User talk:Usedtobecool/Archive 7

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Famke Janssen on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 20:31, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Saida Muna Tasneem on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 19:30, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

PSN
Hey, Can we move User:Usedtobecool/PSN to WikiProject Nepal/Guidelines on sources? This would help a lot of editors. CAPTAIN MEDUSA  talk  20:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , it would be an honour, personally, but I don't think we can move it as is since the WikiProject page is, to some extent, official, while I have used a lot of informal language, and even said stuff that can not be said outside of userspace (for example, ranking Kathmandu Post and Himalayan Times, or the notes on LensNepal, and even Annapurna Post). I suggest either linking it from there perhaps as a redirect, or preferably using it to write a more formal guide. We don't have to write one from scratch, we could just clone it, strip the more informal bits and take it from there. Thoughts? Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:53, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Review message
Thanks for the message and explanation at my talk page! While I'm here, your page says you live in Nepal, so I'll also say that sounds cool, though that may be my stereotypical image of airbender-esque monks. Kingsif (talk) 14:23, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , hey, Haha! It definitely has its moments, but I suppose that would be true of all places. In my experience, anarchy is cool when there's peace, health, happiness and contentment; not so much when something needs actively fixing. And, unfortunately, I am cursed to always find everything needing fixing. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * You are very welcome, whatever I did to deserve this kindness, ; and thank you very much! Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Advice for newcomers
Hello, You are receiving this message because you are invited to take part at Advice for newcomers where you can provide advice that will help our newcomers in the future. It is not a discussion forum, just a place where you say what advice would be helpful to our future editors. I would like to get at least 100 editors to take part in this so please feel free to spread the word to other editors as well. I look forward to seeing what you say to newcomers. Interstellarity (talk) 13:22, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 'Sup, long time! Did you stop editing the Teahouse altogether?Thanks for thinking of me; it's a neat idea but I'll have to think about it a while to narrow down what I want to say. I must say "3 sentences" is not a very good criterion though; English language allows anything of any length to be said in a single sentence if one knows how Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:44, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I haven't been as active as I used to be at the Teahouse. I have been busy in real life and on Wikipedia. I may help out occasionally there. You might want to check out this conservation I had with . See here. He gave me ideas on what this could possibly turn into. You are welcome to edit the page and provide your ideas on what this project might become. Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 17:47, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , that's a great discussion. For some reason, that talk page wasn't in my watchlist; I have just added it and will chime in if I have something to add to the conversation. Cheers! Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:35, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You might want to check out the page again and if you want, you can add your comments there. Interstellarity (talk) 00:26, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I've just added two; don't want to overdo it right now. Let's see what others have to say. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:18, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Identifying disambiguation pages
It has been a while since I made whatever change allows me to see redirects in green, and I had been wanting to see disambiguation pages too. I often forget when I link to them and get a notice and have to fix what I did. Now that I can see disambiguation pages after reading this (yes, I got way behind on the Teahouse archives) I'm wondering how to change the color. It might be best to change the color everyone sees because at least for me, that orange is hard to read. There might be a better, darker shade of orange. I seem to recall changing the link to my talk page in my signature to an easier to read color, but it's still not that easy to read. — Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  17:03, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , it seems the gadget is the easy alternative to having a user subpage with the code such as I have just added to User:Usedtobecool/common.css. So, try creating your own "common.css" page and saving that code choosing whichever color you want and disabling the gadget; see if it works. To change the gadget itself for everyone, I think you'd need to make an edit request at MediaWiki talk:Gadget-DisambiguationLinks.css (best discuss first). Of course you can make your signature any color you like. Are you saying you need a reminder on how to do that again? Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:25, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I decided this was a question on the Village Pump. They explained how to do it. But thanks.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  16:01, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * They also approved my request for a darker color.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  18:47, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , glad it all worked out just the way you wanted; yeah the darker ought to be more accessible, and everyone the better for it. On another note, though not a big deal to me personally, for the future, you might consider dropping a note to the effect to your previous queries when you decide to ask elsewhere. Common courtesy, and at least saves duplication of effort. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I should have said something. At first I didn't think I should bother the Village Pump people but now there's a lot of good information there if anyone wants to look for it. And I got a lot accomplished from the help I got both places.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  20:04, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I just made my first edits using the orange color. It seemed weird to see the orange in article text and then I realized. That's why I did this! Someone made a mistake and I caught it.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  20:52, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , apologies! I completely missed your last. I must've got the notification, but probably clicked it when too many windows were open and later lost it without seeing it. I oft wonder if there's something special about the color orange itself, as it stands out so sorely to me, it's a struggle to leave a page without fixing even when there's just one of those. Definitely one of the things around here that works exactly the way it's supposed to Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:36, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Jayanendra Chand Thakuri
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Mighty kind of, thank you! Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:35, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.
Dear sir, usedtobecool!

Good day,

My contribution to Wikipedia of the article Nepali Patro is being denied various times citing different reasons. I want to humbly inform you that I have written this article with all the data and facts that are true and authentic. I assure you that all the references I have cited and references given in the article are true and have no incorrect information or whatsoever which can or violate the Wikipedia rules or hinder its goodwill. Actually, you yourself can study it and be sure of that as you are more professional than I am and also from Nepal. I am merely a starter on this wiki platform and I am still in the initial learning phase whereas you have done a lot of contributions. Thus, you have more knowledge on how to improve this article.

I want to assure you I am contributing with the article of Nepali Patro app, which in fact if studied thoroughly, references given, etc is the first digital calendar app to be launched here in Nepal for Nepalese people here and also those living abroad.

Maybe my writing is not so perfect but, I have tried my best for the article to be as good and perfect as possible.

I have been going through other Nepali digital calendar app and have become confused because Nepali Patro has more notable references than those which are already published in Wikipedia. Thus, please sir, do explain to me "which and what kind of notable references" have to be included for and its approval and I will surely try my best to make it "Sufficiently Notable for Inclusion in Wikipedia".

hoping to get your full cooperation in this regard so that the Nepali Patro article can be approved.

thanking you in advance for your kind co-operation.

sudan bhattarai dryair 02:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudan Bhattarai Upadhaya (talk • contribs)
 * First of all, Wikipedia is not for promotion. Secondly, I don't see your conflict-of-interest disclosure anywhere. Please go through WP:COI and WP:PAID, and make necessary disclosures. Thirdly, Wikipedia has its own inclusion criteria. The subject existing or its article having verifiability and accuracy, though necessary, are not sufficient. The topics need to meet the applicable notability guidelines to merit inclusion. If there are other articles on subjects that are not notable, you can nominate them for deletion; advocating inclusion of more crap would be backwards. Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Deepak Manange
Hello! Your submission of Deepak Manange at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

New message from Narutolovehinata5
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:01, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Message to usedtobecoo from Dx engine
Dear usedtobecool, I was going through wikipedia to contribute regarding nepali artist's life and event and i have got your messager regarding Uttam Neupane Kamana award receiving picture image copyright issue. I would like to inform you that mr Uttam Neupane is pioneer sound mixer from nepal and the picture what i have uploaded in his wikipedia page was from Award organizer website so it is one hundred percet reliable to keep it on his page so i would request you to keep it on his page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dx engine (talk • contribs) 15:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I have nominated it for deletion at Commons. I will have nothing more to do with whatever ends up happening with it. Your argument is irrelevant; if it is a copyright violation, Commons admins will delete it. I am sorry to see you engage in WP:UPE and WP:SOCKING; I suggest you start respecting Wikipedia policies and terms of use before you end up globally banned. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:37, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Re-review request
Hello, I request you to re-review the draft Draft:Valmiki Ashram. Many improvements have been made since its first submission was declined. Nisheshbhattarai (talk) 14:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , the draft isn't ready but we can only discuss that once you decide to abide by policy. I have left a note about how to do so at User talk:Bhattarai1237. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:09, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Seeking your thoughts
Hi Usedtobecool! Since you considered closing it yourself, I was wondering what your thoughts are on the close here. I explained my objections below it. Do you think it's worth going to AN to ask for a review? &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 23:43, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, (apologise for the delay; my online life has been disrupted of late). I feel being a would be closer is kinda like being a retired pope, that's why I didn't respond to your ping. Obviously no closer ought to be held hostage to what someone else who didn't close might have closed it as. Even a completely opposite outcome, as long as it's within reach, is not considered sufficient reason to overturn. The concern about supervoting is a valid reason for initiating a review though. Close calls and controversial topics are best closed by admins. Adding those two together, I think you would be justified in taking it to review if you so choose, though there's no guarantee the review will resolve in your favour. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:21, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

thank you
I sincerely appreciate someone they might decide to trust taking over. I've been trying to help, but there's just too much water under the bridge. —valereee (talk) 18:23, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

A few areas
Hi again. Thanks so much for digging out the note yesterday. While waiting on the ban to expire, it's a good time to learn more before contributing. When you have time, I'd really appreciate your offered ideas about a few things which are perplexing (and there are others I'll include later, if you're still willing): Hope these aren't too many questions. I've dug through policy, but haven't found the specific answers. Much obliged for your time and aide. Pasdecomplot (talk) 12:47, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Content: What's to be done with content errors, as in here, and here , when CON isn't achieved? Should each factual error citing on talk be accompanied by diffs - always necessary? And if CON still isn't achieved, what then?
 * RS: Where is it best to ask for V on reliability of sources? A norm I've noticed is to state the source's name if reliability issues are noted, ie. "Xinhua reports..." "Human Rights Watch reports...", is this an accepted standard?
 * RS for recent events in Tibet: BBC and sources including ICT note the difficulty foreigners (which would include msm reporters) have in gaining access to areas. This leaves other sources as providers of reports. On the contrary side, Xinhua and other state run agencies are documented as not being reliable. Does it follow that no sources are acceptable? I understand general  policy -if it isn't covered by noted RS, it shouldn't be included- but it's a conundrum. Are there policies/norms which address including information from war zones, for example, which might apply to this situation?
 * Academic RS: So far, I've noticed two academic sources, with their own pages, layered into Tibetan Buddhist pages. Being knowledgeable in the topics, I've also noticed each source has bias. Connecting the exhibited bias to RS about the author's bias is difficult, whereas providing RS with different views is not as difficult. (If you're familiar with the term "armchair quarterbacks", it's a way to describe aspects of the bias/lack of knowledge on the subject.) What's the best recourse?
 * Connecting the exhibited bias to RS about the author's bias&mdash;A likely reference to the BLP violations against Melvyn Goldstein made by the above user here. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 13:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)


 * This discussion is for aid between editors. Your statement is incorrect - not a BLP page, as confirmed by El_C at 18:00 15 September 2020. Continuing to aggressively follow other editors into talk page discussions (Tea House, my user page discussions, here, etc.) repeatedly is discouraged as form of WP:WIKIHOUNDING, while posting disparaging and incorrect information about an editor can be considered a  form of WP:PA : Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done. Please stop @. Thanks. Pasdecomplot (talk) 10:55, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * See WP:DR. If people who are already at the article can't agree, there is a series of steps to take, the final of which is an WP:RFC. If an RFC doesn't go your way, you will have to wait for something to change substantially or at least a few months before you try again. Wikipedia's business is not truth (WP:NOTTRUTH) nor justice (WP:RGW), and there are no absolute auditors, arbiters of truth, editors-in-chief. Everyone is a volunteer and everyone works on what interests them. This means that some content could be biased or inaccurate. This makes Wikipedia a constant work in progress all preliminary drafts of which, not all of them good, are also consumed by the public. That's why each Wikipedia article comes with the disclaimer that Wikipedia is not a reliable source. WP:DIFFS are a way of making it easy for everyone to follow the comment/conversation. They are no more or less necessary than they are useful. On the other hand, if you are talking about the "Unsourced assaults on Goldstein" comment that you received, it's to do with the WP:BLP policy. More on that later.
 * The first question (of your second bullet point) is not clear. Unless the answer is WP:RSN that you found out about later and have now posted to, you will have to elaborate. As for the second one, more or less, yes that's true. See WP:INTEXT, WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV and WP:QUOTEPOV.
 * I am aware of no such special provisions for war zones or similar, and I don't expect there is. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. Much of what Wikipedia already does with writing articles with daily updates, and breaking news and all that is already a poor practice. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia should be waiting for things to settle and substantial debate to take place to narrow down more or less the accurate version of events before writing about them. The labels of "generally reliable", unreliable, etc. are just generalisations to help editors get their bearings, especially the inexperienced ones. On any given specific context, the generalisations could fail. If you are not familiar with the topic, you should not attempt to write about it unless you have access to many reliable sources to cross-check and draw conclusions. If you are familiar with the topic, you may be able to work in relative dearth. If you know of a good source, you can make a case for why it is good and try to convince others that it is a good source for the specific case even if it is not generally reliable. If you can't do that, you will have to work with what little there may be in accepted reliable sources. Or you may have to wait. As I said earlier, Wikipedia is a work in progress, and in some articles, progress is very very slow.
 * If you can't make a convincing case that a given source you know is biased is biased, you might have to drop it, since no one can just take the word of a random username on the internet. Again, see WP:DR. As you get more people to look into it, they may see the bias themselves too. You may also seek help from other editors at relevant wikiprojects, if any. If you have other sources that give a different viewpoint to the sources already in the article, it might mean that the article has neutrality problems. See WP:NPOV. It may be possible to include viewpoints from all the different kinds of sources to strike a balance. That's something to discuss for the editors working on the article. There is WP:NPOVN, the noticeboard for neutrality. You can seek help there if you find an article to be non-neutral (it may not be neutrally worded, it may give fringe viewpoint WP:UNDUE weight, or it may have complete omission of significant contrasting viewpoints, to give a few examples).
 * Hope it helps. Please feel free to ask follow-ups or challenge anything you think I might have got wrong. Best, Usedtobecool&nbsp☎️ 17:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hope it helps. Please feel free to ask follow-ups or challenge anything you think I might have got wrong. Best, Usedtobecool&nbsp☎️ 17:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @. I found the RS desk - excellent closing on Xinhua. Posted a request there. Maybe @ might also be interested. Regards. Pasdecomplot (talk) 11:06, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * There's another request . Should the CTA request be a RfC? Is the second too complicated with all of the sources in the same discussion? (cc @ ). Thanks so much again. Pasdecomplot (talk) 14:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I do not have a lot of experience with what works best to elicit interest on a topic at WP:RSN. is the defacto coordinator on that noticeboard. If they find time, they may be able to offer some advice. If you are as brief as you could be, and succinct and focused, all you can do is there are at least a few editors who are interested in discussing that topic. No, do not make any discussions into RFCs yet. If it deserves an RFC, there will likely be a discussion about having an RFC on that post itself. If no one responds to your post, maybe then. Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:09, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , sorry I just got back. I will take a read and try to compose a reply soon. In the meantime, I am assuming you are using the "<- " at the beginning of your message to reset the indenting to the left. If so, please type in instead which is the right way to do it. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:13, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

About WP:BLP: It has two meanings. It refers to any article which happens to be a BLP, or biography of a living person. And it also refers to the policy about such content which can be found at the page WP:BLP. Only in the matter of your ban, and mainly because El C made an error when giving you clarifications about your ban, does it matter whether an article is tagged as a BLP in its talk page. Otherwise, irrespective of where you are and what you are doing, you must be extremely careful when talking about living people. What you can and can not do is explained at the policy page WP:BLP. When you are editing anything else other than articles with BLP tags on their talk pages, you are not violating your ban but you can still commit a BLPvio, which is the act of making an edit that does not adhere to the WP:BLP policy. You could say something bad about a living person without providing a source to confirm it right here on this page, and it would be a BLPvio. Because blpvios can harm real people in the real world, it is taken extremely seriously. You could make one such violation in an otherwise unblemished career and immediately get an indefinite block which may only be lifted when you agree to years of topic ban from all BLPs. It's not really a punishment, your ban. It's a protection against the possibility that someone unfamiliar with the BLP policy might make a violating edit somewhere which could result in real world harm. So, you need to work on exactly what is allowed and disallowed by the BLP policy before you make controversial edits about real people. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:24, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * oh thanks! I'll read through again more thoroughly asap. Best regards. Truly. Pasdecomplot (talk) 19:05, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * You've spent so much time answering all the questions, I thank you again. I'll open the links to learn more. So kind. In the meantime, I'll also avoid BLP pages, BIO pages, and not post anything negative about a living person, as the explanation makes clear. Best, Pasdecomplot (talk) 21:48, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi. That admin hasn't been abiding on RSN, both topics. Just found this text at CaradhrasAiguo'talk, while looking again for my own texts. Kinda disturbing :
 * Usedtobecool's talk
 * "Probably best if both you and I lay off for a while. There are lots of people watching. —valereee (talk) 16:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC) " The term tag-team has come to mind more than once... Pasdecomplot (talk) 18:19, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * PDC, sorry, not following. What are you finding disturbing about that? —valereee (talk) 19:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , there's always a ton of little things to notice when one goes digging into a conflict. Here's three things I noticed that are the most troubling. The rest is hardly more than noise.
 * You are not following talk page etiquette (WP:TPO). I noticed that in the second RSN thread, you apparently changed the indenting of someone else's comment to change what it was a reply to. You also moved around someone else's comment so that now there are at least two replies to it that appear before it and as replies to a different comment.
 * has repeatedly called for a block on other editors during a discussion in a venue which has nothing to do with examining user behaviours or issuing blocks.
 * You are making accusations or insinuations of tag-teaming against other editors without providing evidence (see WP:ASPERSIONS) or pinging the editors in question to let them know that you are making such insinuations. You might say that the message you quoted is the evidence but all I see there, is your failure to assume good faith. You have no basis to draw a conclusion on what was meant or that there is any ill-will towards you, based on that comment.
 * Two of these you can fix yourself and there is no reason you can't or shouldn't just ignore the one that you can't. Remember that it's WP:NOTTHEM. You are responsible for your actions, and only your actions determine whether you will get in any trouble. Every comment is public and admins are smart enough to draw their own conclusions. If you adhere by the standards, it would make it so much easier for you to complain against someone else without fear of a WP:BOOMERANG. There is nothing to be gained by bringing up others' actions here as I don't have the authority to intervene on your behalf, and until you stop making transgressions yourself, I would not recommend you take it up with someone else, because that will almost certainly get you sanctioned as well, irrespective of what happens with the other editor/s. One more point to keep in mind is that you dove into the deep end of Wikipedia before you were familiar enough with it to properly navigate it and this has brought additional scrutiny into your activities. The way to fix this is to show everyone that you are learning and there is nothing to worry about. Eventually, people will stop finding problems with your edits and stop scrutinising your contributions. As long as there are demonstrable problems with your edits, you must assume good faith, that editors that challenge you do so for the benefit of the encyclopedia rather than from malice toward you. I hope you'll consider this carefully. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:56, 20 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi. I reviewed the links you so patiently provided. Thank you. I humbly offer a few thoughts and explanations :
 * Here's the latest on the 2nd topic. The shift of text was due to the text's content: it is a request for closure and also an note about CANVAS. So, I thought it addresses two very different subjects, the first being on-topic, the second being off-topic and a diversion from the topic. Since a ping notice had already been posted (retabbed by another editor), the text regarding CANVAS seemed misplaced and better located/more appropriate for a talk page; Earlier, a cast of ASPIR about CANVAS was made and doubled down in the discussion; the text was located below that editor's call for a double block on the discussion's editors. The original position of the text was tabbed left, and kinda orphaned the ongoing discussion. I tabbed it in (as another editor tabbed in the ping notice); an editor then said it wasn't a response but the tabbing made it look like a response. Then, I thought a shift of text would be best, based on that response. But being careful, I copied the shifted text before deleting, I checked, all looked good. Don't know why it appeared duplicated unless it was viewed in edit history before the deletion. Your helpful links explain that permission is recommended before such changes; luckily, the editor agreed to the shift (see diff above). I might add I was surprised the editor entered both discussions, after agreeing to basically stay away.
 * A perplexing thing is why hasn't the editor been sanctioned? The editor fell silent in the discussion, so I was looking for a notice on their talk, then looked to see if I overlooked discussions I previously posted on their talk. That's when I found the message. It was disturbing, given the recent experiences of deletions, reverts, of PA, of a relabelling of a BIO page to a BLP after an editor made bad faith reverts with WEIGHT, POV problems, and factual errors; and, then of a request for help at Teahouse. The relabelling was a basis of conclusion since it led to a block (gratefully reversed) and the protection of a BIO page's error-laden non-NPOV regarding a living person abducted by the Chinese government, the 11th Panchen Lama, an abduction and subsequent disappearance the international community increasingly condemns. Then, the ASPIR of CANVAS, and the note of "appear" on the RSN. I was shocked. All ocurred while trying to build CON for better Wikipedia content. The sense was the note speaks for itself (and could be supported by more diffs), but that's obviously wrong. So sorry to trouble you, and not looking for a boomerang, or to pursue the matter of the note further.
 * There's nothing here to worry about. I'd like to continue contributing according to policy and standards, which are still being learned; those policies might protect information from being deleted/reverted, make CON easier to achieve, and enhance the reliability of the project. If it's possible, the scrutiny could be refocused elsewhere, where surely problems have been noticed. (As an aside, the action of relabelling the page was not made by me, and resulted in a block (overturned) which wasn't a result of my actions, but of other editors' actions. The current page's non-NPOV, WEIGHT issues and errors are also the result of other editors' actions.)
 * Those are a lot of words. I trust they're comprehensible. Once again, I thank you for your time and patience. I hope I responded with understanding. Pasdecomplot (talk) 12:44, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I absolutely understand that you are feeling aggrieved and frustrated with your experience on Wikipedia so far. However, I absolutely can't have you or anyone else use my talk page to cast aspersions on other editors. I do not care how certain you are about each of your beliefs about other editors, their actions and their motivations. I suggest you keep them to yourself and if you absolutely can't let them go, present them with evidence at the right time and place which would be WP:ANI threads or WP:ARBCOM cases about those editors and/or you. I don't know how carefully you read WP:ASPERSIONS when I last linked it but here's a quote: An editor must not accuse another of misbehavior without evidence, especially when the accusations are repeated or severe. If accusations must be made, they should be raised, with evidence, on the user-talk page of the editor they concern or in the appropriate forums. It is clear: either bring it up with the editors themselves or bring it up at appropriate noticeboards, my talk page is neither.I am starting to doubt the effectiveness of our approach, so, let's take it one by one. I need you to make a commitment to stop making negative remarks about other editors. Examples:
 * a cast of ASPIR about CANVAS was made: It was not a casting of aspersions if you indeed violated CANVASS, which you did when you pinged an editor you picked from the Xinhua discussion because you thought they'd agree with you, and when you posted to Newslinger's talk page where you could have left a neutral note but you instead tried to suggest which position to take and you poisoned the well by casting aspersions against the editor in dispute with you.
 * A perplexing thing is why hasn't the editor been sanctioned? No, this kind of rhetorical question is a personal attack against the editor. Again, absolutely refrain from making such suggestions outside of ANI or ARBCOM.
 * It was disturbing You are suggesting malice. Unacceptable. Either assume good faith or take it up with them, or take it up with an admin, or take it to ANI. It's not acceptable on any other page including my talk page, other noticeboards and article talk pages.
 * It was disturbing, given the recent experiences of deletions, reverts You can't suggest someone made deletions or reverts out of malice. Take it up with them, or take it up with an admin, or take it to ANI.
 * of PA, accusing someone of personal attacks is in itself a personal attack and again, take it up with them, or take it up with an admin, or take it to ANI.
 * It was disturbing, given the recent experiences of ... a relabelling of a BIO page to a BLP You are suggesting someone relabled some page out of malice. As above, unacceptable. Take it up with them, or take it up with an admin, or take it to ANI.
 * an editor made bad faith reverts with WEIGHT, POV problems, and factual errors No, an editor made reverts, you think they were bad faith, that doesn't mean you can go around saying it everywhere. As above, unacceptable. Take it up with them, or take it up with an admin, or take it to ANI.
 * The relabelling was a basis of conclusion since it led to a block (gratefully reversed) and the protection of a BIO page's error-laden non-NPOV regarding a living person abducted by the Chinese government, the 11th Panchen Lama, an abduction and subsequent disappearance the international community increasingly condemns. You started with "an editor relabelled a page that led to me being blocked" and a few words later, it is blown to such fantastic proportions that a simple relabelling (a normal housekeeping task within Wikipedia) has become equated with acts of global moral outrage and condemnation. This is whole other level of unacceptable. And the only reason you are still editing after having written this is because no one has brought this to the attention of an uninvolved admin. You should be especially careful when talking about topics you really care about in the real world.
 * the ASPIR of CANVAS see above
 * the note of "appear" on the RSN This is a reach. In any case, unacceptable. Take it up with them, or take it up with an admin, or take it to ANI.
 * As an aside, the action of relabelling the page was not made by me, and resulted in a block (overturned) which wasn't a result of my actions, but of other editors' actions. The current page's non-NPOV, WEIGHT issues and errors are also the result of other editors' actions. Your block was in no way caused by the relabelling of the page. But never mind that. These remarks are still aspersions against other editors.
 * When someone reverts you, follow WP:DR and when you have to mention it to someone else, just say that you made a good faith edit but were reverted. And then say what rationale the editor offered for reverting you. There is no need for you to advertise your personal feelings about the revert or the editor's motivations. Same goes for any other disagreement you have with anybody else.Instead of using emotive and accusing remarks about other editors, you can neutrally describe what has happened and let others come to their own conclusions. So, can you commit to doing just that (not just here but everywhere)? Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:08, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Status of BIO page with contradictory BLP note
Hi again. What's the official category of 11th Panchen Lama page? Still a BIO, or does the contradictory note officially make it a continuing complication? If it's still a BIO, what's to be done about removing the note? Much thanks. Pasdecomplot (talk) 12:53, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , it is standard procedure to update talk pages when there is an active dispute on the article, so that admins can more effectively manage it. The notice isn't wrong. It was just missing. So, you'll have to wait for your ban to expire before you can edit it. That goes for any other articles you edit as well. Since you edit many controversial topics, it's a good idea to check talk page notices to see if there are any restrictions or special behavioural guidelines that apply to the page. And when those notices get updated, if they make the article to come under the scope of your ban, you have to stop editing it until your ban expires. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:35, 21 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for the time and aid. Pasdecomplot (talk) 12:43, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Hari Budha Magar - draft
Hi User:Usedtobecool - can I begin by saying your timing is quite impeccable. I have been working on the Hari Budha Magar article for months, and the last week or two it has become quite stressful for me as issues started cropping up, and I began to get confused and frustrated about what to do next. Today it has been particularly stressful for me. Anyway, I was just making an edit, and got the message someone else had edited during the time I was. Initially, I was panicked, thought my article was deleted / someone had ruined it. Upon closer inspection, however, it seems as though you have been a big help. I think you have helped to tidy up a lot of the text and also the references? Could you let me know your thoughts on the article, whether in your opinion it is ready to be submitted or whether it still needs work? If you can let me know any thoughts, suggestions or necessary edits that I can / should make, it would really help me out. I still plan to upload a photo (once permissions are sorted - how complicated!), but other than that I am hoping it is almost ready. Thank you so much for your help, and for your great timing. You have picked up my mood a little bit and hopefully helped get this article almost ready to be submitted. Thanks again!! Guyosaurus (talk) 12:29, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I think it's ready enough for an AFC reviewer to be able to carry out an assessment. It's worth submitting if only to find out if it only needs improvements or whether the topic itself is not notable and you are just wasting your time. Reviews take time anyway, and you can continue to make improvements while you wait. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:00, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Theresa Greenfield draft
Hi Usedtobecool, thanks again for your suggestions on the Theresa Greenfield draft I was working on. I have modified the draft based on your advice, as well as merging it with the other Greenfield draft. Would you be willing to take another look at it and see if the content is now more suitable? Thanks, Js2112 (talk) 07:00, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , it seems fine to me, and fairly comprehensive considering just how much coverage one would expect a never-before-elected candidate to have received. Although... the one-sentence paragraphs in the political positions section with the repeated "Greenfield" on every one of them, get tedious, verging on annoying, quite quickly. You might want to consider better presentation of it; that is by far the section that reviewers are going to see as campaign promotion stuff.But there is a multitude of editors working on the draft, and a few more, even more experienced ones, discussing it at its talk page. They seem to have been working on it for months, with three declinations so far. So, I would advise that you ask them what their thoughts are, and when and if they plan to submit or publish it. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:28, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Adding Category
Hello Sir/mam,I have added some Category to this page please review this page once again and if i had done perfectly then kindly remove that uncategorised template. Thank you (Fade258 (talk) 02:43, 26 September 2020 (UTC))
 * Hello, first of all, let me congratulate you on earning a rhodium editor star with just 13 days and 375 edits. As for the article, you've added all red categories, i.e. categories that don't exist; that is something you shouldn't do (see the bullet point after WP:CATORDER). Please revert yourself (undo your edit) and wait for someone familiar with categories to add them. When they do, they will remove the tag. It usually takes less than a day for that to happen. If you'd like to try again, please find similar list articles for other cricket leagues and look at their categories and add any that you find also applies to your list, and after you save your edit, recheck to see whether the category you've added is blue or red, if it's blue and it applies to your article, you've done it right, otherwise, you should remove it again. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:01, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Improve Category
Hello sir/mam, Here it's me again.I have improve the references as well as added some Category in catorder which you mentioned me please check it out if i had done correctly then please remove that template. Thank you ! Jai Nepal ! (Fade258 (talk) 03:33, 26 September 2020 (UTC))
 * , the article still had a couple of categories in red colour. Did you not understand what I said about not adding those? Anyway, you had added one good one, and I found another. Those are not the best ones, and editors who work with categories might have found better ones, but those will have to do for now. I have removed the tag. Regards! (Jai Nepal!) Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * And you do not need to use "sir/mam" with anyone here. All editors are equal. You can call them all by their username. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:27, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Usedtobecool, It's me there again you remove only uncategorised template but the refimprove template is still there and i added 2 more .so, check it out if that is correct then remove that tag also.Thank you for responding my every questions. Jai Nepal! (Fade258 (talk) 02:07, 27 September 2020 (UTC))
 * , per WP:BLP, all claims about living people should have inline citation to support them. The sources you have added support only for a few players, their membership in the EPL. Please find more references to support all of their memberships and then you can remove the tag yourself. This source only supports that Dwayne Smith has joined EPL. The one about coronavirus mentions a few other players. The third one lists matches and doesn't support anything. So, it would seem there are a lot of sources to add. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:57, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Aal Izz Well
Hi, I was trying to explore the map of the region which has been fastest-growing metropolitan areas in South Asia. I found the map was in raster graphics. Although it has the headquarters of the SAARC still vector map is missing in Wikipedia?

SAARC comprises 21% of the world's population so I wonder how resources and relief packages are supplied or distributed or allocated by local and international authorities during emergencies? I mean do they use old out-dated maps? If updated vector maps are available then are those maps limited just for local governments/authorities? Is it like common people have no right to view or use latest vector maps for free or without any lengthy formality? How do we visualize the ever flowing charity resources when we can't visualize latest vector maps?

The common man from SAARC starts creating great expectations without knowing the reality. So if some Wikipedia page is available to know compared reality people would begin limiting their expectation which would save their time. In case you can create following Wikipedia page content it would at least help to know how far is SAARC from other intergovernmental organizations:

South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) vs European Union (EU)
 * Missing something like Brexit

South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) vs United Nations (UN)
 * Missing something like Veto-Power

Hope Aal Izz Well! -Protagonistology (talk) 17:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse Host
Dear Usedtobecool, Thank you for volunteering as a Host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, and by following our expectations, you are helping new users to get started here at Wikipedia, and aiding more experienced users who just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!

Here are some links you may find helpful as a Host: Editors who have signed up as hosts, but who have not contributed at the Teahouse for six months or so may be removed from the list of hosts. Thank you for adding your name to the list of Hosts - you've been brilliant there, and I'd not spotted you hadn't already done so! You are currently the 10th most active Host there, so I've added you to the set of rotating images which appears on the page heading. In doing so I've taken the liberty of choosing a unique image. I hope that's OK with you? You can change it here. And you might also wish to swap the default teacup image against your entry at Teahouse/Host landing.
 * Useful scripts you can install to make responding easier,
 * templates to use and, of course:
 * the question forum itself.

Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:00, 30 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Doh! Scrub some of that - I've just realised that you were already on the changing 'featured' images selection, so I've accidentally managed to add you a second time - which I'll resolve shortly. I think that was down to Interstellarity adding you a while back. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind words, ! Yeah, first I was there to ask, then to read, and then started answering the ones that I'd seen answers to before. I don't think I had a specific day where I turned host, and that's probably why I just never got around to adding myself in. Interstellarity had notified me a while back that they were adding me to a list but I don't think I was even aware then, that there were two. Yesterday, I had reason to explore the Teahouse's subpage organisation and thought, "why not?"And yes, that is a great choice for my profile image. It is one I probably would  never have chosen myself (because of my disagreement with nationalism in general), but I do love it as a piece of art, very much, and identifying where I'm from sounds right for the Teahouse. I think it would be perfect for my profile on both lists. Thank you! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:46, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I noticed you added Usedtobecool to the Teahouse featured hosts twice. See here and here. You might want to fix that so there are no duplicates. Interstellarity (talk) 13:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Nick is aware,, and was getting to fixing it (see his second post above). I have now added who was missing. Interstellarity, you were going to review hosts lists, right? If there are some active ones missing from the list, you'd be the one to fix that. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:59, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Just to say that the full host list is already up-to-date, with all newly signed up hosts acknowledged and welcomed - there are a few editors who have not contributed there over the last 6 months or so, but I take a relaxed view of that unless they've never contributed at all, and just added their names as a bit of 'hat collecting'. I am halfway through updating my Excel spreadsheet with the details of the most active Teahouse hosts (based on the last 50,000 edits there), and had intended to change some names over in the next few days to reflect recent changes in involvement. Hoary was definitely one of those I had planned to add. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:35, 2 October 2020 (UTC)


 * You rang? Uh, what, me, a host? I suppose it's an honour, so thank you. But, hmm. The named hosts I've noticed are so courteous and welcoming. I've never thought that I could manage that. I have tried not to be discourteous, and I like to think that I've almost always succeeded; but this is about my limit. (I'm particularly troubled by the kind of question whose writer must surely be one among (A) remarkably stupid, (B) remarkably lazy, or (C) a troll: I don't think that anyone should waste their time working out which among the three it is, because none of the three would be an asset to an encyclopedia.) -- Hoary (talk) 10:07, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Glad you could make it, Hoary! If you weren't doing fine with the courtesy thing, I would not have thought of you when checking to see who might be missing, I think. You are certainly not alone about the hopeless cases, but it's more about maintaining the correct atmosphere for everyone who visits than whether we get suckered by trolls, IMO (and it's been discussed before at WT:TEA). A and B are generally encouraged in the way the Teahouse is advertised, to some extent. People are emboldened to ask lazy and stupid questions because they are invited with promises of  a pleasant and friendly atmosphere. Those who may be qualified with "remarkably", I do not believe there are too many of. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

rfa
My rationale for completing the RfA was due to the MfD for it being closed as keep. If the RfA is to let stand, then it should be !voted on as appropriate. What else is the option? Naleksuh (talk) 05:40, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , the option is that you ignore it and go about your business. Does it get on your way when you try and improve articles? Has the candidate disturbed anyone trying to improve the encyclopaedia by, for example, campaigning around? The draft RFA is only sitting there unconnected to anything else. If it starts to disrupt anything else, I am sure admins and bureaucrats will know what to do. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:01, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I guess I just didn't really feel like it should be left like that indefinitely. However, you are right that it arguably does not cause any problem to do so. An alternative could be a WP:SNOW route. I have pinged the closing admin here incase there are any comments in that way. Naleksuh (talk) 06:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , if you are just curious, or would like to discuss the issue further, you may visit WT:RFA where at the time of this posting, the last and the third from last sections discuss untranscluded draft RFAs and what to do about them. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:43, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

interracial marriage talk page
Hey, I'm a little new to wiki and still not sure how to use this site, but I use it to try learn new things and help add reliable information, in the case where I see something which doesn't need to be there, I'll challenge it, but I'm often too scared, because I still don't know how to use this site, I love editing wiki and trying to help other editor, but I often don't know whats going to get me into trouble, so I'd like to say, on behalf of me and the other editors, thank you for helping the discussion on the interracial marriage talk page, I've tried to seek help before, but I still haven't gotten any response back, I have so many questions like, what if I report someone for sock puppeting and I'm wrong, will I get into any trouble? What if I report someone for abuse editing and I'm wrong, will I get into any trouble? Is there somewhere I can ask to see if I'm doing the right thing? I'd love help on all these questions and if you don't wanna help, thats fine, you've already done enough, but could you try help point me in the right direction, once again, thank you for all your help :) -- Toby Mitches (talk) 01:33, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , there is already Sockpuppet investigations/Bablos939 where you can comment at the "Comments by other users" section if that is who you are worried about. If it is about something else, you can create your own investigation. You won't get into trouble for one bad Sockpuppet investigation. Just don't accuse the user outside of their user talk page, an admin's talk page (when you are specifically there to report to an admin) or one of the administrative boards designed to look into editor conduct, such as WP:ANI, WP:ANEW or WP:SPI. If you do create a sockpuppet investigation, don't dump everything about everything like the editor who created the investigation mentioned. Just make a list of user accounts who you think are the same person and make a list of their edits which made you suspect socking. For example: "I believe Toby and Mitches are socks of Toby Mitches because of their usernames, and because Toby mitches made a edit to Interracial marriage[diff] and when I reverted them[diff], Toby reverted me[diff], someone else reverted them[diff], then Mitches reverted that[diff]. Toby's account was created after my revert, and Mitches' account was created after the second revert. When I started a discussion on the talk page, they piled on their votes[diff][diff][diff]." And so on. If there are IPs in your list, only talk about their edits. CUs can not connect IPs with accounts for privacy reason, so bringing up their whois, geodata info is not helpful. Clerks there are perfectly capable of checking those themselves. If there is info from outside Wikipedia, say for example, Reddit, don't mention it on Wikipedia, use email to make a report if there is outside info like that involved. Or you may get blocked immediately for WP:OUTING. Finally, generally, you won't get into trouble if you make a wrong report to admin boards unless you are disruptively persistent and unreceptive of advice. But once you report someone, people will look into the whole issue and determine who's in the wrong. So, it may be you that is sanctioned or both of you or just them, would depend on who's been following the rules. If you follow the rules, it means, mainly, following WP:BRD (not edit-warring and especially not breaking the WP:3RR rule) and being nice (not violating WP:NPA, WP:ASPERSIONS), you need not be afraid.The article is a mess and highly controversial and to make matters worse the talk page is almost unreadable. So, as everyone is a volunteer, no one might feel like getting involved (since without a lot of time on their hands, an editor is likely to make matters worse just as easily as they are, better). You may want to look at Talk:Kenosha unrest and its archives for how to effectively use a talk page when there are a zillion things to discuss about a controversial topic. What should stand out to you is how none of the sections are named after editors and how every section only discusses one issue. I am telling this to you, because you may be inexperienced but you seem to be the one who's anywhere close to a mediator or a moderator in the editor-centric disputes there.You can ask help at the Teahouse, that is the best place for editors who are not sure what they are doing or what they should do. But you are more likely to get help and quickly if you ask one specific thing at a time. "Come help us at Interracial marriage" is an invitation which is hard to answer (even then, I did) while, "I suspect someone I'm in dispute with at Interracial marriage is socking. But I am not sure what to do about it or if I could write a good report that will get acted on or if I would get into trouble if my report doesn't pan out" is a very specific question which you can expect tons of guidance about. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * See also:WP:AN. Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:18, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for helping, but I'm now unsure about what to do next, I think I'll try to discuss things with Vamlos a little more and than report him for sock puppetting, next I wanna clean up the mess in the interracial marriage wiki page, should I just simply remove the information and see if anyone stops me than discuss it with them on the talk? Or should I make a post about it somewhere? Or should I wait for the admins to do something? Should I make another post on the Teahouse? Also if go back and change what I edited will I still get into trouble if I than report someone for abuse reporting? I'm still kinda confused -- Toby Mitches (talk) 04:12, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , it appears to me that you have violated WP:NPA at that talk page, as have both of the others. And that does not seem to be what any of you wants to report the others for. I will check the talk page again, and drop warnings against (likely) all of you against making personal attacks. If you make no new violations on that, that should be fine. Then you can think about sorting the rest of it. Yes, if you suspect an editor of socking, you can ask them at their talk page and warn them that that is against the rules and may get them blocked. If that doesn't work, meaning if there is further such behaviour, you can report at WP:SPI. If there is no recent socking, you could consider just letting the past go, in the interest of a fresh start.Some admins will be watching what happens next. So, you should all follow the rules, but admins won't intervene unless they see someone doing something wrong again. If you intend to make wide-ranging changes to the article, make a talk page post about it. Otherwise you can make bold edits and discuss it once it gets reverted. The Australia issue is already on the talk, so don't edit that one until a consensus is reached.If you want to go back and make changes to your own posts that have already been replied to, you can only do it as explained at WP:REFACTOR. You can do that, but that doesn't mean you can report other editors for violations they made at the same time. At best, it shows that you understand and want to do better, and then you can report new NPAs from others. Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:55, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I thought I was going to get some kind of warning, I was pretty offensive at the start of the debate, it was only a few days ago I read the WP:NPA page, so that is 100% my bad, so should I remove all the personal attacks that I made now? Or after I get my warning? -- Toby Mitches (talk) 05:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , Bablos already had a warning, and it seems all their problematic edits to that talk page was before the warning, so I did not warn them. I have left a note for Vamlos. Since you are now aware, I don't see the need to warn you. I must remind you of WP:OUTING though, because I went through your contributions and one of them was you asking an editor for external links for where another editor might have been attacked and doxxed (it doesn't matter if it was accurate or specific enough). There are usually no warnings for violating WP:OUTING. You get blocked immediately. So, that's something you should be extremely careful about. And please be extremely careful about going back and editing your comments that have been replied to, as well. As I said, follow WP:REFACTOR religiously. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:38, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I can not thank you enough, you have helped me in so many ways, thank you once more, I had no idea about WP:OUTING and I won't do it again, I'll read the WP:REFACTOR to better understand the rules, I'll also get off wiki for a couple of weeks just to let admins figure things out, once again, I can never thank you enough, so THANK YOU, and good luck with the future. Kindest regards my friend!-- Toby Mitches (talk) 05:48, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , glad to know I've been of help. Please take as much time as you need. Going slow and getting things right is better. Good luck! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:06, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Request for required actions
Hello, I would request you to wipe my account, edits (including text/media) and edit logs to avoid cases of Harassment or any other. Also, consider taking other required measures to fix any other issues thanks. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vikram Nankani (talk • contribs) 11:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello ! Unfortunately, there is no process to achieve exactly what you've asked. For reasons not worth going into, neither your account nor your edits or logs can be removed. The second best option is that you request deletion of edits where you may have made your identity known. Please make a list of any such edits and email the oversight team; Special:EmailUser/Oversight has the required form. You can also request WP:VANISH which will rename your user account to a gibberish username, so that your edits are not easily associated with this account of yours. Please see the instructions at WP:VANISH. Or perhaps, or  is able to guide or advise you at this time? Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:25, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I took a quick look, and I don't see anything that's worth worrying about but you'd be the one to know. If it's just your username, VANISH may be a good idea. Otherwise, you can just stop editing from this account, and create a new one if you'd like. See WP:FRESHSTART. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:32, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Help
Thanks for your recent help, I have a concern on the new page you review Chibundu Amah it's not getting a knowledge panel on Google, I just excited that I made my first approved article got index and hope to see it grow. Any help Lynn (talk) 11:24, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That's google's business, . We are writing an encyclopaedia here, not doing SEO for PR. Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:03, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Missed Intention interpretation by Usedtobecool
This is not a question but a response to user [] for making a false assumption about me on the page I created, Next time, ask me questions and not make a false assumptions and stop threatening my page because I count it as threat, you should suggest ways to improve and not query me. Davdotfam (talk) 18:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:24, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Module Redirect
Hi Usedtobecool, Can you help me to redirect this module Module:Location map/data/Nepal Province5 to Module:Location map/data/Nepal Lumbini Pradesh. I moved Module:Location map/data/Nepal Province5 to Module:Location map/data/Nepal Lumbini Pradesh but did not know how to redirect it. Thanks --- 👤 Raju 💌 04:15, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , You cannot redirect a lua template. The best thing to do is go here and manually change them from  to  .   CAPTAIN MEDUSA   talk  11:48, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks !, sorry I was away today. I do not know the first thing about Modules, but I trust CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:52, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you --- 👤 Raju 💌 17:51, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Questions regarding draft page
Hello Usedtobecool ! I want your help please help me.Please check this draft this is correct or not https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Birendra_Multiple_Campus#Review_of_draft (Fade258 (talk) 09:23, 17 October 2020 (UTC))
 * Hello, the references in your draft don't go to any webpages, and even if they did, they don't seem particularly reputable as WP:RSes. I tried looking on the internet for more sources, both with Nepali and English search terms but didn't find anything usable. So, I'm afraid you might have to dig up some offline archives before you can publish this article. Obviously you are close to the Campus, so perhaps you could visit them and ask if they have kept newspaper clippings from important days in the Campus' history, like when it was inaugurated, or when the Prime minister, ministers, or King/Crown Prince might have visited. News reports around such occasions may have WP:SIGCOVS. That it was started in 2022 BS is a strong claim; if you could prove it, that would be something. The motto is unlikely to be what you have written though. Motto is usually like a promise or a slogan and is usually far fewer words. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello its me agian .I have added some new references and changes some text.please check (Fade258 (talk) 15:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC))
 * , sorry, I don't see any meaningful change. I see you changed a url, but it still goes nowhere. Citations are supposed to support the content. So, each of them needs to go to a page whose content verifies what you've just said. And, you seem to be making up the motto. You need to find out what it is for this particular Campus or if it even has one, not make up your own. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:18, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

a star of barn

 * Thank you ! What did I do a good job of? Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:23, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

I found you because of the teahouse and I think you are a great editor :) Antrotherkus (talk) 17:45, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Antrotherkus

Also, side question: how do you put your singnature on a talk page without having to type  every time?
 * You type in four tildes at the end of your message,, like this: . Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Happy Bijaya Dashami!
Wishing You a joy & happiness during this Festive Season. Happy Bada Dashain! CAPTAIN MEDUSA  talk  06:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Aanchal sharma
Dear usedtobecool i can see many unwanted and unnecessary edits on Aanchal Sharma, i cannot revert the edits on the page please have a look and block the ip doing so Khagendrawiki (talk) 09:10, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * For the record, I'd checked the article on the same day, but it had already been taken care of by the usual suspects. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:47, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Gerda Arendt! How time flies!! Hope you are doing well through this difficult winter, oh, and, Happy New Year, Gerda! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Please give your opinion
Please share your opinion on Gaunpalika of Nepal here.-- 👤 Raju 💌 16:32, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Help
Hi Usedtobecool ! Can you move this [|This page]into main article space.If you move then please let me know how to move pages in main article space through mobile. (Fade258 (talk) 06:10, 26 November 2020 (UTC))
 * , I'm on mobile right now and best I can tell your link is to an article on simple Wikipedia which is a different project. Perhaps the translate feature of Wikipedia lets you bring over articles from there to here, perhaps it doesn't. What I would do, and you could do is copy the source code of that article and paste it to a new page here. Be careful though as it appears that particular article has  a history of socking over here and an article was previously deleted. Can't say more until I can get back to my computer. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:18, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter
Hello ,



It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to and  who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to, , and who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
 * Year in review

has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
 * Reviewer of the Year

As a special recognition and thank you has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
 * NPP Technical Achievement Award

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here 18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy holidays
This year, many people had COVID to fear, The holidays are getting near, One thing that will be clear, We will still have holiday cheer, Happy holidays and happy new year!! From Interstellarity (talk) 13:52, 22 December 2020 (UTC)


 * A very happy new year to you too, ! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

 * Happy New Year, ! How have you been? Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you . I've been trying to keep busy & be careful health wise as well as attempting to stay out of trouble with my activities in Wikipedia. :-) How have you been doing? LorriBrown (talk)

2017 Nepalese general election
Hi Usedtobecool, hope you are having good holidays. The 2017 Nepalese general election page doesn't have a section on government formation. Can one be added? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:22, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Of course, seems essential to me. Thank you for the note. Will see what I can do. Happy New Year, ! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Is this looking more and more like a replay of India's Janata Party? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year
Happy new year to you and your family! Hope 2021 will be better than this year. Regards, Churot (talk) 15:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Usedtobecool!


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

Moneytrees🏝️Talk🌴Help out at CCI! 02:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

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

Stop him
Hi. Can you please stop this User talk:Pustam.EGR from editing and moving exist articles? Without any conversation, any consult this guy is moving exist articles and changing the contents according to the old administrative system of Nepal. Please revert his all edit also. Thanks--- 👤 Raju 💌 16:24, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

≥2600:6C5A:4B7F:6CB3:E8A9:7C3A:E504:A8D5 (talk) 22:25, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Name of Nepal
Hello, Usedtobecool. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Name of Nepal, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:01, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

About Draft:Richa Jain
Hi, regarding Draft:Richa Jain, please see User talk:Himanshushukla433 and User:Himanshushukla433/sandbox. No idea what is going on with that user and the creator of Draft:Richa Jain, but as multiple editors have asked them to work on the draft instead of coping it without attribution to their sandbox, the draft shouldn't be removed (especially as there are AfG declines and comments on it already). Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 07:39, 3 April 2021 (UTC)


 * , I am looking at the draft's history and is the only contributor who has "added substantial content" (as WP:G7 says) to that draft. Now that KDRJ has blanked, and again PRODded the draft, it's quite clear they want it deleted and are entitled to it per WP:G7. If the other user is a sock, that's a matter for SPI, if the other user is copying the draft without attribution, that's a copyvio. Both those things have got nothing to do with the draft and its eligibility for deletion under G7. Now, if this is an attempt to start afresh, one can simply leave a comment on the submission when it's submitted from wherever, whenever, that the same draft had been declined five times under Draft:Richa Jain and then G7ed, and the submitter is trying to game the system. I am obviously not reverting you, but if KDRJ makes another edit signalling they want the draft deleted, I might just go for MFD, if you still object to G7; even if they don't, I urge you to reconsider. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:02, 3 April 2021 (UTC)