. 0xBADD0C (talk) 10:57, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you for your advice.
Thank you for your advice. As a member of Wikipedia, I feel very honored. Abouc%w7 (talk) 00:57, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Signing
Hello S0091 Thanks for the message. I will remember to sign from now on. Cheers Peter  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Glyn (talk • contribs) 06:13, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for this. Best wishes, Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomFlynn1955 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I will try to edit as much as i can Hurricane Tracker Man (talk) 00:30, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. Will comply.
--Humble seeker after wisdom (talk) 07:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Ooops
Ooop got it wrong. Trying once more. Peter Glyn (talk) 06:14, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 August 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanking Soo91
Thank you for the welcome! I'm happy to be here and excited to begin.So can I join the meet up about the coronavirus and add my input ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddemod (talk • contribs) 01:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Soo91,I can't wait to begin! So CAN I join the meet up about the coronavirus and add my input? Again thank you for the welcome!! Ddemod (talk) 01:29, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank u 4 showing how to change my user name Soo91but I was in successful. I don't have an email address. Ddemod (talk) 02:07, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Gustav von Wulffen
Hello MilHistExp, Your editing of Gustav von Wulffen was not correct. The rank of Sturmführer was changed after the Night of the Long Knifes, and that was after june/july 1934. Bye and greetings,--Maddriver371 (talk) 16:16, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi you accidentally posted to this is my talk page.  Pinging  so they are aware of your concern. S0091 (talk) 14:57, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oooh, sorry, my mistake. Thanks for the feedback. Greetings, --Maddriver371 (talk) 17:18, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * no problem at all! :) S0091 (talk) 17:21, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Mistake on Mangalwedha?
I wanted to check if you made a mistake removing the comma and replacing it with a nowiki tag on Mangalwedha. Cheesycow5 (talk) 22:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi the comma was my doing, no doubt.  The no wiki I did not add (meaning I did not type in no wiki) so not sure what happened there but clearly it was part my edit.  I think fixed it.  Let me know if you see any other issues and thanks for bringing it to my attention. S0091 (talk) 23:10, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Yep, thanks for fixing it. Cheesycow5 (talk) 23:12, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

I am at a lost
Soo91 I am at a lost,I want to contribute to Wikipedia but I have no idea how to get started.I don't know how to find the user pages of people who are editing the pages of bands/music(mostly heavy metal) and the history of it.Can you point me in the right direction please and give me some advice on how to REALLY CONTRIBUTE to Wikipedia. Also I've made a some edits that I'd like to erase,how do I go about that.Thank you for your past responses also! DdemodDdemod (talk) 23:53, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi try WikiProject Metal.  I will give you a word of caution, so far you have not contributed anything of value to Wikipedia which will be only tolerated for a short time.  If you are truly interested in contributing, I suggest starting with the Wikipedia Adventure then proving you can make meaningful contributions such as correcting grammatical errors, adding sources, etc.  I do hope you find your way here because Wikipedia needs all the constructive editors it can get but this is not a playhouse so please keep that in mind.  I will certainly be here for you as long I can see the value you are adding (or trying to add).  S0091 (talk) 00:16, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! :)
Andres Soop (talk) 15:13, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for sharing the policies and guidelines - it is greatly appreciated.TrimtheCat (talk) 01:06, 11 August 2020 (UTC)Ann

Hello
I saw your message thank you, I really love Wikipedia and I am following long time ago so I want to contribute woth the little I have known. And I want an expert to guide me through on how to to create intresting articles and make perfect edits. Thank you. Maliky (talk) 22:09, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Maliky (talk) 22:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I suggest starting with The Wikipedia Adventure, which is an interactive tutorial to editing.  No one makes "perfect" edits; we all make mistakes here and there.  Once you get a feel for editing, then try creating an article.  You may find this short essay helpful as a starting place to understanding Wikipedia's notability guidelines.  If you have questions or need help, you can reach Teahouse where experienced editors are around to lend a hand. S0091 (talk) 22:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank yoi very much for you kindness Sir. Maliky (talk) 15:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

citation in J B Bury
Hello, I find one edit of mine reverted, marked with “WP:OR (TW)”. I’m not sure how to interpret this. I didn’t expect the simple rectifying a citation of the original source counting as “research”. RomFan (talk) 10:15, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Al-Masih ad-Dajjal: Revision history
You reverted my edit without any reasoning to explain why? I made the change as it mentioned beliefs not strongly aligning with Islamic views. IF you make an edit it's common courtesy to mention why. Thanks.Alif2020 (talk) 12:05, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Restoring long hard work added to hCaptcha
Hello, I'm 174.197.146.179. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. 174.197.146.179 (talk) 18:27, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

False flag.
I don't know why but I've been flagged for vandalism of Wikipedia pages for TV shows and stuff I have neither watched nor have any interest in, let alone editing the wikipedia of. If you could give me back the rights to edit that would be great as I do actually contribute from time to time, eg. getting the Star Wars page sorted. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.252.133.215 (talk) 20:34, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Changing Zynex's page
Hello! So I do see a source cited on Zynex's page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zynex) for the change I made today. I changed the amount of money the CEO started the company with to a $2000 limit on his credit card (changed from $4000). I work for Zynex and our CEO (Thomas Sandgaard) said the cited source is incorrect. I would assume a firsthand source is stronger than a secondhand source. How can I get this changed?

50.236.129.206 (talk) 22:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:33, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Complete Apology
Hey soo91 i am very very sorry for wasting your time here at wiki I don't know what I was thinking of when I logged into this site without being serious about it.So I'd like to know if I fully delete my page in Wikipedia? Every single thing and all my stupid comments.i thank you for being patient with me. Really. But some good still came out of my foolishness, I've now joined wiki commons,I plan to take it slowly and seriously, I really like taking pictures (who doesn't ) so I'm more comfortable there. So again I am VERY VERY sorry for being a complete idiot. (Honestly I think being on lock down sent me a little weird ) so please forgive me!! Ps : my family uses this site for like every piece of information they need !!! Your fabulous!! Sincerely yours with still more apologies Ddemod Ddemod (talk) 02:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, no need to apologize ! I think you are being too hard yourself.  You gave something a try and found it was not a good fit and better find that out sooner rather than later.  Your edits to any space other than your User page cannot be deleted but if you do want your User page deleted, just put  at the top.  You can also simply just blank it yourself.  Good luck over a Commons!. S0091 (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Amanda Nunes
Hello S0091 ! Firstly i want to apologize for my English right at the start, it's not my native language, but hopefully I can express myself intelligibly here. You recently reverted my edit on the Amanda Nunes page, citing insufficient sources as the reason. I added in the claim that "she is widely considered to be the greatest female MMA fighter of all time", which was orginally contributed in by another user (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/962847761), who also sourced and supported it with references to the official UFC website, TMZ and Fox Sports. It was later deleted by someone without reason being given (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/966566706), but the original references were left there so I just added in the statement back. If the reason you reverted my edit was because you found the source websites to be insufficient, i respect it, but I just wanted to check if there wasn't a misunderstanding where you thought the references were related to some other information in the article and the claim I added was completely unsourced, which was not the case. I also added that besides being the first, she is also the only double champion so far to defend both belts while holding them simultaneously, which is factually true. It was added in back in June (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/961630892) and was then deleted in August under reasoning that Henry Cejudo also accomplished this when defending his title against Dominic Cruz (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/974241592), which is plainly wrong because he vacated his flyweight belt before defending the bantamweight one against Cruz and did not hold them simultaneously at the time, which is also clear from Henry's own Wikipedia page. I would like to know what exactly was wrong with that addition, since it was reverted as well. Thank you for your time and have nice day/night :) 2A02:AB04:2F43:5000:4CB:6CBA:9F11:C063 (talk) 19:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It looks like this is rectified. The edit I reverted has no sources attributed the the statement which is why I reverted it.  I see you (or someone) added it back with sources.  Please do note tabloids like TMZ are not considered reliable and even Fox Sports may not be depending on the context, etc. For example, opinion pieces or blogs are generally not considered reliable.  If you find the content is removed again, the next step is to start a discussion on the article's talk page to gain consensus, similar to what you did here. Oh, and your English is fine so no need to apologize or be self-conscious about it.  Thanks for the note. S0091 (talk) 13:45, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Publishing a page from sandbox
Hello S0091. Thank you for leaving an encouraging message! I was wondering if you could help me move a finished article from my sandbox to a published page on Wikipedia? Thank you for any assistance! --Imwhalen403 (talk) 22:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I added the  template so you can now submit it for review. S0091 (talk) 13:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! I'm really grateful. --Imwhalen403 (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!
I thought that I was "publishing" to Sandbox not the live site. My apologies! Thank you for the information

Greglockard (talk) 18:39, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * it was not in main space (where articles are) so no worries there. I moved it because it was on your main User page which is for describing your interests and activities related to editing Wikipedia rather than creating an article.  It is now in your "proper" sandbox.  No need to apologize.  This is common for brand new editors (i.e. how would you know??). :) S0091 (talk) 18:48, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Lionel0OJ5
Hi! S0091, am so gland u messege me, have a blessed sunday! Thank u for ur kindness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lionel0OJ5 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Not getting it done(frustrated!)
HI again,Im not getting my page deleted(I don't understand the instrutions you give me)could u just delete it for me?I give all the permission in my power.You don't need to respond,just please PLEASE delete it!!Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddemod (talk • contribs) 01:11, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Only an admin can delete pages. Let's try this.  Just post a note on your User page stating you want it deleted and be sure sign it will the four tildes (type ~ ) and I will place the template for you. S0091 (talk) 13:58, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

RE: "edit warring"
Hello, and thanks for leaving a comment on my talk page. Although it may seem that I am trying to protect a "preferred version" of the mentioned page I am merely attempting to undo a broad and targeted smear campaign that Wikipedia has played host to on said page. It seems to have largely flown under the radar and I simply have removed information and sources deemed unencyclopaedic. You may check the known bias of said sources and easily discover that they are funded largely by enemies of the Labor party of Australia, who are known to have widely attempted to discredit the achievements of the party while they were in government. It is important to freedom of speech in Australia that such skewed sources are not perpetuated and presented as fact, and I consider the normalisation of such sources a stain on Australian democracy. If I can provide any further information please do not hesitate to leave another comment on my talk page, but I implore you to understand that these changes were made in good faith so as to preserve the integrity of Wikipedia. Ghostpol (talk) 03:52, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi the appropriate place for this discussion is on the article's talk page as I was not the only editor to reverted your changes.  Whether you realize it or not, you are edit warring.  Please read the linked page where it specifically states that being right is not a defense.  Most editors that have disagreements are doing so in good faith as they believe they are right and doing what is best for the encyclopedia.  I do not doubt that is the case here. Please note, you removed content that was sourced to three different sources.  You will need to establish all three are not reliable.  Generally, the place to do that is the Reliable sources Noticeboard where other editors can participate in the assessment as the implications are broader than just this one article. S0091 (talk) 15:19, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi, thank you for accepting the article on Vera Deacon.--TrimtheCat (talk) 07:00, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi actually  accepted that article so pinging them here so they get your message. Congratulations by the way!  I know you here for an edit-a-thon but do hope you stay around. S0091 (talk) 15:27, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for all the intro materials
I look forward to learning. --Art to Tech (talk) 17:11, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Big gay love
I love you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:BD97:C000:758D:5A58:BFB7:8FAA (talk) 23:28, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for sharing your gay love! S0091 (talk) 23:38, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello!
Thanks for the welcome, and for those tips! I admit I'm someone who learns best by doing, but now that I feel like I've gotten something "done" that I'm passionate about, I'll step back and read some of the tips so I can do a better job as I go forward.--PDXMaria (talk) 19:10, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure! Whatever works best for you and your learning style.  You might consider the Wikipedia Adventure which is an interactive tutorial or simply just dive in.  Your sandbox is also great place practice, especially with wiki syntax.  There is a shortcut to it at your top right menu. S0091 (talk) 19:23, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi S0091, thanks for your welcome message and the helpful inputs. I appreciate that. Jbrl5 (talk) 00:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks
for the welcome - I have been active for a while but only now opened a page

Thank you
Hi S0091, I am trying my best, just beginning. I like to correct obsolete information rather than add new stuff. Please let me know if I do anything wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wijkemvan (talk • contribs) 21:56, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Improving content is as much needed here, if not more, than adding new content. If you you are unsure about something, need help, etc., you can ask at the Teahouse.  I will also try to check in and feel free to drop by anytime.  S0091 (talk) 22:03, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Your cut-and-paste move of User:TheElliotAlderson/sandbox
Could you tag the page as db-g7 please? It was G5 eligible as the creation of a sockpuppet in its original version, but since you cut-and-paste moved it, it's yours now. Do I need to tag you with a uw-c&pmove? Cabayi (talk) 08:11, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh no! Sorry about that.  I thought had come across advice somewhere (Teahouse?) copy/paste was how to handle moving content from a User page but sounds like I misunderstood.  So I should be performing a Move instead?  I was worried about leaving a redirect, even temporarily, on someone's User page.  I have now tagged the page as you requested and thanks for kindly not leaving me the full blown template, even though I deserved it. :) S0091 (talk) 15:55, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for tidying up. Cabayi (talk) 15:59, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

What error did I commit?
Hi, S0091.

I just noticed an alert while opening Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:93.176.130.155&diff=cur

If I'm not mistaken, it's rather old, but I you have ways of verification, could you, please, explain me what is this about? What did I do that I shouldn't? What content did I remove?

Otherwise, if it's too complicated, just let it be. I don't think its too serious, if I have not noticed it in two years, but I'd just like to know not to repeat the error in another occasion.

Respectfully, Artsider — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artsider (talk • contribs) 15:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Oh wow!  That was really long time ago and in reference to this edit where the IP removed a section from the article without explanation.  Most IP addresses are reallocated to different people so I doubt this was even you.  In any case, no need to worry.  S0091 (talk) 16:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Horgan
I have reached out on the TALK page for this article several weeks ago and mentioned some suggested changes. Joeyconnick is one of the users that back in August, said "take it to the talk page". I did that but he did NOT respond. Now, several weeks later now that an election has been called in our Province, Joeyconnick and others have been going making changes to this page WITHOUT reaching a consensus and without making any attempt to discuss this. I can only assume that people running the campaign for this political party are adding in obvious biases in this article, including Joeyconnick. So again, he said "take it to talk" which I tried a while back, he would NOT discuss any changes, and now he and others are making obviously biased changes to this article now that an election has been called.

I believe that you reverted to a version of the document which is older. I kept reverting back to one that has been there for a while. Can you please do something about this? Again, instead of trying to reach a consensus, people including Joeyconnick are making obviously biased additions to this article. Can you please revert back and possibly lock this article or somehow ensure that people discuss any protentional changes in the talk section before any further changes are made?

Please read over the changes and you will clearly see what has been going on. The election was called on September 21st, 2020 and you can see the activity since then from Joeyconnick and others, activity which was done without any discussions.

Thank you for your assistance and please stay safe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VirtualVisionary (talk • contribs) 22:22, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , were you editing while logged out? It's best to be honest. I also see you blanked your talk page which you are allowed to do (it means you have read and understood the messages) but can you please explain why? S0091 (talk) 22:50, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I did not bother logging in. With that said, I know that my IP address is connected to my account. If I was trying to hide that fact, I have tools at my disposal. Without going into greater detail, I have been using computers since the early 80s including BSSing and coding ML on the C64. So while I do not want to mention specific tools, again, I was aware of that my IP was visible and I simply did not bother logging in. If I mention QSD / 2600 / HP then you will have some idea. As for the talk page, I noticed that Joeyconnick did the EXACT same thing. Please check that for yourself. I posted a message on his talk page multiple times, asking him not to make further changes, and he blanked that out. Again, he was originally the one to take it to the talk page then without saying a word, goes and make changes himself. I reside in the province where this election was just called. One party in particular is using trolls all over Facebook and other social media in the comments section. That could be considered election interference. I let the other party know about this. Based on what I see, one party appears to be using users to modify the Wikipedia pages of one of the other competing parties, adding in biased references, and modifying the page of their candidate with only favorable information. Again, please check this for yourself. Normally, the Premier of a province (same thing as a Governor in a State) has many their full political record listed, including the positives the negatives. For example, the Premier of Ontario: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Ford As you will notice, there is a COVID-19 pandemic section listed, controversies, etc. John Horgan, the article I tried to edit, is the Premier of BC. There is almost NO record of his political views, the positives and negatives of policies, etc (all of these have been in the news). When I tried to add this in, Joeyconnick and it looks like others in the party cried "fowl", said take it to talk, then refuse to explain or help add in info. Is this fair, especially during an election cycle? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.64.6 (talk) 01:03, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You are not helping yourself here. You have edited logged out again, which is against policy, and blanked your talk page again which is allowed but not a good a look. Joeyconnick has responded to you on the article's talk page so please continue the discussion there.  There are several avenues for dispute resolution but please be aware your conduct will be investigated as well and you have not done yourself any favors.  Please also be aware Wikipedia does not care whether we are in an election cycle or not.  This is a WP:BLP article so the utmost case must be taken and we are volunteers here so it takes time.  Content disputes can go for months (if not for years). S0091 (talk) 02:09, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I apologize for this. Again, force of habit regarding logging out and not bothering to log in again. I blanked my talk page as I normally do not edit articles on Wikipedia nor do I intend to in the future. I simply want to ensure a balanced and neutral election process. I am involved in election security and can see a far from election process here in BC. I only moved to this province three years ago and once I heard that one of the political parties was considering calling an early election, I started digging around to see how elections here in BC are handled and what information there is on the political parties and their leaders.

To my surprise, I was shocked when I noticed that there is a leader of Province that has nearly no information listed about them, their political views, statements made, and any controversies. This is not normal as a Premier of a province normally has a great deal information listed about them, both positive and negative. In this case, only positive information is listed. I do not represent any one political party nor am I becoming involved in this to “swing the vote” however I have noticed one party in particular that seems to be using trolls, social media, and Wikipedia to swing the vote. Again, I am not hiding my intentions nor what I am trying to accomplish, which is simply balance and to ensure that as much truthful and factual information as possible is provided to the voters about all of the political parties and their leaders.

I responded to Joeyconnick yesterday and not surprisingly, after I suggested a more neutral and unbiased blurb about the election call, he disappeared as he has done in the past. I added in a few more suggestions today, all of which are based on news media coverage of the election. I suspect that he will not respond or you will see someone else respond eventually. Please keep in mind that last time he said, “take it to the talk page”, I made suggestions but he disappeared until an election was called then without warning or discussions in the talk section, he started making changes to the article. Please read over what I wrote and judge for yourself what is occurring based on his Joeyconnick’s suggestion, my response, and the way in which others have edited this article. For full transparency and to ensure that we can work towards an unbiased and factual based election process, please see this article as well: This is the current leader of one of the opposition parties though he never served as the Premier of the province. Yet, prior versions of this Wikipedia feature countless negative and extremely biased viewpoints including countless controversies that were mentioned. However, John Horgan has actually served as Premier (equivalent to a Governor) of a province and yet, the minute we try to balance this document by adding something in that the news media (not me or anyone else) has portrayed as negative, people step in and cry foul. Again, please do not take my word for it and examine the prior versions of both articles yourself and you will see what is going on. Compare John Horgan’s Wikipedia article to the Premier of Ontario and see for yourself what is going on. Will this lead to a fair and balanced election here in BC when voters do not have all of the facts? One party in particular floods negative comments about the other party all over comments sections in news media Facebook pages whenever an article is posted about the election. Essentially, using trolls though I believe the other party has now taken note of this. And for full transparency, again, unlike other editing articles on here, I have nothing to hide from anyone. I am one of the parents featured in this news article: We took the Province to the BC Supreme Court after John Horgan announced a back to school plan which we and countless parents considered to be extremely dangerous and would place our children in harm’s way. The lawsuit was featured all over the news, my son I are were interviewed for countless news stories, and the back to school plan was and still is one of the most controversial news topics in the province’s history. Quite frankly considering how this election is being handled online, this may be another newsworthy story. Yes, that is the point I am at. I believe that we deserve a balanced and fair election process and that one party should not be using trolls, scrubbing articles on Wikipedia, and manipulating the other articles for eventual political gain. Again, I do not represent one party for another. In fact, for full transparency, if Horgan eventually changes the back to school plan, I would vote for him! But either way, he was the Premier and every voter deserves and should be made aware of his political views, any controversies such as the Transmountain pipeline expansion project, etc. Then, this is up to voters to decide how they want to vote.

Anyhow, thank you again for all of your assistance in this matter and please stay safe!

Bernard — Preceding unsigned comment added by VirtualVisionary (talk • contribs) 18:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I am not getting involved in this content dispute.  Please understand everyone here is a volunteer.  Editing Wikipedia is not our job so folks are not around everyday, 24/7.  Generally, I only edit on the weekend so it can take me a week to respond to inquiries.  I am sure Joeyconnick, who has been an editor here for almost 15 years and is quite active (according to their contribution history, I don't know them) will respond in the next couple of days or so.  You do need cease making accusatory remarks about them as that will not be tolerated.  Please also know based on what you stated above, you have may have conflict of interest given the lawsuit and your involvement.  I will leave some some information about how to handle a COI on your talk page.  It may be worth a trip to the COI Noticeboard to get input. S0091 (talk) 18:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Pinging so they are aware of this conversation. S0091 (talk) 19:06, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I am not employed, do not represent, or have any type of affiliation with any political party. The legal challenge we filed was against the Government of BC in the BC Supreme Court, so not against any one specific party or individual. I should mention that there were over 42,000 parents that filed a petition against the back to school plan and countless others that shared their concerns online and in TV interviews. I do not believe that any one of these parents, teachers, or school staff could be considered as having a conflict of interest against one specific party or in the election process. Please let me know how I should proceed with the COI as again; I do not feel this is warranted?

As mentioned, I am involved in election security and this is the primary reason why I became involved in Wikipedia. For reasons which I am sure you will understand, after you view these documents, I will need to delete the documents from my Google Drive and delete this conversation from your talk page even though this information was at one point publicly available:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sgzKbAxvPA-4UwxmfiezGv6HEZDWnzLZ/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10M9r5b3Oj8seejymlCC-6fLo48A61zhJ/view?usp=sharing

Please let me know how I can proceed with deleting the documents and relevant section from your talk page. Thank you. Please also note that I cannot disclose any more recent work that my company has been involved in. I believe that Adam Schiff has been working with Wikimedia Foundation on United States election related issues as they are now running rampant and interfering with the election process. I have had very little prior interest in examining the full extent of what has been occurring in Canada regarding Wikipedia and the election process however when I got wind that an election will be called in the province where I now reside, yes, that piqued my interest and I began an investigation regarding what has been occurring in this specific province.

While I do understand that the user in question has been editing articles for 15 years, my specific concern are as follows: August 15th: The user requested that I take it to the Talk page and gain consensus before making any modifications August 15/16th: I posted on the Talk page in an attempt to reach a consensus August 23rd: The user changed one noun September 21st: Election is called September 27/28th: The user reappeared after a period of one month, shortly after the election was called, and they started making changes to this article without discussing the changes in the talk page, as they originally suggested doing back on August 15th. I cannot directly say that there is a political bias at play regarding the specific edits and that is up to you and others to judge.

I, as many in the political spectrum, believe that Wikipedia will eventually need to fully verify the identity of any person editing a document that may have serious political implications. The COI disclosure in this day and age is useless. The concern I have is that the other political party in question may eventually get wind of this and there will an edit war between all of the political parties involved. Hence, why there needs to be more regulation, self-regulation, or otherwise. I highly doubt that there will be any disclosure from either political party regarding a COI. Based on a very preliminary investigation I have conducted, there already appears to be a political bias that is being caused by one specific party on social media and on Wikipedia. In Canada, we are already heading down the same path as the United States election and political discourse wise where tactics such as VPN, TOR, and even further troll type tactics are employed.

Anyhow, thank you again for your assistance in this matter, and please let me know when I can remove the sections and links I referenced above.

Bernard — Preceding unsigned comment added by VirtualVisionary (talk • contribs) 21:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Guidance
Thanks for giving me educating more about wikipedia Econdo 25 (talk) 12:48, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Help
Hi S0091. When I click on a picture, it takes me to another picture. Why is that and how do I fix it?

Love, --Lilkitty200 (talk) 16:23, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , which article and which picture? S0091 (talk) 16:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC) reping. S0091 (talk) 16:48, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I think I have my answer. It was a page’s PDF. Love, --Lilkitty200 (talk) 01:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Moderate level of vandalism
Hello S0091,

I'm attempting my first draft article and didn't realise the sandbox would have any effect on other pages (I'm learning though!). Another editor has changed categories in the article to links, because categories are not allowed in drafts. Was this the vandalism you were flagging? Or do other changes need to be made? I'd really appreciate it, if you would point it out. Thanks very much for the help :) Timeousbeastie (talk) 09:44, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I do not see you were flagged for vandalism and your sandbox is not part of the main encyclopedia thus the reason categories are not allowed.  I think what happened is you clicked the Submit button on your sandbox page which submitted it to Articles for Creation for review as if your were creating a new article to be part of the main encyclopedia.  The message you received was declining it because it is an existing article. If you are simply practicing or drafting changes to an existing article in your sandbox, you just need to select the Publish button (like any other edit) and ignore the Submit button. There is not anything for you to worry about as these are all normal things that happen when a new editor like yourself is learning. :) S0091 (talk) 15:03, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try to do that in future :) Timeousbeastie (talk) 18:33, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

poor removal on articles
I improved Baseball Mogul and Football Mogul and you reverted it. This is edit war. KristenBell69 (talk) 22:42, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not WP:edit war but you might want to fix the cite error you introduced with your edit. S0091 (talk) 22:46, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

i will try but i'm not good with the code KristenBell69 (talk) 22:47, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You might also want to look into why almost all the edits you have made are getting reverted by various editors. In addition, I suggest you change your username as it misleading, unless you are Kristen Bell and provide proof of that (not to me but to Wikipedia). S0091 (talk) 22:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Dimitrios Trimijopulos responding to a message
Thank you for your friendly welcome and the information provided.

I have to confess that I do have a problem, and that is to be able to stay neutral in topics dealing with Egyptology. What ancient Egyptian texts reveal is extremely crude and Egyptologists chose to remain politically correct and let it stay there, hidden into the texts, by leaving without translation key words such as ‘ba’, ‘ka’, and ‘akh’. I am preparing to edit the entry for the term ‘ka’, in the article titled “Ancient Egyptian conception of the soul” and I am going to do it by means of the only way there is: by using images so that the original text can be presented translated word for word.

To give you an idea of the situation prevailing, I am quoting below a passage from the above mentioned Wikipedia article.

quote “According to ancient Egyptian creation myths, the god Atum created the world out of chaos, utilizing his own magic. Because the earth was created with magic, Egyptians believed that the world was imbued with magic and so was every living thing upon it.” unquote

The Pyramid Texts, the oldest religious texts of Humanity, inform that Atum created his children Shu and Tefnut by means of masturbation (the original text is available if you are interested) and then the ancient theologians came to preach that Atum created the whole world, followed by the Egyptologists who teach that the ancient Egyptians were a group of people obsessed with magic, which is quite unfair for the ancient Egyptians.

The author of the article brought to Wikipedia information out of a book published by the Oxford University Press. Unfortunately, that information is misleading because it is only the end part of the complete information as it should have been presented.

As you understand, the problem is a serious one! I’ll do my best to have my first edit as soon as possible, so that you may advice on how to continue.

Best Regards Dimitrios Trimijopulos (talk) 05:15, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Dear S0091. Thank you for the welcome. Loom forward to contributing. Omac Binson --Omac binson (talk) 14:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

HELLO S0091
HELLO SIR... I AM RICK CORNWALLIS WHO MADE THE ARTICLE AINATU FAMILY. SIR I JUST WANTED TO REQUEST TO REMOVE THE SPEEDY DELETION TAG FROM THE ARTICLE.......... AS IT IS NOT REPRESENTING A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL PERSON OR FAMILY, INSTEAD IT REPRESENTS THE VERY LOW IN NUMBER TAMIL BRAHMINIC SAINT THOMAS CHRISTIANS FROM KERALA......ALSO THE SOURCES ARE ALSO STRONG... SIR PLEASE CONSIDER MY REQUEST TO REMOVE THE TAG SIR I CAN MAKE APPROPRIATE CHANGES IN THE ARTICLE FOR MAKING IT LESS SELF CENTRED...... FAITHFULLY RICK CORNWALLIS.... RICK CORNWALLIS (talk) 22:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi First, writing in all caps is considered shouting so please do not do that.  For your immediate concern, an administrator will review the CSD request along with with contests on the talk page and determine the appropriate action to take.  Now I ask that you address my concern.  Have you created additional accounts? S0091 (talk) 22:43, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

NO SIR.... SOME PEOPLE USERS ARE TRYING TO COPY ME... RICK CORNWALLIS (talk) 06:34, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your help
I just published some significant changes to my sandbox, and I was wondering if you still thought I should move them into the existing page you mentioned? Thanks for the opportunity to learn and contribute, I appreciate it. MtnMrtin (talk) 03:04, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi that is up to you.  If you think the subject warrants its own article and there are enough sources showing significant coverage then you can certainly submit it when you feel it is ready. It does not hurt to try that first then if it is not accepted, you can try including content not already covered in the existing article. I say "try" because ultimately content decisions are made the larger community so another editor could object in whole or part to the changes.  If you would like some additional input, you can post a note on the Ku Klux Klan talk page where interested editors are likely to respond.  You may find this guide on using talk pages helpful. S0091 (talk) 15:59, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

In response to notability
Hi there and thank you for the warm welcome to Wikipedia. I am excited to be here and make lots of positive contributions. I would like to post a response to an issue that you mentioned on my talk page regarding notability.

"Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources."

I understand this, the topic of the article has been the subject of reliable and independent third-party sources. I am still in the process of writing and completing my draft and will add the sources as I go along. Once I have added all of my sources and information I will be ready to submit my article for review.

more information about my contribution
I was doing a college research paper on Satanism and was looking to Wikipedia for more information on a specific sect/cult of theistic satanism. I couldn't find anything about it on the website so I decided to undertake this article. My contribution will help many other students and people who are looking for sources and information when undertaking academic assignments as well as those who are interested in the subject.

Another important sect that is not mentioned by Wikipedia is the JoyofSatan. Reliable information has been published about this cult on the History Channel's official website and several news outlets following controversial suicides. I may undertake to write an in-depth article about them in the future.

Best Ryan Jacobson
 * Oh, I did not mean that message to come across as suggesting you should not continue working on the article so apologies for the confusion. It was really more intended to provide guidance for writing a Wikipedia article.  Yesterday was the first time I tried that particular message (it is one of "stock" templates) because I think it has some helpful links but I see now I need to add some additional commentary so thank you for the message.  By all means, please continue. S0091 (talk) 16:20, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate your feedback, I am very passionate about the Wikipedia project. I published my article today. It says the approval process takes roughly 3 months or more which is understandable. Wish me luck! :) RyanJacobson (talk) 19:01, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Hallo S0091
Thank you for your message. I am preparing an article. But first I will write it as Latex. After that I want to do it here in wikipedia. Rainer.schamel (talk) 16:38, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Jennifer Rubin
Hello and thank you for the warm welcome. But your talk page says that your level of vandalism is 3 can you please explain this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryce8273 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, that is the level of vandalism on Wikipedia not of my level of committing vandalism. :) Thank you for the question. S0091 (talk) 23:58, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

hi S0091. I saw your message about my reverting of the Jennifer Rubin page.

I added a paragraph. Someone reverted my "good faith edit" because he/she wanted to see more citation and significance. I therefore reverted the deletion of my paragraph with more elaboration and more citations. If that's not the right way of doing it please let me know and help me do it properly. But I do think it was a legit edit. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Havanananana (talk • contribs) 22:35, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Havanananana, I appreciate you reaching out. You need better sources.  YouTube and Twitter are generally not considered  reliable sources, (see WP:YOUTUBE and WP:SOCIALMEDIA).  Wikipedia has deemed the Daily Caller unreliable.  You may find find this list a helpful guide.  It is certainly not an exhaustive list of acceptable/unacceptable sources but is should give you an idea.  For controversial content, strong sourcing is required to show the content is relevant and should be included.  You might also want to give WP:ONUS a read as well (so many policies and guidelines around this place).  Thanks again for message. S0091 (talk) 22:54, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi S0091 for the TV interview where she made the comments what is an accepted source if not youtube? for something that someone said on Twitter, what is a better source than Twitter itself?
 * The appropriate course of action as this point is to start a discussion on the article's talk page so you can gain consensus for the content. Every decision on Wikipedia requires some sort of consensus from the community (everything I have linked was decided that way, including what is a reliable source, etc.).  The question you will face is if main stream media did not find it relevant enough to cover then why should Wikipedia, regardless if she is said something on Twitter, YouTube, TV interview, etc.  You will need overcome that with strong sourcing, especially for a living person (follow that link and read thoroughly). It's the best advice I can give you. S0091 (talk) 00:12, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hello S0091. Thank you for the welcoming message and for sending the guidelines. I was wondering when will my article be published? Knbna (talk) 09:24, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

How do I publish my sandbox article into the main Wikipedia page?
Hello, Last month I completed my article and submitted it for review. What is the next step? How do I get it published on the main Wikipedia page? Please advise. Thank you
 * Hi click the "submit" button on the page to submit it for review.  However, I am not sure it will be accepted in its current form as it written more like an essay than an encyclopedia article.  You may find this guide helpful.  Also be sure not to include your own personal analysis.  The article should simply summarize what reliable sources have written. S0091 (talk) 17:57, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Happy Diwali!

 * Thanks ! Happy Diwali to you as well!! S0091 (talk) 18:03, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Dear Soo91,
I hope you are doing fine. Thank you for sending me the important information about how to edit Wikipedia. While I was playing around in my own Sandbox page, I got an error:

3. ^Dombroskie, Jason J. (November 14, 2020). "A Matrix Key to Families, Subfamilies, and Tribes of Lepidoptera of Canada" (PDF). Canadian Journal of Arthropod Identification. No. 17 (July 2011): 1–129 – via doi:10.3752/cjai.2011.17. line feed character in |title= at position 39.

I am trying to follow the error message, but I cannot seem to find anything wrong. I also went to the help page, but I cannot seem to find the error. Maybe I need an expert's eyes to find it.

Thank you for reading this message.

Kind Regards,

Haemocyanin11 (talk) 21:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I am not sure either so I suggest posting your question at Teahouse where several experienced editors are around to lend a hand. S0091 (talk) 21:51, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello and thank you!
Thank you for introducing me to Wikipedia! The links were very helpful. : ) Vintageperson (talk) 00:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Good to hear and good job remembering to sign your post!. S0091 (talk) 00:06, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello
Hi,

I see that my edits for the Olive Wharry page were reverted. I haven't any problem with this but as a relative of Olive Wharry I was well placed to add to her history. I had a lot more to add but obviously now that cannot be possible. No criticism, of course, just feedback. I really don't know quite how wikipedia works but will probably leave editing to others in future.

Thanks again,

D. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DamianPGT (talk • contribs) 10:10, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I see.  The issue is Wikipedia requires content to be verifiable by citing secondary reliable sources.  One's personal knowledge is considered original research which is not sufficient. Another point to consider is, being an encyclopedia, Wikipedia articles are not intended to be a full biography covering all the aspects of the subject's life.  Generally, article's summarize significant events, etc. as covered by reliable sources.  What I suggest is trying to find additional sources that have written about her that can provide context around the significance of her trip around the world, etc.  I hope you find this message at least somewhat helpful and do appreciate your desire to contribute.
 * Oh and one more note, the etching you uploaded is fantastic. The issue is you stated it was your own work rather the hers and due to legalities surrounding copyrights, I removed it as well out of an abundance of caution.  However, I think it is old enough that copyrights should not ultimately be an issue.  The folks over at Commons should be able to provide guidance or you might try asking here at the Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 17:34, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

I think I get it. Her round the world trip was instrumental in forming her future life and her role as a suffragette. As you suggest, Olive Wharry was indeed a celebrated artist. Anyhow, not to worry. Thanks for your time.

Thanks and a question
Hello S0091 thanks for your message! I felt welcome :) Yesterday I created a page in Turkish (my native) about a late physicsist. I wanted to add some quotations about this scientist's work, by his friends and colleagues, which I think would better explain his works then my paraphrasing. Although I cited the sources, wiki still took this as a possible copyright violation so I had to shorten it a lot (which made the text drier, and not more accurate, in my opinion). The page still has the copyrights warning - which I hope will soon disappear when someone checks it (now the only words repeated in other sources are the names of the scientist's working fields, and I think this is inevitable. Anyway, is there a good way to make quotations in wiki articles (maybe 3 or 4 sentences)? Danende (talk) 19:41, 15 November 2020 (UTC)danende
 * Hi to which page are you referring?  I see you created Draft:Penrose-Güven limit and edited The Science Academy Society of Turkey. S0091 (talk) 19:46, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi again, it is a page I created in Turkish wikipedia, page: Rahmi Güven (https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahmi_G%C3%BCven) - I'd like to translate to English as well.Danende (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2020 (UTC)danende
 * Oh, ok. Each language is their own project with their own policies, etc. so you will need to ask at the Turkish Wikipedia. S0091 (talk) 22:06, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

OK I will. Thanks S0091. --Danende (talk) 13:17, 16 November 2020 (UTC)Danende

Dear S0091.
Hello there.

I believe Kansas Bear is stalking me.

KitchenScience (talk) 22:56, 15 November 2020 (UTC)


 * S0091, you might want to read this. A little to much of a coincidence. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:03, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Ahhh...and it grows deeper . Another note then. S0091 (talk) 23:07, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello.
I will be quitting from editing as I feel I can't do anything right,

Maybe If I find out how to edit correctly I MAY come back.

Ulyvoei (talk) 23:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi please take the time to read through all the messages editors have left you and follow all the blue links to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  I think editors have tried to guide you and offered help but you need to put forth effort as well.  It does take time to get to know this place and you will make mistakes as everyone does but you do need to take concerns seriously and respond appropriately.  Please take advantage of any help offered. S0091 (talk) 23:28, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello.

I will take a look at it, but I don’t exactly know what counts as vandalism

Ulyvoei (talk) 23:31, 15 November 2020 (UTC)


 * There have been further developments (both in discovered behavior and admin action in response). You're welcome to continue discussing our standards and potential for future constructive edits or mentoring and "indefinite doesn't mean infinite" for a block. There are more details on my talkpage. Sorry it didn't work out for now though. DMacks (talk) 00:06, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Help
Can you help edit or publish my draft here? Citatiins and full info known filled in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alexander_Jackson_Maier

Sincere apology
I made a mistake and briefly blocked you instead of another editor. I am very sorry. Cullen<sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  21:03, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * User: HindiNewsGram is now blocked, which was my intention. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  21:07, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I made a quick run to the store and completely missed it, . No worries! S0091 (talk) 21:12, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Urgent U-11 error review
Dear colleague Soo91, last week I wrote an article about a local company that has been making headlines in my country recently. I am an independent journalist from Nigeria, I usually write articles related to the tech, financial and real estate sectors as well as cryptocurrency and write for Wikipedia as a hobby. The company in question about which I wrote is named Landwey, it is a well known Nigerian company and its CEO already has a wikipedia page. They're playing quite a big role in the development of real estate in Lagos, the economic capital of Nigeria I have read about them and heard a lot about them through the news. Recently my article has been deleted under the mention of U11. I find this quite offensive and slightly disrespectful as I am often praised by my readerbase for writing unbiased articles even about controversial topics such as cryptocurrency. By reading the article carefully, one can easily see that the article is unbiased and factually accurate, all of what is written in the article is backed by the various reputable sources mentioned in the reference section and that I put great effort into making the article neutral. However, I believe that my article has been deleted by mistake as it has been deleted under U-11 before I even posted it as it was still saved as a draft and I therefore think that it should be restored. If however, you can find at least one legitimately biased sentence or paragraph, I will make sure to adjust it so as to make it more neutral. In the opposite case, I think that the article should be brought back. Kha Erl (talk) 15:46, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I see you have contacted Fastily who was the administrator that deleted the page.  They will review your request.  Since it has been deleted, I can longer access it so cannot provide details as to why I thought it met U5 or U11 criteria but clearly Fastily agreed. S0091 (talk) 19:56, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, please contact Fastily or at least tag him so he replies as the way he behaves is rude and racist, I have responded to his message last week and even tagged him

and have not yet received a reply whilst other users have contacted him in the meantime, even yesterday with much bigger requests and have already received a reply(after only a few hours), I am sure had I not been a Nigerian journalist talking about an african company, I would have already received a reply and would have been treated respectfully, this is appalling

Here's my introduction
My name is Ashton, I'll be staying for some years now.

My favorite thing to do is draw because it explains how I feel.

I'm learning different languages so sorry if I leave a message in a different language!

Again, thank you for the introduction, Sincerely, AshtonNewWikiHelper192 (talk) 20:11, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Your intervention is highly required.
Hi, please contact Fastily or at least tag him so he replies as the way he behaves is rude and racist, I have responded to his message last week and even tagged him and have not yet received a reply whilst other users have contacted him in the meantime, even yesterday with much bigger requests and have already received a reply(after only a few hours), I am sure had I not been a Nigerian journalist talking about an african company, I would have already received a reply and would have been treated respectfully, this is appalling Kha Erl (talk) 07:27, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Your reversal of my edits
Hi! I saw you reverted by edits on Encomienda. It seems the references I deleted were from www.remilitari.com which is not a reliable source for wikipedia. Did I accidentally remove any other source? Cheers!Historian734 (talk) 19:49, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi yes, you did.  I see you have started a discussion on the article's talk page so I suggest letting that take its course.  I have added a comment there but cannot speak to the reliability of the source. S0091 (talk) 20:30, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes I saw I did. Was my mistake. Sorry about that. --Historian734 (talk) 21:02, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Query

 * Hi S0091, I was wondering if you could help me. Is there anywhere where I can ask questions to admins or to experienced wikipedians about how to do things or about general things about policy? Thanks.--Historian734 (talk) 11:55, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You can ask questions or get help at the Teahouse where experienced editors, some being admins, are around to help. I also left a Welcome message on your talk page that has some helpful links. S0091 (talk) 15:57, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks!

THANK YOU for your communication. I have added some citations to the Susan Henderson article I submitted. Is this enough? Thanks again. Lane Hastings Lane Hastings (talk) 20:02, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Replied on their talk page. S0091 (talk) 20:12, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

THANK YOU SO MUCH!
You're help is so appreciated. Lane Hastings (talk) 15:21, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:46, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the warm welcome
Hi! Thank you for welcoming me to the community. :)

I am currently experimenting in my sandbox on how my user page is going to be. I was wondering who I could ask to review it while I was tinkering around and no one really comes to mind since I do not know anyone in wikipedia. lol. Until you left a message on my talk page. XD Anyways, ummm... Oh! i just remembered something. I think there's a process about submitting the page for a review. I think I'm getting ahead of myself here. LOL.

Sorry for kinda rambling. :P So... yeah. Thank you, again! ^_^

Ahxel (talk) 21:54, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Ahxel, your User page is really about your interests and activities as they relate to editing Wikipedia so I would worry about that last. A simple "Hi I'm Ahxel and I'm interested in articles about......" is more than sufficient for a beginner.  Concentrate your efforts on improving Wikipedia and your User page will develop from that (i.e. articles you created, improved, other tasks, etc.). S0091 (talk) 22:10, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Wage theft in California
Hi S0091- I added a section on "Wage Theft" to a politicians page (Lorena Gonzalez) in response to her frequent tweets about "standing up for workers."

The largest section on her current page is about "Worker Protections" and she has recently tweeted about introducing legislation in the upcoming legislative session (2021) related to wage theft. At one point, she even said "it should be treated like all other property crimes."

I researched recent wage theft lawsuits in California to determine if this was a serious or widespread issue, and discovered a large class action settlement in October 2020: https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/employment-labor/corecivic-employees-wages-lawsuit-settles-for-3-2m/

This settlement involves a corporation that had contributed to Lorena's political campaigns since she first ran for Assembly- including during the years the wage theft complaint was being heard in court.

The edit was removed, and I'd like to know if it's because it was inaccurate, or inappropriate, to add "Wage Theft" to this page and/or if the reference to the campaign contributions was the problem.

Thank you for the clarification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SandyEdit (talk • contribs) 00:51, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTHERE sock
So that you know, this IP editor is a WP:SOCK of indefinitely blocked User:92.14.216.40 so, whatever your intention, no need to apologise to them for removing their edit. They should not be editing at all. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:54, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Wrong edits
I am sorry, I would like to ask you why did you remove all my edits because of "not reliable source". I translated what was writte in the italian version of Grassobbio wikipedia. And I get information of the economy part from a website written by a journalist of my town that I know because I am from thi town. Thank in advance. Sof1998 (talk) 10:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi wikis, including Wikipedia, are not a reliable source as they user generated (see WP:CIRC).  For a source to be considered reliable, they must have editorial oversight, a history of fact checking, etc. Thank you for asking! S0091 (talk) 15:59, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Hello!

Standbulb (talk) 04:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC) <br style="clear: both;"/>

Thank you
Good afternoon, thank you very much for your welcome! --Reb1998 (talk) 16:23, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello S0091
Verum disputatio here, with regards your message and deletion of my addition to the Larry Hanley wikipedia page, I knew Larry personally he was a friend of mine and the picture I inserted was from my own camera, I took the picture myself on March 5th 2010, he was loved and respected dearly by many people. The addition of his campaign to lower the Express Bus Fare was an actual event, I apologize if I didn't cite sources for that historical event, I am brand new to this process but I can assure you there is no mendacity to my contribution. How do we proceed ? What was wrong with the Picture? What was wrong with Adding information on his Life and Title ? it seems very Authoritarian of you to just remove everything I spent all morning doing out of love and respect for my deceased friend. Source on Express Bus Fare. https://labornotes.org/2019/05/commuters-and-bus-drivers-unite-larry-hanleys-staten-island-campaign Verum disputatio (talk) 01:11, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Thank you for the message.  Please understand Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, thus content must simply summarize what independent reliable sources have chosen to write about a subject.  Claims such as "he was loved by many" does not belong here (see WP:NOTMEMORIAL).  Given you are a close friend, you have a conflict of interest which compromises your neutral point of view. You are more than welcome to add the photo, but this is not the appropriate venue to write adoring narrative about your friend, even though I sympathize I for your loss. S0091 (talk) 01:39, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the response, you are right and I appreciate your input I didn't look at it that way, may I ask for your assistance in adding the link ? that I sent in the message ? I cant seem to acquire the picture correctly now as well. But the other edits He was International President of the ATU all the other information was deleted it just seems so harsh no ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Verum disputatio (talk • contribs) 01:50, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmm....you need to careful about copyrights since it is published on a website. If it is photo you took and you have the original, follow the Files for upload instructions. S0091 (talk) 02:09, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

User:Akaberepl/sandbox
Hello, thank you for your warm welcome. This is my very first edit for English wikipedia. My intention is to enrich the existing article 'Podlachian microlanguage' with more details. Could you kindly review my sandbox and tell me if the edit is acceptable to be promoted to the existing article.

I have made just two articles in Polish wikipedia: 'Jan Maksymiuk' and 'Mikrojezyk podlaski' which is a Polish version of 'Podlachian microlanguage'. Regards. Akaberepl (talk) 11:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi the best place to discuss any changes is article's talk page where knowledgeable/interested editors can participate.  It may also be a good idea to post a note at WikiProject Poland.  Thanks for message! S0091 (talk) 14:46, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your reply. I will follow your recommendation. Regards Akaberepl (talk) 20:07, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello @S0091. Let me return to you again with a kind request for support. I have left my messages in both places, but I have not succeeded. I have been keeping the message on the  article's talk page for few weeks, but it seems it was not noticed. Finally I have removed it. Could you please do me a favour and if possible send my message to the author of the Podlachian microlanguage article (as I am not able to do it). I would appreciate if someone could help me to expand the existing article Podlachian microlanguage with a new content placed in my sandbox, being in fact the English version of my article on the Polish wikipedia (Mikrojęzyk Podlaski). Regards Akaberepl (talk) 16:01, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , I commend your patience. Unfortunately, the original author is no longer active here as they have not edited since 2017.  At this point, you should be bold and move forward with the expansion.  I do suggest restoring your note on the article's talk page (go to history and "undo" your removal) and make the changes over a series of edits rather than one big change.  If you have questions or need help, you can ask at the Teahouse.  Good luck! S0091 (talk) 16:18, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Dear S0091. Thank you so much for your priceless advice! Best regards Akaberepl (talk) 16:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC) And another kind request. I have made the expansion. Could you please have a look if it is ok. Should I make any comments on the Talk page referring to your advice? Thanks again for your help. Akaberepl (talk) 17:26, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not familiar with the subject but nothing jumped out to me as problematic. It is up to you if you want to add another note to the talk page.  It is not required.  Thank YOU for your contributions! S0091 (talk) 18:42, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Delated edits
Good evening, I just wanted to know the reasons why you delated our edits on Grassobbio's english page. We only translated into english what is written in the italian version of the page (that has no sources in those voices). Thank you in advance.

Sof1998. Sof1998 (talk) 21:32, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I answered you above when you asked previously (scroll above) but maybe the ping did work?  Anyway, wikis including Wikipedia, are not a reliable source as the content is user generated.  A reliable source must have some type of editorial oversight, history of fact checking, etc. This time I will also post a note on your talk page to ensure you are aware of my message. :) S0091 (talk) 21:40, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, now I see. Apologies for the confusion.  Grassobbio's website is not a reliable source.  Wikipedia is not interested in what a subject says about itself (see WP:SELFPUB).  As my statement above, what is needed are independent sources with no connection to Grassobbio's.  I hope this makes more sense now. S0091 (talk) 21:59, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Oh ok! Now I understand better, thank you so much, I am correcting them as soon as I can. Thanks a lot again for your explications and kindness.

Sof1998 Sof1998 (talk) 22:04, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , good! :) If you have questions or need help, you can ask at the Teahouse.  Best of luck! S0091 (talk) S0091 (talk) 22:08, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

"Level 1: VERY high level of vandalism"!
Hello! I am very new to this and trying to learn more. I found the "very high level of vandalism" notification! Very much appreciate if I can learn what mistakes I made so to avoid them in future. Thank you so much for your help:) Sculpt Amber (talk) 18:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, that is just a notice about the level of vandalism Wikipedia is experiencing currently, not about you or any other specific editor. S0091 (talk) 18:25, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Soo91 Thank you very much for your welcome! --Reb1998 (talk) 16:47, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Danny Ranes and Brent Koster
could you accept this draft into an article? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Danny_Ranes_and_Brent_Koster — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kinkel Loukaitis Brazill (talk • contribs) 00:01, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

editing vandalized pages
Hey soo91 i would like it if you could suggest me vandalized pages i could edit or fix.Thank you,Arib. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiArib (talk • contribs) 17:53, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I suggest reading WP:VD which provides guidance on identifying and handling vandalism. I also found this guide helpful. S0091 (talk) 17:58, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

suggest articles which i could edit so i could get some experience
Hey Soo91 again,i wanted to ask you to suggest articles i could edit so i could gain some experience.Thank you,WikiArib. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiArib (talk • contribs) 18:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks
I appreciate the warm & informative welcome.

I am a long-time user, a recent Wikimedia Foundation supporter, and I figured it was time I start directly contributing, by doing small edits when I encounter the need.

In my day job, I do quite a lot of documentation, including wiki editing, so this feels very natural to me.

Happy holidays, thanks again!

AttendantLord (talk) 22:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * we welcome the help. In my opinion, Wikipedia needs competent editors much more than money.  Happy holidays to you as well! S0091 (talk) 23:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Cheers!
Thanks for the nice welcome message you left on my page. Someone close to me recently told me "Gangi þér vel á nýju ári" so I'll pass the words on to you.

Keep up the good work.

JoePhin (talk) 9:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, S0091!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

Happy New Year! S0091, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:23, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.


 * Thanks and wishing the same for you as well. Here's to 2021! S0091 (talk) 16:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Same to you. . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)