User talk:WordSeventeen/Archive 2

Welcome!
Hello, WordSeventeen, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Huang Tiange. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! &mdash;  LeoFrank  Talk 06:02, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Getting started
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Hello, thank you

Word P WordSeventeen (talk) 06:07, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

AfD tagging of Arab World Institute for Professional Certification
Hello. I noticed that you have tagged Arab World Institute for Professional Certification for deletion at AfD but you have not started the AfD discussion at Articles for deletion/Arab World Institute for Professional Certification. Please create the discussion or the AfD tag will be taken down. • Gene93k (talk) 03:39, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * thanks Gene93k WordSeventeen (talk) 03:59, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Henry Ademola Adeola (December 22)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chris troutman was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Henry Ademola Adeola and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:WordSeventeen Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chris_troutman&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:WordSeventeen reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chris Troutman ( talk ) 03:16, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

New Page Patrol
Hi. We appreciate your enthusiasm but  with  only 171  edits to  mainspace please do  not  patrol  new pages until  you  have significantly more experience. If you would like to  help  maintain  the quality  of the encyclopedia, as soon  as you  have made 200 edits to  mainspace you will  qualify  to  enroll  at the WP:CVUA to  learn about counter vandalism. Anti-vandalism work requires a much lower threshold of knowledge of policies and guidelines than NPP, but  is nevertheless very  important. Happy editing! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:02, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Noted    WordSeventeen (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Caution
Following me around and reverting my redirects will result in me seeking sanctions against you. Legacypac (talk) 13:56, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Well that is surely not assumimg WP:AGF. I am following up on a list of FAILED AFD's that was closed as KEEP all by DGG. You are being disruptive by redirecting inappropriately articles that have established notability. Please stop your disruptive editing. Saying in an edit summary that an editor doesn't understand GNG is bordering on a WP:PA Cut that stuff out! Consider yourself warned!    WordSeventeen (talk) 14:05, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Brown inheritance
Putting that much detail in the lead paragraph is undue weight, excessive, overly detailed. It does not help the reader better understand the article subject and should be pared down considerably if not removed altogether. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 06:55, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

WP:GNG and WP:RS
The Elizabeth Melendez AFD has closed but I am still interested in hearing your thoughts on the questions I asked: the sources you added just mention this individual, this does not constitute significant coverage. You say it passes WP:GNG, but GNG says: "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention". Do you really think these references are more than trivial mentions?

And then there is the question of reliable sources, do you think that http://foreign.movies.com.pk/ has a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy? Or this source which you used as a rational for removing the PROD on Berry Town? Regards, Vrac (talk) 13:49, 14 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Please keep discussions about AFD's on their appropriate discussion pages. The Melendez AFD has closed. Drop the stick!!! Please do not post on this talk page again.    WordSeventeen (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2015 (UTC)


 * This is a discussion about your interpretation of guidelines which spans multiple AFDs and PROD removals. Such a discussion is entirely appropriate for your user talk page, particularly as you haven't responded to earlier queries.  What stick?  Vrac (talk) 15:29, 14 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Please go harass someone else. You were asked not to post here again and yet you did. I do not wish to have any discussions with you. Do not post on this talk page again. Doing so will constitute further harassment. Drop the stick!!!    WordSeventeen (talk) 15:37, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Vrac (talk) 13:41, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015
Hello, I'm !dea4u. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Dale Levitski because it did not appear constructive. 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. The reverted edit can be found [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=648445199 here].  !dea4u   07:45, 23 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Whoa!!!  You left a vandalism warning on my talk page and reverted the article I was working on. When I found the article it was already prodded. After doing some research and writing, I found many references and information that do denote notability for the subject after his appearance at Top Chef. I removed the prod and endorsement as per the instructions and proceeded to expand, improve and reference the article with inline citations which was mentioned also in the prod. Please explain why you are reverting my edits that are improving the article, which added back the prod notice and removed all the improvements to the page? There is no Vandalism here at all! Please strikeout your untrue level one vandalism warning you have left here     WordSeventeen (talk) 08:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Done, Buddy at that point of time, while checking the article i learnt some deficiencies in the article like prodded & noticed some Slangs in the article with no proper references hence tagged it. Well thanks for highlighting the case & improving article.(   !dea4u    08:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC))

Abraham Lincoln High School
Just wanted to let you know I reverted your edit here because I think you may have clicked the wrong link or something. - Amaury (talk) 02:17, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you, I think we were trying to correct that the same time, and my revert hit yours which put it back to the bad version. Sorry about that, ty for fixing it. WordSeventeen (talk) 02:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * LOL! No problem. - Amaury (talk) 02:24, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Steven Universe#Amazon as a reliable source
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Steven Universe. Thanks. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:47, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Martha Brockenbrough
Hi, I am the creator of the Martha Brockenbrough that was so quickly deleted. I'd like to re-visit the page to re-create it or edit it so that it meets the Wikipedia criteria. Can you send me the text?JameswoodSK (talk) 18:12, 19 March 2015 (UTC)James

Hi, if you contact the admin that actually did the deletion, they will sometimes put the text of the article in your user space where you can develop it further. WordSeventeen (talk) 18:41, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I thought you were the person who did the deletion. This is the message I received. WordSeventeen left a message on your talk page in "Speedy deletion nomination...". A tag has been placed on Martha Brockenbrough, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the c... JameswoodSK (talk) 18:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)James
 * Here is the notice of deletion. " 12:01, March 19, 2015 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page Martha Brockenbrough (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)" This is the link for the admin that actually deleted the page. You can ask there. Good luck!     WordSeventeen (talk) 19:04, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Verification while using reFill
Hey, thanks for helping fight linkrot on Wikipedia. However, please be careful about verifying that the information prefilled by reFill is accurate. For example, for archived URLs on WebCite, it just fills in the title as "WebCite query result" and the work as "webcitation.org". Another example of it's pitfalls is shown in your edit on Diwan Videos, where the last 4 citations look exactly the same, but in reality point to different pages in the website. While these are due to limitations in the service itself and bad practices by the websites linked, you are responsible for all edits made using the tool and should study the diff. Keep up the good work :). Opencooper (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:51, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tyson Fury
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tyson Fury. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Acharya S
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Acharya S. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:American Left
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:American Left. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jemima Goldsmith
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jemima Goldsmith. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anwar Ibrahim
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anwar Ibrahim. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject World's Oldest People
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject World's Oldest People. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Need your opinion on Eliza Jane Scovill
Hi,

I posted a RfC on Talk:Eliza_Jane_Scovill a while ago, but aside from the two people involved in the dispute nobody else has commented. Since you're signed up for the feedback request service, can I ask for your opinion? Thanks. Banedon (talk) 02:29, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

i want to delete the article Linda Ikeji
i just got a message directly from her telling me to bring down her article from wiki, that was why i cleared the whole content. she seriously wants me to remove it. So please help me remove it because from the tone of her message is like doesn't want it up.Onwughalu Uchechukwu 19:28, 10 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Insonet (talk • contribs)

Civitatis International
I may owe you an apology. We were working on the same article at the same time. I think we were both trying to untangle the mess created by Xy21. I finally gave up in frustration and reverted it to the last good version, possibly undoing your constructive edits. Maproom (talk) 13:45, 12 January 2015 (UTC)


 * no problem. I was trying to work on the article a bit. I got an edit conflict. The article probably will need a third editor. lol! Best regards, WordSeventeen (talk) 13:49, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

March 2015
Hi WordSeventeen. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Suncore Photovoltaics, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. ''CSD A-7 only applies when there is no credible claim whatsoever to importance. This is a much lower bar than notability. Most business related articles, provided there is any material at all, will normally meet that very minimal requirement. Feel free to take it to AfD if you think the subject lacks notability. '' Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! Ad Orientem (talk) 01:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


 * You are welcome and thanks for the note.    WordSeventeen (talk) 02:18, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your input. Always encouraging with good feedback. Please take a look at the article Tina Leijonberg that I created yesterday. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 10:41, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I see that you have made edits on Miss Universe 2016. I think we should try to edit the Miss Universe 2015 article first. After a ridiculous AfD process it was decided that the article should be merged into Miss Universe. And now someone has blocked re-creation, but the fact is that the article was fully sourced and it has been confirmed that the pageant will be held for atleast another 5 years through a deal between NBC and Donald Trump. --BabbaQ (talk) 10:44, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Constructive Links
I have given Full links with new style To this article "Nayyar Sultana filmography", i think you made mistake please don't change it,and you have just destroyed my handwork. i have given new links to it and i am making this article reliable again thx(Mjabran2012 (talk) 14:13, 24 March 2015 (UTC))
 * You are not allowed to remove the AFD template until the discussion is completed. If you remove it again, I will have to revert it. Please keep that in mind as you are working on the article. Thank you.    WordSeventeen (talk) 14:18, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Edits on Florida Georgia Line page
You've recently reverted my edits on the page because I had them as a bro-country duo. I believe that my edits are correct. I mean, the bro country page states that it is a term used to describe Florida Georgia Line and seeing as how every song they've released besides three fit the BC definition word for word, I believe that having them as a bro-country duo is completely accurate. Thanks Jacob Sudduth

Fairy Tail
Those are real upcoming episodes I put, not fake info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.248.183.144 (talk) 03:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Warning level
Hey. Can I have a word with you about warning vandals? Level 1 warning (uw-vandalism1) is only for very benign acts whose nature of vandalism might be disputable. Deliberate acts of revenge with an edit summary that reads "VANDALISED YOUR PAGE IN REVENGE!" need to be treated with an ultimatum (uw-vandalism4im) or a level three (uw-vandalism3) warning for those who might not repeat it ever again. Fleet Command (talk) 08:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

P.S. You are more than welcome to ask for a third opinion on this from a more experienced user, but I believe they'd tell you the same. Fleet Command (talk) 08:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree with you there. That warning was made via a huggle edit which automatically assigns the warning level based on how many times the editor has been warned. AFAIK there is not a way to override the warning level on huggle. Do you know of one? I was trying to help revert the damage on the users page.    WordSeventeen (talk) 09:11, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Not really. I myself was a Twinkle guy. But the golden rule is that you and you alone are responsible for the quality of what your software does to Wikipedia. (I have some bad and some good memories from this rule.) If it didn't or doesn't achieve your purpose, you could go manual. (I did.) Fleet Command (talk) 09:20, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Of course I know that. I guess next time I will just go past vandalism on a users page in fear of angering you. Thanks for the note anyways.    WordSeventeen (talk) 09:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Ouch! Did I sound like an angry person? Ouch! Ouch! Ouch! And sorry. I won't bother you ever again. Fleet Command (talk) 09:29, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Cross-reference policy
I am dismayed to learn that my attempt to delete misleading cross-references from my dance-related articles is a matter of serious concern. I do apologize for causing trouble. It is my understanding that the purpose of cross-references in a scholarly article in a reference work is to direct the reader to other articles where pertinent information on the subject of the article can be found. Thus, in Wikipedia articles, cross-references to institutions and organizations mentioned might sometimes be relevant. However, in articles on scholars active on the international scene, cross-references to every city or country mentioned in passing is, clearly, pointless. No reader of an article on a historian known in many countries, for example, will be served by being directed to an article on Toronto or Oslo or Italy. Besides, numerous irrelevant cross-references obscure the value of those that actually are pertinent. This is my reason for wanting to delete misleading cross-references from my Wikipedia contributions. I urge you to refer this matter to Wikipedia policy makers for reconsideration.

Now that I know that cross-references will be automatically added by Wikipedia to my contributions, I shall, of course, give up my efforts at editorial control. I certainly have no wish to be disruptive of Wikipedia procedures. My only intent is to improve Wikipedia coverage with informative, accurate, carefully researched and documented articles.

With all good wishes, Claude Conyers Claudeconyers (talk) 05:34, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 13, 2015)
Hello, I just checked your latest revision and show what changed, your result has worked, but i just re edit the page of a Rwandan football player so that to let you know. I just know your thoughts about it.

So Please talk. Erns — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erns8874 (talk • contribs) 23:21, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

April 2015
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ilias Psinakis. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. ''There is no reason to have two copies of the image even if you won't move the information from an image caption to an infobox. Jerod Lycett (talk) 15:55, 4 April 2015 (UTC)'' Jerod Lycett (talk) 15:55, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.


 * This is a joke coming from an inexperienced user that over tags articles to the point where he/she tagged one with both no refrences and linkrot???b And then tags 15 to 20 articles with speedy or prod inside of one hour where an administrator need to ask him to slow down on the tagging.  Your retribution in the form of a disruption template her is disruptive in and of itself on your part.     WordSeventeen (talk) 16:04, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Cobain
hey there regarding cobain, would love to discuss with you directly, anyway to send you my contact information? WhateverLive WhateverLive (talk) 04:00, 2 April 2015 (UTC)]


 * You are welcome to send me info via my email link on this page either in the left column or in a drop down menu from the top.  Cheers!     WordSeventeen (talk) 04:03, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:04, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement



 * Hello WordSeventeen:


 * Please consider participating in this week's vote for TAFI's upcoming Week 17 collaboration. Last week's voting did not receive many participants. Thanks for your consideration. North America1000 16:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * You are welcome @Northamerica1000. Do you have the vote just once a week? Can editors nominate an article as well? Thanks for the notice about the voting.    WordSeventeen (talk) 00:11, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

archive - was asked to comment at talk pages
You are not acting in accordance to wikipedia policy. I tried to act in good faith now, but you very clearly are either not reading the article or you can't follow guidelines. On primary sources, this is what the guidelines say "Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia; but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them.[4] Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source. Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so. Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them. Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material. Use extra caution when handling primary sources about living people; see WP:BLPPRIMARY, which is policy." Another thing, the articles you removed like Vice are so far from a self published blog with no editorial oversight it's very clear you didn't even bother to learn about the institution. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_(magazine) This has also been made at the talk page' but since you haven't bothered to comment to the other two people, here this is here as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SanctuaryX (talk • contribs) 15:30, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Notification of Request for Third Opinion
Notification of Request for Third Opinion on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allie_X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CollXtion_I https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch_(Allie_X_song) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SanctuaryX (talk • contribs) 16:49, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Notification of Requested Administrator Assistace
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Notification of Requested Administrator Assistace in Dispute Resolution for the following articles:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allie_X
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CollXtion_I
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch_(Allie_X_song)

Please discuss
According to this and no edit summary to accompany, it appears you would rather blanket revert and edit war than discuss. Please discuss the reason for your complete removal of the good edits I made at the Taylor Swift article. You have already been asked to do so before this second reversion by you here. Someone who has been here as long as you have and with as many edits as you have should know that edit summaries are not really optional and that talk page discussion is imperative, especially when such a blanket reversion is made. Indeed, if an IP made such edits, they would be seen as possible vandalism. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 04:23, 10 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Noted.    Cheers!   WordSeventeen (talk) 06:24, 10 April 2015 (UTC)


 * By the way, I edited the Taylor Swift article to improve the article, and thus better the online encyclopedia. You are using the words " it appears you would rather blanket revert and edit war than discuss." Perhaps you should read over the guidelines at the edit warring guideline pages. and this statement by you, " it appears you would rather blanket revert and edit war than discuss." is a violation of WP:AGF. I will be sending a another warning notice over to your talk page shortly. I do hope that you will be able to show WP:AGF in the future, or there is a possibility of future consequences if an administrator wishes to address your violation with you.  (ps... Please do not use your fuzzy math when trying to count up actual reversions  at that article. I reverted your reversion to all my edits ONE time)     WordSeventeen (talk) 06:38, 10 April 2015 (UTC)


 * WordSeventeen, "it appears you would rather blanket revert and edit war than discuss" is not a violation of AGF, especially since you blanket-reverted and didn't discuss. You can send all the warning notices you like, of course, but this is mine: stop edit warring and start discussing; in short, start being a collegial editor. I'm about to see if there is something to the charge that you've been following around, and I hope I don't find any truth to the suggestion that you are trying to get them into trouble--since that's harassment, and highly blockable (as are, of course, edit warring and disruption). Drmies (talk) 15:38, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

civility barnstar
How could you give a civility barnstar to CrazyAces489 immediately after he was blocked for personal attacks on many editors and bringing false SPI accusations? Do you understand what being civil to other authors means? This is me not being very civil.Mdtemp (talk) 15:56, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement



 * Hello WordSeventeen:


 * This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaboration has begun at Week 18 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

Sent by User:Northamerica1000 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:26, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

April 2015
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but your recent edits, such as those to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CollXtion I (2nd nomination), appear to be intentional disruptions designed to illustrate a point. Edits designed for the deliberate purpose of drawing opposition, including making edits you do not agree with or enforcing a rule in a generally unpopular way, are highly disruptive and can lead to a block or ban. If you feel that a policy is problematic, the policy's talk page is the proper place to raise your concerns. If you simply disagree with someone's actions in an article, discuss it on the article talk page or, if direct discussion fails, through dispute resolution. If consensus strongly disagrees with you even after you have made proper efforts, then respect the consensus, rather than trying to sway it with disruptive tactics. Thank you.  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 22:41, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Editor Interaction Analyzer
See User talk:Drmies and
 * Editor Interaction Analyzer: Kbabej, Winkelvi, WordSeventeen.

As you know user:Winkelvi was told to stop editing pages which Kbabej had created or made a large contribution.
 * Editor Interaction Analyzer: Kbabej, Winkelvi

If I take fifteen of the page from this sample: it show that you are turning up at a lot of pages that Winkelvi has edited fairly recently before you arrived to make your first edit, while the inverse is much less common. I suggest that to avoid accusations of WP:HOUNDING that, for the next few months that if you come across a page you have not edited before that has been edited by Winkelvi, you do not edit it until at least a month has passed since Winkelvi made an edit to a page. -- PBS (talk) 01:06, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Editor Interaction Analyzer: Winkelvi, WordSeventeen

So that we are clear on the numbers. I have done some further analysis of the pages where the two of you have edited. if we strip out those that user:Kbabej edited first, then the articles which you have edited after Winkelvi has edited them are 9 within upto 14 days between edits and another 5 where you made an edit well over a month after Winkelvi's last edit to that specific article:
 * Simon Collins (2 mins), Taylor Swift, Title (EP), Walter O'Brien, Johnny Kemp, Meghan Trainor, Alison Lundergan Grimes, Mike Tyson, Buddy Holly (14 days)
 * All About That Bass (53 days apart) Chris Evans (actor) (80 days) John Green (author) (94 days) Bill Clinton (106 days), Kim Kardashian (114 days)

In contrast you edited 3 articles which Winkelvi then edited: -- PBS (talk) 01:44, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Christelyn Karazin (49 minutes) Laurence Fishburne (2 hours) Ilias Psinakis (2 hours)


 * Thanks for the note PBS, and of course your time.    Cheers!     WordSeventeen (talk) 06:08, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

kim kardashian
i deleted the personal life section because that information is already repeated several times in the article with a whole section dedicated to her marriage to kris humphries and another for motherhood and marriage to kanye west. maybe you should revert your edits to include the personal life section back in the intro as her 72 day marriage and marriage to kanye are reasons she is notable and would not look misplaced in the lead unlike having a personal life section above early life and sex tape. her career is her personal life from the tabloids to the reality shows and as mentioned before looks misplaced as a stand alone section with the info mentioned in other places within the article. Naue7 (talk) 22:51, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I will take a look at the article again, and consider your suggestions. Thanks for the message. Cheers!    WordSeventeen (talk) 23:01, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Allie x
I agree we should be civil. I redacted that as requested. But forgive me if it's a bit hard for me to stay collected when this is my third attempt at tellingyou that I identified my own interedt in the article. I did not intend or claim and ownership of the article, my intent was solely to disclose my interest. When I said "you" it was in the sense of you all, as in all people have a duty to disclose an interest in an article if they created or significantly contributed to it. I never said and do not believe, as is fact, that you have an interest in the articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SanctuaryX (talk • contribs) 22:27, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I note that you are now saying I am unbiased and that I am connected to it somehow. I am not at all. I was just disclosing I created the article. That is all I was doing. I not sure how to say this since you are failing to understand. From the Articles for Deletion page "Please disclose whether you are the article's creator, a substantial or minor contributor, or if you otherwise have a vested interest in the article; WP:AVOIDCOI." Again, I am omly disclosing I contributed to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SanctuaryX (talk • contribs) 22:30, 6 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Please make your comments regarding these articles at their appropriate talk pages or AFD discussion pages. Thank-you. Cheers!    WordSeventeen (talk) 23:47, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Biography MOS
Please learn what the WP:MOS for biographies says in regard to names in articles. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:56, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Please learn not to be so rude! Please answer the question though, why are you attempting to gut this group of articles that were originally created by Kbabej? It looks like you nominated nearly every article he/she created for AFD, and then the ones that made it through the AFDs, you are systematically removing sourced and cited information from them. What is your purpose? Why did you not mention in the rationales for the AFDs that the original creator had been banned? Do you have some sort of vendetta against the editor named Kbabej? WordSeventeen (talk) 02:18, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Please also learn what WP:UNDUE is about. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 02:45, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Please learn what 4 reversions in less than 24 hours (between 02:44, March 29, 2015 ‎and  22:54, March 28, 2015‎ means on the article Robert Hastings Hunkins.     WordSeventeen (talk) 02:54, 29 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Is that a threat? Because, if it is, I see seven reversions at that same article for you . -- WV ● ✉ ✓  02:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

While you are please trying to learn please read over the difference between an edit and a reversion. LOL    WordSeventeen (talk) 03:00, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015
Hello, I'm Winkelvi. Your recent edit to the page Patsy Presley appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''She's being incorrectly attributed with being a "Collaborator". You need proof of her actually being a true collaborator other than a writer from a UK online publication saying it is so. Find a credit somewhere that proves she was an actual collaborator.'' -- WV ● ✉ ✓  03:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * You are incorrect. You also changed the wording of a direct quote from an article that was cited. I have replaced the correct quote in the article to correct your error. Just because your argument got trumped in the AFD discussion is no reason to go in and frivolously start gutting the sources and references in the article.  You need to self revert all those changes and discuss them before deletion.  If you cannot agree to self revert all those changes and discuss I will have to take this matter further. (Including that you have a pattern of this same ill behaviour over a group of articles that were all originally created by editor Kbabej._  I do not think you really want to open up that hornets nest.   WordSeventeen (talk) 03:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * You want to report me for this? Go ahead.  See what happens.  -- WV ● ✉ ✓  03:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * ✅   WordSeventeen (talk) 00:07, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

A new reference tool
Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

content dispute/RFC started/note from Drmies
WordSeventeen, remember this? It seems pretty clear that you followed Winkelvi to Simon Collins with the intent to bother them. I will not hesitate to block you if this appears to be part of an ongoing pattern. Thank you, and cheers. Drmies (talk) 03:24, 24 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the note Drmies. Please be aware I have an expansive watchlist and edit many different types of articles. I certainly not guilty of following anyone. LOL Perhaps as the fine administrator that you appear to be, you might want to be neutral and look at both sides of every situation. There are quite a few issues with the user Winkelvi where he directly implied in a RFC here:  that I was dishonest and started the RFC in bad faith which is in and of itself him being guilty on not assuming good faith. WP:AGF That statement in the RFC borders on a personal attack against a specific editor. Please advise Winkelvi to cut that out. Thank you. Cheers!     WordSeventeen (talk) 03:39, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the compliment; your good sense gives me even more reason to think that you will take this seriously. If you have a problem with an editor, and you start editing articles that editor has been editing before you ever edited them, then I have little choice but to assume you followed them on purpose. My advice is to start clicking "Random article" to avoid the very impression that you are following them. That RfC, I don't think you can use that as a good example of them harassing you--in fact, I see the opposite there, since it just adds to the appearance of hounding. Thank you! Drmies (talk) 04:29, 24 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Again thank you for your note Drmies. Please see the note I left at the talk page of Bbb23 here:

There is quite a bit of backstory that you may or not be aware of. I will have no further comment regarding the issue of winkelvi being disruptive, arguing with editors, implying an editor started an RFC and did that dishonestly, and in bad faith, did not assume WP:AGF among other things. If you do have the time to read about the full backstory, a good start for you would be the talk page of Bbb23 which is located here:. Cheers! WordSeventeen (talk) 04:50, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:11, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement



 * Hello WordSeventeen:


 * This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaboration has begun at Week 21 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 00:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)