User talk:Saturdayopen

Alert for India/Pakistan/Afghanistan related articles
Vengeance 01 (talk) 11:58, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Note - I'm leaving this alert on multiple other editors to make sure everyone is aware that editor behavior is closely watched on these articles. Vengeance 01 (talk) 11:58, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

August 2020
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:John F. Kennedy. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 17:53, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Saturdayopen modifying Vital Article List without consensus. Thank you. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  18:25, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/Technology, you may be blocked from editing. Roller26 (talk) 08:39, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/People/Politicians and leaders. Roller26 (talk) 08:39, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Roller26, are you talking about my removal of Mir-Hossein Mousavi? Because I was the editor who added him in the first place. Saturdayopen (talk) 15:17, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , it refers to your mass removals and additions to Vital Articles Level 5 lists of various topics. While you are welcome to include a article in the incomplete list, it is considered an etiquette to include just add one article per edit with an edit summary justifying the inclusion. For deletion of any article from the list you are supposed to following the procedure at Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5. Roller26 (talk) 15:27, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

please start using edit summaries
Please start using edit summaries immediately. You are making changes other editors don't understand, and you need to explain your reasoning. There's a tool you can turn on at Preferences>Editing>Editor that will remind you if you leave the edit summary blank. —valereee (talk) 09:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with Valereee - this needs to start happening with all of your edits moving forward. Failure to include edit summaries with your edits will likely result in those changes being reverted, and with further warnings being left. Repeated issues in this regard can lead to being blocked, and assuming your edits are legitimate - I don't want to see you blocked over something like this. Please start including edit summaries. If you need help, you can message me on my user talk page by clicking here. Thanks :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:09, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

coup
Stop adding the Capitol riot as a coup without sources. And stop removing the coups in Argentina. If you continue you will be benned because your disruptive edits --Yilku1 (talk) 00:31, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * So the sources already in the entry don’t count? Saturdayopen (talk) 00:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Use ctrl-f and tell which of the sources uses the word coup --Yilku1 (talk) 00:40, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Who made you the decider of what constitutes a coup? Saturdayopen (talk) 00:47, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Just provide a reliable source calling it a coup. --Yilku1 (talk) 00:57, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Will you do the same for the Argentine entries? Saturdayopen (talk) 00:58, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


 * There are sources in the articles --Yilku1 (talk) 01:24, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

There’s an entire section devoted to various reliable sources calling 1/6 a coup. Saturdayopen (talk) 02:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Dummy
Regarding your question in your edit summary about the album – yes, the liner notes state "All tracks produced by Portishead with A. Utley". It's also very clear in the section in the liner notes titled "Portishead Thanks" where he is the first person they thank, so he obviously wasn't a member of Portishead, otherwise he wouldn't need to thank himself. This is because Utley was not considered an official member of the band at the time. He was quite a bit older than Geoff Barrow and Beth Gibbons, and they saw him as a "father figure" with experience in the studio who could help them make the music they wanted. Richard3120 (talk) 19:18, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of reliably-cited entry in Template:Modern yoga gurus
Hi, the entry you chose to remove from this template is reliably cited in the template topic's article.

Please take extreme care not to remove cited content. I assume this removal was well-intentioned; please check properly next time before taking any such action, which would usually be considered damaging. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:07, 24 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Er, if you'd put in your edit comment "removing duplicate entry" (or even "rm dup") then of course I'd have seen that you weren't acting in careless haste. There must be a moral in there somewhere. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:45, 24 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Wow, dude. Can you even be more of an asshole? Saturdayopen (talk) 17:49, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Baruch Spinoza
I assume that a "Bible and history" template was on the Baruch Spinoza article because he was one of the pioneers of "rational" Bible criticism... AnonMoos (talk) 16:57, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

October 2021
Hello. I have noticed that you edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Rsk6400 (talk) 05:49, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

New message from Tarl N.
Please discuss reasons for including Martín Cortés as a vital article. It seems to make no sense whatsoever. Tarl N. ( discuss ) 22:58, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Shinzoh Abe


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that the page Shinzoh Abe has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it was an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consisted only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Liz Read! Talk! 02:46, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what this is. Saturdayopen (talk) 03:39, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/Arts. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. You have been warned about this previously. – The Grid  ( talk )  04:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I feel like my edits is completely constructive. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make vandalism. Saturdayopen (talk) 04:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You're completely missing the point. Any changes you make to the Level 5 Vital articles needs to be discussed on the talk page. – The Grid  ( talk )  04:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Buddy, the last time someone made an edit to the talk page was November 29, 2021‎. My suggestion for swapping out Deadpool for Black Panther in the superhero section was made in August 30, 2020, which went unnoticed until October 27 of this year. For a project that centers on picking the most important articles, it is surprisingly not that active. I have come to accept that you just need to do things yourself. Saturdayopen (talk) 04:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That's a bad assumption when the Level 5 articles have been at their maximum capacity. – The Grid  ( talk )  00:49, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

"Most of the other French authors don't have this sidebar"
Hi,

I'm ambivalent about the value of the sidebar in question, but did you count how many relevant pages used it versus how many didn't before you began deleting it wholesale? If so, could you share the results of your research?

Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 23:13, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I will admit, there's a lot more authors that have this sidebar than I thought. I'm just removing the sidebar because it doesn't list anyone. Saturdayopen (talk) 23:21, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Frank Miller
Hello and thank you for tidying up after the Frank Miller page move. However, it's safe to leave redirects which are not broken, as they will still guide the reader to the correct article. Thanks again, Certes (talk) 12:41, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Michael Jackson (critic)
I have reverted your move. I disagree that (critic) is a superior disambiguator to (writer). The less specific (writer) more accurately summarizes his output. Please feel free to start a WP:RFM for this change. --Cerebral726 (talk) 23:50, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Changed lyrics
Revised COPYRIGHT pub Nov 1949

Lovesick blues; words and music by

Irving Mills and Cliff Friend, arr. by

Hank Williams. © Mills Music, inc.,

New York; 1Nov49; on changed lyrics &

music; EP41741. Tillywilly17 (talk) 00:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Netherlands
Maybe like Denmark (which is just the part between Germany and Norway/Sweden) and the Kingdom of Denmark (or Danish Realm) which includes the Faroes and Greenland? See also United Kingdom v British Islands (sic). Does [Do?] the Netherlands have overseas colonies any more? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:35, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, Saba. Actually, seeing the Danish Realm article, I'm going to undo my changes, considering that the Netherlands article (without the the Kingdom part) is universally treated as the main article. Saturdayopen (talk) 19:48, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Scotland
I have reverted your latest edit to the Scotland article which you have been been edit-warring over and advised by others to seek consensus for, per WP:BRD. Wikipedia works on concensus and persistent failure to observe this and insist on edit-warring to enforce your edits may result in a block - Cactus.man  &#9997;  08:03, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ulster Scots people. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please stop removing articles from the Level 5 Vital Articles list immediately
The first paragraph on the talk page reads as follows: Any article currently on this list may be challenged. The discussion is open to the following rules:
 * 1) Any discussion must run at least two weeks before being closed
 * 2) Any discussion must have at least four total votes before being closed
 * 3) Any article with at least 55% support for inclusion will be retained
 * 4) Any article with at least 55% opposition for inclusion will be removed

You are not opening discussions, you are removing authors based on completely arbitrary criteria like 'we have enough pony authors' or your feelings on the 'anti-Tom' genre. I am reverting these edits and if you would like to open discussions for each of these authors on the talk page, I will be happy to discuss them one by one with you and anyone else who is interested where we can make collaborative decisions. This is now the third time this has been discussed on your talk page. Please refrain from making edits like this in the future. Kazamzam (talk) 00:43, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

June 2022
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.– The Grid  ( talk )  01:52, 23 June 2022 (UTC)