User talk:Spumuq

Shana
Hello. I appreciate your efforts in trying improve Wikipedia, but adding red links to disambiguation pages, and replacing disambiguation tags with red links doesn't really accomplish anything helpful, unless you are very soon planning on writing the article. If you are going to write the article, then great, revert my actions and continue your work. If not, please wait until someone does. -- Racer X11 Talk to me Stalk me  12:44, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Why is a red link to a tribe worse than a blue link to a totally different page that doesn't mention the tribe? Spumuq (talk) 12:53, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * It's not that its really worse, it just doesn't help the situation.


 * Regarding your recent edit summary: See this subsectiion of WP:REDNOT part of the same guideline you mention WP:REDLINK, and maybe reconsider? Are you planning on creating the article? -- Racer X11 Talk to me Stalk me  13:01, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * OK, on second thought I will let your changes stand. I was imposing my own interpretation of the guideline and my own editing style on you here. The red link doesn't hurt and if you think it's helpful, I will leave it be. -- Racer X11 Talk to me Stalk me  13:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zimbabwe national cricket team, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ODI. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Edit-stalking
If you continue edit-stalking and reverting just because it's me rather than for genuine reasons then I'm going to have to post in the administrators' noticeboard about this. Zozs (talk) 12:01, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I am fixing problems in articles. I don't care who put those problems in articles. If editors remove a lot of your additions then you should reconsidder your editing, not mine. Spumuq (talk) 12:37, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No, you're not. You're blatantly disrupting intentionally (example) and I haven't ever seen you take any of these issues to the talk page even once (it's you who is making crazy changes which deviate from the consensus, so it's you who needs to explain them). Zozs (talk) 10:38, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited A Star Is Born Again, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Born again. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
Peridon (talk) 17:50, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Gibraltar
Hi there. As one of the recent editors of Gibraltar who recently (knowingly or not) participated in an edit war over how much prominence to give to a certain item in the lead of the article, I am inviting you to comment on a proposal at Talk:Gibraltar towards unprotecting the article. Can I also take this opportunity to cordially remind you that it is both more collegial and more effective to discuss in talk than to join in an edit war? Thanks a lot. --John (talk) 23:31, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Uncivil behavior
Regarding this AN/I discussion: there appears to be a serious problem with your contribution to the discussion. You provided four diffs to edits I've made to an article, then you attacked me by calling me "dishonest." You appeared to use the four diffs as proof I've edit warred, in support of your accusation I'm "dishonest." However, you neglected to indicate that one of the four diffs is an (immediate) self revert, reducing the total number of valid diffs to two. In general it is not right to complain about an edit that an editor has self-reverted. Either you didn't notice the self-revert, perhaps because you may be a relatively new editor on Wikipedia, or you may have noticed the revert but you chose to behave extremely uncivilly. Uncivil behavior can result in your being banned or blocked. Moreover, you need to learn to be much more careful with your evidence-gathering and evidence-presentation practices, especially when making an extremely serious accusation of dishonesty on a major admin noticeboard.

I also looked briefly at your edit history and I'm now slightly suspicious. I'm not an expert on user behavior and my suspicions may be baseless, and thus I'll leave it to the judgement of more experienced users, but I find it somewhat odd that a relatively new user (your account was opened in July 2014) would appear to be making very serious, highly disputed accusations against several different users on several different admin noticeboard (not only the AN/I complaint linked above), all regarding controversial or contentious subject matter. ---IjonTichy (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * If you edit war while complaining that you are not edit-warring, people may think your comments are hypocritical, do not blame me for that, other people saw the same problem. You had similar problems before, ,      and there are more people.
 * Now you accuse me of being suspicious, because I use an admin board after seven month editing here, this is more hypocrisy, within one month of starting to edit, you started using admin boards and you made another false sockpuppet accusation, how many other people have you called sockpuppets because they disagree with you, and who was the sockpuppet that joined your attack on Mongo? Spumuq (talq) 14:39, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Spumuq, your response is very bad, and is a cause for serious concern. The substance of your response, and the battleground tone of your response, have basically affirmed my view that there are serious problems with your editing, and especially with the way you interact with fellow editors. You neglected to address the substance of the issue I raised, regarding your using a self-reverted edit to attack me as 'dishonest'.
 * All you needed to do was to say that you have made a simple mistake when you overlooked the fact that in general it is wrong to complain about an edit that a user has self-reverted. If you would have done that, I would have accepted your admission of mistake and we all would have moved on and forgotten about the entire issue, because we are all human and we all make innocent mistakes, it is a normal part of the editing process. But instead of doing that, you have acted with further hostility and you appear to have increased your attacks. You have provided a bunch of irrelevant diffs from almost 3 years ago when I was a newbie and I made a lot of mistakes, including (but not limited to) filing frivolous complaints against users on AN/I, and one (and only one) request for sockpuppet investigation.
 * You falsely accuse me of having made "another false sockpuppet accusation," but the fact is I have never made "another accusation" as you imply, I have only made a single request for sockpuppet investigation (not an accusation) almost 3 years ago, which I quickly realized was a mistake on my part. "How many other people have you called sockpuppets because they disagree with you?" - the answer to your question is zero. "And who was the sockpuppet that joined your attack on Mongo?" - the answer to your question is that I have no idea, and that you appear to make a suckpuppet accusation while you are accusing me of making suckpuppet accusations.
 * And MONGO and I are now interacting civilly on the talk page of the film and the DRN and working collaboratively towards compromise. And I will not elaborate here on this user talk page on any issues between me and user Earl King Jr. (EKJ), this is not the proper venue to discuss these issues, they are irrelevant here right now.
 * Again, your comments above show your attitude needs major improvement, or you will soon be blocked or banned, although regretfully it appears you are likely to waste weeks or months of the community's time in trying to patiently wait for your hostile behavior to improve. Spumuq, almost nobody on WP cares about edits that were made almost 3 years ago - on WP even a month ago, under most circumstances, is considered ancient history.
 * More importantly, I have learned from the many mistakes I've made almost 3 years ago, and I have not repeated them. You have conveniently neglected to mention that from Dec. 2012 to date I have edited entirely trouble free, and no complaints were opened against me on any admin boards (except one in summer 2014 that was quickly closed without any actions or warnings against me). I'm also concerned about the aggressive, hostile, belligerent style of your interactions with others, and your attacks on several different users, on several other AN/I threads and WP articles.
 * Spumuq, you are strongly advised to reconsider your approach to interaction with the community including taking much more care to understand the arguments of those opposed to your opinion. I hope you can learn from the mistakes you have made so far, and I also hope you can learn from the many mistakes I've made 3 years ago. I hope you can grow into a friendly, collaborative, approachable, effective, productive member of the community who is interacting in a respectful and considerate way with others. I wish you the very best in all your future endeavors on WP. Thanks and goodbye, IjonTichy (talk) 17:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Stop attacking me, stop dishonesty, stop it. You say «2012 to date I have edited entirely trouble free, and no complaints were opened against me on any admin boards», but this is not true, many editors complained recently, like this, don't blame me. Spumuq (talq) 18:19, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The evidence you cited once again willfully, deliberately misrepresents what I said. I said "were opened." The evidence you presented is not an AN/I that was opened against me, the AN/I complaint was opened against other parties, and within that AN/I, an editor, MONGO (with whom I'm now in good terms and we're both interacting civilly with each other and working collaboratively), decided to complain against me, a complaint that, by the way, quickly went absolutely nowhere and had almost no support (in contrast to your saying "many editors complained recently"), with the exception of the editor that complained (MONGO), and EKJ (whose comments are irrelevant to this present discussion on this user talk page and are best discussed elsewhere), as well as yourself.
 * You have continued to cast aspersions on me by repeatedly calling me 'dishonest' despite my explanation that it is in your best interest to stop immediately, or you could be blocked or banned. I'm done wasting my time responding to your misrepresentations of evidence and your twisting of the facts, and your hostile approach and your personal attacks on me. I will disengage and will not come here to your user talk page again anytime in the near future to read your comments or respond to you. Again I sincerely wish you the best in your future career on Wikipedia. Goodbye, IjonTichy  (talk) 20:19, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Stop attacking me, stop dishonesty, stop it. Get off my talk page, stop harassing me. Spumuq (talq) 09:47, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Daniel arap Moi, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kalenjin and Kikuyu. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Regions and departments
Hello. I wanted to let you know that though I know you put a lot of effort into the changes you made to pages on Senegal departments and regions, I've been changing them back. This is English Wikipedia, and in English usage "region" and "department" are ordinarily used for the subdivisions known in French-speaking countries as "région" and "département". Compare Regions of France and Departments of France. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:37, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015
Your recent editing history at Communist state shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Pishcal — ♣ 19:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Pishcal, what can we do? Zozs tried to turn the article into something else, on the talkpage everybody rejected Zozs' change (Wbm1058 and Ahecht and 209.211.131.181 and TURTLOS and me), then Zozs made the change anyway, then Zozs always reverts to his new version, against consensus, what can we do? Zozs' changes are reverted everywhere by different editors but Zozs always reverts again, what can we do? Spumuq (talq) 10:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * If he's editing against consensus then report it to WP:ANI or WP:AN3. Pishcal  — ♣ 13:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * What they rejected is a page move. I haven't changed what the page is about nor removed information about the original term described. Zozs (talk) 17:48, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Criticisms of Marxism
Stop making controversial edits without consensus. -Xcuref1endx (talk) 18:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Pishcal — ♣ 17:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

March 2015
Hello, I'm Ahunt. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Rotax 912 without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ahunt (talk) 22:23, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Translate it
Translate it.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:55, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Btw, I have requested in-line references in the French article.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If you can not add sources or notability to your own article, possibly you should not remove the notability template, don't instruct me to do your chores Spumuq (talq) 11:36, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at User talk:Ubikwit, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Please sign template messages, too. Liz  Read! Talk! 12:32, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thankyou! Spumuq (talq) 12:34, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Do not edit my User Talk page again if not posting an official notice
And if you have a complaint about edit warring, you know the proper venue to file it.-- Ubikwit  連絡見学/迷惑 10:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This is an official notice of revert warring, and so is this, and you are reverting and hiding them, why tell me to fuck off , it is not civil. Spumuq (talq) 10:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Edit warring
While I haven't blocked you yet, your edits on Neoliberalism are bordering on an edit war. Edit warring is not just breaking the bright line rule WP:3RR, it is about a pattern of edits and it doesn't require 4 reverts in 24 hours to block an editor. The merits are irrelevant here, it is the behavior that is an issue. You need to restrain yourself and continue to use the article talk page, and use the revert button less. Dennis Brown - 2&cent; 13:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, sorry. Spumuq (talq) 13:10, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

FYI
User:Zekenyan wrote that ''The current ban (on User:Middayexpress) is not effective. I propose the current topic ban be amended to "East African related articles" and include User:AcidSnow'' and I agree with him. Furthermore I agree with what other users wrote on Middayexpress's external canvassing. But IMHO we have to add even User:26oo and User:Vituzzu (who is a Mafioso probably related/involved in "Operation Martese" ), in order to make the ban REALLY effective. FYI please go to and click on Manmer2015 ....sincerely, B.

July 2015
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Greece. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 16:59, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
 * I made one revert, you made two reverts, then you gave me an edit-war warning, this is hipocrisy, and you said «Rv speculation from a polemical opinion piece», why do you lie about references? Many good sources outside Greece support this. Greece had a huge default in 2012 and again in 2014, this is not a foreign slur against the glory of Greece, it is a fact. Spumuq (talq) 13:45, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Citations and bare links
Hi, I recommend that you use Cite web inside tags, instead of just bare URLs. There are other similar citation templates for other media. See Help:Citation Style 1. bobrayner (talk) 18:21, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for continued edit warring and hounding. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice:. S warm  we ♥ our hive  07:39, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

That was an accident
Hi Spumuq, I just wanted to let you know that I accidentally clicked rollback on your edit on ANI. I clicked rollback accidentally less than five times in my wiki career. You must have been very stressed so you didn't look at my apology in a dummy edit summary. I tried to re-add your comment but I got edit conflict every time. I thought you will see my edit summary, but you didn't. Sorry for that. I was searching my name in archives of ANI and I found your comment. I think this will explain why I took this much time to explain my actions. Supdiop ( Talk 🔹 Contribs ) 06:26, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Discussion
Discussion here might interest you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Long_term_pattern_of_POV_edits_and_edit_warring_by_User:Jimjilin

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Contests
User:Dr. Blofeld has created WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:37, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list