User talk:XRENEGADEx

Remember to sign with ~ and indent your replies using a : for each reply. Thanks! (Credit to Belwine, who I stole this from :D)

Stubs
Yes, stub tags belong at the bottom of the article - see WP:ORDER. Thanks. Pam D  05:53, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi XRENEGADEx! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 08:16, Wednesday, November 20, 2019 (UTC)

Attention needed at username change request
Hello. A renamer or clerk has responded to your username change request, but requires clarification before moving forward. Please follow up at your username change request entry as soon as possible. Thank you. &#8208;&#8208;1997kB (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Congressional districts.
The reason I removed those tables was because of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Congress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:301:4360:150D:1E11:3B1:F8AF (talk) 20:41, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry. I'm undoing my reverts. Didn't see the discussion. xRENEGADEx 20:44, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:301:4360:150D:1E11:3B1:F8AF (talk) 20:45, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Edits
I do think you’ve made a mistake regarding Suzi Gardner. The information is available from-themselves being the source. Doesn’t get much more verifiable than that Tinylittlecomet (talk) 02:31, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I think @ Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots already discussed the issue on your talk page, and I agree with them. However, I would like to reiterate that you didn't add any reliable sources (see WP:RELIABLE). Saying that the information is publicly available is not enough. Like said, this information is too trivial to be include in a biography of a living person. See WP:BLPGOSSIP and WP:BLPREMOVE for more details. xRENEGADEx 07:04, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Sir or madame,
The fact is that as is noted in questions of reliability / neutrality, the article "Anti-religious campaign during the Russian Civil War" is almost overwhelmingly drawn from the writing of Dimitry V. Pospielovsky.

I do not know if all of the various acts of brutality, murder, and torture attributed in the article to Bolshevik forces actually happened or or not or what degree of source evidence there is for them.

I am unsurprised you found my additions non neutral. They were at least sarcastic.

But I must question why you permit sections or overall writing to stand when whoever authored the article produced an entire section they entitled "Suppression of miracles" which at various points describes supernatural event clearly drawn from conflicting rumors as fact.

The detailed descriptions of numerous killings by torture are apparently all taken from one secondary author. The scholarly opinion on that author's work would be nice to know.

The article author sets out the article with this sentence: "The Bolsheviks used the alleged support of the Russian Orthodox Church for the Whites as their justification for killing clergy in massive numbers."

No one, no historian on earth doubts that the ROC and its clergy as a group and an institution supported the Whites. This is an incredibly bald faced evasion that would be laughed at or seen for the abuse of the reader that it is by anyone familiar in the slightest with the Russian Civil War. Those with nothing to grind do not set up article's with such preposterous soft pedaled lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.90.247.37 (talk) 19:22, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * @ Hello, and thank you for contacting me. As I am not an expert on the topic of the Russian Civil War, I must ask you to grant me some leeway on this topic. I reverted your edits because of WP:OR. The article already has templates at the start of the page that state that the article is based mainly on one source. Whether I do or do not (or you, for that matter) agree with content in the article is negligible. This is why all Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view. If you have reliable information to add (see WP:RELIABLE and WP:SOURCE to make sure it is reliable), you are welcome to do so in the article. When you discuss the article next time, please do so on the article's talk page (top left corner). I also highly suggest creating an account, as it allows you more freedom to edit. Also, please sign your messages with ( ~ ) next time. xRENEGADEx  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 01:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Don't revert to defamatory content as you did at Justine Kish.  Acroterion   (talk)   22:42, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops, I thought I was reverting to a different version. Thanks for telling me! xRENEGADEx  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 00:14, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Not a big deal, but watch out - those two IPs were related and they made it hard to see who was inserting the nasty defamation.  Acroterion   (talk)   00:45, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * @ Ok, I'll make a mental note to always check which version I'm reverting to so that doesn't happen again. xRENEGADEx  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 00:59, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

WP:CSD
Hello, XRENEGADEx,

Please review Criteria for Speedy Deletion before you tag any pages for speedy deletion. The criteria are very specific in what kind of subjects they apply to.

Also, if there is vandalism on an article, rather than deletion, you should see if there is an earlier version of the article, before the vandalism, that you should revert back to. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 23:16, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * @Liz Okay, thanks for the advice! I will check it out. I haven't been active on Wikipedia for very long, so I still have a lot of learning to do. Do you know any editing tools I can use to revert back to a non-vandalized version of the article? Thanks! :> xRENEGADEx  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 23:58, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The only method I know is to view the edit history and go back to the last revision before vandalism or before an edit war. This can be difficult on popular articles but for many articles there are can be months or even years between edits and it is clear what the "last good version" is.
 * I have two recommendations for new editors. Set up Twinkle. It's very helpful with tagging pages for deletion or posting notices. For example, if you are tagging an article, template or category for deletion, it will show you which criteria might apply. Once you set up your Preferences, it will post a notice on the talk page of the page creator when you tag one of their pages for deletion. This action can be overlooked and it is SO important that page creators know what has happened to the pages they have created. Admins have access to deleted contributions but regular editors do not so without a notification, the editor might not ever know what happened to their work or that it was even deleted!
 * Secondly, I recommend visiting the Teahouse when you are puzzled. As a new editor 8 years ago, I got frustrated very easily and reacted poorly, for example, when an edit I made was reverted. Being able to bring my questions to the Teahouse kept me editing until I better understood policies. Of course, the editors who staff the Teahouse have changed since 2013 but I still think it is a great resource for answers and explanations when some action just doesn't make sense and you aren't getting a helpful response from the editor or admin involved.
 * Finally, not a recommendation but just my experience...you can not edit here without coming into conflict with other editors. People are people have different interpretations and different ideas about what is and what is not important. It's crucial to base your response to other editors in Wikipedia policy and precedent and don't take things personally. I know I still get corrected and I weigh the criticism, defend my action when I think it was correct and if I made a mistake, I learn from it and try not to make it again. I've become friends with some editors who straightened me out when I was a newcomer. Life is too short to hold grudges! Happy editing! Liz Read! Talk! 00:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi XRENEGADEx! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:35, Saturday, April 10, 2021 (UTC)

Rollback granted
Hi XRENEGADEx. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3AXRENEGADEx enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing!  Anarchyte  ( talk &#8226;  work ) 13:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.

my talk page
Hi, you have left a message on my talk page. Is the message meant for me or the IP editor?. Cassiopeia  talk  04:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The IP editor. Sorry for any confusion.  xRENEGADEx  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 04:37, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Incomplete vandalism reversion
Hi. Thank you for your edits reverting vandalism/tests. When you do a reversion, such as this, please make sure you check the article's edit history so you make sure you got them all. Otherwise you end up accidentally going back to an earlier, but still vandalized, version. Thanks, best wishes and happy editing! DBaK (talk) 09:45, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Update: having said all that, I do note that you were having a gruesome time with all that vandalism from those two now-indeffed accounts, so, well done for that and I think you can be excused for missing a bit in the heat of the moment! Cheers DBaK (talk) 12:30, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Agh, my apologies! Thanks for letting me know and for understanding; those two accounts were taking up much of my time, unfortunately.  xRENEGADEx  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 23:45, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, wow, nightmare!! Have a good day, cheers DBaK (talk) 00:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi XREGNEAGEx,

Regarding my edits to the Brad Allen page, 1. I updated his 2020 referee crew with his 2021 crew. 2. I removed the table about refereeing statistics because I felt it contained an excessive amount of intricate detail for a Wikipedia page. I think a link to the Pro Football Reference page would be sufficient. (In articles on MLB umpires, for instance, there is always a link to the retrosheet.org page for that umpire's data, but the data table is not copied into Wikipedia).

Thanks for the feedback. Please let me know if this makes sense. My apologies for not explaining better.

Acheriel (talk) 14:32, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Acheriel

Error on Shanti Project page history section
Hello,

I am a historian who writes about Shanti Project and an article of mine is cited on the Wikipedia page. I recently edited some incorrect information on the history section stating that Helen Schietinger was Shanti’s first director. This is incorrect and not factual. She was the residence program director from 1983 to 1986. I tried editing this or removing it because it’s just not historically accurate at all. It should be removed.

Best, Brendan McHugh 2601:645:4580:3AA0:7570:BE24:BBAA:7C72 (talk) 00:05, 18 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi! I reverted your edit because you removed sourced information from the page. If you could provide a reliable source that shows that Schietinger was not the first director, feel free to discuss on the talk page the source you got the information from and, if possible, link it so others can see. After that, you can either remove that text or add something else that states "However, XYZ reports that the first director was *actual first director* and not Schietinger," or something along those lines. Cheers!
 * P.S. if you do end up finding a source and removing the text, it would be beneficial if you could explain that in the edit summary so that someone doesn't revert you for removing sourced content.  xRENEGADEx  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 07:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)