| Revision as of 15:43, 13 December 2024 editHeythereimaguy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,321 edits →Question: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:04, 13 December 2024 edit undoToBeFree (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators128,243 edits →Nancy Torresen: new sectionTags: contentious topics alert New topicNext edit → | ||
| Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
| ::::Hmm, you're right I don't but why my screen showed you reverting the edit to "muslims" - As of now I cleared the cookies - and now it seems right ] (]) 15:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | ::::Hmm, you're right I don't but why my screen showed you reverting the edit to "muslims" - As of now I cleared the cookies - and now it seems right ] (]) 15:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
| :::::I'm glad it works correctly now! ] (]) 15:43, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | :::::I'm glad it works correctly now! ] (]) 15:43, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi {{u|Heythereimaguy}}, | |||
| == Introduction to contentious topics == | |||
| {{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = You have recently edited a page related to '''articles about ], and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles''', a topic designated as ''''']'''''. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>. | |||
| A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as ''contentious topics''. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the ]. When editing a contentious topic, Misplaced Pages’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Misplaced Pages ] have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project. | |||
| Within contentious topics, editors should edit <strong>carefully and constructively</strong>, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and: | |||
| *adhere to the ]; | |||
| *comply with all applicable ]; | |||
| *follow editorial and behavioural best practices; | |||
| *comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and | |||
| *refrain from ]. | |||
| <p>Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics ''procedures'', you may ask them at the ] or you may learn more about this contentious topic ]. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{tl|Ctopics/aware}} template. </p>}}<!-- Derived from Template:Contentious topics/alert/first --> | |||
| If I see correctly, you had restored a birth date removed "for privacy" reasons in the article about ] without providing a citation. Are you sure that the information has been {{tqq|widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public}} as required by ], and would you mind citing the source you used when restoring the material? | |||
| Thank you very much in advance and best regards,<br>] (]) 17:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:04, 13 December 2024
Emergency user slap button
Editors: Use this button if the user is malfunctioning. (direct link)
Unregistered users can report a malfunctioning user to Misplaced Pages talk:Village stocks.
 Archives | ||
Index
|
||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Happy First Edit Day!
 | Happy First Edit Day! Hi Heythereimaguy! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC) |  |
The Signpost: 26 September 2024
- In the media: Courts order Misplaced Pages to give up names of editors, legal strain anticipated from "online safety laws"
- Community view: Indian courts order Misplaced Pages to take down name of crime victim, editors strive towards consensus
- Serendipity: A Wikipedian at the 2024 Paralympics
- Opinion: asilvering's RfA debriefing
- News and notes: Are you ready for admin elections?
- Recent research: Article-writing AI is less "prone to reasoning errors (or hallucinations)" than human Misplaced Pages editors
- Traffic report: Jump in the line, rock your body in time
The Signpost: 19 October 2024
- News and notes: One election's end, another election's beginning
- Recent research: "As many as 5%" of new English Misplaced Pages articles "contain significant AI-generated content", says paper
- In the media: Off to the races! Misplaced Pages wins!
- Contest: A WikiCup for the Global South
- Traffic report: A scream breaks the still of the night
- Book review: The Editors
- Humour: The Newspaper Editors
- Crossword: Spilled Coffee Mug
The Signpost: 6 November 2024
- From the editors: Editing Misplaced Pages should not be a crime
- In the media: An old scrimmage, politics and purported libel
- Special report: Misplaced Pages editors face litigation, censorship
- Traffic report: Twisted tricks or tempting treats?
The Signpost: 18 November 2024
- News and notes: Open letter to WMF about court case breaks one thousand signatures, big arb case declined, U4C begins accepting cases
- News from the WMF: Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia Endowment audit reports: FY 2023–2024
Regarding your last AIV report
I noticed you left a talk page message notifying a vandal about how you had reported them. Now I'll say up front that this is just how I feel about it, but I don't think it's a good idea.
Firstly, it's not something you're required to do, unlike the administrators' noticeboard. Second, it could serve to agitate an angry vandal and open you up to abuse. And finally, I feel it goes against WP:DENY by giving the vandal extra attention. I also just noticed you're replying to their questions about why they were blocked. Again, I feel DENY applies here, and I very much think they are intending to waste your time, considering the bad faith of their edits. If they want to appeal, then they should follow the instructions themselves and an administrator will look at it.
Other than that, I'm glad to see another editor working against vandalism! TheNerdzilla (talk) 19:59, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Fair, thanks for reaching out about it. I'll stop - I think they've learned their lesson. Heythereimaguy (talk) 20:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Talk page messages
I don't appreciate getting template messages that make false accusations against me. If you want to say something to me, write your own words, and don't make false accusations. 31.222.81.248 (talk) 20:51, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't make any false accusations against you - for this edit I do not believe that a sentence having the wrong tense is sufficient reason to delete it entirely as opposed to altering it to the past tense instead, unless you deleted it for another reason. Heythereimaguy (talk) 21:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- You may disagree with the reason I left. You may not falsely claim that I did not leave a reason. Don't post on my talk page again. 31.222.81.248 (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- I did not claim that you did not leave a reason, I thought that it wasn't sufficient enough. Heythereimaguy (talk) 21:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- If you don't even understand the templates you are leaving, you should not be using them. What exactly made you think that leaving a dishonest template was a better thing to do than writing a message in your own words? 31.222.81.248 (talk) 22:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- The template in question says "without adequately explaining why," not that you didn't have an explanation at all. Heythereimaguy (talk) 23:31, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- You don't understand the implications of the template you are leaving. But ironically enough you don't feel that you need to give any reason at all for trashing my edits. Templating and warning seems to be basically all you do. It might make you feel important; it does not do very much at all to build an encyclopaedia. 31.222.81.248 (talk) 07:01, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- The template in question says "without adequately explaining why," not that you didn't have an explanation at all. Heythereimaguy (talk) 23:31, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- If you don't even understand the templates you are leaving, you should not be using them. What exactly made you think that leaving a dishonest template was a better thing to do than writing a message in your own words? 31.222.81.248 (talk) 22:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- I did not claim that you did not leave a reason, I thought that it wasn't sufficient enough. Heythereimaguy (talk) 21:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- The IP user 31.222.81.248 is a sockpuppet of WP:LTA/BKFIP and hence not acting in good faith. I have reported them to WP:ANI accordingly. — AP 499D25 (talk) 09:25, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking care of that! Heythereimaguy (talk) 13:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- You may disagree with the reason I left. You may not falsely claim that I did not leave a reason. Don't post on my talk page again. 31.222.81.248 (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 12 December 2024
- News and notes: Arbitrator election concludes
- Arbitration report: Palestine-Israel articles 5
- Disinformation report: Sex, power, and money revisited
- Op-ed: On the backrooms by Tamzin
- In the media: Like the BBC, often useful but not impartial
- Traffic report: Something Wicked for almost everybody
Question
Can you elaborate - why you reverted the edit The AP (talk) 15:22, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- See this for better context The AP (talk) 15:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- If you mean by User:2409:40F2:3F:62A6:89EF:BE19:B68E:75E9, it was because the capitalization of "Muslims" was incorrect. Heythereimaguy (talk) 15:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Shouldn't
muslims
be capitalized and written asMuslims
per MOS:GOD The AP (talk) 15:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)- Yes, it should - that's why I reverted the edit so "muslim" would be changed back to "Muslims" - the edit I did should be on the right side of the screen. Heythereimaguy (talk) 15:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm, you're right I don't but why my screen showed you reverting the edit to "muslims" - As of now I cleared the cookies - and now it seems right The AP (talk) 15:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm glad it works correctly now! Heythereimaguy (talk) 15:43, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm, you're right I don't but why my screen showed you reverting the edit to "muslims" - As of now I cleared the cookies - and now it seems right The AP (talk) 15:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it should - that's why I reverted the edit so "muslim" would be changed back to "Muslims" - the edit I did should be on the right side of the screen. Heythereimaguy (talk) 15:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Shouldn't
Nancy Torresen
Hi Heythereimaguy,
Introduction to contentious topics
You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Misplaced Pages’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Misplaced Pages administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Misplaced Pages;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
If I see correctly, you had restored a birth date removed "for privacy" reasons in the article about Nancy Torresen without providing a citation. Are you sure that the information has been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public
as required by WP:BLPPRIVACY, and would you mind citing the source you used when restoring the material?
Thank you very much in advance and best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)